One Season too Many?

[TheLobes]

The thing is, I think a show has the right to be not quite as great in the first season.

Conversely, you can make the case that it's okay for a show to be not quite as great in its sixth or seventh seasons. History teaches us that shows which reach that age are normally in a state of decline, very few shows reach their peak in season 6 or 7 (The Shield being the only exception I can think of). By that time writers are running out of ideas, they begin repeating themselves, or they jump the shark, so the fact that DS9 was still a quality show when it reached that point (as is the opinion of most) is commendable.

I dont really think you can make that sort of argument. As I said, the 'failures' of season one were due not to bad writing, but by the use a trial and error process, testing the waters to see what kind of shows would work for DS9. This produced episodes like 'If Wishes Were Horses', but it also produced episodes like 'Duet', and the next few seasons refined what had worked well and built on it.

The fact that history teaches us that shows tend to fall apart in later seasons seems to suggest that the writers should have really focused on this, and come up with various methods to avoid it. They should have known that doing things like:

-Making your main antagonist fade from the story, and changing what makes him cool

-Seperating your two stories into two totally seperate climaxes in the same finale.

- Using poorly explained paranormal and intanglible bad guys.

- Bringing in a new character at the start of the last season.

Are basically not going to make your show that great. I mean I know people are pretty divided about Ezri, but nobody on here seems to like the Pah-wraiths. There must have been writers on that show that knew they were a terrible idea, but nothing was done about it. Thats a lot different to what happened in season 1.

My ideal would be to shorten up the show to six seasons. Everything would be the same until the end of the opening six season arc; Jadzia would die at the end of this, just at the moment of triumph as the station is taken. Instead of bringing in a new Dax, we would actually be able to see the grief acting on the crew, Worf would be desperate for battle, Sisko would lose confidence in himself, Julian would fall into depression, and the rest of the crew would just have a general sense of defeat. This is where I would have placed 'In the Pale Moonlight'. With the Romulans in the war, the Dominion forces (including Dukat) would agree that the wormhole needs to be opened for reinforcements, and DS9 would then become the central point of action. Sisko's success in getting the Romulans into the war would actually be visibly beneficial in this version, and give the episode more depth.

As DS9 becomes the focal point of the war, it becomes a station under seige. This is where you place an episode like 'AR558'. The crew becomes united again under the pressure of fighting, and this leads to the final battle against the dominion. We'd still have the founders illness, and the battle would play out much like the original battle in 'What You Leave Behind', accept the founders and Weyoun would be on a flagship. Odo would then make his offer to return to the founders and heal them in exchange for surrender. Dukat, enraged, would take control of his ship and head for the wormhole, intent on destroying it, crippling Bajor. Sisko, realising his purpose, would take a runabout or something and sacrifice himself by ramming Dukats ship. At the last second, he would be saved by the prophets, and when then appear for Jake and Kassidy to let them learn of his fate, the same as in the original ending.

I know this isnt perfect, and some episodes would have to be cut, but this eliminates a lot of the redundant aspects of the series, and I think it would have made the story a lot tighter.

 

[Tulaberry whine]

To your first point, you should look up the term "anti-hero." I think early seasons-Dukat fits it well.

"Waltz" was revisionist writing. Dukat's attitude toward Bajorans and his role in the occupation had always been pretty ambivalent. Suddenly in "Waltz" he has a Hitler-esque hatred toward the Bajorans. I guess they figured Trek viewers needed a cartoony supervillain to boo and hiss at.

I think you're mixing up Dukat's rather messed up image of himself with what we saw onscreen. I mean, we're talking about a man who believes the Occupation was good for the Bajorans (this was established years before Waltz).

"The voice of the new Cardassia – so compassionate, so understanding. Almost makes you forget that five years ago, he was working Bajorans to death in forced labor camps and shooting anybody who tried to stop him! Almost makes you forget."

OK, refer to episodes like "Indiscretion" and "Return to Grace," basically season 4 Dukat, before his big comeback as Dominion ally/puppet in the later part of the series. Now try and reconcile that Dukat with "Waltz" and "Covenant" Gul Dukat. I cannot.

Like I said, I was wrong about the anti-hero thing. However I maintain that they took a complex and well-written character and turned him into a cartoon by the end of the series.

You may not, but I certainly can. The developments in Waltz made perfect sense given the context in which it takes place. By that stage Dukat has literally lost everything, why would he still bother with the pretence about his role in the Occupation? And where does that pretence end and delusion begin?

