PDA

View Full Version : Why dont some(or alot) of people like Sam to be...



Elwe Singollo
May 13th, 2004, 08:43 PM
A few threads or so, it was stated that some people didn't want Sam, or didn't like the idea of Sam to lead SG1, but why?

Red_Rabbit
May 13th, 2004, 08:48 PM
I don't know why they don't want her to lead, I personally think that it's the best thing next to having Jack lead and that might be the answer there, people don't mind having Sam but they would rather have Jack

Elwe Singollo
May 13th, 2004, 08:51 PM
I was thinking the same exact thing, but i do rather have the funny/sarcasm lines that Jack says.

earck
May 13th, 2004, 10:08 PM
It would seem a little wierd at first but I think i'd get used to it. Sam is the next most experienced officer at the base when it comes to Off-World ventures, and she is the foremost expert on the gate.

bcmilco
May 13th, 2004, 10:16 PM
Sam is the next most experienced officer at the base when it comes to Off-World ventures,

Actually that's probably not totaly true. I would suspect that there are other officers who have had just as much if not more experience, AFAIK Ferretti is still around there somewhere and he, at one point, was in command of SG-2. Whereas Sam has not had much command experience at all, and almost none of it has been off-world.


and she is the foremost expert on the gate.

Which would actually be a good reason to keep her grounded.

Don't get me wrong though I am looking forward to seeing Sam in command, I'm just trying to point out a few facts. :p

the_fours
May 14th, 2004, 03:14 AM
i like the idea of sam in command, maybe we will get the strong warrior back instead of the girllygirl some people think she has turned into

Whitster
May 14th, 2004, 03:30 AM
Has anyone actually noticed that even if Sam was in command of SG1 it wouldn't really amount to much as neither of the other 2 members are actually military officers, Daniel is still just a civillian on the Air Force pay role and T'lec is an alien who probably doesn't get payed. Thinking about it jack was only actually in command of one officer. :S

the_fours
May 14th, 2004, 03:33 AM
yeah you got a good point, this i think relates to the fourth member thread and justifies that if there were one it should be a military personnel instead of a civilian

ShadowMaat
May 14th, 2004, 03:45 AM
Has anyone actually noticed that even if Sam was in command of SG1 it wouldn't really amount to much as neither of the other 2 members are actually military officers, Daniel is still just a civillian on the Air Force pay role and T'lec is an alien who probably doesn't get payed. Thinking about it jack was only actually in command of one officer. :S

Actually, I should think that would make it more challenging. When you issue orders to a soldier, you can be at least 99% certain they'll follow orders, but with Daniel especially under your command, it's a lot harder to predict what he's going to do. ;) Teal'c, while no doubt very good at obeying orders (all those years rising through the ranks to First Prime), will also have his own motivations and ideas about what he should be doing (especially since he's been doing it for longer than Sam and Daniel and probably even Jack have been alive). And let's not forget the Jaffa Revenge thing. ;)

I'm not saying either of them won't obey orders, I'm just saying that depending on the circumstances they could act a lot less predictably than actual military personnel. ;)

Me, I'd like to see Sam in command. Assuming we get our old Sam back- the strong, independant woman whoi can take charge of her own life as well as those of others. The one who has a backbone. The one who actually has a brain! Because if we get more of S7 Sam the wishy-washy, inconstant, featherbrained cliche of a girly girl who sits around mooning about Jack and getting all teary-eyed about her love life, then no, I wouldn't want to see her in charge. She'd get them all killed their first mission out because she'd be too busy wondering what her dearest loving Jack was doing and wishing she could be with him. Bleah.

the_fours
May 14th, 2004, 03:50 AM
i cant wait to see how the three-man team thing works out off-world. So i doubt we will see that until the second half of s8

Bast
May 14th, 2004, 04:01 AM
Teal'c should lead! :D

Whitster
May 14th, 2004, 04:09 AM
Maybe they should get their russian officer now. :D
Spoilers series 6-7 onwards
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Actually thinking about it now that the SGC is now common knowledge of the major US allies governments they should all get teams, how cool would a british SAS SG team be :D

the_fours
May 14th, 2004, 04:17 AM
Maybe they should get their russian officer now. :D
Spoilers series 6-7 onwards
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Actually thinking about it now that the SGC is now common knowledge of the major US allies governments they should all get teams, how cool would a british SAS SG team be :D


oh i can just see that the stereotypical british accent well dressed, cos thats what would happen, remember the guy in disclosure

Whitster
May 14th, 2004, 04:52 AM
Yeah we don't wanna end up as sterotypical as the Stargate russians, how long d'ya reckon it'l be until they start talking about Nuclear Wessels.

Coz
May 14th, 2004, 05:08 AM
Me, I'd like to see Sam in command. Assuming we get our old Sam back- the strong, independant woman whoi can take charge of her own life as well as those of others. The one who has a backbone. The one who actually has a brain! Because if we get more of S7 Sam the wishy-washy, inconstant, featherbrained cliche of a girly girl who sits around mooning about Jack and getting all teary-eyed about her love life, then no, I wouldn't want to see her in charge. She'd get them all killed their first mission out because she'd be too busy wondering what her dearest loving Jack was doing and wishing she could be with him. Bleah.

I've got to agree, even as a big Sam/Jack shipper the subtext became text a bit too much and it brought both of them but especially Sam, out of character, or at least the way I see the characters from the earlier seasons. This could either be the best thing or the absolutely worst thing that could happen to Sam's character depending on the writing. I've got my fingers crossed that they do it right!! :)

keshou
May 14th, 2004, 05:35 AM
I'm looking forward to seeing Sam in charge of SG-1. I think it could provide her character with a lot of growth that's (thankfully) unrelated to ship. I think it will also be interesting to see her relating to Daniel and Teal'c as the head of the team and how they react to that.

Strong Sam back? Yes, I definitely hope we see that!!! :)

Dani347
May 14th, 2004, 06:00 AM
Teal'c should lead! :D

That would be a good idea. Has Teal'c ever lead a team? Sam's done it. Daniel's lead an archeological team.

I agree that season 7 Sam is not in a position to lead.

Elwe Singollo
May 14th, 2004, 07:51 PM
That would be interesting, Teal'c leading, i would like to see.

Scruff
May 14th, 2004, 10:49 PM
I'd hate to see SG-1 turned into a Scientific team. SG-1 has always been a "First Contact" team, and under Jack's leadership, has been able to usually handle itself under fire. Sam is a scientist first and I don't believe she has the background necessary to be an effective leader in a combat situation.

While I am sure the writers will place Sam in command, Ferretti is a much better choice. Or even Dave Dixon for that matter, Baldwin wanted a role in SG-A and and his job on Angel is over now- he needs a job.

Teags
May 15th, 2004, 08:18 AM
I don't get it... why can't Sam be a girl and a leader at the same time?! That ultra feminist, butch tomboy thing she had going in the pilot was pathetic!! What's wrong with her having emotions?! It shows that shes human... shes like this ultra smart, pretty, strong woman! They have to give her emotion cause otherwise she will we seem fake.
It's gonna be really strange seeing the team without Jack! His sarcasm and "dim-wittedness", really eased the tension in all those tough situations the team seems to get themselves into!
I reckon they'll have to replace him eventually... otherwise it will really disrupt the team dynamic! Why do you think they replaced daniel when he ascended? Why do you think their are four team members in atlantis? Sam might lead to begin with but i reckon they'll end up getting someone else in to play the hard arse/ sarcastic role of jack!

Elwe Singollo
May 15th, 2004, 08:51 AM
They don't have to have four members, it was just preferred to have a 'daniel/jonas -esque' kind of person on the team. Such as in Redemption, the Season 6 Premeire, Oneill asked why does the team have to have four team members, and hammond said it doesn't.

ShadowMaat
May 15th, 2004, 09:00 AM
I don't get it... why can't Sam be a girl and a leader at the same time?! That ultra feminist, butch tomboy thing she had going in the pilot was pathetic!! What's wrong with her having emotions?! It shows that shes human... shes like this ultra smart, pretty, strong woman! They have to give her emotion cause otherwise she will we seem fake.

I don't think people are objecting to her having emotions. As has already been pointed out in this thread, she has already displayed lots of empathy and emotion throughout the series. I think the main complaint is the way it has been displayed this past season.

It's possible to be strong AND have geniune emotions, but- and I can only speak for myself, here- I feel as if all of Carter's strength of character, all of her head-strongedness, independence, vitality, all of the things that make Sam Sam have been stripped away so she can be the weepy little girly girl who's pining after Jack to the detriment of everything and everyone around her. She isn't strong anymore, she isn't independent, there's no true spine left to the character, she's just... Jack's Girl. Which, considering the fact that she's supposed to be dating Pete only makes her that much weaker and less enjoyable to watch.

I miss the Sam who could kick ass, take names and still offer comfort. I miss the Sam who could kiss the boys and make them cry. I miss the Sam who was actually Sam and not this pathetic cliche of a girl in love. You can be in love and still be who you are. I wish the writers would realize that, but instead they seem to favor emasculating her (or whatever the feminine equivalent is). Or, rather, they've chosen to highlight that she's female and forgotten the rest of her personality and character traits.

This is NOT the strong, independent, sensitive Sam I knew and loved. This is some over-testosteroned stereotype.

My opinion, anyway.

SGSlugger
May 15th, 2004, 09:04 AM
Agree with you completely ShadowMaat. I would really like if Jack stayed, but changes are usually good. It will be interesting seeing how she handles things.
If all else fails, Jack numbled them with his sarcasm, Sam can confuse them with her technobabble. :p

Elwe Singollo
May 15th, 2004, 09:06 AM
I liked both as team leaders, such as in evolution part 1 and 2, Sam lead her team and came back nicely (with a few injuries i guess).

Bagpuss
May 15th, 2004, 11:14 AM
A few threads or so, it was stated that some people didn't want Sam, or didn't like the idea of Sam to lead SG1, but why?

For various reasons! None of which are relevant to my POV, as they are just as free as I am to express their views. :D

My personal POV is this: I want Sam to be given the chance to lead the team,and to be given the respect and courtesy, that she would receive in RL Armed Forces, from the other characters,and we "Show-Fans" to make her own mark as a leader!

IMO,she has massive field experience,and plenty expertise of her own to call on, to function as an effective leader of SG-1.After 7 years of being Jack's second in command of SG-1,and as the SGC's top Scientist and their main expert on the "Gate" itself,I don't personally feel she needs to justify her promotion at all! :cool:

bcmilco
May 15th, 2004, 02:45 PM
IMO,she has massive field experience,and plenty expertise of her own to call on, to function as an effective leader of SG-1.After 7 years of being Jack's second in command of SG-1,and as the SGC's top Scientist and their main expert on the "Gate" itself,I don't personally feel she needs to justify her promotion at all! :cool:

I agree I don't think she needs to justify her promotion.

However saying that being Jack's second makes her capable of command is like saying working in a reasturant makes you capable of cooking... well if you're the waiter/waitress then it's not a given. You may very well be able to cook, just like Sam may very well be able to lead, but first you have to prove it.

She's a scientist and she's a soldier but that doesn't automatically mean she can command in the field, and IMO she hasn't been proven yet, not where the hard choices need to be made, and I'm hoping we'll get to see some of that in s8.

Elwe Singollo
May 15th, 2004, 02:47 PM
She hasn't gotten the chance too (or maybe she has)...

bcmilco
May 15th, 2004, 03:14 PM
She hasn't gotten the chance too (or maybe she has)...

