You can see the implication with how Raffi describes her life in comparison to Picard's
Raffi's poverty
- Thread starter GMDreia
- Start date
Poverty definitely existed on non-Federation worlds, with Yar's planet and all that experiences, i.e. rape gangs.
As @The Wormhole notes it is Raffi's self-description of her experience, using Picard as a contrast and convenient guilt trip. I don't think she was lacking anything. She was trying to get off the grid because she was convinced of a conspiracy theory within Starfleet and didn't want help.
And, no the economics of Star Trek have rarely been thought through.
Good discussion...here's my take:
1. "Poverty" is a relative term. There are millions of inhabitants on Earth right now who would kill for what Raffi was shown as having in PIC.
2. Repeat after me....take a deep breath...and then say it again: "Yes, despite a few ramblings of kool-aid drunk Jean-Luc Picard, there is actually some form of economic system in the Federation that requires people to contribute to society in some productive way before having access to a chateau, their own ship, or whatever else their hearts desire."
I know....I know....that's a tough one for everyone to swallow, but you can accept it once you take a few deep breaths and clear your mind.
1. "Poverty" is a relative term. There are millions of inhabitants on Earth right now who would kill for what Raffi was shown as having in PIC.
2. Repeat after me....take a deep breath...and then say it again: "Yes, despite a few ramblings of kool-aid drunk Jean-Luc Picard, there is actually some form of economic system in the Federation that requires people to contribute to society in some productive way before having access to a chateau, their own ship, or whatever else their hearts desire."
I know....I know....that's a tough one for everyone to swallow, but you can accept it once you take a few deep breaths and clear your mind.
In a supposed post-scarcity society, there will probably always be those who have nicer stuff than others. Raffi isn't living in poverty, (by our current definition), but she isn't living in a big chateau with big wine vineyards like Picard either. Raffi describing her home as a "hovel" was a relatively cheap shot at Picard and his inheritance, IMO.
I tend to agree. I think her bitterness at Picard colored much of her perspective.
Great points all around. There really isn't anything about Raffi's current situation that implies poverty to me. It's self-imposed exile for causing the break up of her family. Pretty sure if she just decided to up and move back into the city, she could probably make that happen pretty quickly without much fuss, provided there was a space available, of course.
I've seen similar criticisms leveled towards Raffi's addiction issues. How it's unrealistic for that to be a problem in a supposed utopian society. Thing is, I have no doubt there's a whole plethora of help available, but that person has to want to get help, which she clearly doesn't when we first meet her.
I've seen similar criticisms leveled towards Raffi's addiction issues. How it's unrealistic for that to be a problem in a supposed utopian society. Thing is, I have no doubt there's a whole plethora of help available, but that person has to want to get help, which she clearly doesn't when we first meet her.
I got the impression Raffi's living condition was by choice.
I hope he doesn't because he has nothing to apologize for, that she was right doesn't change the fact that her obsession destroyed the family, he has the right to be angry.
I mean, I think part of the story in Picard is the idea that grief and anger cause people to act in irrational ways. Picard retires from Starfleet and basically hides away. Raffi is angry at Picard, feels unsupported, and so lashes out at him for her condition when that is entirely true. The Romulan Senator lashes out even though the Romulan government clearly had some foreknowledge to evacuate some people. Obviously there is some reason to be angry, but all of it gets blown up far out of proportion in their reaction, making the problem worse not better until they face it.
I probably could have phrased that better.
I don't think it's an either/or situation. Both sides have a completely valid point of view. Raffi chose to prioritise saving millions of lives over spending time with her family, and that was valid, because millions of lives were at stake. But from the point of view of the kid who probably didn't get to see his mother for months if not years at a stretch, feeling rejected and neglected is also completely valid. Then after the Mars disaster, Raffi's mental health collapsed and she spiralled into paranoia and drug abuse, and again, that's valid, because mental health is often something completely out of our control, and she knew she was right about the conspiracy, it is easy to understand how that would have eaten away at her until there was nothing left. But again, from the point of view of the kid whose mother has devoted years of her life to her career at the expense of ever spending any time with her family, who is now finally released from that responsibility and at last has the chance to rebuild the familial bond, but instead spirals into paranoia and drug abuse that only serves to tear the already broken family further apart...again, feeling rejected and neglected is completely valid.
Raffi was right all along. There was a conspiracy. But her obsession with that conspiracy was deeply, deeply damaging to more people than just herself. And her son has the right to feel that it is too late to repair that damage, just as Raffi has the right to want to make up for all those lost years. They each have a completely valid point of view, and they each need something completely different at this point in time, which is why they can't (yet) reconcile. That's what makes it a tragic story.
But life keeps moving forward. In time, they might be able to meet in the middle, they just aren't at that place yet.
Few! Glancing at the thread title, I thought a beloved childrens entertainer had fallen on hard times...
I also found it odd that such a house near such a famous geological and film-historical location is supposed to be "humiliating"
I'd love to live there! Imagine being able to walk up that rock and take in the sunset every day!
Aliens and 5th Element did a good job showing minimal housing, some apartment like that would've made sense if they really wanted her to feel poor.
Indeed Bruce Willis's apartment looks like a broom closet in comparison.
Sure, while it happened and he was a kid, his POV was completely valid. But as soon as it was revealed that she was right, that in fact 'all life in the galaxy' was at stake in the end, his point becomes selfish if he maintains it. A Tal Shiar agent became head of Starfleet Security. They attacked Mars, they assassinated people on Earth, and they wanted to eradicate the synths. Isn't that kind of threat worthy of attention, when no one else believes it because the Tal Shiar is suppressing the truth? I hope they show the fallout of this... Clancy realized she was wrong and immediately did what was right when confronted with proof. Raffi's son should do the same, perhaps gradually over time.
Clancy should apologize for the way she spoke to Picard.
She really shouldn't. Even if Picard was right, when he walked in there he started acting all high and mighty asking for things like it was nothing just after just throwing starfleet under the bus in that interview.
Similar threads
