How could anyone say Archer was the best captain?
- Thread starter ReadyAndWilling
- Start date
Disillusioned
Commander
I can't say I really agree with that. Some of the worst decisions Archer ever made were during seasons 3 and 4.
Examples please?
Disillusioned
Commander
1) There was that time he rather stupidly and arrogantly lead himself and his people into a trap that almost got them captured and turned into slave labor. Really, any time he lead an away mission meant that he was putting the primary mission at risk. Just look at how many times it lead to him being infected by something and/or almost killed. I know they were trying to have him be more like Kirk, but the "captain redshirt" (as TheGoulBen puts it) aspect really wasn't one of the better aspects of Kirk's character.
2) There was that time he threatened to airlock a guy.
3) There was that time ordered a clone made of Trip, treated that clone like crap, then killed the clone in order to save Trip. What bothered me about this wasn't so much that it was done as it was that it was completely forgotten about and never addressed again, considering its unethical nature.
4) I'd almost bring up what happened in "Hatchery", but technically that was more the fault of the MACOs for listening to Archer while he was under the influence of Xindi love juice, but this is another example of why Archer shouldn't have gone on so many away missions himself.
5) Then there was that time Archer decided he couldn't be a real captain and send the only crew member he had who was experienced at flying their captured Xindi shuttle on a suicide mission which as far as he knew would have resulted in the destruction of the Xindi planet buster and completed the objective of their mission. Instead he abandoned his post and left a Vulcan civilian in charge of his ship when he could tell she wasn't quite right. Really this is the biggest instance of season 3 where Archer is a poor captain.
6) The next one that really bothers me is in "Daedalus", when it's obvious that scientist guy has lied to them, yet the captain still insists on keeping the ship where it is. One crew member has already died, another has been injured, yet he ignores the input from all of his officers and keeps his ship and crew in harms way.
I'd say the majority of it as far as the run of each season went though was the cliched action hero mentality that put Captain Archer in pretty much every away mission. Each time he did so he was essentially abandoning his post and endangering the mission. I had to bust out laughing during the Klingon episodes when Archer charged in to rescue Phlox all by himself.
Captain Archer definitely had his moments ("Observer Effect" springs to mind), but for the most part I didn't see much change in his character or his leadership style from the first two seasons.
2) There was that time he threatened to airlock a guy.
3) There was that time ordered a clone made of Trip, treated that clone like crap, then killed the clone in order to save Trip. What bothered me about this wasn't so much that it was done as it was that it was completely forgotten about and never addressed again, considering its unethical nature.
4) I'd almost bring up what happened in "Hatchery", but technically that was more the fault of the MACOs for listening to Archer while he was under the influence of Xindi love juice, but this is another example of why Archer shouldn't have gone on so many away missions himself.
5) Then there was that time Archer decided he couldn't be a real captain and send the only crew member he had who was experienced at flying their captured Xindi shuttle on a suicide mission which as far as he knew would have resulted in the destruction of the Xindi planet buster and completed the objective of their mission. Instead he abandoned his post and left a Vulcan civilian in charge of his ship when he could tell she wasn't quite right. Really this is the biggest instance of season 3 where Archer is a poor captain.
6) The next one that really bothers me is in "Daedalus", when it's obvious that scientist guy has lied to them, yet the captain still insists on keeping the ship where it is. One crew member has already died, another has been injured, yet he ignores the input from all of his officers and keeps his ship and crew in harms way.
I'd say the majority of it as far as the run of each season went though was the cliched action hero mentality that put Captain Archer in pretty much every away mission. Each time he did so he was essentially abandoning his post and endangering the mission. I had to bust out laughing during the Klingon episodes when Archer charged in to rescue Phlox all by himself.
Captain Archer definitely had his moments ("Observer Effect" springs to mind), but for the most part I didn't see much change in his character or his leadership style from the first two seasons.
1) All Captains did that, not just Archer
2) So what? We hear about how great it is to airlock people in NuBSG but someone complains if it's done in Trek?
3) One-episode-then-forget, happens in Trek.
4) Again, all the other Captains did this too (away missions)
5) He figured someone unfettered by emotions would be able to pull it off. Sounds reasonable.
6) Never saw this episode
2) So what? We hear about how great it is to airlock people in NuBSG but someone complains if it's done in Trek?
3) One-episode-then-forget, happens in Trek.
4) Again, all the other Captains did this too (away missions)
5) He figured someone unfettered by emotions would be able to pull it off. Sounds reasonable.
6) Never saw this episode
I think it has something to do with being the captain of the only Earth Warp 5 ship. If he died, there was no easy way of sending over a replacement, or even communicating the need for one. Also, the general lack of experience in the crew, especially in command, would hamper them if one had to take over long term.
Because it's par for the course nuBSG for people to threaten, or actually, airlock people. It however seems wrong to see it in Star Trek.
Can't argue with that.
Picard seemed not to do that, at least as often, but that's because Riker did his job in ensuring the captain kept himself safe.
Can't remember the episode that well, so can't comment on it either.
Also can't comment on it.
This isn't to say I disagree with you on this, Anwar, I think it was totally in character for him, as the explorer type captain, like Kirk, to be the one leading his away missions. It's probably behaviour like his and Kirks' that led to stricter enforcing of regulations preventing captain's going down in such scenarios, especially by Picard's era.