She has commanded several times:

Spirits -- but they brought it back to the base and Jack handled all the nasty stuff :rolleyes:

Nightwalkers -- which I enjoyed because it was Sam without a saftey net and she did really well, but first it wasn't combat, second it was on-world, and third I can't stand it when they break encryption that easily. :D

Reserrection -- The episode was alright, but again it was on-world, this time she had a partner (someone to make decissions with instead of for) and it was non-combat, and again with that encryption thing :D ;)

Evolution -- It was good to see her in charge militarily speaking, but she didn't have any "major" decisions to make. It was very black and white: they were gou'ald they needed to be killed.

The Lost City -- Just a touch, I did enjoy seeing Sam give Jack an order. :D but otherwise it was pretty cut and dry again.

What I'd like to see is Sam put in a place where she has to make the "hard call" like in The Other Side or Unnatural Selection, or have to actually kill someone with hand-to-hand combat. Those kinds of episodes would be some great character development for her. :)

Elwe Singollo
May 15th, 2004, 03:18 PM
I agree, that would be good :)

TameFarrar
May 15th, 2004, 03:42 PM
I am looking forward to seeing Sam prove that she is a woman, an officer and a kick butt leader...I don't think I am going to be disappointed :D

Elwe Singollo
May 15th, 2004, 03:43 PM
I will be happy when she does :)

Bagpuss
May 15th, 2004, 04:46 PM
She has commanded several times:

What I'd like to see is Sam put in a place where she has to make the "hard call" like in The Other Side or Unnatural Selection, or have to actually kill someone with hand-to-hand combat. Those kinds of episodes would be some great character development for her. :)

I agree BCM! Hopefully the writers will come up with similar ideas.Otherwise I have no doubt,that some,not all fans,will be up in arms at SC being inept, etc and even loyal "Sam" fans,may lose hope for her!

On the same note,I hope Jack is written and portrayed as supportive,not sarcastic to her methods,whatever they may be....

Going back to your reply to my previous post:When Jack led the team,he was very much able to take the "Tough Calls".He was the Team leader and he had years of experience in Field decisions,partly due to long experience in "Black-Ops"

Sam has wide experience in diff. fields.Let's wait and watch. ;)

the dancer of spaz
May 15th, 2004, 07:36 PM
Hello all! How's it going? I've actually READ the entire thread this time, so I think I have a general concensus of what people think, which is... good, I suppose.
I'm just gonna talk about each topic separately, because I may ramble otherwise. In fact, I STILL may end up rambling. Sorry in advance.

SEASON SEVEN SAM:
I think she showed emotion, but not as extreme as other people think. "Grace," for example, was the first of its kind, as it actually got into the head of one of the main characters for an entire 45 minutes. We've had character-focused eps throughout the seasons for years, but nothing like "Grace," and I think that scared people. It would seem that people who are what I like to call "Old School Show Fans," like the same stuff that they're used to. :o There's nothing wrong with that, but I notice that most of these fans don't like Sam in season seven because she shows more emotion and more CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT than she has in any other season.
Also... I notice that most of the people who demean Sam's character because of season seven are of the same group that constantly call her a "Mary-Sue." It's sad really. When she contributes to saving the world, she's played as "Superwoman" or "Ice Queen," however, when she shows that she has a heart, she's "Dana Scully," "Weepy Woman," or "Weak." The character can't please anyone. I don't know - maybe I'm way off-base here. Maybe not. :S

THE SAM/JACK THING:
Let me just say that I love team-dynamic. I love the team, and though I have my "faves" and am an S/J shipper, I will choose the team over ship any day of the week. That being said, I must say that Sam has been the character that has had to bare the brunt of non-shippers' anger and disdain. Yes, for some weird reason, the writers have decided that Sam should be the only one to show any emotion, but look at season four. Who showed more emotion for the other that season? That's right, Jack. But no one remembers that. They only remember eps like "Evolution: Part Two," "Grace," or "Chimera." All I'm asking for is for people to become more objective than they currently are. Not only does it make posters come off as Sam-haters (which they very well may not be), but it also causes posters to lose credibility for newbies and other people who read the thread. :rolleyes:

THE "QUALIFIED" QUESTION:
Is Sam qualified? I think so. No, she hasn't been given a chance to lead (that we've seen), but that's only because canon has not gotten to the level where we absolutely HAVE to see Jack in a General position (duh!). If he's there, they use him; if not, Sam is used. Teal'c will probably never lead, and though that sucks in a way, he and Daniel will need to be there to support Sam, just like the three of them all supported Jack as a leader. Teal'c had and still HAS more experience than Jack and Sam combined, and he still conceded to Jack - and he and Jack are two peas in a pod! "The Lost City: Part Two" is a perfect example of Sam taking charge. Watch the last 45 minutes, and you'll see more of Jack in her than you've probably ever seen. It's a good mixture of the scientist and the leader. :cool:

THE THREE-PERSON DYNAMIC:
If I had to evaluate Sam and Daniel's behavior over the past seven years, I would have to say that they have adopted more of Jack's mannerisms than they probably ever wanted to do. Both already contained CONTROLLED hints of sarcasm, but now, from about season five through season seven, they just let it all out - Daniel moreso than Sam during season five, but Sam makes up for it in season seven. Those three characters are all we need, as we'll still have Jack, and no one should replace Jack. Daniel wasn't replaced, he was just DISplaced, and Jonas was his own character. The problem with Jonas (and, subsequently, poor Corin Nemec) was that fanatical people went crazy and didn't give his character a chance. There's really no need for the TPTB to go through that again so late in the game.

OVERALL:
I'm looking forward to season eight, because they could completely ditch the ship, send the team to Mars for an excavation mission, or bring Janet back from the dead, and I'd still watch it, because I trust the writers, producers, etc. I'm looking forward to Sam taking charge of SG-1, because I like change, and I'm looking forward to watching Jack grow up, so to speak, and grab the bull by the horns when he needs to do so. The SGC will probably be fine (probably!). The two of them are ready for this change in their lives, and it should be an interesting development. And, hopefully, Daniel and Teal'c won't fade into the background. I love those guys, too. :p

Dani347
May 15th, 2004, 07:58 PM
We've had character-focused eps throughout the seasons for years, but nothing like "Grace," and I think that scared people. It would seem that people who are what I like to call "Old School Show Fans," like the same stuff that they're used to. There's nothing wrong with that, but I notice that most of these fans don't like Sam in season seven because she shows more emotion and more CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT than she has in any other season.


I'm sorry, those are huge generalizations to make as to why people don't like Grace or the direction Sam's character is taking. It totally disregards anyone's arguments to say that it's because they don't want change or character development. Or, to say that the reason people dislike Grace is because it's different. Exactly what show was I watching for three seasons? Because the show I watched gave Sam PLENTY of character development, although it would seem here that she never had any until this season, and it's all about character development that people object to. Couldn't the reason be that people are objecting to the WAY her character is developing, not the mere fact of the development? You really believe she didn't show character development in the other seasons? Or, is emotion equated with character development? And, speaking of that Sam showed PLENTY of emotion, a healthy amount for a human being. She wasn't some automan robotic scientist that tptb had to suddenly wake up in season 7 and say, "Hey, we need to let Sam show that she's human and has emotions." They used to show that just fine.


." All I'm asking for is for people to become more objective than they currently are. Not only does it make posters come off as Sam-haters (which they very well may not be), but it also causes posters to lose credibility for newbies and other people who read the thread.

First, who decides who's being objective? In your opinion Jack showed more emotion in season 4. In other people's he didn't. Who can say who is right, when it comes to opinions? And, frankly, the objection to Sam is mostly about her character in season 7, and there shouldn't have to be a tit for tat criticism of Jack (especially from another season) to make criticism of her valid. Anybody have any criticisms of Jack, have at it, and don't feel like you have to match them with criticisms of Sam. And, sorry if this comes off *****y, but I frankly don't care how credible I sound to people. I call it like I see it. I try to present my arguments as well thought out (to the point of being verbose) as I can, but I can't do anything about people's perceptions and if they see me as a Sam hater, there's nothing I can do, and I won't change my arguments when they reflect exactly how I feel.

ShadowMaat
May 15th, 2004, 08:01 PM
It would seem that people who are what I like to call "Old School Show Fans," like the same stuff that they're used to. :o There's nothing wrong with that, but I notice that most of these fans don't like Sam in season seven because she shows more emotion and more CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT than she has in any other season.

Oh, I'm all for emotion and character development. But that depends on the emotion, the amount of it and exactly what kind of character development we're talking about. Learning all about Sam's pathetic crush on Jack is not the kind of character development I'm looking for, nor is it the kind of emotional content I want to see. And for the record, I haven't seen Grace and have no intention of ever seeing it.



Also... I notice that most of the people who demean Sam's character because of season seven are of the same group that constantly call her a "Mary-Sue."

Speaking for myself, I have never once called Sam a "Mary Sue". I love the character. I think she's a great role model (or was) and a fine addition to the team. Not knowing these "Sam bashers" by name I can't say whether or not any of the others complaining are doing so to bash her. What I've gotten from this thread is that a lot of people who genuinely love the Sam character are upset to see her being portrayed the way she has been this past season.



That being said, I must say that Sam has been the character that has had to bare the brunt of non-shippers' anger and disdain.

Speaking strictly for myself, I feel that Sam is the character who has suffered the most at the hands of TPTB this season. However, I hate what has been done to the character of Jack as well and have said so on several threads. If Jack was showing "too much" emotion in S4, he's showing none at all in S7. Unless you count anger. But then, I haven't found Jack very likeable since S5.

I'm anti-ship, but I love each of the characters, both individually and as a team. I'm very pro-Team. :) Unfortunately, TPTB are systematically making me hate each character. Sam annoys and embarrasses me, Jack infuriates me, Daniel is dull and frustrating and Teal'c... sorry, who's he? Oh, that guy propping up the wall? *sigh*

Change is good... when it's for the better. Emotion is good... when it's the right emotion and in the right quantity. Character development is good... when it takes the character forward and broadens our understanding of that person.

Of the changes, emotions and character development I've seen in S7 (and admittedly, I only watched part of it), I found very little of it to be "good". I hate the direction the show is going and I hate the direction TPTB are taking the characters. I don't feel that the show or characters are changing for the better. If anything, they're getting worse. They're regressing.

I'm not sure I care for your generalizations and snap judgements, but if that's the way you see things then nothing I say is going to change your mind. I just wanted to get this down for the record. ;)

Asgard-VA
May 15th, 2004, 08:22 PM
I'm new to the forum so please forgive me if someone else has already suggested this. Do you think that Adam Baldwin (Colonel Dave Dixon in Heroes, Part I) might become a regular as the next leader of SG-1? It almost seemed that his character was similar to Jack's in the limited time he was in the episode. If he were to become a regular, it might help to keep some of the Jack-like humor in the show.

Don't get me wrong, I like Sam's character, but making SG-1 a three person team with Sam in charge would make the dynamics of the unit very different. Jack's somewhat rash, military solutions were offset by Sam's and Daniel's scientific/diplomatic solutions. If Sam is elevated to command of the unit, that element of the stories would disappear. If you added a new military member under Sam's command, you'd definitely have someone providing the Jack like solutions. On the other hand, a lower-ranking officer couldn't get away (realistically) with making sarcastic comments like Jack. Anyway, just some thoughts.

Dani347
May 15th, 2004, 08:25 PM
Change is good... when it's for the better.

