Why is Janeway worse than Sisko when it comes to ...

[DarthTom]

.....not following the Federation's rules?

I've noticed over the years there is an intense dislike of Janeway among the fan base because she broke the rules several times and in one case threatened a fellow officer with potential death.

However Sisko doesn't get the same level of disdain with fans yet, he's done close to the same. The other day I re-watched For the Uniform and he destroyed the biosphere of an entire planet to catch one man. And of course he violates the temporal prime directive and is OK with several other very morally nebulous situations.

Why does Sisko get a free ride and not Janeway with many fans?

 

[JiNX-01]

Seems to me quite a few people in Trek ignore the rules at various times. Of course, if everybody on Star Trek was perfectly perfect who'd watch?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Sisko broke the rules for clear and consistent reasons. Janeway kept flip-flopping; sometimes she'd endanger the crew for the sake of Federation ethics, sometimes the reverse. Sisko was pretty consistently ruthless in defending the Federation from a security standpoint, at the expense of both human lives AND ethics.

Ironically, Janeway might be "better" because she wasn't always ruthless but inconsistency is hard to swallow when it's obviously just a function of sloppy writing.

 

[DarthTom]

JiNX-01 said:
Seems to me quite a few people in Trek ignore the rules at various times. Of course, if everybody on Star Trek was perfectly perfect who'd watch?

One of the reasons I like TNG least now is Picard was the 'captain remake' after Kirk to be the super clean boyscout which is as you say, no fun.

Morally tenuous characters are more real and more like able because they are flawed like all of us are in reality.

 

[Malcom]

Because we - all of us - judge men and women in leadership positions by different standards and bring different assumptions to judging both.

 

[exodus]

Malcom said:
Because we - all of us - judge men and women in leadership positions by different standards and bring different assumptions to judging both.

True.

Plus, Sisko had the support of the Federation/Starfleet behind him while Janeway had nobody. Janeway had to make choices Sisko didn't and without the resources and back up Sisko did. Plus, Sisko had the security of the Bajorian people. Starfleet couldn't remove Sisko from DS9 no matter what he did or it would ruin relations between Bajor and the Federation. Many issues of politics come into play with Sisko that didn't with Janeway, allowing Janeway to change her choices based on the situation without having to worry about political consequences.

Frankly, I think people bad mouth Janeway simply because they didn't like Voyager and view anything involving it as negative. Honestly, the highs & lows of Voyager are no different than the high points & low points of TNG. Had Voyager had a soild ending like TNG, I have a funny feeling there would be much less complaining about the show.

 

[Malcom]

Agreed. And their situations are not comparable for that reason. She's most comparable to Kirk's circumstances.

 

[exodus]

Malcom said:
Agreed. And their situations are not comparable for that reason. She's most comparable to Kirk's circumstances.

Exactly.

Plus, Sisko wasn't much of a diplomat and someone like Picard was too passive. Neither one of them would of had what it takes to get thru the Delta Quaderant. As odd as it sounds, she was the perfect captain with the perfect ship to fit that unique situation.

 

[votd]

Mmmmm...it's almost as if the writers knew Janeway would end up in that situation

 

[PKTrekGirl]

DarthTom said:

JiNX-01 said:
Seems to me quite a few people in Trek ignore the rules at various times. Of course, if everybody on Star Trek was perfectly perfect who'd watch?

One of the reasons I like TNG least now is Picard was the 'captain remake' after Kirk to be the super clean boyscout which is as you say, no fun.

Morally tenuous characters are more real and more like able because they are flawed like all of us are in reality.

My feelings exactly. And it's not just Picard. It's pretty much that entire crew. I'm bored with the happy shiny crew crap...and I'm bored with the smug superiority.

I liked Sisko for the same reasons I liked Kirk. He was not afraid of a fight...and occasionally, it *was* at least in small part personal. Mostly, his mission was to defend the Federation and Bajor...and he was pretty single minded about that. But on a couple of occasions he illustrated clearly that he was not above bending the rules in order to carry out that mission - particularly in In the Pale Moonlight, where he participated in a plot to bring the Romulans into the war when defeat for the Federation looked imminent otherwise....and in For the Uniform, where he went to great lengths to capture a treasonous crew member who had betrayed his uniform (Eddington) by poisoning the atmosphere of a Maquis planet.