In any case, Dukat's admission in Waltz is neither sudden nor surprising. From Emissary - where in the very first scene he is in he delivers a pretty blunt threat to retake the station - right up to Call to Arms - where the only reason he doesn't reoccupy Bajor is because he's on the Dominion's leash - Dukat's thoughts and ambitions towards Bajor are pretty transparent if you ask me.

Whether you agree with the direction the writers took Dukat in the later seasons - and I agree it didn't really amount to much in the end - I don't think it involved a retcon at all.

 

[TheGodBen]

I dont really think you can make that sort of argument. As I said, the 'failures' of season one were due not to bad writing, but by the use a trial and error process, testing the waters to see what kind of shows would work for DS9. This produced episodes like 'If Wishes Were Horses', but it also produced episodes like 'Duet', and the next few seasons refined what had worked well and built on it.

Okay, but if you're allowed to toss aside my excuse for the failings of season 7, I'm allowed to toss aside your excuse for the failings of season 1. Just glancing at my DVD collection, the only two shows I have where the first season is significantly weaker than the rest of the show are DS9 and TNG. (Actually, I'll include The Shield as well, that first season is nowhere near as good as the heights they managed later.) All of those shows have weaknesses in their first season, or something is missing, but they didn't let those weaknesses drag them down like DS9 season 1 did.

Frasier's first season was largely lacking in the Frasier/Niles dynamic that was a source of much comedy in the rest of the show. The Wire's first season focused on a single case and lacked the wider scope of the later seasons. The West Wing's first season had a boring character called Mandy who got in the way before being jettisoned without explanation before the second season. But all those first seasons were great, they didn't let those weaknesses get in the way like DS9 did. If I'm recommending The West Wing to someone, I don't have to add that it gets really good in season 2 when Mandy goes away, it's really good right out the gate in spite of Mandy.

However, if I'm recommending The West Wing to someone, I do have to warn them that there's a big drop in quality in season 5. If I'm recommending Frasier to someone, I have to warn them that there's a gradual decline in quality starting around season 6. In fact, of all the shows I own that last longer than a couple of seasons, I have to warn that there's a decline in quality at some point during the run. (Except for The Shield, there's a show that kept getting better right up to the end.)

As you can see, my explanations for the weaknesses in DS9 seasons 1 and 7 are consistent with how I view television generally. But even from an entirely objective standpoint, I still think that season 7 is way ahead of season 1, warts and all.

 

[sonak]

I think you're mixing up Dukat's rather messed up image of himself with what we saw onscreen. I mean, we're talking about a man who believes the Occupation was good for the Bajorans (this was established years before Waltz).

"The voice of the new Cardassia – so compassionate, so understanding. Almost makes you forget that five years ago, he was working Bajorans to death in forced labor camps and shooting anybody who tried to stop him! Almost makes you forget."

OK, refer to episodes like "Indiscretion" and "Return to Grace," basically season 4 Dukat, before his big comeback as Dominion ally/puppet in the later part of the series. Now try and reconcile that Dukat with "Waltz" and "Covenant" Gul Dukat. I cannot.

Like I said, I was wrong about the anti-hero thing. However I maintain that they took a complex and well-written character and turned him into a cartoon by the end of the series.

You may not, but I certainly can. The developments in Waltz made perfect sense given the context in which it takes place. By that stage Dukat has literally lost everything, why would he still bother with the pretence about his role in the Occupation? And where does that pretence end and delusion begin?

In any case, Dukat's admission in Waltz is neither sudden nor surprising. From Emissary - where in the very first scene he is in he delivers a pretty blunt threat to retake the station - right up to Call to Arms - where the only reason he doesn't reoccupy Bajor is because he's on the Dominion's leash - Dukat's thoughts and ambitions towards Bajor are pretty transparent if you ask me.

Whether you agree with the direction the writers took Dukat in the later seasons - and I agree it didn't really amount to much in the end - I don't think it involved a retcon at all.

Ah, so you're basically just saying that you DISBELIEVE him when he says he regrets the Occupation and his role in it, and then you choose to BELIEVE him when he expresses a racist hostility toward the Bajorans and aspirations to conquest.


Why do you decide that one point of view represents his real feelings and the other is "pretense?" Is it because by cherry-picking character aspects you can eliminate the ambiguities in that character?