Yes. I object to the snap judgement that anytime someone has something negative to say about the show now, it's because they don't like change. And, the argument is left at that, as if all change is good, and no matter what kind of change, if you don't like it, you're an old fuddy duddy. If they decided to turn whatever gou'ald they had left into pastry chefs and have the entire SGC do an American Idol competition, and had Sam in a bikini as her standard uniform (And I'm talking about the whole season, not some warped special episode) that would be change. Would people really come up with the "you just don't like change" argument if they implemented these aspects? If so, I'd say that was carrying loyalty to the show a tad too far. But, assuming people want at least a semblance of the premise of the show, no one would raise an objection to others objections. And, it should be the sane here. If you disagree, disagree. But, don't just lump it all in with not liking change. Not all change is good. Certainly not for all people.

Sorry, I'm rambling now.

ShadowMaat
May 15th, 2004, 08:36 PM
Yes. I object to the snap judgement that anytime someone has something negative to say about the show now, it's because they don't like change.

Yep. It's on my list of Most Hated Comments in Fandom.
"You just don't like change."
"You only like him because he isn't Jack."
"You only like him because he isn't Daniel."
"You must have been watching a different show."
"You're just mad because Jonas left."

If people would actually read what is being said and maybe even- gods forbid- tried to understand it, maybe they'd see there's more to it than stupid blanket statements like that.

As for the changes you suggested... If the goa'uld all became pastry chefs... I can only imagine what Luke's reaction would be. Poor guy. ;)

Dunno about the American Idol thing, although I suspect Teal'c would reveal some long-hidden talents in that department.

Personally, Sam in a bikini would do nothing for me, but I'm sure there's a contingent of fans who would LOVE that. ;)

epiphany
May 15th, 2004, 09:13 PM
Totally agree with you ShadowMaat. Sam was always a three dimensional character, in fact I found her way more three dimensional in the first three seasons than she is now. Now she's just this weak, wishy washy "girl". Even watch her in the hall with Jack in Evolution Part 1 explaning their supersoldier capture plan or with Col. Ronson(I think that is his name) at the beginning of Grace. She's like some little girl looking for a pat on the head from Daddy. I mean Ronson even utters the lines "Oh I'll do it just to see the look on your face", you half expected him to pinch her cheeks. Only she's a nearly 40 year old woman and it's just embarassing.

ShadowMaat
May 15th, 2004, 09:21 PM
Makes me wish there were a few women on the permanent writing staff. Every time TPTB tried to get away with slop like that they could smack 'em in the head. ;)

bcmilco
May 15th, 2004, 10:49 PM
Hey, Welcome! :)


Do you think that Adam Baldwin (Colonel Dave Dixon in Heroes, Part I) might become a regular as the next leader of SG-1?

Spoiler Space s8
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)
:)
:D
:p
:o
;)

Acording to the spoilers for next season Sam is going to be a Lt. Col. and in charge of SG-1. So no I don't think there's much chance of Dixon being in charge of SG-1.


If he were to become a regular, it might help to keep some of the Jack-like humor in the show.

I think they may off load some of the snarky comments onto Daniel and Sam they seemed to have started to do that in season 7, but that's just my guess. ;)



Don't get me wrong, I like Sam's character, but making SG-1 a three person team with Sam in charge would make the dynamics of the unit very different.

Yes, which will make it Sam's SG-1 as oposed to Jack's SG-1, so it will be interesting to see how the change is handled and what if any problems may arise


Jack's somewhat rash, military solutions were offset by Sam's and Daniel's scientific/diplomatic solutions. If Sam is elevated to command of the unit, that element of the stories would disappear.

It'll be different that's for sure, but I think it'll be good and it could lead to a lot of character development for Sam. :)

the dancer of spaz
May 16th, 2004, 12:27 AM
Couldn't the reason be that people are objecting to the WAY her character is developing, not the mere fact of the development? You really believe she didn't show character development in the other seasons? Or, is emotion equated with character development? And, speaking of that Sam showed PLENTY of emotion, a healthy amount for a human being... And, sorry if this comes off *****y, but I frankly don't care how credible I sound to people. I call it like I see it. I try to present my arguments as well thought out (to the point of being verbose) as I can, but I can't do anything about people's perceptions and if they see me as a Sam hater, there's nothing I can do, and I won't change my arguments when they reflect exactly how I feel.

It's entirely possible. I'm aware of the fact that she has shown emotion before. I'm aware of the fact that Sam's not a robot. It's seven years, however. People DO change over time to some degree. I'm not saying that the route she's taken is flawless - I'm just not willing to go off the deep end (like some posters have) and bash the current route completely. Also: I'm not asking you to care about your credibility. Like you, I'm calling it as I see it. And I definitely can relate to you on the whole "Verbose" deal. I don't see any INDIVIDUALS as Sam haters, because that is ONE assumption (of many, believe it or not) that I will not make on my own, either based on my observations or otherwise.



I'm not sure I care for your generalizations and snap judgements, but if that's the way you see things then nothing I say is going to change your mind. I just wanted to get this down for the record.


Notice how I said "most" or "some?" I definitely was not speaking like 100% of fans believe this or that, and I DEFINITELY don't believe that my feelings on the subject are the God's honest truth. I know that there are people who have different feelings, different beliefs, etc., etc. Like EVERYONE ELSE ON THIS THREAD, I posted what I saw. Should I have done it in the way that I did? Apparently not, as people are just as touchy on this subject as they are on any of the character-related subjects that come up.

Secondly, "snap judgements" are a trend for some posters, though something away from which I have TRIED to stay.


Yes. I object to the snap judgement that anytime someone has something negative to say about the show now, it's because they don't like change.

Dude, I do NOT think that. And though that comment may not have been CLEARLY directed at my last post, it wasn't exactly the most timely for others either, eh? Look, I'm not here to anger people. I understand that differences of opinion are gonna happen. Anyone who doesn't understand that shouldn't be on the threads, frankly, but look at what you're saying (a hard thing to do, I know: LOOKING at what you're SAYING :o ): You're basically saying that you don't like the show that much, you hate the direction in which it's headed, but you're taking time out of your presumedly busy schedule to post about just how much you hate the show/characters/plot lines?

Is that honestly in hopes of getting TPTB to change their nine-month plan just to fit the plots into your (or anyone's, even my) desires of how the show SHOULD be? :( The show is what it is. Period. There's no turning back - even for season eight now. At least, that's the way it SHOULD be.

No, change is not always good. No, not liking direction does not mean you hate change, but again we're getting to the whole "What change is good change?" question. No one should even attempt to answer that, and I certainly am not trying to answer it. I guess my problem is when people get on these threads (you know, the threads for supposedly CURRENT fans) and talk about how bad the show is, how sucky a character suddenly is, how baseless the writing is. Granted, there are only a few of these people (as my tongue drips with sarcasm), and granted, sometimes I wonder where the HECK a show is going, but this fandom/forum is so big because the people on and off screen are doing SOMETHING right... :eek:

I apologize if anyone felt like they were included under "The Dancer of Spaz's Umbrella of Horrible Generalizations." And I mean that honestly and truly. That was not my intention, and I'll watch myself in the future. Again, everything I described in my previous post was based off of my own observations, not fact.

Hope I don't get ousted completely from this thread, as it apparently has started to get REALLY INTERESTING... :rolleyes:

Bagpuss
May 16th, 2004, 12:48 AM
Makes me wish there were a few women on the permanent writing staff. Every time TPTB tried to get away with slop like that they could smack 'em in the head. ;)

Sorry,Shadow,but as far as I'm concerned,I don't think female writers would do any better,unless the PTB had the good sense to include your good self and Denise P,and several other excellent Fan-Fic authors as Show Story Consultants! Bit late for that,though,I suppose.

And I've just watched the local Porcine population doing an aerial display over
my town! Wow they're GOOD.Wonder who trained 'em? ;)

Bagpuss
May 16th, 2004, 01:05 AM
[QUOTE=the dancer of spaz.
Hope I don't get ousted completely from this thread, as it apparently has started to get REALLY INTERESTING... :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Not half as "Interesting" as it'll get, once Dani347 discovers she's become a "Dude",methinks!! ;)

Not taking your views lightly or trying to be snide,btw!There's room for everyone.I agree mostly with your POV, as I for one,am still a Show fan,and am still optimistic about Season 8 . :)

Bagpuss
May 16th, 2004, 04:38 AM
Only she's a nearly 40 year old woman and it's just embarassing.

OK,not "dissing" your POV,you're just as entitled to that as any other poster!If you feel Sam has any Daddy issues or approval needs,fair enough!

I would like to point out though, that IMO,Sam's age has no relevance to her role on the team,and her fitness to lead.Nor should it be part of any criticism of RL women.

There's enough RL "Ageism".Let's not set back many years of positive growth as regards women's rights,by using Sam's age as an issue.If we were discussing any male,I'd say the same! :)

No personal attack on you or any other Poster intended.Honestly.It's just my POV!

ShadowMaat
May 16th, 2004, 06:49 AM
I would like to point out though, that IMO,Sam's age has no relevance to her role on the team,and her fitness to lead.Nor should it be part of any criticism of RL women.

Perhaps "she's a grown woman" would have sufficed. I think the point wasn't how old Sam is, but the fact that she should be old enough to not need the approval of the men (especially the older men) around her.

Spaz, sorry if I misread you but your post still came off as making sweeping generalizations, even with the "most" and "some" bits. I think at least part of that is because those "most" and "some" comments referred to groups of people that I personally have not noticed on this thread. "most" of the people making the nasty comments are Sam-bashers, "some" of the people objecting are "old school" fans (and don't even get me started on THAT comment!), etc.

I know that's how YOU see it, but as I said in my post, I have seen no evidence at all that "most" or even "some" of the people posting their objections to Sam's direction are doing so because they flat-out hate her.

While I know there are a lot of "old school" fans out there, I don't think that any or even "some" of them are objecting to Sam's development simply because it's "different".

If this is how you see things, then your view of fandom is a lot more negative than mine. I tend to take people at face value until I get to know them and THEN I decide whether or not they belong to "this" group or "that" group.

As for "What kind of development is good development?" You're right. It's impossible to say because everyone has different expectations. However, judging from this thread and a few others I think that a lot of people either dislike or are uncomfortable with the direction Sam is going in terms of her emotions. LOTS of people want Sam to declare her love for Jack, but I've noticed that at least "a few" of them don't care for the... side effects.

No, just because "most" or "some" of the fans don't like something doesn't mean it should be changed, but it makes me feel better to know I'm not the only one who feels that way and it says- to me- that maybe TPTB are making a mistake. Yes, the characters all belong to them, but they're creating them for us to enjoy- or, at least, they're creating them knowing that we will have SOME kind of reaction, and while they hardly pander to fan demands, they've managed to balance us all pretty well in the past. Barring major unavoidable upheavals like the whole Daniel/Jonas issue, of course. So that I don't make any sweeping generalizations, let me say that I find it... interesting that fans are upset with the current situation regarding Sam's "feelings" and it makes me curious what TPTB were thinking when they made the choices they did.

If there are legions of Sam fans out there who LOVE her current development, then by all means, speak up! I'd like to see some different perspectives, maybe get a read on some alternative interpretations.

Dani347
May 16th, 2004, 08:29 AM
I think in some places "dude" is a catch all phrase for both males and females, so it could go either way. But, anyway, I'm female.


