Drop the S31 show for a Captain Pike show?

[fireproof78]

MU Georgious is not a complicated character. She got the complexity of a wrestling heel-turned face, just WAAAAY more over-the top in regards of her actual evil-ness.

If she goes through a redemption arc then she can grow and change . I don't need complex but I prefer dynamic.

 

[BillJ]

Actually, I was once commissioned to write an interactive time travel story about going back in time and "Killing Hitler" with kindness. So I did my job and wrote five sequences where you could fix history by simply doing nice things for him at crucial times in his life. And I had no trouble with the undertaking, and that is akin to giving him a "second chance" in my books. Because, hey, it was science fiction, and it was never actually something I'd seen done so it was good exercise of my imaginative faculties.

I imagine those scenarios are before he kills seven million Jewish folk in the Holocaust?

 

[The Wormhole]

Why does everyone keep referring to Georgiou as a cannibal anyway? We have no proof she engaged in cannibalism. She ate Kelpiens, but since she isn't a Kelpien herself, that isn't cannibalism. Or is there some reference to her eating humans I'm not remembering?

Would we call Voq and L'Rell cannibals because they ate Georgiou Prime?

 

[fireproof78]

In the vein of forgiveness, should Hitler or Stalin or Pol Pot or even Charlie Manson be given "second chances"? If we are supposed to forgive Georgiou, shouldn't she stand some kind of trial and serve punishment for her crimes against sapient beings across the galaxy, including the Talosians? For me, saving her own ass on Discovery isn't some kind of repayment for the wounds she inflicted on her empire and others.

It seems like Georgiou is merely an extension of Garak and Into Darkness Khan, an outside monster the Federation needs to do its dirty work. Except neither of Garak nor Khan were being turned into good guys and given their own shows.

Is Georgiou a good guy? Just because she works on the side of Starfleet doesn't automatically make her a good guy. I certainly do not regard as a good guy.

Secondly, whose authority would be used to force her to make reparations? She did not commit these crimes against anyone in the Universe she is currently inhabiting, nor were they crimes in the universe she came from, which was far more survival of the fittest than Prime.

Finally, given the general negativity towards Georgiou in this thread, I would say that there is not a single thing she could do to earn the second chance in the audience's eyes. To that point, I would argue that simply vote against the upcoming show with your dollars. Also, I strongly recommend not watching things like Game of Thrones, Breaking Bad, and the like. The protagonists are those shows do horribles things too, perhaps even evil things. I would not want to support them, and I don't since I do not watch those shows.

"Commited genocide", "slaughtered sentient beings to eat them" and "gloated about that in their victims' faces" are really a few things were the first glance is absolutely enough to know what you're dealing with and judge accordingly.

Have you studied human history? It is filled with individuals who did those things and then some. And, yet, somehow, I am to believe that this human race is worth saving and have optimism about them becoming better? If environmental pressures can shape human evolution for them to become better would it not be the best place to put a former empress to teach her to become better?

Or, is that not acceptable? Is becoming better not a worthy enough Star Trek theme to explore? I do not get this point...

 

[BillJ]

Kirk dumped Khan on a backwater planet, didn’t make him the leader of a Federation intelligence service.

I am mystified that people think that having an acknowledged monster as the head of a Federation division somehow will make for good Star Trek.

 

[Alan Roi]

Kirk dumped Khan on a backwater planet, didn’t make him the leader of a Federation intelligence service.

I am mystified that people think that having an acknowledged monster as the head of a Federation division somehow will make for good Star Trek.

Yeah, I realized that was inaccurate for the situation. But good Star Trek is good television. Many people make claims of something being bad Trek that turns out to be good Trek and the reverse as well. AFAIC if its good TV, as Disco is, then it will be good Trek.

And no one said Georgiou is going to be the head of a Starfleet division. She's just going to be the lead of the series. What spy show has ever had the head of the division as its lead?

Although leaving her on a backwater planet might set up a TWOG movie, so I'm torn now.

 

[Gepard]

Would we call Voq and L'Rell cannibals because they ate Georgiou Prime?

People did, and have, and I would tend to agree.

As was pointed out somewhere upthread, "aliens" in Star Trek are just funny-looking humans, as indicated by everything from the prevalence of halfbreeds to the franchise's often hit-you-on-the-head allegory. It's cherry-picking to treat, say, the Ferengi as symbols of runaway American capitalism, and then take the Kelpian's alien nature very, very literally.

 

[BillJ]

Would we call Voq and L'Rell cannibals because they ate Georgiou Prime?

Interesting question. According to “The Chase”, Klingons and Humans share a common ancestry.

