Galileo 7 – Was it Boma, Spock or is it me?

[Gary7]

^ The only exception I take on that is when your life is in danger. If a hostile alien life form wants to kill you, you have to defend yourself regardless of whether you are an intruder. True, if there's no means to communicate that there's no hostile intention, you still don't want to kill them outright, hoping you might be able to neutralize the situation... but they killed several crew members. I think vaporizing a shield or weapon of theirs would scare the living daylights out of them. They are intelligent, yet they are primitive with a very low tech existence. The tech possessed by the landing party would be magic in their eyes, something to fear if it proved powerful enough to make something of theirs disappear in a fire ball flash.

Some of what I don't like about the episode I chalk up to a limited budget. This was the first time they were using the shuttlecraft, an enormously expensive prop. I do wonder if this was weighed into the cost of the episode or amortized across the entire life of the series as a "long term" prop. But in any case, we see very little in the way of special effects where the phasers are concerned. Just a few beams here and there, no exposure of the result (phaser burns or vaporized objects). They may not have had enough SFX budget to show, thus they conveniently left this out. So instead, there's this thick mist where you can't see your enemy, then suddenly they emerge and launch a spear into your gut before you can fire your phaser at them.

 

[Grant]

I think the writer basically made both Spock and the crew look like fools. It's not phaser or getting into orbit or any of that. The writer made Spock this clueless tunnel vision creature and then had the crew react like insobordinate jerks.

You can't defend too many of Spock's actions in this episode unless you resort to making excuses for the inconsistancies.

"They tried heavy stun--it didn't work!"

c'mon it's bad writing. great concept for an episode though.

 

[Mr_Homn]

You can't defend too many of Spock's actions in this episode unless you resort to making excuses for the inconsistancies.

Lol, welcome to star trek. Making excuses for inconsistencies is the name of the game.

And, like I said, while it's obviously an oversight by the writers, it's really not a leap to think that stun may just not have been effective. We've seen it Trek since then.

An even more absurd aspect of this episode, that hasn't really been addressed in this thread, is the idea that this is Spock's first time in command of a mission. Really? A first officer of one of the federation's best ships that's never even been in command of a routine shuttle mission?

Take the episode for what it is, it's a first season episode, the 14th episode of trek ever produced, and like many first season episodes(of all the star trek series), there are inconsistencies and errors. TOS had the best first season of any Trek, but they were still figuring things out.

 

[Timo]

A few clarifications:

these are aliens not humans; what are you thinking?

If these were insectoids with three heads, then this might be relevant. But these are Star Trek humanoids, perfectly mimicking humanity save for the one quirk-of-the-week, in this case humungous size. Spock would have no reason to think their behavior would deviate from the expected.

And we can easily tell how humans making Folsom points would behave in the given environment and situation...

the word "water" was never mentioned in the episode

There was plenty of mist around, easy to collect and drink. Unless all of the victims had forgotten the very basics of their supposed survival training.

OTOH, since water was never mentioned, we could simply assume our heroes had plenty of it. No reason was given for them losing it, after all.

?

Cavemen have no reason to fanatically keep banging their heads against a brick wall (or, given the brick-busting physical qualities of these ones, a steel wall). If they notice the arrivals can easily kill, then they withdraw.

Also,

while not attempting to use the stun is an oversight of the writers, it might be better to just imagine in your head that they found out the stun setting doesn't work on these creatures, and it was determined off screen.

But it was determined on screen: our sidekicks failed to kill the creatures despite scoring hits on them (unless Gaetano was mistaken about scoring that hit). This would only be possible if they used a low setting, because high settings vaporize solid matter regardless of whether that matter is strong and brave or weak and wimpy.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Grant]

You can't defend too many of Spock's actions in this episode unless you resort to making excuses for the inconsistancies.

Lol, welcome to star trek. Making excuses for inconsistencies is the name of the game.

And, like I said, while it's obviously an oversight by the writers, it's really not a leap to think that stun may just not have been effective. We've seen it Trek since then.

An even more absurd aspect of this episode, that hasn't really been addressed in this thread, is the idea that this is Spock's first time in command of a mission. Really? A first officer of one of the federation's best ships that's never even been in command of a routine shuttle mission?

