Yeah, I'm not sure I'd give the show too much credit for being progressive by tackling 1950s racism in the 1990s. TOS was actually sneaking stuff past the censors by using allegory.
I officially began my journey through all Star Trek on October 9th...
- Thread starter Shalashaska
- Start date
If all you see in Far Beyond the Stars in the 1950s, than it seems to fall flat as a critique. However, it was as much about the 1950s as MASH was. Indeed, the genius is that the episode works on several levels. First, it is a metaphor for Sisko's experiences, acknowledging the elements of the African American experience that has been part of the character, on and off, since the pilot. Second, it is a critique of the birth of science fiction. Yes, the episode was written by a white man at a time when white men were still dominating science fiction. The episode presents, nonetheless, the mechanisms by which science fiction can act as a vehicle for social improvement by proposing futures that could not be imagined at the time. I think it is interesting that Benny is presented as a contemporary of Gene Roddenberry, a veteran struggling to put across a unique story. Indeed, Benny is probably more like what we wanted Roddenberry to be like than he really was. Writing this story made it almost essentially that Benny's world was as much as possible like Roddenberry's. Third, I think it confronts some of the presumptions that a few science fictions have about the future. Star Trek has not been the only universe in which technology solved certain social problems (in some cases, to create new ones). The episode is a reminder that social justice has been won by emotional struggles, sometimes with the inclusion of strong spiritual messages, and that the people who are fighting do explore their identities without guilt. Benny, as well as Sisko, is unapologetically black. He is impossible to whitewash.
I wonder what the hatred between the character played by shimmermann and the one played by siddig was all about.
Yeah, it's definitely DS9's official "WTF did I just watch?" Episode. Not quite as epic as Voyagers "Threshold", "Profit and Lace" is a much more traditional type of "wrong on every level" sort of ick.
First kiss on the lips between two guys, of the franchise though...
I didn't think of it as a polemical episode. It was just a very moving human story. For sci-fi fans it was also nice to see a portrayal of the early days on screen. These two things combine to demonstrate the power and importance of imagination.
Also making fun of Klingons, which is always fun.
What's strange is Sisko's later remarks about Vic's program in Bada Bing Bada Bang.
I kind of feel that it's over dramatized. I wish Sisko hadn't pontificated as much as he did. You know for example when he says: "I had to tell him that the truth was a lie" or something to that effect.
In the Pale Moonlight is often argued for as DS9's best episode (Generally the point of debate is with The Visitor) and stands as one of the entire franchises highest moments. That closing scene with Sisco dictating his log is just chilling. It is as you say Star Trek grown up. OK gang you've achieved Utopia. Now what are you willing to do to keep it? To protect and save it, when faced with an inherently incompatible and virtually unstoppable enemy? Yeah Sisco is not Picard... and if he was the Federation would have died. Andrew Robinson's performance was so good in this one. Garrak is evil, coniving, duplicitous, underhanded and a murderer. But by every measure, he is not wrong. He reminds me a bit of Avon from Blakes 7.
And one of the things that makes the episode work, is unlike First Contact's whining emo over the top Picard, everything we see of Sisco in this episode has been there from the beginning. The first time we meet Sisco we see him facing unimaginable loss against an unstoppable enemy. Everything from that point on builds on his desire to not face that again. Not him, not his people, not his family or Federation. He built the Federations first dedicated warship. He took it to war to defend home and hearth. Picard and TNG represents the ideal. DS9 and Sisco represent the realities. Realpolitik. Sometimes you do have to do a bad thing to prevent a far far worse outcome. With Picard we see him shrieking about drawing a line and not one step further while frothing at the mouth aboard his badly damaged ship while facing his worst fear. Whereas by this point we have watched Sisco spend 6 years building that line. Manning it. All while praying it never comes to that.
Actually what Sisco does here may be argued to be far more moral and defensible than some of Picard's actions while following orders. Sisco looked the other way when a foreign spy killed a hostile diplomat of another foreign power, because it was in his and the Federations best interests to do so. Picard initiated a 24th Century Trail or Tears that led to the Maqui and the use of WMD's on civilian Federation targets.