 

[fireproof78]

I am mystified that people think that having an acknowledged monster as the head of a Federation division somehow will make for good Star Trek.

Nowhere have I argued that it would be good Trek. I am simply intrigued by the idea and even more so by the ardent opposition to this idea. I am simply blown away by the idea that Georgiou must be excluded from a show, but Garak, Kor, Damar and Dukat can work with the heroes no questions asked.

 

[BillJ]

I am simply blown away by the idea that Georgiou must be excluded from a show, but Garak, Kor, Damar and Dukat can work with the heroes no questions asked.

Nowhere did I say she should be excluded from the show. My gripe is the Federation openly working with her to the point that she’s the head of Section 31.

I can openly admit I could be completely wrong and they somehow pull it off. But based on the writing on Discovery, I’m not having high hopes.

 

[fireproof78]

Nowhere did I say she should be excluded from the show. My gripe is the Federation openly working with her to the point that she’s the head of Section 31.

As opposed to any of the other morally questionable people in Starfleet ?

 

[Gepard]

Nowhere have I argued that it would be good Trek. I am simply intrigued by the idea and even more so by the ardent opposition to this idea. I am simply blown away by the idea that Georgiou must be excluded from a show, but Garak, Kor, Damar and Dukat can work with the heroes no questions asked.

Because the way her character was written this season, the way other character's reactions to her were written, and behind the scenes comments from the writers, suggests we're supposed to enjoy and even lionize her because of her bad behavior – not be interested in her in spite of it, as was the case the case with all the other characters you mentioned. Dukat was an interesting, engaging character we weren't supposed to like or agree with. Geogeau has the potential to be interesting, but she's presented like maybe we are supposed to like her and maybe even cheer her on when she, say, tortures an enemy to death.

This point has been hammered repeatedly by other posters like @Rahul. I don't understand how this is so hard to grasp. It's not the character in isolation, it's the context around her, plus a lack of faith in this writing team to treat her homicidal, genocidal ways as anything other than "kewl."

Seriously. Why is this so hard to grasp?

 

[BillJ]

As opposed to any of the other morally questionable people in Starfleet ?

If you can’t see the difference between people who work their way up and lose their moral compass along the way, and just saying fuck it and hiring a monster from another universe to head up one of your government agencies, I don’t know what to say.

 

[BillJ]

Because the way her character was written this season, the way other character's reactions to her were written, and behind the scenes comments from the writers, suggests we're supposed to enjoy and even lionize her because of her bad behavior – not be interested in her in spite of it, as was the case the case with all the other characters you mentioned. Dukat was an interesting, engaging character we weren't supposed to like or agree with. Geogeau has the potential to be interesting, but she's presented like maybe we are supposed to like her and maybe even cheer her on when she, say, tortures an enemy to death.

This point has been hammered repeatedly by other posters like @Rahul. I don't understand how this is so hard to grasp. It's not the character in isolation, it's the context around her, plus a lack of faith in this writing team to treat her homicidal, genocidal ways as anything other than "kewl."

Seriously. Why is this so hard to grasp?

WINNER!

 

[Alan Roi]

If you can’t see the difference between people who work their way up and lose their moral compass along the way, and just saying fuck it and hiring a monster from another universe to head up one of your government agencies, I don’t know what to say.

Again, the heading up of a government agency? Where do you get this? We've never even had this in the history of the Franchise. Where are you getting this?

 

[BillJ]

Again, the heading up of a government agency? Where do you get this? We've never even had this in the history of the Franchise. Where are you getting this?

When they first started talking about the show, she was supposed to be the head of Section 31.

 

[fireproof78]

This point has been hammered repeatedly by other posters like @Rahul. I don't understand how this is so hard to grasp. It's not the character in isolation, it's the context around her, plus a lack of faith in this writing team to treat her homicidal, genocidal ways as anything other than "kewl."

If I thought she was "kewl" i could understand this premise. Since I don't, I don't agree. Sorry.

If you can’t see the difference between people who work their way up and lose their moral compass along the way, and just saying fuck it and hiring a monster from another universe to head up one of your government agencies, I don’t know what to say.

When it's about survival then people act illogically.

If that doesn't make sense I don't know what to say.

 

[NewHeavensNewEarth]

If you can’t see the difference between people who work their way up and lose their moral compass along the way, and just saying fuck it and hiring a monster from another universe to head up one of your government agencies, I don’t know what to say.

It's a redo of the Khan concept from "Into Darkness," except Georgiou is being allowed a long story arc to grow/change in.

