I'm amused that this comes up less with Kirk's feelings toward Klingons or many people's reaction to Seven of Nine. It's not like it is a black and white issue.
Did Sisko ever forgive Picard?
- Thread starter retroenzo
- Start date
Because people - or possible all sentient beings - are basically irrational, no matter how many times we congratulate ourselves for being logical and intelligent.
Sisko doesn't have an excuse. He was being irrational. Just as Picard was being irrational in "First Contact".
I think Spock would shrug and say, "Humans are illogical, emotional beings."
Intriguingly, it may well be that Picard was in at least partial command over what happened - and that he goaded the Borg into killing Jennifer Sisko and 11,000 others because he gambled that this would be vital in helping Earth survive.
We have long been debating why the Borg would decide to stop and fight Starfleet. They didn't have to; there was nothing Starfleet could have done to stop them from reaching Earth anyway. Yet they stopped at Wolf 359 and fought; stopped (or at least significantly slowed down) at Saturn and (supposedly) fought; stopped at Jupiter and fought; stopped (or at least significantly slowed down) at Mars and fought. It would make sense for Picard to put in the reasonable suggestion that fighting Starfleet would be a good idea (assimilating new fighting techniques, clearing your flanks and rear before the final attack), while in fact the constant stopping was the desired thing.
Perhaps Sisko factually has Picard to blame for it being his dad rather than his wife surviving the Borg incursion?
Timo Saloniemi
We have long been debating why the Borg would decide to stop and fight Starfleet. They didn't have to; there was nothing Starfleet could have done to stop them from reaching Earth anyway. Yet they stopped at Wolf 359 and fought; stopped (or at least significantly slowed down) at Saturn and (supposedly) fought; stopped at Jupiter and fought; stopped (or at least significantly slowed down) at Mars and fought. It would make sense for Picard to put in the reasonable suggestion that fighting Starfleet would be a good idea (assimilating new fighting techniques, clearing your flanks and rear before the final attack), while in fact the constant stopping was the desired thing.
Perhaps Sisko factually has Picard to blame for it being his dad rather than his wife surviving the Borg incursion?
Timo Saloniemi
Picard himself felt that he should have been able to resist the Borg, so the notion that other Starfleet officers might also consider him to have betrayed crucial tactical information to the enemy that let them cut through the Wolf 359 fleet like butter isn't beyond the pale. Locutus did have a higher degree of autonomy (it might have appeared to a casual observer) than a standard drone.
But yes, Sisko's feelings were irrational. We're irrational beings. Other Starfleet officers might have moved on and learnt to forgive given time and knowledge about what happened to Picard, but the whole POINT of Emissary is that Ben Sisko HASN'T moved on - he's still mentally stuck on the Saratoga watching his wife die. All that rage and pain is still there, raw as the day of the battle.
But yes, Sisko's feelings were irrational. We're irrational beings. Other Starfleet officers might have moved on and learnt to forgive given time and knowledge about what happened to Picard, but the whole POINT of Emissary is that Ben Sisko HASN'T moved on - he's still mentally stuck on the Saratoga watching his wife die. All that rage and pain is still there, raw as the day of the battle.
The key work there is "should", as opposed to "likely would" or "actually could"
I really am not sure how to intellectualise this comment. You could have just made a brilliant cutting moral insight or an incredibly ignorant insensitive gaffe. I'm genuinely bewildered as to which.
I got the impression that the Borg could 'see' into his mind and then determine what to do with that information. Then again that idea first showed up later when Chakotay was 'joined' with that bunch in Unity. They could see his thoughts, he could see theirs. He could 'see' into Seven's mind. I don't know if that was something the original creators of the Borg intended or not.
I'd say the latter. The two are in no way comparable. Whether it's rape or the Holocaust, best to avoid comparisons unless they're truly 1:1.
The only impasse I see is whether or not there is some sort of special training in the 24th century that would allow us to see Sisko's anger as a choice rather than something that is human.
This is basically it. After all, one of the things that gets Sisko later on is the Prophets constantly bringing him back to the Saratoga saying, "But you exist here". Once he realises that, he starts to work through his grief.
To be perfectly honest, the only reason people might have for holding Sisko's initial response to coming face to face with Picard against him is because of Star Trek: The Next Generation swinging so far towards a stereotypical 'utopian ideal' that, quite frankly, was unrealistic and silly and that actually detracts from its overall quality as a series, particularly when contrasted with the remainder of the series in the franchise (all of which strike - or attempt to strike - a balance between the idea of utopia as presented by TNG and the reality of human/humanoid existence and the frailties associated therewith).