I guess you would think Dukat is written consistently throughout the series if you just choose to ignore or dismiss any evidence that contradicts that view.

 

[Navaros]

I dont want to make a blanket statement, but it seems to me that people on this forum generally agree that season seven of DS9 had major problems, and was the worst one. My question is: 'Do you think DS9 would have worked better as a six season show?'

I do not think it is the case that most people think Season 7 is the worst-not by a longshot.

In fact, Season 7 is perhaps the best, although Season 6 may also be the best.

The main problem exclusive to Season 7 is the fubaring of Dukat nonsense getting ludicrously out of control, but even that started as of Season 6's "Waltz" episode. Other than that, Season 7 is no worse than any other season.

Yes, Season 7 has a bunch of bad episodes, such as the Ezri filler episodes. However, every single season of DS9 has a similar amount of bad episodes. Moreover, Season 7 also has a ton of masterpiece episodes.

Yes, as you've pointed out, there is also the problem of how they keep sidelining the Dominion subject matter. But again, that's a series-wide problem (starting way back in Season 3), not a Season 7-specific problem.

The best way to correct the problems you have pointed out would be for the show to be made, across the whole series, with: a> no bad filler episodes and b> 100% serialization.

However, in and of itself, having a 6-season series would have done nothing to improve any of the issues you've mentioned because it still would have resulted in 6 seasons, each of which is laced with a bunch of bad and disjunctive episodes.

 

[Tulaberry whine]

OK, refer to episodes like "Indiscretion" and "Return to Grace," basically season 4 Dukat, before his big comeback as Dominion ally/puppet in the later part of the series. Now try and reconcile that Dukat with "Waltz" and "Covenant" Gul Dukat. I cannot.

Like I said, I was wrong about the anti-hero thing. However I maintain that they took a complex and well-written character and turned him into a cartoon by the end of the series.

You may not, but I certainly can. The developments in Waltz made perfect sense given the context in which it takes place. By that stage Dukat has literally lost everything, why would he still bother with the pretence about his role in the Occupation? And where does that pretence end and delusion begin?

In any case, Dukat's admission in Waltz is neither sudden nor surprising. From Emissary - where in the very first scene he is in he delivers a pretty blunt threat to retake the station - right up to Call to Arms - where the only reason he doesn't reoccupy Bajor is because he's on the Dominion's leash - Dukat's thoughts and ambitions towards Bajor are pretty transparent if you ask me.

Whether you agree with the direction the writers took Dukat in the later seasons - and I agree it didn't really amount to much in the end - I don't think it involved a retcon at all.

Ah, so you're basically just saying that you DISBELIEVE him when he says he regrets the Occupation and his role in it, and then you choose to BELIEVE him when he expresses a racist hostility toward the Bajorans and aspirations to conquest.


Why do you decide that one point of view represents his real feelings and the other is "pretense?"

Mainly because when it came to Bajor, when he was not subjugating its people and strip mining the planet he was threatening it or even planning to destroy it. Actions speak louder than words, etc.

 

[the skullcowboy]

Season 7 was flawed, I wish they would have spent more time on the war and less on things like " badda-bing badda-bang " or whatever the name of that awful episode was. I thought the Sisko as the prophet child was logical as they did elude to such things since the series began. perhaps if the last season had been a scaled back 18 episodes and lose the Ezri heavy episodes it may have been much much better, hard to establish a new character when they only have a fleeting amount of time

 

[TheLobes]

Okay, but if you're allowed to toss aside my excuse for the failings of season 7, I'm allowed to toss aside your excuse for the failings of season 1.

I really dont think I did, your excuse was: 'By that time [season six/seven] writers are running out of ideas, they begin repeating themselves, or they jump the shark, so the fact that DS9 was still a quality show when it reached that point (as is the opinion of most) is commendable.'

As I said, if this is obvious to you, it should have been obvious to the writers too. They should have planned for it, and avoided doing all the stuff (pah-wraiths, putting Dukat in the background etc) that they eventually shoved in there through lack of planning. They'd taken the time to create all these big story arcs, you'd think they would put a decent amount of time into. I dont really think I tossed it aside.

Ive not seen any of those shows except Fraiser, and its hard to make a point on that alone, since it seems to be the most removed from ds9.

What are your complaints against season 1 anyway?