Janeway could have been like this. But due to crappy writing, she made some really questionable decisions - mostly during the last couple of seasons of the show when the writers of VOY had given up any pretense of caring about the character of Janeway. The most obvious is in Endgame, where she blows off the Temporal Prime Directive and potentially changes the lives of millions, NOT for the Federation's greater good...but just so a couple of her 'friends' could be 'happy'. And one other really obvious one is is at the end of Flesh & Blood, where the right thing to do to protect the entire crew of Voyager would have been to hit CTRL-ALT-DEL on the EMH. The guy committed treason and had a LONG and colorful history by that time of being more concerned with himself than with his duties. Letting him off over and over...and especially at this juncture...put the entire crew at risk. And it would have been easy to simply reboot him.

For my own part, I LOVE when characters bend the rules. But the writing in these situations is critical. The motivation is critical. The bending should be for the greater good. But even more importantly, it should be consistent with the character's core beliefs. I cannot emphasize this last bit enough.

I think the biggest beef with Endgame was that, after 7 years of running all over the dangerous DQ while defending and fiercely clinging to Federation principles...Janeway completely ABANDONS one of the most MASSIVE of those principles - the TPD - just to make a couple of dead friends happy. This was NOT consistent with her core beliefs, as illustrated numerous times throughout the series.

That is why people like me are still annoyed about this episode. And that is why we maintain that it ruined Janeway.

 

[cultcross]

Malcom said:
Because we - all of us - judge men and women in leadership positions by different standards and bring different assumptions to judging both.

Possibly, but I think it's too easy to assign blame for "Sisko > Janeway" to sexism. If the character of Janeway was male, but her command decisions remained the same as depicted, I still beleive 'he' would be bitched about - as Temis says, the character was wildly inconsistent in her motivation, values and actions, and that doesn't make for a believable and engaging character, of either sex.

 

[-Brett-]

DarthTom said:
And of course he violates the temporal prime directive...

The temporal prime directive was a Voyager invention, and IIRC it was invented after DS9 ended. Sisko couldn't have violated a rule that didn't exist yet.

To answer your question though, it's probably a matter of attitude and consistency. Sisko was never presented, by himself or other characters as a perfect officer that could do no wrong and never broke the rules. Janeway was, even though her actions didn't reflect that.

 

[Unicron]

^ Yeah, I just ignore the whole TPD anyway. It's a silly concept that can't really be enforced, unless the future Starfleet is willing to screw with time to ensure it remains "on track."

 

[cultcross]

-Brett- said:

The temporal prime directive was a Voyager invention, and IIRC it was invented after DS9 ended. Sisko couldn't have violated a rule that didn't exist yet.

Well they didn't call it precisely that but a pretty much identical law was mentioned in both 'Past Tense' and 'Trials and Tribbleations'

 

[Praetor]

^Well said!! Endgame, while occasionally entertaining, was indeed a copout, and Janeway was a wonderful character who was badly handled in the end.

 

[number6]

PKTrekGirl said:

DarthTom said:

JiNX-01 said:
Seems to me quite a few people in Trek ignore the rules at various times. Of course, if everybody on Star Trek was perfectly perfect who'd watch?

One of the reasons I like TNG least now is Picard was the 'captain remake' after Kirk to be the super clean boyscout which is as you say, no fun.

Morally tenuous characters are more real and more like able because they are flawed like all of us are in reality.

My feelings exactly. And it's not just Picard. It's pretty much that entire crew. I'm bored with the happy shiny crew crap...and I'm bored with the smug superiority.

I liked Sisko for the same reasons I liked Kirk. He was not afraid of a fight...and occasionally, it *was* at least in small part personal. Mostly, his mission was to defend the Federation and Bajor...and he was pretty single minded about that. But on a couple of occasions he illustrated clearly that he was not above bending the rules in order to carry out that mission - particularly in In the Pale Moonlight, where he participated in a plot to bring the Romulans into the war when defeat for the Federation looked imminent otherwise....and in For the Uniform, where he went to great lengths to capture a treasonous crew member who had betrayed his uniform (Eddington) by poisoning the atmosphere of a Maquis planet.