You're basically saying that you don't like the show that much, you hate the direction in which it's headed, but you're taking time out of your presumedly busy schedule to post about just how much you hate the show/characters/plot lines?

I just don't get this argument. Why is it any more sensible to take time out of a busy schedule to post about what you like? Why is only happy wonderful praise worth posting about? That still takes time out of a busy schedule. And, you couldn't know it, but my schedule actually has become pretty light now. I just fininshed finals, and I only work part time, so I have more free time than usual. And, people that don't like the direction the show is going shouldn't post? :S And, just because I don't like something doesn't mean that I don't care about it. It's the fact that I do care about certain elements that I voice my opinions. If I didn't care, I wouldn't post, no matter how badly I thought the show was doing.



Is that honestly in hopes of getting TPTB to change their nine-month plan just to fit the plots into your (or anyone's, even my) desires of how the show SHOULD be? The show is what it is. Period. There's no turning back - even for season eight now. At least, that's the way it SHOULD be.

No, it's not in the hopes of anything. I'm posting on a messageboard, one of porobably thousands of messageboards. no offense to Gateworld, but this is just a drop in the bucket. If I really wanted to influence tptb to change the direction of the show, I'd be writing to them. But, I don't think tptb give a hoot about someone like me. I'm writing here, for the same reason that anyone who only writes happy fuzzy things writes. Because I want to talk about the show, and I want to talk about how I feel about it.


I guess my problem is when people get on these threads (you know, the threads for supposedly CURRENT fans) and talk about how bad the show is, how sucky a character suddenly is, how baseless the writing is. Granted, there are only a few of these people (as my tongue drips with sarcasm), and granted, sometimes I wonder where the HECK a show is going, but this fandom/forum is so big because the people on and off screen are doing SOMETHING right...



I thought this board in general, and as a result all the threads were for people who want to talk about Stargate. Period. And, again, just because a lot of people watch is not definitive proof to me that they're doing something right. Because it's a matter of individual taste, and to my taste, regardless of who else is watching, they're not doing something right. And, that also assumes that if you do complain, you aren't a current fan. You don't have to be a fan of every aspect of the show to be a fan. I'm a huge fan of Daniel. But, Daniel doesn't live in a vacuum (I could make a snide comment about that, but I'll resist). To watch him, I have to watch the rest of the show. And, when I watch the rest of the show, I see things that interest me enough, sometimes positively, sometimes negatively, to comment on. Maybe all negatively, to some people. And, for other people, maybe they would consider themselves fans of the show (and maybe they could come up with even more reasons to like the show), and still be disappointed in the way things are going. Fan doesn't = love show unreservedly with no complaints.



. I'm not saying that the route she's taken is flawless - I'm just not willing to go off the deep end (like some posters have) and bash the current route completely.

Why is that going off the deep end? Why should anyone have to like the change at all to be reasonable in their criticism? Couldn't you just as well say that someone who says that the change is absolutely perfect and the best thing to ever happen to Sam is also going off the deep end? And, is it a matter of being willing? Can anyone help what they like? Or don't like? Wouldn't life be a lot easier if we could? I could tell myself, "I'm going to love the J/S ship" and "I'm going to love what they do to Sam." Tada!!! Now, it's all wonderful, and watching the show is so much easier!! But, it doesn't work that way. You like what you like, and you dislike what you dislike.



but again we're getting to the whole "What change is good change?" question. No one should even attempt to answer that, and I certainly am not trying to answer it.

Why shouldn't anyone? Isn't that what people are doing everytime they post that Sam and Jack should just declare their love and get on with the rest of the show? Or that Sam and Jack should just give it up already? Or that Teal'c should get more lines? Or that Jack should show more caring for Daniel? People have and most likely will continue to post what changes they think are good. Or, what things they think should stay the same. It's got nothing to do with making anyone else think like them, but just saying how they feel.

As to the sweeping generalization statement, I'm not objecting to how many people you say are old school fans who don't like change or just hate Sam. If you had just said I was an old school fan who hated Sam (or, if you singled out anyone) that would have been a sweeping generalization of me. That would have put my objections to the show and the character in the most flat, one dimensional terms. Some people might think my objections are way off base and ridiculous, but I'd like to think I've given reasons that are more detailed than simply "I hate Sam" or "I don't like change" Instead of just chalking up criticisms of Sam to people not liking Sam, how about looking at the criticisms themselves, and taking each one as an individual one, and thinking why people feel this way. Instead of chalking up anyone who doesn't like the way things have changed on the show as being against change in general, maybe just think that they aren't happy with these particular changes. Maybe other changes would be very satisfactory to the same people who are complaining now. And, I've already answered who should get to say. Everyone. Anyone. Will it make anyone else agree with me? Will I force tptb to implement the changes? No. So, there's no harm in voicing them.

ShadowMaat
May 16th, 2004, 09:11 AM
I just don't get this argument. Why is it any more sensible to take time out of a busy schedule to post about what you like? Why is only happy wonderful praise worth posting about?

Just wanted to second you on this. I'm getting a little tired of always getting dumped on for saying less-than-positive things. I do make positive posts here, I do say nice things. It takes an equal amount of time to post anything. Why is the negative stuff bad, but the positive stuff is OK? Just because people don't wanna hear about the bad stuff? ;) Well, phooey on that! ;)



But, I don't think tptb give a hoot about someone like me. I'm writing here, for the same reason that anyone who only writes happy fuzzy things writes. Because I want to talk about the show, and I want to talk about how I feel about it.

Exactly! Negative comments are no more or less valid than the positive ones and it doesn't make us any less of a fan if we occasionally have complaints to make.



I thought this board in general, and as a result all the threads were for people who want to talk about Stargate. Period. ...Fan doesn't = love show unreservedly with no complaints.

Wow. I missed spazz's comment on this. Guess I should read more carefully. :P

And to think, all this time I thought Gateworld was a board for ALL fans- past, present and future. Thank goodness Spazz came along and showed me the error of my ways. Gateworld is ONLY for CURRENT fans. Gosh, well, OK, if that's the way it is. I guess Spazz would know better than I would. I should just pick up my toys (and Luke) and shuffle on outta Dodge, 'cause I'm not a CURRENT fan so I have no place here. Huh. Who'd'a thunk it?

Anyway, now I'm getting angry, so I'm gonna get this thread back on topic.

While I am not currently planning to watch S8 (and therefore my opinions are probably invalid), I think that having Sam be in command of SG-1 is a good move- for her and for the show. IF the writers put some effort into it, maybe it'll finally do some good and get the show back on track. Excuse me, back on the tracks that I think it should be on. Me. MY thoughts. MY opinion.

Of course, since I'm not planning to watch, what does it matter, right? Well, it matters to me because I am still a fan of the show, even if I don't like its current direction. I like what the show was, I like who the characters were and even though I'm 99% sure I'm never going to see any of that again, there's still that stubborn 1% that hopes things will get better. Or, as a non-current fan, am I not allowed to have hope? Am I not allowed to think the show can be improved? Am I not allowed to post my thoughts in ANY direction because I haven't watched all of S7? Maybe the folks who refuse to watch S6 should be banned from the board, too. And all those "new" fans who haven't caught up yet shouldn't post here until they actually know what they're talking about (and yes, folks, that's sarcasm and not an actual statement or opinion).

I love the character of Sam. I love Jack and Daniel and Jonas and Teal'c and all the others. Just because I'm not happy with the way things are turning out doesn't make me love them any less. I may not like what they're becoming, but I still love who and what they were and I will continue to love MY vision of them and I will continue to support- in absentia- those aspects of their characters which are still headed in the "right" direction (the right direction being my own PERSONAL definition which is not subject for scrutiny, debate, or issues over validity).

I'm sorry if anyone has a problem with that, but I didn't come here seeking approval. I'm not going to grovel, I'm not going to change my views just to fit the groupmind, I'm going to post MY thoughts, MY feelings and MY opinions because despite other opinions to the contrary, that's what I think this board is for: sharing your thoughts with other fans. Unless or until the mods come along and tell me, "No, you're wrong, you aren't allowed to post that stuff" then I'm gonna keep posting.

I hope Sam surpasses ALL expectations in S8. I hope she becomes the definitive leader of SG-1 and takes the team to previously unknown levels of excellence. So there. :P

Dani347
May 16th, 2004, 09:34 AM
and therefore my opinions are probably invalid

No, valid! Valid! I may not agree with everything (just 99.9%) but your arguments are well written and it's easy to see you put in a lot of thought into your views.

And, here's something else. Instead of continuing to ask why some people post negative things in a board for fans (current, past, what does it matter??) why don't people who have positive things to say just post the positive things? Discussing the points of the posts is fine. You want to debate with me about Sam? I'm always up for a good debate. You disagree with my views? Let me know, I'll defend mine, you defend yours, we'll communicate. But, to say, "Why are you posting at all" just shuts down the lines of communication. And, that's not good.

epiphany
May 16th, 2004, 10:08 AM
OK,not "dissing" your POV,you're just as entitled to that as any other poster!If you feel Sam has any Daddy issues or approval needs,fair enough!

I would like to point out though, that IMO,Sam's age has no relevance to her role on the team,and her fitness to lead.Nor should it be part of any criticism of RL women.

There's enough RL "Ageism".Let's not set back many years of positive growth as regards women's rights,by using Sam's age as an issue.If we were discussing any male,I'd say the same! :)

No personal attack on you or any other Poster intended.Honestly.It's just my POV!

Where are you getting that? It isn't "ageist" to say someone who is an adult, supposedly a responsible adult in the AIR FORCE is acting like a child waiting for a pat on the head, she even uses a somewhat childish tone of voice.

It's got nothing to do with her gender, it has to do with how I felt she was acting. It is embarrasing when a 40 year old woman, aka AN ADULT, acts like she's a child in a professional situation apparently as some sort of way of getting someone to approve of her. Just as it's embarassing when a 50 year old man who is supposed to a Colonel in the US Air Force acts like a child with some sort of attention issue(see Jack).

It's got nothing to do with "daddy issues" I think she has, it is what her behavior seems to convey.

Bagpuss
May 16th, 2004, 10:51 AM
Where are you getting that? It isn't "ageist" to say someone who is an adult, supposedly a responsible adult in the AIR FORCE is acting like a child waiting for a pat on the head, she even uses a somewhat childish tone of voice.

It's got nothing to do with her gender, it has to do with how I felt she was acting. It is embarrasing when a 40 year old woman, aka AN ADULT, acts like she's a child in a professional situation apparently as some sort of way of getting someone to approve of her. Just as it's embarassing when a 50 year old man who is supposed to a Colonel in the US Air Force acts like a child with some sort of attention issue(see Jack).

It's got nothing to do with "daddy issues" I think she has, it is what her behavior seems to convey.
...........................................................................
All in our chosen perspectives then!I wasn't trying to have a go at you or your views.Mine are different.If you'd used the term "responsible adult",I wouldn't have had any problem with your previous Post!

Shadow used the alternative term "Grown Woman" ,in her reply to me,and either that or your term "Responsible Adult" are fine and IMO,far better suited than your original line.Also I don't see those alternatives as "Ageist".

As to your views vis any of the characters,fire away! They're Fictional.If you find their actions embarrassing,fine.I have my own issues with some of the plot-lines and character development too. ;)

Scruff
May 16th, 2004, 10:58 AM
My concern with Sam in command comes not from any dislike for the character, but from a standpoint of the real world military. I could see her in charge of specialized missions, but not all of the time. For all of her experience in gate travel and years in the military, she does not have the specialized combat training of many other team leaders. While there are female officers in the military in command positions, none are in SpecOps; none are Infantry. When there is a very real possiblity of engaging in combat, the Air Force would not send a woman into harm's way. The exception being that now they do allow female pilots go on bombing runs.