 

[TheGodBen]

As I said, if this is obvious to you, it should have been obvious to the writers too. They should have planned for it, and avoided doing all the stuff (pah-wraiths, putting Dukat in the background etc) that they eventually shoved in there through lack of planning.

How do you plan for running out of ideas? If you're running out of things to say in a particular setting, and you have 26 episodes you're contractually obliged to write, how do you plan not to repeat yourself? These are problems that face the entire television industry, and it's why it's very rare for a show to peak at season 7. In my experience, most shows peak in their first three years, so the fact that DS9 kept improving until season 5 is impressive, and the fact that it was still going strong in season 7 is very impressive.

And just so I'm clear, while I admit that season 7 had problems, I don't think they're as widespread as you do. The Dukat storyline was weak, there was a bunch of filler episodes in the middle of the season, and Extreme Measures was a poor ending for the Section 31 arc, but those are my only real complaints. Despite what I said earlier, I don't excuse the writers from these mistakes, and when I get around to reviewing DS9 (coming 2011) I will mark the episodes down on those weaknesses. But at the same time, I don't expect the show to be at peak performance in its seventh season.

What are your complaints against season 1 anyway?

My main complaint is the failure to exploit the setting correctly. Emissary set up a very interesting situation on Bajor, but very few episodes followed up on it: Past Prologue, Progress, Duet and In the Hands of the Prophets. Many of the episodes felt like TNG rejects, and some of them actually were TNG rejects. There was no vision, no drive, it was like TNG but without the same sense of wonder. There are many good episodes in the first season, but it's harder to forgive the bad episodes because they lacked the passion that later DS9 had.

 

[Deckerd]

Season 7 was flawed, I wish they would have spent more time on the war and less on things like " badda-bing badda-bang " or whatever the name of that awful episode was. I thought the Sisko as the prophet child was logical as they did elude to such things since the series began. perhaps if the last season had been a scaled back 18 episodes

I so agree. It's unbelievable they had filler episodes in the last season. The timing of the big denouement was so silly. They had Kai Winn and Dukat in that cave for about 3 days before Sisko's spidey senses suddenly started tingling. A lot of the ending was poorly written and the final episode leaving out Jadzia from the big farewell was unforgiveable. They should have stowed the shmaltz and done something more imaginative.

 

[DevilEyes]

I dont really think you can make that sort of argument. As I said, the 'failures' of season one were due not to bad writing, but by the use a trial and error process, testing the waters to see what kind of shows would work for DS9. This produced episodes like 'If Wishes Were Horses', but it also produced episodes like 'Duet', and the next few seasons refined what had worked well and built on it.

Okay, but if you're allowed to toss aside my excuse for the failings of season 7, I'm allowed to toss aside your excuse for the failings of season 1. Just glancing at my DVD collection, the only two shows I have where the first season is significantly weaker than the rest of the show are DS9 and TNG. (Actually, I'll include The Shield as well, that first season is nowhere near as good as the heights they managed later.) All of those shows have weaknesses in their first season, or something is missing, but they didn't let those weaknesses drag them down like DS9 season 1 did.

Frasier's first season was largely lacking in the Frasier/Niles dynamic that was a source of much comedy in the rest of the show. The Wire's first season focused on a single case and lacked the wider scope of the later seasons. The West Wing's first season had a boring character called Mandy who got in the way before being jettisoned without explanation before the second season. But all those first seasons were great, they didn't let those weaknesses get in the way like DS9 did. If I'm recommending The West Wing to someone, I don't have to add that it gets really good in season 2 when Mandy goes away, it's really good right out the gate in spite of Mandy.

However, if I'm recommending The West Wing to someone, I do have to warn them that there's a big drop in quality in season 5. If I'm recommending Frasier to someone, I have to warn them that there's a gradual decline in quality starting around season 6. In fact, of all the shows I own that last longer than a couple of seasons, I have to warn that there's a decline in quality at some point during the run. (Except for The Shield, there's a show that kept getting better right up to the end.)

As you can see, my explanations for the weaknesses in DS9 seasons 1 and 7 are consistent with how I view television generally. But even from an entirely objective standpoint, I still think that season 7 is way ahead of season 1, warts and all.

Then there's ENT, which had a mediocre-to-bad first season, an even worse second season, and excellent seasons 3 and 4. Oddly enough, the only non-Trek show I can think whose season 1 was significantly weaker than the rest of the show is Buffy. But Buffy S1 was good, it just wasn't great as the show got during season 2.