Disillusioned
Commander
Other than Kirk, not so much. TNG made a point of having Riker lead the vast majority of the away missions. If Picard ever went on one, there was usually a big deal made out of it. Sisko went on one from time to time early on, but he got better about it as the series progressed. I can only think of a few times Janeway went on an away mission.
I'm not going to bother with some kind of a versus argument here. This is about Archer as a Starfleet captain.
Which is not a good thing, and doesn't change Archer's actions or the attitude he displayed in the episode.
Part of the point I made was that he knew that wasn't the case with T'Pol. He saw that something was not right with her. Even if she had been completely normal, that still doesn't change the fact Archer abandoned his post. His lament about "ordering people to their death" is part of it too, because that's exactly what a commanding officer must do at times. If he couldn't deal with that then he should not have been captain.
Plus what I'm pointing out is that Captain Archer doesn't really show all that much improvement from the first two seasons.
Whole grain?
1. You don't think things like this happened to other captains? Kirk - several times. Picard - turned into a Borg. Sisko - lost the station. Janeway - Lost her ship.
2. He made a hard decision. Sorry you did not agree. Hope the planet never depends on you for survival.
3. See above.
4. It was the crew that was stupid in this episode.
5. You lost me on this one.
6. I'll give you this one. That's one out of the last 48 episodes. I would call that a big improvement over the first two years.
2. He made a hard decision. Sorry you did not agree. Hope the planet never depends on you for survival.
3. See above.
4. It was the crew that was stupid in this episode.
5. You lost me on this one.
6. I'll give you this one. That's one out of the last 48 episodes. I would call that a big improvement over the first two years.
To me, Archer was written exactly the way he should be. As a pre-Federation starship captain, he didn't have the deep-space knowledge or experience that Kirk, Picard, etc., had. Archer had to figure out stuff on his own and yes he made mistakes at times.
Archer isn't my favorite captain, but I do think he was appropriate for the era he was in, IMO...
Archer isn't my favorite captain, but I do think he was appropriate for the era he was in, IMO...
Disillusioned
Commander
None of that has any bearing on what I listed. Picard was kidnapped off of his bridge and Sisko was forced to withdraw.
If the planet is ever stupid enough to send only one ship after a threat like that, then it practically deserves to be destroyed. In any case I don't belong to the Jack Bauer school of thought in that I'd rather lose as the good guy than win as the bad guy.
And who insisted on leading that away team? Who opened up his helmet just because there was air to breathe?
Archer admitted he couldn't be captain and abandoned his post as well as the mission he was charged with.
He acts exactly the same in every season. In "Daedalus" he still has the same attitude toward anyone giving him advice as he does in "A Night in Sickbay."
There's a difference between being inexperienced and being incompetent. Not knowing about the different aliens is no excuse for acting like an ass, even to his own crew. He simply lacked good leadership skills, which would be especially important because he is supposed to be the first one out there.
And all of us on Earth would be proud, dead, but very proud.
This has got to be one of the stupidest moral stands I've ever seen (and Disillusioned isn't the only one I've seen take it). My whole species'll be destroyed, but I'll feel good about myself. Gimme a fucking break.
You've got me feeling dirty now... I'm defending Archer.
I'll agree that Archer might have been the best captain in terms of historical significance, helping to create the Federation, ect.
Disillusioned
Commander
That's where I stand according to my sense of morality and integrity. I do not belong to the school of thought that all the good things people are supposed to stand for go out the airlock the second we're at risk, because to face facts, there is never really ever a time that we are not at risk.
By calling my sense of morality "stupid", apparently.
That's where I stand according to my sense of morality and integrity. I do not belong to the school of thought that all the good things people are supposed to stand for go out the airlock the second we're at risk, because to face facts, there is never really ever a time that we are not at risk.
By calling my sense of morality "stupid", apparently.
Dumb is dumb. You're the one that put out the equation: One man's morals are worth six billion lives.
Didn't he torture that guy in S3 just for the files on the spheres?
I doubt Archer will be welcomed back to the Delphic Expanse anytime soon. But he accomplished his mission: saving humanity. Historians can look back and question the validity of his actions... but at least they'll be there to ask the questions.
In any case, torturing someone should have been one of those "mistakes he learned from".
Every Trek show is a child of its time, I guess.
I wish their comment on torture would have been bolder than just "look!...we'll still need to torture the baddies in the 22nd century. And Archer is badass enough to handle it."
Every Trek show is a child of its time, I guess.
I wish their comment on torture would have been bolder than just "look!...we'll still need to torture the baddies in the 22nd century. And Archer is badass enough to handle it."
Did you ever watch DS9? And if so, do you also think Sisko is the worst captain along with archer? If not, that is some double standard. Sisko spent much of his time leaving the space station to go off on some adventure and took along someone not in Star Fleet to be his first officer on the ship. Someone like that must really be a horrible captain. Entertaining, but horrible. 
I guess I just enjoy the more human Captains'. The ones who aren't afraid to make the big decisions, even if they might be wrong. There's just something more interesting about those characters.
We watched Jim Kirk do it, Ben Sisko do it and Jonathan Archer do it. Each character knew how their actions may have been interpreted and yet went forward anyway.
Similar threads