Sam in command would please a lot of fans and might make good television, it's just not realistic. (Ok, neither is the idea that a 32 ton ring made of quartz can allow travel between planets, but I digress.)

Bagpuss
May 16th, 2004, 11:21 AM
Perhaps "she's a grown woman" would have sufficed. I think the point wasn't how old Sam is, but the fact that she should be old enough to not need the approval of the men (especially the older men) around her.


Thanks, Shadow.Much better term ,IMO! :D

As to the "Point",no probs with that either, as it wouldn't be much of a debate, if we all wandered around the Forum,saying "Wow" and "Cool" to everything the PTB/Writers come up with!

I enjoy reading ALL the different POV's.As IMO,I owe it to myself, to keep my mind open, and question everything I see/feel.Some might think I'm just nosy.(I prefer curious or inquisitive.) ;)

Have to admit: some aspects of Stargate SG-1 writing make my blood boil.
I'm not on the right thread to have a go at the things I loathe at the Mo',so I'll go away and take some deep breaths,and chill! :D

sgeureka
May 16th, 2004, 12:46 PM
To ShadowMaat (I'm putting several posts of yours in this one; sorry if they're taken out of context too much ;) )


I hate the direction the show is going and I hate the direction TPTB are taking the characters. I don't feel that the show or characters are changing for the better. If anything, they're getting worse. They're regressing.


maybe TPTB are making a mistake. Yes, the characters all belong to them, but they're creating them for us to enjoy- or, at least, they're creating them knowing that we will have SOME kind of reaction, and while they hardly pander to fan demands, they've managed to balance us all pretty well in the past.

Also, it was written

We've had character-focused eps throughout the seasons for years, but nothing like "Grace," and I think that scared people. It would seem that people who are what I like to call "Old School Show Fans," like the same stuff that they're used to. There's nothing wrong with that, but I notice that most of these fans don't like Sam in season seven because she shows more emotion and more CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT than she has in any other season.
And you replied

While I know there are a lot of "old school" fans out there, I don't think that any or even "some" of them are objecting to Sam's development simply because it's "different".
I would really like to read your POV on this :)

I haven't participated in online fandom in the earlier seasons so I don't know what the fans were talking about then. But I read through some of the threads that Gypsy dug up in the Delphi forum a few weeks ago, and it seemed to me that you could basically take the old conversations and say that they were just a few weeks old. The fans debated about the same stuff as they do today, and their opinions were as wide-ranged as they are now.

It just seemed that they didn't jump at each other when they had different opinions, and TPTB were not blamed for anything that often (IMO of course, and I didn't read ALL the threads). So I agree that something has changed in fandom.

You don't agree with spaz's opinion that many "old school" fans dislike Sam's development because it's different. You like to put the "blame" on TPTB (I know that you usually say that in a cynic way and you don't really want to put suicidal thoughts onto them). But do you think it is possible that it is not all the writers' fault?

That there weren't so many people who didn't like Sam two years ago doesn't mean that they loved her then. It just means that they didn't care enough to state their dislike of the character. And now the writers have changed a little bit (partly by RDA's reduced schedule, hence Sam takes the role as the leader more often, partly by re-introducing the love theme). And suddenly we have the big "I-don't-like-the-direction-that-TPTB-are-taking-Sam" group. The same can be said about other themes of the show.

I mean, everybody is free to state their opinion (and you have done so very well in this thread and elsewhere ;) ), but is it really that TPTB are just doing a crappy job or is it that a few (or a lot) fans don't like an aspect of the show anymore because it has become different?


If there are legions of Sam fans out there who LOVE her current development, then by all means, speak up! I'd like to see some different perspectives, maybe get a read on some alternative interpretations.
I wouldn't say that I love her current development, but neither do I see much of a reason why I should hate it. She is my fave character of the show, and I will either join you next year or I'll say that I don't see why so many fans made a fuss about her development. At the moment, I just don't like to read the really nasty posts (not from you) that say that TPTB suck for doing what is their job. (I know, I'm just too much of a positive person too look for the fault in me before I doom everyone else ;) ).

(Let me just add that I don't agree with your opinion that often but your posts are usually that well written and insightful that I can resist the urge to put you on my ignore list ;) . I always *really* enjoy reading your posts :) )

ShadowMaat
May 16th, 2004, 01:55 PM
You don't agree with spaz's opinion that many "old school" fans dislike Sam's development because it's different. You like to put the "blame" on TPTB (I know that you usually say that in a cynic way and you don't really want to put suicidal thoughts onto them). But do you think it is possible that it is not all the writers' fault?

It isn't all the writers' fault, but they are the likeliest target since they are the ones responsible for writing the content that I and "a few" others find so objectionable. ;) I can't speak for anyone else, but I have always enjoyed Sam's character. I like her enthusiasm for science, the strength of her convictions, and the fact that she bucks the cliche of the military figure by having a genuine emotional side. If she lacked that, Cassie would probably have died. There are other instances where her emotions have ruled her judgement for the better, but that's the most obvious case to spring to my mind.

It is only recently that I have perceived a "change" in her overall attitude. Instead of her emotions helping her, I feel as if they're hindering her. Is this because of some change in the writing, or because of something else? Speaking for myself, I stand by my conviction that it's the writing that has changed, but I'd be a fool if I didn't admit that my own attitudes are likely being affected.

I wasn't a part of fandom when I saw Singularity, so I only had myself by which to judge the merits/faults of the ep. It has never been a particular favorite of mine, and to be honest I was a little annoyed with Sam for taking the chance she did... but I also understood why she did what she did. I sympathize with her choice and however foolish it was, I also felt it was selfless. Not so, S7. It's hard to judge accurately because I haven't seen all of the eps, but there were scenes in Chimera and Heroes where I felt she made emotionally-based decisions which were not for the betterment of those around her and which read to me as being very selfish. Yes, it could simply be a matter of my own personal biases, but the writing has to figure in there somewhere in order for me to have seen things the way I saw them.



...is it really that TPTB are just doing a crappy job or is it that a few (or a lot) fans don't like an aspect of the show anymore because it has become different?

I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're trying to make. An aspect of the show has become different (several have, but we'll stick to the topic). Are the writers not responsible for that change in aspect? And if some (or a few, or most, or just me) see that aspect as being "bad", then wouldn't we (or I) target TPTB for making that change?

As a fan I see the changes that have been made as being detrimental to the development of Sam/the show. In that respect, yes, I suppose it IS all me, but given my current negative attitude, if things with Sam had stayed the same or if they'd gone in another direction, how would that "affect" me? Would I still be upset with the show, but not mind Sam? Would I be upset with the changes no matter what? Would my opinion still be based on my biases, or would it have basis in the writing? Without an example for comparison, it's hard to say. I like to think that if Sam had turned out differently that I wouldn't have objected. My main problem with Sam at the moment relates directly to the ship aspect of the show. If that aspect were absent or as subdued as it has been in early seasons, I don't think she would aggravate me as much. I don't know if the changes would be enough to make me keep watching, though, it'd just be one less thing for me to complain about. ;)

My "problems" aren't just with the development of Sam, they're with the creation and implementation of the stories themselves, stories which I feel have been watered down, retread, and made far too hokey for my tastes. That again could easily have to do with my own personal biases, but I can say that I was hellbent and determined to love S7 when it started. No matter what, I was going to like it because I didn't want to become like the angry people who spent an entire season complaining about the lack of Daniel regardless of what was happening in the stories themselves (I'm not talking about the ones with genuine complaints, just the ones who were literally saying that an ep sucked because Daniel wasn't in it). Unfortunately, despite my determination to love S7, I was finding it incresingly difficult to watch and enjoy the show. It was for a wide variety of reasons which I don't think are necessary to detail in this thread, but one of the main reasons was the writing.

Another reason, and a fairly big one, was the "vibe" I got from the characters/actors. It managed to sublimate itself a little better in eps like Fallout and Heroes, but overall I didn't feel that the characters had any more cohesion as a team. Maybe that, too, is a factor in my disliking of Sam's development, although I cannot at the moment think of any instances where I felt that "Amanda" leaked through into Sam. Still, it's a possibility.

The point is, I guess, that you're right- it isn't just the writers. But they aren't entirely lacking in blame, either. Not from where I sit. ;)

I'm glad folks are enjoying my posts, even if they don't always agree with me. :P Stick around. I'll brainwash the lot of you eventually. :D

bcmilco
May 16th, 2004, 02:08 PM
Stick around. I'll brainwash the lot of you eventually. :D

Yeah, you just keep trying, but it wont work :p

Dani347
May 16th, 2004, 02:24 PM
I mean, everybody is free to state their opinion (and you have done so very well in this thread and elsewhere ), but is it really that TPTB are just doing a crappy job or is it that a few (or a lot) fans don't like an aspect of the show anymore because it has become different?

Not when fans are saying they dislike the way totb are handling things. You can't just say it's because they don't like it simply because it's different when people are stating their reasons. Why is it so hard to believe that some people don't like the direction that tptb have taken with aspects of the show, and it has nothing to do with the flat out simple thing as "you just don't like change?" I have a problem with the particular directions tptb are taking. I think they're doing a lousy job. Feel free to disagree. This is for anyone. Feel free to think that tptb are doing an absolutely fabulous job. But, please, no matter what you think of my reasons, do me the courtesy of not reducing them to the one note "you just don't like change." And, no, this wasn't directed specifically at me. But, in a way it was. Since it is about the people that are upset with the changes made, and I'm one of those people upset with them. I can only answer for myself, so I am. In fact, why don't people just stop telling people what they feel and why they feel it? I'm sure we all know our own feelings well enough.


I wouldn't say that I love her current development, but neither do I see much of a reason why I should hate it. She is my fave character of the show, and I will either join you next year or I'll say that I don't see why so many fans made a fuss about her development. At the moment, I just don't like to read the really nasty posts (not from you) that say that TPTB suck for doing what is their job. (I know, I'm just too much of a positive person too look for the fault in me before I doom everyone else ).

Does reason come into it? Since when does reason come into liking or disliking anything? They're emotional responses. As for saying tptb suck, maybe it's that people are criticizing tptb, because they think they're not doing their job as well as they have.
And, again, to people in general, please don't throw out the old "do you have a tv show? Well, then what right do you have to say they aren't doing their jobs well?" Movie critics criticize movies without ever having produced or acted in one. Book reviewers criticize books without writing one. Everytime someone goes into a clothing store and decides not to buy an outfit because they think it's ugly, they're making a critique, and probably haven't picked up a needle and thread.

I'm fine with change. Change in and of itself doesn't bother me. I don't dislike it just because it's change. On the other hand, I don't like change simply because it's change. It has to be what I consider good change. And, that's a decision that is up to each individual. I'd also wager that anyone who has made complaints about the changes doesn't live in some unnatural fear of change, but just has objections to these particular ones.

epiphany
May 16th, 2004, 06:49 PM
Why is it so hard to believe that some people don't like the direction that tptb have taken with aspects of the show, and it has nothing to do with the flat out simple thing as "you just don't like change?" I have a problem with the particular directions tptb are taking. I think they're doing a lousy job. Feel free to disagree.