Take the episode for what it is, it's a first season episode, the 14th episode of trek ever produced, and like many first season episodes(of all the star trek series), there are inconsistencies and errors. TOS had the best first season of any Trek, but they were still figuring things out.

The fact that it would be Spock's first landing party command is so stupid it simply can't be true. A terrible line that I choose to ignore.
Even after McCoy says it, Spock replies, "My first command."---you can almost hear the ? at the end of the sentence. I just assume it Spock's first 'away team' since he and McCoy began serving together and McCoy was just making more trouble and Spock choose to ignore it.

You don't serve 18 years and rise to Lt. Comm/Comm without leading a landing party---period.

 

[Mr_Homn]

while not attempting to use the stun is an oversight of the writers, it might be better to just imagine in your head that they found out the stun setting doesn't work on these creatures, and it was determined off screen.

But it was determined on screen: our sidekicks failed to kill the creatures despite scoring hits on them (unless Gaetano was mistaken about scoring that hit). This would only be possible if they used a low setting, because high settings vaporize solid matter regardless of whether that matter is strong and brave or weak and wimpy.

Timo Saloniemi

Good point! Forgot about that.

 

[Admiral_Sisko]

Also, why is it that every surviving member of the “Galileo 7” appears on the bridge in the last scene to enjoy a light-hearted laugh at the re-telling of the event, including Yeoman Mears, but excluding Boma? Maybe Boma was confined to the brig? Or sickbay?

Memory Alpha suggests that Boma was placed on report by Mr. Scott, which ultimately led to a court martial and his dismissal from Starfleet, largely due to his attitude toward Spock, which Scott noted was both unprofessional and insubordinate. What surprises me is that only Boma received any punishment for his behavior, as I thought that McCoy should have been punished, as well. On the other hand, McCoy was part of Kirk's inner circle, which probably protected him from any negative action.

 

[Timo]

Even after McCoy says it, Spock replies, "My first command."---you can almost hear the ? at the end of the sentence.

Indeed. One can choose whether to believe that McCoy was being plain nasty and sarcastic ("You botched it all up despite having long experience with these things, just because you had to be you!"), or perhaps ignorant of Spock's track record (because while many of the characters are said to have long joint pasts, there's no direct evidence that McCoy and Spock would have known each other for long).

You don't serve 18 years and rise to Lt. Comm/Comm without leading a landing party---period.

...Unless you are an instructor for your entire career before this, like the parallel Spock from STXI.

But "our" Spock had field assignments with Pike.

Memory Alpha suggests

That should really be Memory Beta suggesting - because these exact consequences were described in the Diane Carey novel Dreadnought! where Boma reappears in a minor role.

On the other hand, Spock and McCoy together could have browbeaten the rest of the group to silence about what really happened, and no punishments of any sort would have been dished out. Scotty might be fuming, but it's not as if Boma insulted him personally or professionally. If Spock was okay with it, Scotty would have to agree to being, too.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Lt. Zanne]

Spock always said he never wanted command, never wanted to be captain, etc. I think he knew he was not really cut out for that type of position.
...the episode was exploring what it took to command ~ not just superior knowledge and ability to make decisions, but an ability to read and understand people - not just human - because Spock mis read not just his crew, but the species that lived on the planet and attacked them.

Uneven writing. Spock shows much more awareness of the nuances of command in some of the earliest episodes: Corbomite, and Enemy Within. Spock in Corbomite and Balance of Terror (more so in Corbomite) also showed an ability to "read" aliens, anticipate how their tactical actions would be perceived.
(I'm thinking of Spock's comment about "flypaper" in Corbomite, and his insistence in Balance that the Romulans must not be allowed to get back home and trumpet their success.)

The Spock from those early episodes was quite capable of command. The Spock from many of the later episodes was not. To me, that is a loss, a depletion of his character

Also too, there was at times in other episodes, an underlying understanding that Spock was discriminated against because he was half Vulcan and I thought that was partly why the Galileo crew was not respectful of him.

Like Stiles in Balance of Terror? Rough stuff.

That would mean that the Enterprise senior officers had that kind of bigotry in them. I have some trouble swallowing that. Also, the Federation itself seems to be without a streak of institutional bigotry. They have (had) a starship crewed entirely by Vulcans. Later, M'ress was a respected officer. Stiles stands out from the other officers and crew, which implies that his bigotry was an exception.