Tell me this Khan quote doesn't apply. "Marcus needed to respond to an uncivilized threat in a civilized time, and for that, he needed a warrior's mind - my mind..."

If we regard the Section 31 show as an extended concept of "Into Darkness," it's suddenly not such an outlandish concept. When Mama Burnham was talking to Georgiou, she indicated that she had some good & self-sacrifice in her, and I want to give the character the chance to show that. Without a doubt, Georgiou has done absolutely terrible things, but a redemption story is one of the most powerful stories that can be told.

 

[Alan Roi]

When they first started talking about the show, she was supposed to be the head of Section 31.

Well, as far as I heard, she was going to be an agent. But considering she might know were all the bodies are buried for the next ten years, its not so surprising that Starfleet might strike a deal with her. it turns out bad, so be it. I'm not worried. Starfleet makes all sorts of bad deals over the years that come to bite them in the ass. It won't be any different than at least a dozen others. But enjoying watching a character who isn't moral on TV isn't the same as enjoying one succeeding in real life as your argument has suggested. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot were real people who made real people suffer and die by the millions. Attempting to elevating a fictional character to their status seems a rather hyperbolic attempt to win an argument to me.

 

[fireproof78]

Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot were real people who made real people suffer and die by the millions. Attempting to elevating a fictional character to their status seems a rather hyperbolic attempt to win an argument to me.

Precisely so, and this is my frustration. I am sure to many Georgiou is the embodiment of evil and is not one that could be considered an ally or trustworthy. And, in real life, I condemn that kind of behavior in all its forms. But, fiction is a completely different form, including demonstrated in the very Star Trek show that those in the upper echelons of Federation and Starfleet power are just as susceptible to corruption, and fear-based reactions as many other people. It is demonstrated repeatedly that corruption seems to impact those towards the top far more, so they often make questionable decisions and ally themselves with morally questionable people. I highly doubt that Chang, or Garak, or Dukat made morally good decisions or decisions that met with Starfleet's principles. And yet, we see leadership working with questionable people.

Ultimately, for me, it is this simple. One, I do not care that the production team states that I should think Georgiou is "kewl" or whatever. I can make up my own mind on the matter and continue to do so regarding Discovery, and all other media I consume.

Two, I believe that Star Trek is a big enough platform to allow for these kinds of morally grey situations. As much as I want to have optimism regarding humanity I am also painfully aware of our foibles as humans.

In fiction, it is the perfect vehicle to explore these morally grey situations, to explore the capacity of human beings, both the bad. In fiction, we can have antiheroes, evil characters, and people of questionable moral character. What makes Star Trek unique, past GoT or Breaking Bad, or even Star Wars, is the fact that humans can grow and evolve.

At some point the humanity of Georgiou still needs to be considered, the capacity for great good as well as great evil.

ETA: Other articles have discussed this a bit, and I find them interesting to add to discussion:

The mirror Universe gave us an interesting look at the classic nature vs. nurture argument. Take Tilly, for example. Known as Captain Killy for her ruthlessness and swiftness when it comes to murder, we have a hard time believing this is the same person. But she believes it. “When we were in the Terran Universe, I was reminded of how much a person is shaped by their environment.” There is darkness within all of us, and Tilly is working on recognizing it, and confronting it; it’s the only way she can conceive of beating it. Everyone human who had a mirror counterpart saw their mirror version act complicitly with the Terran Empire’s villainous actions, regardless of how good and ethical and upstanding they may be in their own Universe.

Source

And the morally questionable foundation of Star Trek VI:

But all of this is insignificant next to the great moral failing of Star Trek VI—by which I mean the continuous portrayal of the Klingons as misunderstood victims of human meanness. Throughout Star Trek, we’ve seen that the Klingons aren’t just an aggressive race; they are a brutal warrior culture hellbent on galactic domination and dictatorship. Kor’s attempted enslavement of the Organians is a crime against decency far worse than, say, the 1931 invasion of Manchuria. The Klingons’ sabotage of quadrotriticale is little short of attempted genocide. The Rura Penthe gulag is cruel beyond description. The roster of Klingon offenses is long and frightening, when you think about it. But instead of thinking about it, we’re shown that Gorkon’s efforts toward peace are hampered by Federation prejudice and fear of change. The Klingons are victims of a “homo sapiens-only club” and a conspiracy of the military that profits by the perpetuation of tensions.

Source

Fiction is a place to explore all of these themes. Star Trek is no different!

The hopelessness of a lost soul resonates with us in the real world. Even if our stakes are not so high or the tragedies so great, everyone can relate to the journey and there is value in sharing our own light during another's dark times.

Source