Janeway could have been like this. But due to crappy writing, she made some really questionable decisions - mostly during the last couple of seasons of the show when the writers of VOY had given up any pretense of caring about the character of Janeway. The most obvious is in Endgame, where she blows off the Temporal Prime Directive and potentially changes the lives of millions, NOT for the Federation's greater good...but just so a couple of her 'friends' could be 'happy'. And one other really obvious one is is at the end of Flesh & Blood, where the right thing to do to protect the entire crew of Voyager would have been to hit CTRL-ALT-DEL on the EMH. The guy committed treason and had a LONG and colorful history by that time of being more concerned with himself than with his duties. Letting him off over and over...and especially at this juncture...put the entire crew at risk. And it would have been easy to simply reboot him.

For my own part, I LOVE when characters bend the rules. But the writing in these situations is critical. The motivation is critical. The bending should be for the greater good. But even more importantly, it should be consistent with the character's core beliefs. I cannot emphasize this last bit enough.

I think the biggest beef with Endgame was that, after 7 years of running all over the dangerous DQ while defending and fiercely clinging to Federation principles...Janeway completely ABANDONS one of the most MASSIVE of those principles - the TPD - just to make a couple of dead friends happy. This was NOT consistent with her core beliefs, as illustrated numerous times throughout the series.

That is why people like me are still annoyed about this episode. And that is why we maintain that it ruined Janeway.

I disagree. For the entire run of the series Janeway grappled with the guilt of stranding Voyager in the DQ and was always looking for the best way to get home. For me, the only issue I have with Endgame is that the consequences of her going back in time could have been addressed, but weren't. The action of her acting on her guilt and going back to a time where she could have done something about it doesn't bother me in the least. It works in the context of addressing Janeway's guilt and her willingness to finally do what it takes to get her crew home.

It's always only too easy to blame Berman and "crappy writing" on something we don't like. I thought Endgame was a good way to end the series.

 

[ktanner3]

cultcross said:

-Brett- said:

The temporal prime directive was a Voyager invention, and IIRC it was invented after DS9 ended. Sisko couldn't have violated a rule that didn't exist yet.

Well they didn't call it precisely that but a pretty much identical law was mentioned in both 'Past Tense' and 'Trials and Tribbleations'

There's one big difference between the above episodes. Sisko was transported back in time against his will. He had no choice. He only played the role of Bell because the real one got killed.Janeway intentionally violated the prime directive by going back in time and altering history just to shave years off the journey. She told the entire crew what would happen in the future and even brought with her technology from the future to use for an advantage.Big difference. That's why that episode is so reviled.It has nothing to do with sexism or any other garbage that has been spouted here.

 

[cultcross]

ktanner3 said:

cultcross said:

-Brett- said:

The temporal prime directive was a Voyager invention, and IIRC it was invented after DS9 ended. Sisko couldn't have violated a rule that didn't exist yet.

Well they didn't call it precisely that but a pretty much identical law was mentioned in both 'Past Tense' and 'Trials and Tribbleations'

There's one big difference between the above episodes. Sisko was transported back in time against his will. He had no choice. He only played the role of Bell because the real one got killed.Janeway intentionally violated the prime directive by going back in time and altering history just to shave years off the journey. She told the entire crew what would happen in the future and even brought with her technology from the future to use for an advantage.Big difference. That's why that episode is so reviled.It has nothing to do with sexism or any other garbage that has been spouted here.

I don't disagree, as my previous post will attest. I was just making a GeekFact(tm) post. Janeway was the single biggest timeline messer on the show. For all that Braxton was reviled by his crew for what he did in the past, Janeway did pretty much exactly the same thing to her future.

 

[Odon]

I think what annoyed people was that the writers had Janeway make a big deal out of maintaining Federation principles, so when she violated those principles she seemed hypocritical.

 

[greenmystik]

I personally think there shouldn't have been a voyager series. Who would really strand there crew on the other side of the galaxy for the sake of a planet that wasn't that advanced in the first place. I think Janeway could have used Caretaker to get back and Starfleet wouldn't have done anything to her.