I don't know if you're right about that. Do you have other examples?

Very interesting points. I agree Spock has shown great capacity for command, but I always thought he preferred not to. I also think, that as a TV show in the 1960s, bigotry was explored because of its importance/relevance to the audience. Part of making Spock believably alien would be to have negative reactions toward him ~people can be uncomfortable with what they do not understand and such and so we can see the error of discriminating; we can also see that he is in fact, not like us. He is alien.

In the episode with the "Yangs" and the "Comms"~I'm sorry I forget the name~ the commander on that planet, did not like Spock, and I always thought it was because he was Vulcan. I could totally be wrong. Also too, ST 6 The Undiscovered Country deals with discrimination and not just against Klingons. And Spocks character has always been described as a man of two worlds- not fitting in with humans because he looks Vulcan and is expected to act thus, and not fitting in as Vulcan because he is half-human. Why would he not fit in? (somewhat rhetorical) This is just my opinion~I'm not in anyway trying to state facts. There are so many ways to interpret things.

 

[Admiral_Sisko]

Very interesting points. I agree Spock has shown great capacity for command, but I always thought he preferred not to. I also think, that as a TV show in the 1960s, bigotry was explored because of its importance/relevance to the audience. Part of making Spock believably alien would be to have negative reactions toward him ~people can be uncomfortable with what they do not understand and such and so we can see the error of discriminating; we can also see that he is in fact, not like us. He is alien.

But is the error of discrimination clearly illustrated in "The Galileo Seven?" There is obviously discrimination, as multiple crew members- including the Chief Medical Officer- take Spock to task for his insistence on completing repairs to the shuttle before attending to other matters, but the error of this behavior isn't well illustrated. Spock champions logic above emotion, yet he seemingly takes an action influenced by emotion near the episode's conclusion- jettisoning the shuttle's remaining fuel to alert the Enterprise to its presence.

Would it not have made more sense for Spock to devise a solution guided entirely by logic, as this would have made plain his colleagues' error in questioning his judgement? Additionally, would it not have made sense for Boma to apologize to Spock for his behavior, rather than simply disappearing? One can infer that he was either in the brig or preparing for a transfer, but neither is stated on screen, leaving the audience to wonder about his whereabouts.

As an aside, the entire Enterprise crew seems to have "a bug up its ass" about Spock spending any time in the captain's chair, as their behavior in both "The Paradise Syndrome" and "The Tholian Web" suggests. Some have attributed their behavior to poor writing, but it seems as though the crew becomes unruly whenever Kirk is absent. The only time that they seem to fall in line behind Spock is in The Undiscovered Country, as they willingly assist his investigation of Chancellor Gorkon's assassination.

 

[Lt. Zanne]

I think the error of discrimination is clear in Galileo 7. It does not have to be obvious to be clear. Spock is not respected as a commander because he is not acting as the crew anticipates/expects and it is causing tension. Their explanation is that he is Vulcan. The main idea of this episode to me is what does it take to be a leader? Spock is logical and intelligent and makes good decisions without panic. But there seems to be other qualities needed to be a good leader- I think the episode is contemplating this.

I think Undiscovered Country is about the misconceptions of people. I should start a new thread for that.

 

[Admiral_Sisko]

I think the error of discrimination is clear in Galileo 7. It does not have to be obvious to be clear. Spock is not respected as a commander because he is not acting as the crew anticipates/expects and it is causing tension. Their explanation is that he is Vulcan. The main idea of this episode to me is what does it take to be a leader? Spock is logical and intelligent and makes good decisions without panic. But there seems to be other qualities needed to be a good leader- I think the episode is contemplating this.

I think Undiscovered Country is about the misconceptions of people. I should start a new thread for that.

I understand that point, as their disdain for Spock's approach to their situation is made plain. What I wonder about is whether the episode effectively conveyed the message of their discrimination being in error, as Spock ultimately saved their lives not through an act guided by logic and critical thinking, but by an act perceived as desperate by his shipmates. If the writers had intended to show the error in discriminating against a man who always chooses the logical course of action, it would seem that having this type of thinking prevail would be the best means of illustrating that Spock's approach- different as it may be- is no less effective.

