I think Admiral T'Par was using 'Captain' as a positional title and not as an indicator of rank given that Saru has now repeatedly called Georgiou " Commander", indicating that it is indeed her actual rank within Starfleet Intelligence/Section 31.
Spoilers Georgiou Season 3 Rank
- Thread starter trek.punk
- Start date
Ugh. Since they were going with the pretense that Mirror Georgiou was Prime Georgiou, I wonder on what grounds they would've been able to demote her without raising suspicions among those not in the know?
I wonder if it was something like "Well, on the record, Leland is Captain, and we don't need two Captains so, if you want to work in Section 31, we'll have to give you a grade reduction to Commander. I'm sure you understand, Your Highness."
If Section 31 has a different chain of command then her rank could be reflective of that. And I would imagine it would be so.
Well, so far this is open to speculation. We hear of Captain* and Commander and Agent, which could be police-style ranks easily enough. And so could be Tyler's Lieutenant, even though it seems he inherited that from (the) regular Fleet service (of the guy whose skin he is wearing). We then hear of five Admirals who would have been involved in overseeing the ops, but neither the quartet killed by Control nor Cornwell were actually S31 employees as far as we know, merely people directly involved in overseeing the organization.
Timo Saloniemi
* Captain Leland, that is. "Captain Georgiou" would be merely the alias of the Emperor in every occasion of its use during S2; her S31 rank may have been Agent all along, but it may also have been Commander or Lieutenant or something else like that.
Timo Saloniemi
* Captain Leland, that is. "Captain Georgiou" would be merely the alias of the Emperor in every occasion of its use during S2; her S31 rank may have been Agent all along, but it may also have been Commander or Lieutenant or something else like that.
Let's face it -- this is mainly a writing SNAFU that needs sorting out.
It's a fairly common occurrence in Trek though and sometimes you just have to ignore the inconsistencies. I long ago gave up trying to even bother with the mental gymnastics necessary to invent convoluted explanations and retcons for what were basically just ****-ups. They just need to put more thought into this stuff or any least make the effort to spot the wrinkles and either explain them or iron them out and move on.
It's a fairly common occurrence in Trek though and sometimes you just have to ignore the inconsistencies. I long ago gave up trying to even bother with the mental gymnastics necessary to invent convoluted explanations and retcons for what were basically just ****-ups. They just need to put more thought into this stuff or any least make the effort to spot the wrinkles and either explain them or iron them out and move on.
They'll just move on.
Heck, they'll never even bother to explain who made the Seven Red Signs - supposedly the greatest mystery in history during S2, and never resolved. (Not that anybody even in-universe would be interested: this "greatest mystery" never had any repercussions, as great and puny powers just shrugged at the Signs coming and going.)
Timo Saloniemi
Timo Saloniemi
Given that they already explained that particular story point in the 2-part Season 2 finale, your comment is false.
It's said several times throughout both parts of Such Sweet Sorrow that Burnham set the signals.
And it just shows the writers didn't understand what the were writing.
It's fairly simple, really. As you probably know, S2 featured two distinct storylines because it had two different sets of writers. The first one involved the Seven Red Signs, and terminated soon after the introductory episode because the writers were shown the door. The second one kept on using the Red Angel, but it abandoned the concept of the Seven Red Signs, and never returned to it.
Basically, the issue is twofold. For one, we learn that there were Seven Signs across the galaxy, remarkable chiefly for their ability to shine so brightly across the vast distances. Of the Signs introduced by the second set of writers, only a single one meets this criterion, though: the one at Terralysium. The rest are local phenomena, and the storytelling actually precludes the possibility that a Red Sign would have appeared over these locations at all, until the respective episodes where a Sign leads the Discovery to the location. So the second set dropped the ball right there already.
For another, the heroes get handed the map of the Seven Signs right off the bat in "Brother". But the subsequent episodes establish that the map doesn't exist, that it is of no help: it does not tell the heroes where the next Sign might appear at all.
In combination, these completely void the idea that Michael Burnham creating her own set of Signs would explain the original Seven. And of course Gabrielle said she didn't create the Seven, either. So they remain a mystery, even though we do have every reason to think that two of the Seven were identical with two of the seven that Michael ultimately lit (Hiawatha and Terralysium; the rest of the Seven were not included in the set lit by Michael).
It's not really the fault of the writers. For some reason, they were told to completely ditch the original storyline, so they came up with this replacement where it's Michael and Control and whatnot; the original story could not be recovered at the end of the season even if the writers tried. The end result nevertheless is that the fictional universe is lacking a major rationale for a significant event now.
