Janeway or Archer

[MicahBrack]

Archer all the way. Janeway was the worst Starfleet captain in the history of Star Trek.

She spent the first two seasons ranting about the prime directive with regard to Voyager's troubles with the Kazon and giving self-righteous speeches about how the crew must keep their values (meaning her values). Then in the final three seasons she had no problem with throwing aside those values and the prime directive when it came to the Borg.

Overall, her obsession with the Borg became one of the most annoying aspects of ST: VOY. Almost every other episode she would go off on some speech about the importance of individuality and how evil the Borg were because they didn't agree with her. I thought Starfleet captains are supposed to be about embracing other cultures, not ranting about how Human culture is so superior.

Do I need to even get into the fact that she was responsible for all those people (many of whom died during the voyage) being stuck in the Delta Quadrant in the first place?

The writers really screwed up when it came to that character - a self-righteous, hypocritical obnoxious b*tch.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I kinda prefer Janeway, slightly more diplomatic and definitely more intelligent than that guy who kept getting beat up,

I loved ENT, but i was not a fan of Archer.

Getting beat up used to be a Star Trek tradition (see numerous episodes of TOS). If Janeway was real Trek Captain she'd get beat up more often.

 

[Katrine]

I happen to have liked both shows, but I'd say Janeway simply because there were men like Archer & Kirk before her. How many times did she look up something on the ships computer library when in a uandry about a situation? It would not have been possible had it not been for all the captains before her, even Archer.

 

[Mordock]

Interesting choice for a poll, since they are, in a way, the same character: a moody, inconsistent, bullheaded martinet who, thanks to producerial fiat, is always in the right (even when wrong).

I think I agree with SFRabid that Archer has the edge, though, since he became somewhat more tolerable as his series went along.

 

[Nedersong]

I kinda prefer Janeway, slightly more diplomatic and definitely more intelligent than that guy who kept getting beat up,

I loved ENT, but i was not a fan of Archer.

Getting beat up used to be a Star Trek tradition (see numerous episodes of TOS). If Janeway was real Trek Captain she'd get beat up more often.

She's a woman and even in the modern age people still believe that women shouldn't be fighters. Despite that we have women boxers and martial artists.

Many people would be offended by her being beaten up like archer, because we shouldn't beat up on women. When people think of women being beaten up they tend to think of that woman being abused, usually by men.

 

[Ro_Laren]

Of course Janeway was a better Captain! If she had to deal with the Xindi probe should would have destroyed it in a week...

 

[LeadHead]

Archer for me. His arc worked better for me, a Captain who stumbled and made mistakes, who was tempered and trained by his experiences and became a very strong and decisive leader.

I liked Janeway a lot in the earlier seasons, then she became a very inconsistent character that really bugged me.

Also, I hate Coffee

 

[Gepard]

Archer is the guy who makes Janeway look like a great captain. Sure, she was inconsistent, but at least she wasn't five steps from being a drooling moron. Sign me up for the Delta Quadrent!

 

[Jono]

I'd go with Archer. He had a very tough job since he was in command of a vessel that was slower, less powerful and less advanced then just about every single other person out there at the time.

 

[bluedana]

From what little I've seen of VOY, I'd pick Archer. He didn't get to rely on technobabble to solve problems, and he had this sort of protective quality with respect to his crew that I haven't seen in the few episodes of VOY I've sat through.

 

[Triskelion]

Janeway all the way.

And I don't mind inconsistency. I wouldn't handle the Borg the same way I'd handle say, the Hirogen, or the Ocampa. With the Borg, all bets are off. After all, total destruction of a civilization is the Borg's term, not Starfleet's. I've got no problem at all with that kind of "inconsistency". Respect for the Borg culture sounds pretty short-sighted. If the Borg make it a matter of survival of one's own civilization, then it's time to bend the rules, or bend over and kiss our self-righteous asses goodbye.