The X-Files had the worst season 7 of any show I can think of. (I think that this was the absolute nadir, and the next 2 seasons were an improvement, though the show never got as good as it was in seasons 2-5.) VOY season 7 was also quite awful, but the differences between the best and worst seasons weren't as huge as with some other shows.

 

[TheLobes]

How do you plan for running out of ideas? If you're running out of things to say in a particular setting, and you have 26 episodes you're contractually obliged to write, how do you plan not to repeat yourself?

This isnt Fraiser, this isnt a show where each episode can be reviewed on its own merits. The only arc was the relationship between Daphne and Niles. The writers of DS9 had constructed a lot of arcs, but they didnt plan these out, and just made it up as they were going along. They should have realised that it would be a good idea to start thinking about resolutions early on. You cant plan how not to run out of ideas, what you can do is plan out your story arcs in the first couple of seasons, then when it comes time to write them, you arent hurried for time making things up.

My main complaint is the failure to exploit the setting correctly. Emissary set up a very interesting situation on Bajor, but very few episodes followed up on it: Past Prologue, Progress, Duet and In the Hands of the Prophets. Many of the episodes felt like TNG rejects, and some of them actually were TNG rejects. There was no vision, no drive, it was like TNG but without the same sense of wonder. There are many good episodes in the first season, but it's harder to forgive the bad episodes because they lacked the passion that later DS9 had.

Emissary .Past Prologue. A Man Alone. Battlelines. Progress. Duet. In the Hands of the Prophets. I consider each of these episodes to be about the situation on Bajor, and you may have noticed there are seven of them. Thats over a third of the entire season. Maybe more on Bajor would have been good, but they also needed to devote episodes to the characters.

While I agree that the first season is someone lacking in passion, this was something I found helpful to the overall structure of the show. The characters were a lot more relaxed in the first season because there was really very little going on, relative to the rest of the series. No Maquis, no Klingons, no Dominion. DS9 seemed like a pretty safe place at first. The slow build up from characters who were fairly relaxed and secure, to characters who were wound up and anxious of the future, allowed those characters room to expand naturally. In my opinion, DS9 was so different from the rest of Trek because it was mainly a character piece, while the rest had been largely plot driven. I felt it was necessary to have this slow start, because its important in that kind of a show, which (theoretically, at least) has seven seasons to fill, to be able to let the characters grow and change in front of the audience.

I dont think ds9 would have worked as well if the first season was as 'passionate' as subsequent seasons. In fact, I find it ironic that you would argue that at all. Surely if all television programs are doomed to become repetitive, as you argue, the inclusion of many more Bajor themed episodes, and a more passionate 'in media res' start, would exacerbate the problem?

One thing I will eagerly agree on is that lack of a 'sense of wonder'. Nobody seemed that amazed at the wormhole.

 

[TheGodBen]

You cant plan how not to run out of ideas, what you can do is plan out your story arcs in the first couple of seasons, then when it comes time to write them, you arent hurried for time making things up.

I agree with you, and I think that all shows that set out to be serialised should be planned out in advance. If television was free from the pressures of being an industry, I'm sure there would be more shows with pre-planned arcs, but the nature of television means that planning years in advance is often futile because your show might be cancelled after only 2 episodes, or the lead actor might decide to walk, or the network would interfere and change certain aspects of the show to include more lesbian sex scenes.

DS9 in particular had terrible trouble planning ahead for one big reason: The show wasn't supposed to be an arc-based show, it was supposed to be an anthology show like TNG. Michael Piller didn't set out to make DS9 an epic show about war and politics, he set out to make a Star Trek show on a space-station, and that's what Paramount paid for. When Ira Behr took over as head writer and started pushing for more serialisation and more arcs, he had to fight network interference every step of the way. How could Ira Behr plan a war-arc to last two years when he was told by his bosses that the war had to be wrapped up in four episodes? He had to negotiate that up to six episodes, and the only way he could keep the war going was by putting it in the background for most of season 6.

Emissary .Past Prologue. A Man Alone. Battlelines. Progress. Duet. In the Hands of the Prophets. I consider each of these episodes to be about the situation on Bajor, and you may have noticed there are seven of them.