I agree. :D

I'm fine with change. Change in and of itself doesn't bother me. I don't dislike it just because it's change. On the other hand, I don't like change simply because it's change. It has to be what I consider good change. And, that's a decision that is up to each individual. I'd also wager that anyone who has made complaints about the changes doesn't live in some unnatural fear of change, but just has objections to these particular ones.

I agree again. :)

the dancer of spaz
May 17th, 2004, 08:57 AM
Just wanted to second you on this. I'm getting a little tired of always getting dumped on for saying less-than-positive things. I do make positive posts here, I do say nice things. It takes an equal amount of time to post anything. Why is the negative stuff bad, but the positive stuff is OK? Just because people don't wanna hear about the bad stuff?


No. There's room for negativity. I'll agree with that. There's ALWAYS room for negativity. I just don't think that it's been so overwhelmingly HEAVY, like someone said earlier, those first few years. Also, I guess it's because the fandom wasn't so big, but, either way, I don't remember it being this crazy even when people made the references to Season Six ("The Season Which Will Not Be Mentioned" or something like that).



Exactly! Negative comments are no more or less valid than the positive ones and it doesn't make us any less of a fan if we occasionally have complaints to make.


No. Fan does not = loving, adoring, all-worshipping shipper or anything of that sort. Again, I recognize that fact as well. Did I say that I thought otherwise? No.



Wow. I missed spazz's comment on this. Guess I should read more carefully. :P


Was that a not-so-subtle dig at me? Nice. For the record, I worked yesterday and couldn't "retort." Sorry. :)



And to think, all this time I thought Gateworld was a board for ALL fans- past, present and future. Thank goodness Spazz came along and showed me the error of my ways. Gateworld is ONLY for CURRENT fans. Gosh, well, OK, if that's the way it is. I guess Spazz would know better than I would. I should just pick up my toys (and Luke) and shuffle on outta Dodge, 'cause I'm not a CURRENT fan so I have no place here. Huh. Who'd'a thunk it?


More digs... again, very appreciated. Thank you! Whereas you just ASSUMED that I believed you fell into all of those "generalizations," you have taken it upon yourself to include ME (not other posters; just me) in your snide comments and sarcastic remarks. I suppose mudslinging is next on the agenda, eh? Why not? It'd be appropriate. Look, I read your post over and over again, trying to decide whether or not I should bother replying, because I don't want you to think that I can't take sarcasm. I've LIVED with sarcasm- that's not the problem. The problem I have occurs when people single posters out and bash them unashamedly. Like WE ALL AGREE, this is about your, my, our opinions. I haven't intentionally bashed YOURS, ShadowMaat, and if I have, please let me know so I don't do it again. :)



Anyway, now I'm getting angry, so I'm gonna get this thread back on topic.


Apparently it's not that hard for you. And thanks for taking upon The Charge, as it is, to "get this thread back on topic." No one is more grateful than I.



...Or, as a non-current fan, am I not allowed to have hope? Am I not allowed to think the show can be improved? Am I not allowed to post my thoughts in ANY direction because I haven't watched all of S7? Maybe the folks who refuse to watch S6 should be banned from the board, too. And all those "new" fans who haven't caught up yet shouldn't post here until they actually know what they're talking about (and yes, folks, that's sarcasm and not an actual statement or opinion).


Wow, ShadowMaat! You agree with me? Awesome!
(Yes, also sarcasm.)



I'm sorry if anyone has a problem with that, but I didn't come here seeking approval. I'm not going to grovel, I'm not going to change my views just to fit the groupmind, I'm going to post MY thoughts, MY feelings and MY opinions...


Fantastic.



I hope Sam surpasses ALL expectations in S8. I hope she becomes the definitive leader of SG-1 and takes the team to previously unknown levels of excellence. So there. :P


Excellent. On this, ShadowMaat, you and I do agree.

Dani347
May 17th, 2004, 10:06 AM
I think this is what Shadow and I (well I know I was) were referring to from one of your posts:

I guess my problem is when people get on these threads (you know, the threads for supposedly CURRENT fans)

The stress on current fans was yours. That the thread is for current fans. And, I don't feel that way. I think the entire board and every thread is for all fans and all people who want to discuss it (except protected threads that clearly state -This is only for S/J shippers, or Daniel fans, or Sam fans, or what have you).

Also, from the same post and in the same sentence:

and talk about how bad the show is, how sucky a character suddenly is, how baseless the writing is.

That makes it seem that if people are saying negative things about the show, they aren't fans. Why can't someone be a fan and think a character is sucky at the same time? Why can't someone feel the writing is baseless and still be a fan?


I just don't think that it's been so overwhelmingly HEAVY, like someone said earlier, those first few years.

Have you thought that it's maybe because the people who complain now felt those first few years the show was better? That, maybe, possibly, in some deep dark corner of the universe, for some people something has gone wrong with the show lately? And, I'm not even going to bother with the whole change argument, since I've stated my views on that numerous times.

Webbgirl
May 17th, 2004, 10:14 AM
And, I'm not even going to bother with the whole change argument, since I've stated my views on that numerous times.

Aww, c'mon. Do it again, do it again.


...feeling a bit punchy after getting up at 4am for work today.

Teal'c
May 17th, 2004, 01:20 PM
There's no room for negativity! *runs away throwing petals, into the rainbow* :D

Livi2Jack
May 17th, 2004, 01:28 PM
Sam is as Jack put it, "a national treasure, a national resource." To keep risking her off world in combat is stupid. She is high enough to command/supervise others from the base and teach/train the next brains in action. With the material she has gleaned in the field she could do research or set policy for that research for the next hundred years. She could also be sent off world after the situation has been secured or to interface with friendly aliens willing to share technology. Perhaps she should lead a techno team which comes in AFTER first contact is made. The program has to grow its own personnel for it continue.

Livi2Jack
May 17th, 2004, 01:32 PM
It was strange that such a senior field officer was rarely shown in charge of additional troops. Yet many times he was and the inference was frequently there that he was...check out Homecomming and the many times he had other teams along as in Orpheus and Evo p1. I think you have to read between the lines. His role grew administratively as you see him off to briefings and meetings on the base. He was acting as Hammond's second in command as the character grew. Now he will grow some more.

And Teal'c does get paid otherwise how could he afford to buy civilian clothes and go off base for living and entertainment?

the dancer of spaz
May 17th, 2004, 04:52 PM
Alright! :) Time for clarification!

My observations have come from my times on the Delphi Forums (not Gateworld - yet) and on a few chat rooms. It's different on chat rooms, as everyone knows, because it's more of an instant conversation, although it does have the potential to be really chaotic. :p

Anyway, after having long, long, LONG conversations on the chat rooms with SEVERAL people who were all in agreement, and after reading what some people said in the Delphi-verse, I came up with a very non-specific conclusion. ;)

My observations did not specifically come from anyone on these new, cool forums, and even if they did, that wouldn't matter, because the differences of opinions are everywhere.

Livi2Jack
May 17th, 2004, 06:27 PM
Teal'c was a general under Apophis...First Prime is a general...give him a command.

Elwe Singollo
May 17th, 2004, 09:54 PM
Good idea :)

the dancer of spaz
May 17th, 2004, 10:45 PM
Teal'c is obviously a great warrior, but the way the team is set up (and has been set up) has proved to be best. He has amazing expertise and instincts, so - just as he has been good support for Jack - he can be good support for Sam.

KorbenDirewolf
May 17th, 2004, 10:55 PM
A few threads or so, it was stated that some people didn't want Sam, or didn't like the idea of Sam to lead SG1, but why?

The main reason that I don't want to see Carter leading SG-1 is becuase it is O'Neill's job. O'Neill's leadership is what (for me anyhow) made the series what it is (or was?). I'm not here to say that I don't like Carter (although I do have a problem with scientists), because I think that she has a definate place on the team. But, with Anderson's reduced schedule I do realize that someone has to take O'Neill's place as field leader of SG-1. I'm not sure if it should be Carter or someone else. It most likely will end up being her, why would they bring in a new starring role at this point in the series? The few times I've seen Carter leading a team, I wasn't too impressed, but that was just a few times. Once season eight gets going I'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out. If it was my choice, Carter would probably end up with the job, since she's been with that team from the beginning, rather than transferring someone from elsewhere. And I'm sure that Military Intelligence (and most likely the JCS as well) would frown on an alien getting any type of military command.

Tok'Ra Hostess
May 18th, 2004, 04:25 AM
She's a scientist and she's a soldier but that doesn't automatically mean she can command in the field, and IMO she hasn't been proven yet, not where the hard choices need to be made, and I'm hoping we'll get to see some of that in s8.


<nods> There's some terrific potential to further develop Carter's character, here. And not only Carter's.

Let Daniel and Teal'c give her some grief in the field; they both certainly gave enough to Jack. Let her make some mistakes. Let her doubt herself. Let some guest star question her command abilities, as MacKay questioned her scientific theories. (And just think of all the threads and fic such situations would engender! ;) )

Tok'Ra Hostess
May 18th, 2004, 05:03 AM
My concern with Sam in command comes not from any dislike for the character, but from a standpoint of the real world military.
While there are female officers in the military in command positions, none are in SpecOps; none are Infantry. When there is a very real possiblity of engaging in combat, the Air Force would not send a woman into harm's way. The exception being that now they do allow female pilots go on bombing runs.

Oh, yes, indeed!

The whole idea of putting a woman in the front lines of battle is against US Air Force regulations, let alone puting her in command of a front line unit.

Which means that either SG-1 will cease to be a front line unit (a possibility since lately they seem to be doing less of that pioneering exploration stuff), or that the Air Force wants to give the impression that females can and do advance to battle command positions.

If it's the latter(which I think will prove to be the case) then it's as false a lead as the whole ship/regs debacle(and, FYI, I'm neither pro nor anti ship).

Capt. Rivet
May 18th, 2004, 05:40 PM
Oh, yes, indeed!

The whole idea of putting a woman in the front lines of battle is against US Air Force regulations, let alone puting her in command of a front line unit.

Which means that either SG-1 will cease to be a front line unit (a possibility since lately they seem to be doing less of that pioneering exploration stuff), or that the Air Force wants to give the impression that females can and do advance to battle command positions.

If it's the latter(which I think will prove to be the case) then it's as false a lead as the whole ship/regs debacle(and, FYI, I'm neither pro nor anti ship).


Stargate SG-1 is a TV Show. On top of that it's Sci-fi. The whole point of Sci-fi is "entertainment without limitations." I'd say that philosophy most likely extends to the whole "women in combat" issue as well.

ShadowMaat
May 18th, 2004, 05:50 PM
I can see how, from a real-world military perspective, Sam in charge would be aggravating. I can also understand how, as a TV show, they don't necessarily have to follow the book. But, just as there's such a thing as being TOO "By the Book" you also don't want to throw the book out completely (although I know a lot who wouldn't mind that *g*).

The trick is to find a balance. IF the writers can have Sam in charge and still maintain military realism in other ways, more power to 'em. But if for whatever reason it isn't working out- or if they're advisors advise against it, then I say find another solution. I'd love to see Sam in charge, but not at the expense of the integrity of the show itself.

Of course, if we're depending on the writers, we're all doomed either way. :P

Capt. Rivet
May 18th, 2004, 06:12 PM
since it's pretty much set in stone that Carter will be the CO of SG-1 this coming season anyway, There is one thing I'd love to see change. As much as I love the S/J ship element, I don't like the way the wrote her in season 7. To put it simply, they made her out to be an emotional mess. It was very out of character. If they're really gonna try and pull this off right, I'd really like to see them restore the traits that made the character different from the typical sci-fi female lead (Personally I thought Carter was at her best in seasons 2 and 3.)