Timo Saloniemi
It's fairly simple, really. As you probably know, S2 featured two distinct storylines because it had two different sets of writers. The first one involved the Seven Red Signs, and terminated soon after the introductory episode because the writers were shown the door. The second one kept on using the Red Angel, but it abandoned the concept of the Seven Red Signs, and never returned to it.
Basically, the issue is twofold. For one, we learn that there were Seven Signs across the galaxy, remarkable chiefly for their ability to shine so brightly across the vast distances. Of the Signs introduced by the second set of writers, only a single one meets this criterion, though: the one at Terralysium. The rest are local phenomena, and the storytelling actually precludes the possibility that a Red Sign would have appeared over these locations at all, until the respective episodes where a Sign leads the Discovery to the location. So the second set dropped the ball right there already.
For another, the heroes get handed the map of the Seven Signs right off the bat in "Brother". But the subsequent episodes establish that the map doesn't exist, that it is of no help: it does not tell the heroes where the next Sign might appear at all.
In combination, these completely void the idea that Michael Burnham creating her own set of Signs would explain the original Seven. And of course Gabrielle said she didn't create the Seven, either. So they remain a mystery, even though we do have every reason to think that two of the Seven were identical with two of the seven that Michael ultimately lit (Hiawatha and Terralysium; the rest of the Seven were not included in the set lit by Michael).
It's not really the fault of the writers. For some reason, they were told to completely ditch the original storyline, so they came up with this replacement where it's Michael and Control and whatnot; the original story could not be recovered at the end of the season even if the writers tried. The end result nevertheless is that the fictional universe is lacking a major rationale for a significant event now.
Timo Saloniemi
Berg and Harberts were not fired until the fifth episode of the season was filming.
People grossly overexaggerate the degree to which the creative direction of Seasons 1 and 2 was changed because of Bryan Fuller's departure in the former and Berg and Harberts' departure in the latter.
People grossly overexaggerate the degree to which the creative direction of Seasons 1 and 2 was changed because of Bryan Fuller's departure in the former and Berg and Harberts' departure in the latter.
Not really. After all, as demonstrated, the Seven Signs idea was completely ditched.
Elements conforming to it are basically limited to the Hiawatha incident (two distinct moments the Sign was lit, the "it was the only one close to us" thing made explicit) and the Terralysium one (again a reference to a previous light show when the heroes get there, and this one is not close to the first one). There then is a hiatus on Red Sign episodes, until Kaminar becomes a sorta-halfway event (there is no mention of a previous Sign, but it adheres to the original storytelling where the very arrival of the heroes wrought havoc they had to undo, Quantum Leap style). And then another hiatus, until we have to face the fact that none of the original Seven Signs ever shone upon Boreth.
It would be interesting to hear the whole story behind this, and the reason the original creative direction was found so totally unacceptable. Was the Angel going to be something TPTB couldn't digest?
Timo Saloniemi
Elements conforming to it are basically limited to the Hiawatha incident (two distinct moments the Sign was lit, the "it was the only one close to us" thing made explicit) and the Terralysium one (again a reference to a previous light show when the heroes get there, and this one is not close to the first one). There then is a hiatus on Red Sign episodes, until Kaminar becomes a sorta-halfway event (there is no mention of a previous Sign, but it adheres to the original storytelling where the very arrival of the heroes wrought havoc they had to undo, Quantum Leap style). And then another hiatus, until we have to face the fact that none of the original Seven Signs ever shone upon Boreth.
It would be interesting to hear the whole story behind this, and the reason the original creative direction was found so totally unacceptable. Was the Angel going to be something TPTB couldn't digest?
Timo Saloniemi
You really don't know what you're talking about since we see each of the red signal appearances from Michaels POV in "Such Sweet Sorrow P2".
Oh, come on. You can drop the act - you clearly don't have a clue, either.
No, I don't expect you to be a nice person. But I did try to lay out clearly enough why Michael's signals have nothing to do with the Seven, conceptually or in the details of execution. And that this is not just the generic loose and lazy Star Trek writing at play, but a specific discontinuity in a story that apparently was preplanned but got mutated mid-run. I know exactly what I am talking about, and I am correct here as regards the logical errors in what the writers tried to do.
What to make of that as regards the end product is a YMMV thing. Do we value an internally consistent fictional universe? A string of nice episodes that don't necessarily tell a whole story? A good sprinkling of mystery, however unintended, on what is already an internally reasonably consistent and sufficiently awesome story, possibly enriching the experience? Much of what is good in Star Trek stems from writer error, either with or without the sandpapering afterwards to try and make the rough edges fit after all. And us never learning how the galaxy lit up is not a problem.