Whether that makes him suitable for command is something that cannot be answered in the course of a single television episode, as command requires a combination of knowledge, experience, trust in oneself, and the trust of others in one's abilities. Spock does seem to have the trust of his crew in The Undiscovered Country, but the events of said film occur nearly thirty years after those in "The Galileo Seven." It's likely that Spock- having proven himself in numerous situations since this initial mission- eventually gained the trust of his colleagues, once they realized that they didn't have to fear his unique approach to problem-solving.

That being said, you're right in that The Undiscovered Country deserves its own thread if we're to discuss discrimination as it relates to that film.

 

[Ssosmcin]

As an aside, the entire Enterprise crew seems to have "a bug up its ass" about Spock spending any time in the captain's chair, as their behavior in both "The Paradise Syndrome" and "The Tholian Web" suggests. Some have attributed their behavior to poor writing, but it seems as though the crew becomes unruly whenever Kirk is absent. The only time that they seem to fall in line behind Spock is in The Undiscovered Country, as they willingly assist his investigation of Chancellor Gorkon's assassination.

Actually, isn't it mostly McCoy who has the issue? Sure, the crew would give glances when Spock was too literal or uncompromising (That Which Survives), but for the most part, Bones was the guy who crabbed about Spock being in charge. Uhura was just dandy with it, Sulu and Chekov never seemed to have a problem. Scotty bitched about "that Vulcan won't be satisfied until these panels are a puddle of lead" and he was also crabby about chasing a "wild goose" in Triskelion, but again, that had little to do with him being in command. They just didn't agree with his actions at the time. Not everyone agreed with Kirk at all times either (Scotty was always railing about going past warp 7 or something). In Galileo Seven, Scotty was his staunchest ally, but still questioned when he did something weird. That was Spock's fault, he never explains ahead of time.

I see it not so much as havnig a "bug up their asses" but more of a "he's an alien and so they don't quite get his motiviation for his decisions." Mostly, though, it's just Bones who's the crabby pain in the ass.

 

[Lt. Zanne]

I understand the idea of why the writers should have had Spock save the Galileo crew using his unique logic abilities instead of the seemingly human resourcefulness if they were trying to convey his point of view and that discriminating against it is in error (since it would have been successful) but I do not think that was the point of the episode. I think that it was part of the tension created. I think it was used to put him at odds on purpose to show how he is different. Then I think the episode went on to explore the idea of successful command /not necessarily coming up with an exact answer since Spock chose to change his path of reasoning at the very end and that is what saved the crew. This could be seen as a growing flexibility in the character or as a point for the side of human emotion. I don't see it as clear cut- I see it as something to think about.

 

[Lt. Zanne]

Admiral Sisko, I am still new here, and I cannot remember how to start a new thread ~ I have only done so once so far. Also too, my last comment was in response to yours. I enjoy the thoughtfulness of these conversations, but how are you able to write so much without getting kicked off the site and having to re-log in? That has happened to me a couple of times and then my final response is a bit shortened as its my 3rd attempt to write down all I am thinking... is there a section for newbies to read up on "technique"?

 

[Grant]

Leaving Geatano in ememy territory alone with no knowledge of the terrain, in a foggy area with hostile creatures who are proven killers is a good decision on Spock's part?

When Spock orders Geatano to stay behind Geatano and Boma look at each other like "I'm/you're dead." and so he was.

It was the writer's fault, but Spock makes a lot of dumb decisions in the episode.

When the crew complains about Spock not being inspiring--they're not talking about a long-winded "don't fire until you see..../give me liberty or give me death" speeches.

They mean the simple things that Kirk and most commanders do to inspire confidence in a tough situations--gestures, actions, looks, small encouragements.

Not lecturing people who have seen their comrades die and are in iminetent dangerabout "their duties to other life forms"
If his duty to the natives is a component of his decisions--he doesn't need to broadcast it.

 

[Maurice]

Admiral Sisko, I am still new here, and I cannot remember how to start a new thread ~ I have only done so once so far. Also too, my last comment was in response to yours. I enjoy the thoughtfulness of these conversations, but how are you able to write so much without getting kicked off the site and having to re-log in? That has happened to me a couple of times and then my final response is a bit shortened as its my 3rd attempt to write down all I am thinking... is there a section for newbies to read up on "technique"?

Click this link for the board FAQ about reading and posting season.