ShadowMaat
May 18th, 2004, 06:21 PM
Amen to that, Rivet. Unfortunately, I doubt it'll happen. Apparently women are supposed to pine after the man they love and go all weepy and weak in the brain... Or so TPTB seem to think. :P

Capt. Rivet
May 18th, 2004, 06:30 PM
Yeah... as much as I want to believe otherwise, I don't think it'll happen either... It's a nice thought though :p

epiphany
May 18th, 2004, 07:19 PM
I'd really like to see them restore the traits that made the character different from the typical sci-fi female lead (Personally I thought Carter was at her best in seasons 2 and 3.)

Absolutely, I agree. I love Sam in those Seasons and like her quite a bit in Season 1 as well, when she was finding her feet. :)

Capt. Rivet
May 18th, 2004, 08:41 PM
I'd really like to see them restore the traits that made the character different from the typical sci-fi female lead (Personally I thought Carter was at her best in seasons 2 and 3.)

Absolutely, I agree. I love Sam in those Seasons and like her quite a bit in Season 1 as well, when she was finding her feet. :)

can't argue there... she was awesome in S1 (minus that bit in the pilot.)
In the early seasons she seemed so much more confident in herself and her abilities. Aside from the basic traits, (strength, courage, etc...) confidence is definitely something they're going to have to bring back to the character if they want to make her situation convincing. If you're gonna be a leader, you have to be sure of yourself. bottom line.

I hate to say it, but in season 7 they pretty much stripped Carter of all the things that made her so complex and drawn out as a main character, and as a result she's become very one-demensional. I really hope the writers have realized this and are trying to fix it, but I'm not exactly counting on it... :(

ShadowMaat
May 19th, 2004, 03:29 AM
I hate to say it, but in season 7 they pretty much stripped Carter of all the things that made her so complex and drawn out as a main character, and as a result she's become very one-demensional. I really hope the writers have realized this and are trying to fix it, but I'm not exactly counting on it... :(

Exactly! They dropped everything that makes Sam Sam to me. She isn't fun to watch, anymore, she's... embarrassing. I'm embarrassed for her, I'm embarrassed by her... and that doesn't make for quality TV in my book.

Bring back the Sam we love.

the_fours
May 19th, 2004, 03:38 AM
when she was finding her feet. :)

If she did find her feet then she must have lost them in s7

ShadowMaat
May 19th, 2004, 03:42 AM
If she did find her feet then she must have lost them in s7

Luke would be perfectly happy to carry her around if that ever happened. ;)

the_fours
May 19th, 2004, 04:12 AM
Luke would be perfectly happy to carry her around if that ever happened. ;)

love to see how she'd escape the jaffa offworld without feet

ShadowMaat
May 19th, 2004, 04:34 AM
love to see how she'd escape the jaffa offworld without feet

Maybe she could get a flying throne chair thingy like Rygel on Farscape. Or maybe Thor's chair has some previously unguessed abilities. Then install weaponry in the armrests and she could fly around in her chair shooting the bad guys. They'd be so confused by the sight she could probably get most of them before the surprise wore off. ;)

Of course, that would mean Luke couldn't carry her, but I'm sure there would be the occasional "technical difficulty" that would arise...

the_fours
May 19th, 2004, 07:52 AM
i like it, could you imagine a wheelchair bound sg unit that would be damn funny :D

Pagan Twylight
May 19th, 2004, 09:01 PM
Maybe they should get their russian officer now. :D
Spoilers series 6-7 onwards
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Actually thinking about it now that the SGC is now common knowledge of the major US allies governments they should all get teams, how cool would a british SAS SG team be :D
I'd like to see one of the female Russians we have seen..... either the one from Watergate or The Tomb...either would be a really great addition to the team.

the_fours
May 20th, 2004, 03:21 AM
I'd like to see one of the female Russians we have seen..... either the one from Watergate or The Tomb...either would be a really great addition to the team.

o'niell would never let a russian join sg-1

Otis
May 22nd, 2004, 06:07 PM
I like the idea of a strong Sam in command. It might bring back some of the unhappy audience members who can't stand the way she is currently being written.

the dancer of spaz
May 23rd, 2004, 01:20 AM
I like the idea of a strong Sam in command. It might bring back some of the unhappy audience members who can't stand the way she is currently being written.

...Or it might anger the people who like the way she has been written this season.

...Or it might confuse the people who never saw a difference between season six Sam and season seven Sam.

...Or it might just give the same unhappy audience members more reasons to be angry.

I know you're trying to be optimistic, Otis, so just know that this isn't a jab at you. I'm just talking about the consistency of topics that have been spreading through this forum and other popular forums, I suppose.

Personally, I think that Sam hasn't been given the proper chance to show that she can command a field unit, which would explain why people don't have much faith in her (in some aspects). RDA has been top-britches for nearly eight years, with a complete absence in, what? Four eps? And, as much as I appreciate that fact, there is one thing that should be pointed out: ;)

Because of this ratio, it may look like Sam has always been looking to Jack for the answers, when really she's just been following the proper chain of command.

Like I've said before, if RDA is THERE, why wouldn't they use him in his full capacity? It's only when he's been gone that Sam's taken the lead, and even then it hasn't really been a serious off-world mission, without her father, Bratac, another leader, etc. Reduced RDA schedule means a greater chance for Sam (and subsequently AT) to show her stuff... or to screw up. Either result is human, IMO.

:eek: Unfortunately, despite the fact that Jack has screwed up in the past (also in spite of his IMMENSE experience), it probably won't be debated/talked about NEARLY as much as Sam's screw up, should she have one.

Then again, if she DOESN'T screw up, she'll be considered written as being too perfect. :D
Please, someone try to tell me that NO ONE will think that. We can have a good laugh together. :rolleyes:

:) Nope. She's not a martyr (That's just stupid). No, this isn't a Pity on Carter session (Even more stupid). It's simply the truth. Even if it's a half-truth, a quarter-truth, a little, itty-bitty bit of the truth - someone out there is gonna think that Jack is the almighty leader and that Sam should never be out in the field. :S Sad, but true.

*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*
On a more serious note, is it true that females cannot lead a field unit in the Air Force, or was that sarcasm? I thought I read it somewhere, but I can't remember. :o

Mar9645
May 23rd, 2004, 05:10 AM
:S
:eek: Unfortunately, despite the fact that Jack has screwed up in the past (also in spite of his IMMENSE experience), it probably won't be debated/talked about NEARLY as much as Sam's screw up, should she have one.

Then again, if she DOESN'T screw up, she'll be considered written as being too perfect. :D

:) Nope. She's not a martyr (That's just stupid). No, this isn't a Pity on Carter session (Even more stupid). It's simply the truth. Even if it's a half-truth, a quarter-truth, a little, itty-bitty bit of the truth - someone out there is gonna think that Jack is the almighty leader and that Sam should never be out in the field. :S Sad, but true.
How very true. That old gender-based double standard is still alive and kicking along with a number of other stereotypes that have come out of the closet in Season 7 and going into Season 8. :mad:

One thing I've noticed in the synopses of the stories for Season 8 so far (9 with one still to be filled in) is that Sam isn't mentioned in any of them. They talk about Jack, who isn't really a member of SG-1 any longer, Daniel and Teal'c but Sam's name is graphically missing. :confused:

I guess TPTB are still having problems juggling all the characters that were so effortlessly integrated prior to Season 7. Too bad. :(

Bogopimp
May 23rd, 2004, 08:04 AM
A few threads or so, it was stated that some people didn't want Sam, or didn't like the idea of Sam to lead SG1, but why?id like sam to lead sg1 (naked)...

she'd be a descent leader i think, but shes too moral. Jack knows when to put morality aside for the good of the mission, im not so sure sam's quite as good!

Teal'c
May 23rd, 2004, 08:19 AM
:S
How very true. That old gender-based double standard is still alive and kicking along with a number of other stereotypes that have come out of the closet in Season 7 and going into Season 8. :mad:

One thing I've noticed in the synopses of the stories for Season 8 so far (9 with one still to be filled in) is that Sam isn't mentioned in any of them. They talk about Jack, who isn't really a member of SG-1 any longer, Daniel and Teal'c but Sam's name is graphically missing. :confused:

I guess TPTB are still having problems juggling all the characters that were so effortlessly integrated prior to Season 7. Too bad. :(
So you missed New Order, Affinity and Covenant then? :P

jjj2046
May 23rd, 2004, 08:26 AM
Other than leaving a spot open for the times they want to have Jack go off-world there isn't really any good reason to leave SG-1 as a 3 man team. Since Daniel isn't a military guy the loss of a 4th member possibly puts the team at risk. They probably should put Sam "in-charge" and assign a junior officer to the team for training. If the 4th team member was a rotating member it would be easy for Jack to replace them when he wanted to do so.

Bogopimp
May 23rd, 2004, 08:36 AM
you gotta trust ytour team though, and as for SG1 having a rotating members, that silly, there flagship, they should be the best team on base! :)

Elwe Singollo
May 23rd, 2004, 10:21 AM
Sam was leader before in Evolution part 2 (i think she was at least), and she did great, but the whole 'rotating' member is just, giving me a headache...

the dancer of spaz
May 23rd, 2004, 09:48 PM
id like sam to lead sg1 (naked)...

she'd be a descent leader i think, but shes too moral. Jack knows when to put morality aside for the good of the mission, im not so sure sam's quite as good!

And the mention of nudity was injected into that reply because... :D

No, but seriously, :) even though Daniel has been pushed as "The Perfect Moral Aspect" of the team in the past, with Sam as an apparent close second, Jack DOES have morals. He wouldn't be in the position that he is, if he didn't.

:rolleyes: Even though Jack tends to throw caution to the wind when dealing with morons, he does know what's right. That's why he was so affected by the look Sam was giving him at the end of "The Other Side" and the effects of their actions in "Unnatural Selection."

Yes, sometimes actions need to be taken "for the good of the mission," but that doesn't mean that Jack is OK with them. Again, we haven't really seen Sam placed in a position where she has to do the same, considering she was criticizing Jack's actions in "Unnatural Selection." :o

The thing is, even though she didn't like what had to be done, she followed orders. I think she's perfectly capable of doing what has to be done when the need arises. She's had a great teacher. :D

Daniel's just incapable of doing it, which makes him and Jack such great foils. Also, Sam has tended to be the middle (wo)man between Jack and Daniel as both the soldier and the scientist, which may prove to be very advantageous for the SGC to have. They've never mentioned someone with experience from both aspects of the SGC being promoted to the leader of a field unit - probably because those people are few and far between.

And Teal'c, whom I will never forget when mentioning the team, is a great source of support for whomever he's working with, whether it's Hammond, Bra'tac, Jacob Carter, Janet Fraiser, Daniel, Sam, or Jack. That's why he makes a good pseudo-second in command, and that's why he makes an even better friend. Sam won't have to worry about Daniel with Teal'c around; Jack rarely did. And Daniel respects Sam, so there wouldn't be a problem with "keeping him in line" - at least, not any moreso than there was when Jack was in charge. :p

Bogopimp
May 24th, 2004, 06:33 AM
im not saying he isnt moral, im just saying he's quick, carter always questions him, so she'd always be questioniung herself!

the dancer of spaz
May 24th, 2004, 08:16 AM
im not saying he isnt moral, im just saying he's quick, carter always questions him, so she'd always be questioniung herself!