It's just that Season 2 ended up showing fourteen signals, not seven, and also showing that at most two of those overlapped spatially (but did not overlap temporally, there being two distinct signals one after another at both locations). And it was left somewhat unclear whether Gabrielle B also made lesser signals whenever and wherever she went, such as when we got red glow at the aftermath of Michael and Spock's chess game. This need not concern us nor the writers to any great extent. It's just fun to think that at some point, the characters themselves must be able to figure this out...
Timo Saloniemi
No, I don't expect you to be a nice person. But I did try to lay out clearly enough why Michael's signals have nothing to do with the Seven, conceptually or in the details of execution. And that this is not just the generic loose and lazy Star Trek writing at play, but a specific discontinuity in a story that apparently was preplanned but got mutated mid-run. I know exactly what I am talking about, and I am correct here as regards the logical errors in what the writers tried to do.
What to make of that as regards the end product is a YMMV thing. Do we value an internally consistent fictional universe? A string of nice episodes that don't necessarily tell a whole story? A good sprinkling of mystery, however unintended, on what is already an internally reasonably consistent and sufficiently awesome story, possibly enriching the experience? Much of what is good in Star Trek stems from writer error, either with or without the sandpapering afterwards to try and make the rough edges fit after all. And us never learning how the galaxy lit up is not a problem.
It's just that Season 2 ended up showing fourteen signals, not seven, and also showing that at most two of those overlapped spatially (but did not overlap temporally, there being two distinct signals one after another at both locations). And it was left somewhat unclear whether Gabrielle B also made lesser signals whenever and wherever she went, such as when we got red glow at the aftermath of Michael and Spock's chess game. This need not concern us nor the writers to any great extent. It's just fun to think that at some point, the characters themselves must be able to figure this out...
Timo Saloniemi
^ You're misinterpreting and misconstruing what we're shown and told onscreen.
No, I am not. The writers were.
But as said, it's not a big problem. I just wonder if you are somehow unable to follow through the logical failures there?
I could hand-walk you through Michael's Signs if it helps, to show that they are not the Seven.
1) Michael lights up one at the Hiawatha. Except there explicitly were two signals there, separated by time, as clearly stated in "Brother", and Michael is only shown lighting one, and there's zero rationale for her to light two (other than predestination, but this wouldn't be a factor if she really were in control of both the signs). And never mind that she also further appears to herself in person, this not setting up a Sign, and raising the question of where and why she was hiding during the events of the episode. Apparently appearing without Signing is part of the original concept here, but this creates problems later on.
2) Michael lights up one over Terralysium. Except again explicitly this Jacob guy already saw another heavenly sign previously, and she only lit the one.
3) Michael lights up one over Kaminar. We never learn whether the locals previously saw one, so she gets a pass there. The signal necessarily overlaps the first one, at the scale of the map and galactic visuals we see. And the heroes at this point (that is, during the events of the original episode) stop pretending these signals appear at previously known (even if somewhat fuzzily established) locations: contrary to the original concept, the location where this signal flares up takes the heroes by surprise. Michael (that is, the Red Angel) also does something to the Ba'ul machines, in her suit that presumably wasn't armed for such tasks - a remnant of the original storyline there?
4) Michael lights up one over Boreth. This deviates from the original concept for good, because there could never have been a previous signal over the holy planet without associated and explicit holy hell. And again, this overlaps the first and third signals spatially, deviating from the map, which everybody has forgotten anyway. This is also the first one to deviate from the original story idea that the arrival of our heroes would set things in motion Quantum Leap style. This time, they simply arrive.
5) Michael lights up one over Xahea. Again there might have been a previous, unmentioned signal there in theory, as with Kaminar - but again there's spatial overlap and the map gets contradicted.
6) Michael lights up one to lead her People to the Future. Again spatial overlap, again everybody fails to point out that the map would have predicted the spot (and with just two signals left, this should be obvious to them). Plus, we finally see a Red Sign for the first time, and boy what a disappointment it is! You really can't impress Lieutenant Connolly with that one. Even the Admiral interrogating the left-behind heroes at the conclusion fails to associate this one conceptually with the Seven.
7) Michael lights up a final one when her timehole is about to collapse, at the conclusion of S2/start of S3. At Terralysium, again providing spatial overlap and thus bringing the actual number of Michael-lit signals down to the final count of two, not seven!