Where is the enlightenment in that? At some point you have to acknowledge the positive contribution of one's culture, take responsibility for protecting and preserving it. Sometimes you have to shoot the wolf. Or stand aside and let the wolves have the world. Some enlightenment. Selfish lack of responsibility, you ask me.

 

[Sector 7]

Wow... interesting debate. It's the lesser of two evils. Drooling moron vs. menstrual bitch.
Tough call... Archer just had no backbone. If I'd served my combat duty under him I'd be dead. Janeway would have faced a court martial upon return for all her Prime Directive violations, but she would have gotten us back alive.
My vote has to be for Janeway.

 

[Falcor5]

I vote for Janeway. I just always thought Archer was kind of wimpy.

 

[Steven Of Nine]

Janeway. Easily.

 

[Aragorn]

Well, you have to give Archer credit for having an awfully low death count. Plus he wasn't so self-absorbed and self-important that he spent all his free time in stuffy, elitist holodeck scenarios.

Although if Janeway cared enough about you and you were killed, she'd be able to reverse the quantum trajectory of the metaphysical polarity to create a trilateral temporal inverse fluxuation in the space-time continuum and rescue you. Of course, if she didn't even know your name she sure wouldn't give a damn if you died.

 

[exodus]

Archer all the way. Janeway was the worst Starfleet captain in the history of Star Trek.

She spent the first two seasons ranting about the prime directive with regard to Voyager's troubles with the Kazon and giving self-righteous speeches about how the crew must keep their values (meaning her values). Then in the final three seasons she had no problem with throwing aside those values and the prime directive when it came to the Borg.

Overall, her obsession with the Borg became one of the most annoying aspects of ST: VOY. Almost every other episode she would go off on some speech about the importance of individuality and how evil the Borg were because they didn't agree with her. I thought Starfleet captains are supposed to be about embracing other cultures, not ranting about how Human culture is so superior.

Do I need to even get into the fact that she was responsible for all those people (many of whom died during the voyage) being stuck in the Delta Quadrant in the first place?

The writers really screwed up when it came to that character - a self-righteous, hypocritical obnoxious b*tch.

You mean like how Picard was judgemental of Q and held Q to human values of morals and ethics when Picard had no clue of what it was to be Q or anything about their culture?


Janeway wins. Starfleet Officers take an oath to lay down their lives in the line of duty. All that died on Janeways watch died doing what they were trained for, just like that Ensign in TNG's "Lower Decks".

 

[JM1776]

Which Archer? The one from seasons one through three or the guy resembling a starship captain from season four?

 

[Aragorn]

Archer started bad and ended good.

Janeway started good and ended bad.

The reason Archer started out bad is because the first two seasons of Enterprise could've passed for seasons 8-9 of Voyager. Other than Walker, Texas Ranger, what kind of network TV show that is just plain awful would last nine seasons?

 

[James Bond]

Interesting circumstances each found themselves in. Janeway started out determined to uphold Starfleet protocols and philosophy in a wilderness and in the end found herself becoming a veritable Ripley (Alien), a mother wolf who would bend or break any rule or violate her own ethics in order to protect her brood.

Archer, meanwhile, similarly found himself in a wildnerness but had no paradigm from which to proceed except the Vulcan paradigm which he'd already largely rejected. He was forced to act as a pioneer in an ethical and tactical way, making it up as he went along. Given all that, I don't think he did the worst job. Too many people judge him against a future they already know but which he didn't.

Which was the better captain. Tough to say. I'd say overall (given his implied future) Archer was the more successful of the two. He did a very big thing while Janeway's accomplishment was much smaller... and don't tell me "she beat the Borg" because that was never implicitly stated or shown. She dealt them blow after blow, admittedly, but the foe remained after she brought her flock back to Earth.

I'd have to agree with assessment.

Archer doesn't exist, neither does that nameless show he was on.

You realize of course, that Star Trek as a whole doesn't actually exist, right?

 

[kimc]

Definitely Janeway.

I give Archer points for the cute dog though.