A couple of years ago we had parallel discussion threads -- "Did Trip Do the Right Thing?" and "Did Archer Do the Right Thing?" in "Cogenitor."
After seeing a discussion start up over in the Trip/T'Pol thread after Monday's airing of the episode on SciFi, and with new fans coming onboard, maybe it's worth another look.
Trip: I believed two years ago and I still believe that he was right to stand by his principles. However, he was also wrong in his handling of the situation: lying about his whereabouts; going behind the backs of the Vissians; not bothering to learn more about Vissian history/social structures so he'd have an idea what the cogenitor would be up against (just recalling American history re: slavery and the Jim Crow/civil rights eras might have helped, for heaven's sake); failing to recognize the red flags (when he asks to say hello to the cogenitor during dinner with the Vissian couple the wife wonders why he would want to.
).
Archer: The biggest flaw in this episode is that we never see Archer struggle with the question of asylum, which makes it so much harder to evaluate his decision.
Here the writers had an opportunity to examine the larger question: What role will humanity play in dealing with other species? Will we take our principles into space to guide us or will we seek to impose them on others? Will we be student or teacher?
After exploring these issues, even if Archer reaches a flawed conclusion either way, at least we could appreciate his thoughtful examination of the question.
Having said that, I think the cogenitor should have been granted asylum: Whether you agree with Trip's actions or not, the fact remains that Charles has been changed by its encounter with him, and is clearly never going to be able to reassimilate itself into the singular role the other Vissian sexes have imposed on it.
By condemning the cogenitor to that fate (Dred Scott anybody?) Archer practically ensured the tragic end that he (cruelly, IMO) blamed entirely on Trip.
After seeing a discussion start up over in the Trip/T'Pol thread after Monday's airing of the episode on SciFi, and with new fans coming onboard, maybe it's worth another look.
Trip: I believed two years ago and I still believe that he was right to stand by his principles. However, he was also wrong in his handling of the situation: lying about his whereabouts; going behind the backs of the Vissians; not bothering to learn more about Vissian history/social structures so he'd have an idea what the cogenitor would be up against (just recalling American history re: slavery and the Jim Crow/civil rights eras might have helped, for heaven's sake); failing to recognize the red flags (when he asks to say hello to the cogenitor during dinner with the Vissian couple the wife wonders why he would want to.

Archer: The biggest flaw in this episode is that we never see Archer struggle with the question of asylum, which makes it so much harder to evaluate his decision.
Here the writers had an opportunity to examine the larger question: What role will humanity play in dealing with other species? Will we take our principles into space to guide us or will we seek to impose them on others? Will we be student or teacher?
After exploring these issues, even if Archer reaches a flawed conclusion either way, at least we could appreciate his thoughtful examination of the question.
Having said that, I think the cogenitor should have been granted asylum: Whether you agree with Trip's actions or not, the fact remains that Charles has been changed by its encounter with him, and is clearly never going to be able to reassimilate itself into the singular role the other Vissian sexes have imposed on it.
By condemning the cogenitor to that fate (Dred Scott anybody?) Archer practically ensured the tragic end that he (cruelly, IMO) blamed entirely on Trip.