I could well excuse the writers for ignoring the issue of spatial overlap of the Hiawatha, Kaminar, Boreth and Xahea signals - after all, that's just a matter of scale, and we could say the map took artistic liberties or whatnot (despite Pike and Connolly loudly insisting that the distances truly were galactic - perhaps both were mad, or joking, or drunk?). And, heck, I excuse the writers anyway. But there's the conceptual overlap as well, an inexcusable writer brain fart because there won't be seven signals if two of them happen at the exact same spot; there won't be seven signals if one of them happens 124 days after the rest; and there won't be seven signals when several of them blatantly happen twice. The idea of Seven just plain ceases to be with "Sound of Thunder" at the very latest. And yet I excuse that, too, because there's no harm done. This merely means that we don't know who made the Seven Signs, directly because the writers didn't know, either.
(The second set, that is. The first one supposedly did, and some day it would be nice to learn the truth.)
Timo Saloniemi
But as said, it's not a big problem. I just wonder if you are somehow unable to follow through the logical failures there?
I could hand-walk you through Michael's Signs if it helps, to show that they are not the Seven.
1) Michael lights up one at the Hiawatha. Except there explicitly were two signals there, separated by time, as clearly stated in "Brother", and Michael is only shown lighting one, and there's zero rationale for her to light two (other than predestination, but this wouldn't be a factor if she really were in control of both the signs). And never mind that she also further appears to herself in person, this not setting up a Sign, and raising the question of where and why she was hiding during the events of the episode. Apparently appearing without Signing is part of the original concept here, but this creates problems later on.
2) Michael lights up one over Terralysium. Except again explicitly this Jacob guy already saw another heavenly sign previously, and she only lit the one.
3) Michael lights up one over Kaminar. We never learn whether the locals previously saw one, so she gets a pass there. The signal necessarily overlaps the first one, at the scale of the map and galactic visuals we see. And the heroes at this point (that is, during the events of the original episode) stop pretending these signals appear at previously known (even if somewhat fuzzily established) locations: contrary to the original concept, the location where this signal flares up takes the heroes by surprise. Michael (that is, the Red Angel) also does something to the Ba'ul machines, in her suit that presumably wasn't armed for such tasks - a remnant of the original storyline there?
4) Michael lights up one over Boreth. This deviates from the original concept for good, because there could never have been a previous signal over the holy planet without associated and explicit holy hell. And again, this overlaps the first and third signals spatially, deviating from the map, which everybody has forgotten anyway. This is also the first one to deviate from the original story idea that the arrival of our heroes would set things in motion Quantum Leap style. This time, they simply arrive.
5) Michael lights up one over Xahea. Again there might have been a previous, unmentioned signal there in theory, as with Kaminar - but again there's spatial overlap and the map gets contradicted.
6) Michael lights up one to lead her People to the Future. Again spatial overlap, again everybody fails to point out that the map would have predicted the spot (and with just two signals left, this should be obvious to them). Plus, we finally see a Red Sign for the first time, and boy what a disappointment it is! You really can't impress Lieutenant Connolly with that one. Even the Admiral interrogating the left-behind heroes at the conclusion fails to associate this one conceptually with the Seven.
7) Michael lights up a final one when her timehole is about to collapse, at the conclusion of S2/start of S3. At Terralysium, again providing spatial overlap and thus bringing the actual number of Michael-lit signals down to the final count of two, not seven!
I could well excuse the writers for ignoring the issue of spatial overlap of the Hiawatha, Kaminar, Boreth and Xahea signals - after all, that's just a matter of scale, and we could say the map took artistic liberties or whatnot (despite Pike and Connolly loudly insisting that the distances truly were galactic - perhaps both were mad, or joking, or drunk?). And, heck, I excuse the writers anyway. But there's the conceptual overlap as well, an inexcusable writer brain fart because there won't be seven signals if two of them happen at the exact same spot; there won't be seven signals if one of them happens 124 days after the rest; and there won't be seven signals when several of them blatantly happen twice. The idea of Seven just plain ceases to be with "Sound of Thunder" at the very latest. And yet I excuse that, too, because there's no harm done. This merely means that we don't know who made the Seven Signs, directly because the writers didn't know, either.
(The second set, that is. The first one supposedly did, and some day it would be nice to learn the truth.)
Timo Saloniemi
Last edited:
I think that Georgiou's Admiral's uniform was just for this ep only. She seems to like the black covert ops gear. As for rank, I guess the S31 show will settle that. I'm of the belief it will be set during the 32nd century. Heck, I'm assuming she's already figured out how to contact S31 of this century.