I don't count Emissary because that was the set-up, it couldn't possibly have continued on from itself. I don't count A Man Alone because that was a typical Trek mystery episode that bent Bajor to fit the story that it wanted to tell rather than basing a story around Bajor's unique situation. The same is true of The Storyteller. I consider Battle Lines to be one of the biggest insults of the first season because it took a character that's hugely important to Bajor, used her to tell a story that had nothing to do with Bajor, and then killed her off without considering the significance she could have played in future stories. Once again, I don't count that as a proper Bajor episode.

While I agree that the first season is someone lacking in passion, this was something I found helpful to the overall structure of the show. The characters were a lot more relaxed in the first season because there was really very little going on, relative to the rest of the series.

When I say that the show lacked passion in the first season, I'm not saying that there should have been battles or major plot twists, I mean that I sense a lack of passion from the writers towards the show. When you look at the writing credits, there's a lot of one-off writers in there, and a number of the episodes were scripts that were originally submitted for TNG but were adapted to work on DS9. Some of the writers were originally trying to write for TNG, but were coaxed over to work on DS9 instead. The writers may have been passionate about Star Trek, but were they passionate about DS9?

To add to that, Michael Piller was working as head writer on DS9 and TNG at the same time, which wasn't a good idea because when you're working two jobs at the same time, you're going to lose some enthusiasm for both. TNG could take the hit at that point as it had a really strong writing staff that had proven themselves, but DS9's writers hadn't yet proven themselves and they needed that strong hand at the wheel during the first season. I think Piller himself realised that when Voyager came along as he quit his role as head writer on DS9 so that he could focus on making Voyager as good as possible (and in my opinion, Voyager's first season was better than DS9's).

 

[Nightdiamond]

One thing I will eagerly agree on is that lack of a 'sense of wonder'. Nobody seemed that amazed at the wormhole.

Science fiction concepts don't seem have the same affect that they used to.

Androids, Time travel, Strange Aliens- it's all been seen so many times, it doesn't inspire that same science fiction style awe anymore.

Time travel has definitely been done too much in all Treks.

TOS and TNG got to enjoy that, but as time moved into the mid 90's, it lost some of the fascination.

I think that may be partly why at that point most viewers were more willing to enjoy a good "mindless" space battle scene, than hear too much techno babble.

The spiritual/pah wraiths angles didn't seem to work with everyone, in the end the analogies seemed too close to our own religious ideas, as if we were being led by the script to "discover" that.

I think seeing something totally weird and "out there" at the end would have been much more interesting.

 

[Vinkula]

I liked the last season of DS9

 

[DS9 Gal AZ]

"Waltz" was revisionist writing. Dukat's attitude toward Bajorans and his role in the occupation had always been pretty ambivalent. Suddenly in "Waltz" he has a Hitler-esque hatred toward the Bajorans. I guess they figured Trek viewers needed a cartoony supervillain to boo and hiss at.

Strongly disagree, I thought it was very in character. Dukat's feelings towards the Bajoran people were very complicated. He had a great desire to be loved by them, to be "appreciated" for what he felt he was doing for them, to be embraced by them and their culture as Sisko eventually was.

And yet, even when he spoke favorably of them, you could tell he still felt the Bajorans were inferior to his own people (he says as much in "Waltz"), and needed Cardassian "guidance." If you've ever read the poem "The White Man's Burden" by Rudyard Kipling, Dukat's attitude is very similar to that. It's basically the idea that the conquering/dominating people are morally and intellectually superior to other people/races, who are to be treated as wayward children (as Kipling says, "angry, sullen peoples/half devil and half child") needing "discipline." Dukat wanted to be hailed as a hero and a savior by these "primitive" people - essentially, he wanted to be worshipped by them. In his mind, he was wrongly rejected by them, so his "love" for them turned to hate. Given the losses he'd recently suffered, both personal (Ziyal's death) and political (Feds re-taking the station), and the establishment of his subsequent mental breakdown, "Waltz" seemed like a logical progression to me.

 

[sonak]

"Waltz" was revisionist writing. Dukat's attitude toward Bajorans and his role in the occupation had always been pretty ambivalent. Suddenly in "Waltz" he has a Hitler-esque hatred toward the Bajorans. I guess they figured Trek viewers needed a cartoony supervillain to boo and hiss at.

Strongly disagree, I thought it was very in character. Dukat's feelings towards the Bajoran people were very complicated. He had a great desire to be loved by them, to be "appreciated" for what he felt he was doing for them, to be embraced by them and their culture as Sisko eventually was.