I really get the feeling that pre-DS9 Sisko had parallel thoughts about Picard before he came to his realization, like no counselor or therapist could convince Sisko that Picard was faultless, and that Sisko could only begin his journey of healing by seeing the big picture for himself, by himself.
Like, on a certain level, it doesn't matter if Sisko is right or wrong about blaming Picard, as long as it's acknowledged that his grudge was a serious detriment to his personal and professional life. That had to be addressed. His feelings were perfectly valid even if he missed the mark. Once Sisko came to the conclusion that his hanging on to tragedy continued to cause harm, he started to let go, and Picard was one of the first people he told, rightfully so.
This is true and for the record, I'm not 'holding it against Sisko'. His reaction just seemed out of step with what we had seen in the Star Trek Universe up to that point. Before if you were a victim of mind control no one held it against you, no matter what you got up to while the alien was in your head. It has little to do with what real humans do here in the real world and more to do with the way these issues had been dealt with up to that point in the Star Trek Universe. Sisko did not react the way humans in 'that' world' normally reacted. Either people are held accountable in 'that' universe for what they do while under alien influence or they are not.
Given that TNG is the anomaly in this regard, I'd personally say that, by and large, people are in fact held accountable in the Star Trek universe for their actions, regardless of whether or not they were 'under the influence', and that we just never saw this happen during TNG because of extra-universal writing decisions.
Logically people know that. But the face of Picard was responsible for the death of his wife. I can understand being angry with him even though you know it wasn't his fault
I disagree. Sisko is supposed to be an intelligent man not some imbecile that can't make the difference between victim and victimizer. Yet he's played in that scene like a moron. He says that "they met" in battle but that's bullshit and he should know it. Picard was no more part of that battle than the hostage of a hostage taker is part of the shoot out between him and the police. Sisko deliberately dropped poison on children, just to capture one man that he wasn't smart enough to get otherwise. That's far worse than anything that Picard ever did to him and unlike Picard he didn't have the excuse of not being in control of his own body.
Sisko dropped something, yes. But it wasn't poison. Those colonists had time to evacuate. And none of them were children (it was a Maquis base).
In any case, those same colonists subsequently just took over the Cardassian colony that THEY had dropped "poison" on, so I'm going to have to call "they started it" on that one.
As for Sisko's attitude towards Picard - I used to think Sisko was just being a jackass, but then again, I don't know what it's like to lose someone like he did. There's no way I could know what Sisko was feeling in that scene.
No, I am pretty sure that they had children with them. Colonists consist in families. That's the whole point in colonizing something. Plus we saw some of the maquis in the teaser and you could see children among them.Sisko dropped something, yes. But it wasn't poison. Those colonists had time to evacuate. And none of them were children (it was a Maquis base).
In any case, those same colonists subsequently just took over the Cardassian colony that THEY had dropped "poison" on, so I'm going to have to call "they started it" on that one.
I don't care what the adults were allegedly responsible for, he had no right to attack their children for it. But apparently you can get away with a lot in starfleet when the script demands it.
Sisko had no right to attack Picard because "his face" was on the other side of the battle. Only a cretin wouldn't be able to understand at that point that Picard wasn't responsible. Now if Sisko is insane then maybe he should be treated in an institution somewhere not being given responsibilities. Then again the deck is stacked in favor of Sisko, just as it is in favor of Picard, Janeway and Archer on their respective shows, so no matter how assholish they behave they never suffer the consequences of it. Acher can gazelle his way out of any shit his stupidity got him into. Just as Picard and Janeway do in their own ways.
But Sisko did not attack Picard, in fact he was as civil as he could bring himself to be, that's the whole subtext of the scene. He knows logically that the responsibility is not Picards but human emotions are not a courtroom.
His reaction was visceral, it was a purely human response to being dragged back to the very worst moment of his life and forcing himself to interact with someone whom every fibre of his being is revolted at on an instinctive level, whilst being forced to remember something so awful he can't bring himself to even think about it most of the time. Not because it was Picard's fault, but because that's a very human thing to do.
As for being insane I'd have to say no, not on the basis of that scene, in fact to not show any strong emotional response would be more concerning to most mental health professionals.
His reaction was visceral, it was a purely human response to being dragged back to the very worst moment of his life and forcing himself to interact with someone whom every fibre of his being is revolted at on an instinctive level, whilst being forced to remember something so awful he can't bring himself to even think about it most of the time. Not because it was Picard's fault, but because that's a very human thing to do.
As for being insane I'd have to say no, not on the basis of that scene, in fact to not show any strong emotional response would be more concerning to most mental health professionals.
Similar threads