This episode also highlights one of the core differences between Sisco/DS9 and Picard/TNG. Picard is as we know an Explorer, A Diplomat, A researcher and a Philosopher. The Enterprise is out seeking new worlds. Whereas Sisco is a frontier Sheriff. He is the only law out on the edge. Out there on the line. The light standing against the darkness. If you even read any Terry Pratchett he is a bit like the Sam Vines character in some regards. He will accept some moral stain in order to keep it from others. To keep others safe. He has principles. He will not break those. But his are the hands that will get dirty when the job must be done.
Also worth noting going forward will be the subtle contrasts between Sisco in this case and the new recurring character introduced last episode, William Sadlers, Luther Sloan. The shades of grey are fascinating.
Last edited:
I think it's overrated and here's why: it's normal. Most people in that situation would make that decision. It's not anything out of the ordinary, not especially heroic, etc. When I think of "Gene's vision" oooh-ahhh, it isn't of a family-friendly future that can only exist in fiction. I think of it as bolder one achieved by effort, sacrifice, ingenuity and choice. "In the Pale Moonlight" showed me a war-battered and weary Sisko, outwitted by Garak, overshadowed by Vreenak, who did what any schlep would ultimately do in his place. Nothing mind-blowing there, folks.
Harry Truman said, however true, that he never lost a night's sleep approving the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki because it was simply a matter of numbers -- many more would have died otherwise. You'd think that if it were say Pike, if he couldn't find a better way to victory, of course he'd make the same decision, but you'd respect him because you know he'd carry it with him, he'd lose sleep. I didn't find Hawk cool at the end there for toasting his mediocrity. He can live with it? Yeah, no shit. So could you or I.
It's a good episode, but I think it stands out because it's unusual rather than brilliant.
Harry Truman said, however true, that he never lost a night's sleep approving the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki because it was simply a matter of numbers -- many more would have died otherwise. You'd think that if it were say Pike, if he couldn't find a better way to victory, of course he'd make the same decision, but you'd respect him because you know he'd carry it with him, he'd lose sleep. I didn't find Hawk cool at the end there for toasting his mediocrity. He can live with it? Yeah, no shit. So could you or I.
It's a good episode, but I think it stands out because it's unusual rather than brilliant.
Oh one other thing that is interesting to note about DS9. While it had an exceptionally talented writers room, even by Star Trek standards, most of the flow and these subtle greys and nuances in the later seasons largely come from the input of two people. Ira Behr, the showrunner and Ronald D Moore, one of the lead writers. Who we all know from this show and his numerous other projects, such as his Battlestar Galactica. Moore is one of the things that really set DS9 apart from the other shows, in a very subtle way. Most writers are writers by trade and education. English Majors of some sort and coming up through the highly liberal politically left leaning Hollywood system. They by and large have some background in maybe Journalism or Film Studies or similar. Pretty much all out of the same mold. But Moore was different. His Education was in Political Science with a healthy dosing of Economics. These greys, these contrasts between the ideal and the realpolitik. Between what was wished for and what was, are what fascinated him. What he understood. What he brought forth. It often shows up in unusual places in DS9. In little character moments. Often in quick filler scenes Moore had to cobble together to get another minutes run time in on an episode that was running short. Pay special attention to Quark. More often than not he seems to be Moore's mouth for these sorts of things. This is one of the better examples from "Way of the Warrior"
What were you expecting?
ETA: This episode, like the four episodes before it, explored the tension between the values of promoted by one's culture, one's personal relationships, and the needs of the state in war. It would be explored seven more times before the "final chapters" arc. It was ground that the series explored perhaps too well.
Last edited:
I do too. Have you just watched The Reckoning then?
I agree completely--except not Reckoning.
The Bajor stuff grew on me as the series went on.
By Bajor stuff, you mean their obsession with the Cardassian occupation or the one with the prophets. It seems that they talk of little else.
All of it. They became a pretty well-developed culture, as Trek aliens go.
Yes we learned a lot of things about them. Their fantastic landscapes, their thirty thousand year old history (six times as long as ours), the buried city that Sisko found, the orbs, the fire caves, the prophets, the pah wraiths, spring wine... and much more.
How you liking them Ferengi episodes now?
Similar threads