And yet, even when he spoke favorably of them, you could tell he still felt the Bajorans were inferior to his own people (he says as much in "Waltz"), and needed Cardassian "guidance." If you've ever read the poem "The White Man's Burden" by Rudyard Kipling, Dukat's attitude is very similar to that. It's basically the idea that the conquering/dominating people are morally and intellectually superior to other people/races, who are to be treated as wayward children (as Kipling says, "angry, sullen peoples/half devil and half child") needing "discipline." Dukat wanted to be hailed as a hero and a savior by these "primitive" people - essentially, he wanted to be worshipped by them. In his mind, he was wrongly rejected by them, so his "love" for them turned to hate. Given the losses he'd recently suffered, both personal (Ziyal's death) and political (Feds re-taking the station), and the establishment of his subsequent mental breakdown, "Waltz" seemed like a logical progression to me.

Well, first I said that Dukat's attitude toward the Bajorans and the Occupation is complex, but that "Waltz" unfairly simplifies them.

So you say that you "strongly disagree" with me-and then you say that Dukat's attitude toward the Bajorans is "very complex." So.... you're saying that "Waltz" portrays Dukat as a complex character? If so, I don't agree. I think it portrays him as a deranged, racist lunatic with no relation to the Dukat of earlier seasons.

I suppose that yes, there had been elements of racism to his character shown before-but as you say, more of the patronizing racism sort than the murderous hitler-esque racism of Dukat post-"Waltz."

I'm surprised how many here think that "Waltz" and the Dukat character after that episode was a natural and well-written progression. Maybe it's just the respondents to this thread. My impression of other Trek fans and from the online reviewers was always that the feeling was they'd ruined Dukat's character toward the end of the show.

I got sort of side-tracked into a discussion on where Dukat was on the villain scale, but my intent wasn't to defend the character or his motivations, but to show that he was always a COMPLEX character, and I think that season 7 Dukat really had none of that complexity or nuance, he was purely a cartoon supervillain.

 

[DS9 Gal AZ]

I'm saying "Waltz" portrays the logical progression of Dukat's character after he's been broken and is man who's lost everything. Dukat has always had a disconnect with reality IMHO. Right before the Feds re-took the station, he was complaining to Weyoun about how there wasn't a single statue of him on Bajor. Weyoun, of course was clearly thinking the same thing the audience thought: "Dude, are you serious? You were the head of the Occupation! They hated you, and they always will!" Dukat's patronizing racism turned to murderous, Hitler-esque racism precisely because the Bajorans "rejected" him (twice, if you count the Dominion Occupation) and were ungrateful for all the "help" he offered them. I mean, it terms of Dukat being oversimplified in season 7, I just didn't see it. The same desires to rule/be beloved of the Bajoran people were still there, as we saw when he set up the Pagh-wraith cult (and yet again had a dalliance with a Bajoran woman). And when he doesn't get the Bajoran's "love," he goes back to hating them and wanting to destroy them, their gods ... and their Emmisary.

 

[Mirror_Barclay]

I don't think S7 is notably weaker than what came before, but then I don't regard what came before as the pinnacle of TV making.

S7 had some really good stuff (Ezri!) and some really bad stuff (Pah Wraiths!). But to me, DS9 always had stuff that was great and stuff that was quite annoying. S7 probably had more of both, to the same end result - a good but never perfect show.

 

[Navaros]

The writers of DS9 had constructed a lot of arcs, but they didnt plan these out, and just made it up as they were going along. They should have realised that it would be a good idea to start thinking about resolutions early on. You cant plan how not to run out of ideas, what you can do is plan out your story arcs in the first couple of seasons, then when it comes time to write them, you arent hurried for time making things up.

I absolutely agree with you that the DS9 ending arcs were fubared and not properly implemented nor planned.

However, the DS9 writers could not plan the arcs like you suggest, because they had to fight vs. Berman constantly just to be able to include any sort of arcs. Berman was vehemently against the 6-episode arc at the start of Season 6, and also against the 10-episode arc at the end of Season 7. The DS9 writers can't be blamed for lack of planning because they had no way to know what arcs they would be able to get away with making; they were hamstrung by meddling from higher-ups like Berman.

Having said that, the hamstringing certainly makes DS9 as a show become less great than it should be, and the flaws you point out are indeed big ones that would have been nice to see better-done.