She doesn't ALWAYS question him, although I do see your point about him making a split-second decision.

Again, it's all about what we've seen. I'm not gonna make any judgements about her capabilities until I see the season eight opener. I just hope they don't screw it up, or anything.

Elwe Singollo
May 24th, 2004, 02:34 PM
She does have excellent surviving skills, haha...

Cap. Jack
May 24th, 2004, 03:18 PM
I don't get it... why can't Sam be a girl and a leader at the same time?! That ultra feminist, butch tomboy thing she had going in the pilot was pathetic!! What's wrong with her having emotions?! It shows that shes human... shes like this ultra smart, pretty, strong woman! They have to give her emotion cause otherwise she will we seem fake.
True, without emotion it does seem fake. On the other hand if she has to much emotion her judgement will be clowded and she will make mistakes or even worse get killed. The wrighters really should find the right balance between Sam(as a person) and Sam(as an airforce Officer).

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 26th, 2004, 12:43 AM
It's possible to be strong AND have geniune emotions, but- and I can only speak for myself, here- I feel as if all of Carter's strength of character, all of her head-strongedness, independence, vitality, all of the things that make Sam Sam have been stripped away so she can be the weepy little girly girl who's pining after Jack to the detriment of everything and everyone around her. She isn't strong anymore, she isn't independent, there's no true spine left to the character, she's just... Jack's Girl. Which, considering the fact that she's supposed to be dating Pete only makes her that much weaker and less enjoyable to watch.

.
Yes, I feel exactly the same way, ShadowMaat. The Sam that we saw in Season 7, was defined only by her relationship to Jack - she made bad decisions in the field, allowed her emotions to get in the way of her judgement, became distracted far too easily and commanded no respect from me, at least. The Sam that we saw in Season two, for example in Sprits, was someone who I could have believed would soon be ready to command the SGC's premier first contact team. But that was then, and I don't think that Sam has demonstrated over the last year that she's ready to command anything, or that military personnel would respect her enough to follow her when the going got tough.

Madeleine
May 26th, 2004, 01:15 AM
I don't think that Sam has demonstrated over the last year that she's ready to command anything, or that military personnel would respect her enough to follow her when the going got tough.


Probably not, I doubt that any of the soldiers who saw her drop her weapon and go and stand in the line of fire over Jack and just stare at him would want her as their CO. I think though that Daniel and Teal'c would follow her out of loyalty, and since neither of them followed Jack *all* the time they'd be as likely to go their own way when part of Sam's team whether she was a good soldier or not. In Evolution2 she seemed ready to delegate decision-making to Bra'tac and Jacob; Teal'c's field experience is comparable to theirs - and like them he has far more experience than Sam, so maybe he will take a greater role in the leadership of the team, in which case losing Jack from the team might not be such a bad thing.

Or maybe I've been overdosing on the Sudafed and Lemsip.

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 03:55 AM
Y'know, I just read that infamous interview with AT (thanks Madeleine) and I have to say, I no longer want to see Sam in charge of SG-1. She can't even command her own emotions, nevermind the SGC's premiere team! And the sheer shallowness of Sam's thinking in regards to the whole Pete/Jack thing make me fear what the rest of her reasoning/decision-making process will be. Lives will be on the line and she'll be worrying about her boytoys, the team will be in danger and she'll be thinking of her own needs.

I'd say "Put Teal'c in charge instead" except that Teal'c obviously isn't a character TPTB have much interest in or they'd have done a better job developing him.

Put anyone in charge of SG-1. Poochinski, even. As long as it isn't Sam "It's OK to toy with Pete's emotions to satisfy my own needs until I can have Jack" Carter.

Aphrodite
May 26th, 2004, 05:44 AM
I reckon with Menopause creeping in, she'd be in even more of a mood swinging emotional mess, not knowing who to love and be with, Jack or Pete, let alone be self composed enough to lead SG1. Sam was just in an emotional wishy-washy state in S7, I'm not sure how well she would even take it now that her CO will barely be around for her to "moon" over in S8, IMO anyway.

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 05:59 AM
If the military personnel don't respect her, she won't really be needing their respect, because shes going to be the leader of her own sg team, not the other people that work in the SGC.

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 06:10 AM
I don't think that Sam's age or the possibility of "menopause" have anything to do with the way Sam is acting. I think it has to do with a massive lack of imagination on the part of the writers. "Sam is a girl. Sam needs a man in order to be happy. Sam needs to have babies in order to feel complete." I think that pretty much sums up their line of reasoning. Or, at least, that's how I read it. Maybe the menopause nonsense does figure into it, from TPTB's perspective. Whatever the "reasons" behind it, I still hate it. I think it makes her look unreasistic, unprofessional and uninteresting.

Dani347
May 26th, 2004, 09:29 AM
If the military personnel don't respect her, she won't really be needing their respect, because shes going to be the leader of her own sg team, not the other people that work in the SGC.

And, she'd better be very glad that she will be leading Daniel and Teal'c.

Of course, no matter how weepy, and girly, tptb will make it all seem like everything she does is right. Even if she makes some huge mistake, it won't be reflected in the stories.

dipsofjazz
May 26th, 2004, 10:25 AM
I don't think that Sam's age or the possibility of "menopause" have anything to do with the way Sam is acting. I think it has to do with a massive lack of imagination on the part of the writers. "Sam is a girl. Sam needs a man in order to be happy. Sam needs to have babies in order to feel complete." I think that pretty much sums up their line of reasoning. Or, at least, that's how I read it. Maybe the menopause nonsense does figure into it, from TPTB's perspective. Whatever the "reasons" behind it, I still hate it. I think it makes her look unreasistic, unprofessional and uninteresting.
Shadow, this is a special moment, because, for the first time ever....I agree with you!!!!! :D

epiphany
May 26th, 2004, 10:35 AM
Totally agree, ShadowMaat. You know at this point I'm almost ashamed to share the same gender as she does.

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 12:25 PM
Totally agree, ShadowMaat. You know at this point I'm almost ashamed to share the same gender as she does.
I don't know if I'd go that far, but it definitely irritates the hell out of me to see stereotypes like this reinforced and propagated and sold in a cutesy little package. She's gone from being a militant feminist in the COTG to being a weepy little girly girl in Lost City. It's all very sad and depressing.

Bagpuss
May 26th, 2004, 12:59 PM
Speaking only for myself,I'm refusing to condemn "Sam" for the Sterotyping mess, Season 7 seems to have been, for some Posters.

Some Eps I enjoyed.Some I didn't.

I have no problems regarding Sam Carter's potential as Leader of SG-1,but it all depends on the writing/direction as usual.

I'm awaiting Season 8,in the hope that her promotion is a positive move and enjoyable to watch.

I hope the Season contains loads of entertaining Sci-Fi adventure,with plenty of "Team" moments.

If the actual episodes are too disappointing,IMO,I'll deal with that if it happens!!

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 01:37 PM
Me agree :)

Mar9645
May 26th, 2004, 03:23 PM
... it definitely irritates the hell out of me to see stereotypes like this reinforced and propagated and sold in a cutesy little package. She's gone from being a militant feminist in the COTG to being a weepy little girly girl in Lost City. It's all very sad and depressing.
And who has created this regression in the character? Not Sam herself, that's for sure. Beating up on her is exactly what TPTB want all of us to do. The indecisive, submissive, emotion-driven Sam of Season 7 was, IMO, a set-up disguised as extra ship. From the descriptions of certain episodes for Season 8 it seems as if they're basically going to have events around her be cumulatively negative so that she'll be seen as a failure at commanding SG-1. When they've brought her down enough in all our eyes, they'll have the perfect excuse to bring in a male commander.

One of the brightest achievements of Stargate SG-1 was the creation of two exceptionally strong, independent and powerful women. To my total disgust and disillusionment, TPTB killed off one of them with the excuse of shaking things up and making changes and are mentally and emotionally castrating the other so that Sam bears less and less resemblance to the totally together leader she was in Season 6.

If their goal is to make Stargate SG-1 into an all-male show with a curvaceous twenty-something pseudo-professional here and there as eye candy, it's their show. The twenty-eight year old new doctor seems to be the first step in that direction.

If I see Sam deteriorating further in the first half of Season 8, I won't stick around to see her brought down completely. That would be the last straw. Fortunately, Star Trek: Enterprise and Jag will both be available for replacement viewing in that time slot.

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 03:31 PM
And who has created this regression in the character? Not Sam herself, that's for sure.
Oh, I know it's not her fault. Believe me, I know exactly who's to blame for this sorry state of affairs. http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/contrib/scorchio/sevil.gif




One of the brightest achievements of Stargate SG-1 was the creation of two exceptionally strong, independent and powerful women.
Yep. Two great female role models and now both of them are dead. I don't know who that weepy blonde chick is, but it sure as hell isn't Sam. Not the Sam I remeber from previous seasons.




If their goal is to make Stargate SG-1 into an all-male show with a curvaceous twenty-something pseudo-professional here and there as eye candy, it's their show. The twenty-eight year old new doctor seems to be the first step in that direction.
I like Alisen Down, but I fear what TPTB will do to her/her character.




If I see Sam deteriorating further in the first half of Season 8, I won't stick around to see her brought down completely.
Now, see, it's already too late for me. Sam has sunk as low as I'm willing to watch her sink and from what I've been reading of S8 she hasn't hit bottom yet. Or, rather, TPTB intend to reach new depths with her character. And I don't mean that in a good way.

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 03:35 PM
Although it seems mostly negative on how Carter's character is 'going down', i think i rather have some kind of character development, even if its bad, the same isn't always good (maybe this is), but yah, thats just my opinion.

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 03:40 PM
Although it seems mostly negative on how Carter's character is 'going down', i think i rather have some kind of character development, even if its bad, the same isn't always good (maybe this is), but yah, thats just my opinion.
And you're welcome to that opinion. ;) However, speaking for myself, if the character "development" destroys what I love about that character, then I'd be quite happy to have her stay the same.

Not ALL change is good. :P

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 03:46 PM
I agree to that, but why do you think her character is such a 'bad' character now? Is it because of her 'hormones' she suddenly has gotten (laughs)...

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 03:51 PM
I agree to that, but why do you think her character is such a 'bad' character now? Is it because of her 'hormones' she suddenly has gotten (laughs)...
In a word, yes. :P But there's more to it than that. I think I've explained myself enough in this thread already. ;)

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 03:53 PM
Yah, i've read them :) , maybe i just like making you retype what u already typed. Haha... I really hope Carter doesn't go downhill anymore.

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 03:55 PM
Yah, i've read them :) , maybe i just like making you retype what u already typed. Haha... I really hope Carter doesn't go downhill anymore.
You're just trying to run up my post count. :P I feel guilty enough about it already, thankyouverymuch. And most of that is your fault! :P

I, too, hope Sam doesn't go downhill... but have you been reading the spoilers?? ;)

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 05:04 PM
I am trying to avoid them, but o well, too lazy/tempted, what does spoilers say about Carter?

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 05:09 PM
I am trying to avoid them, but o well, too lazy/tempted, what does spoilers say about Carter?
Let's just say that the wishy-washiness increases. Things with Pete may be taking a serious turn, but she's still mooping after Jack.

Nolamom
May 26th, 2004, 05:24 PM
ACK! No spoilers!!! I've been spoiler-free for almost 24 hours, can't start back-sliding now. What would they think at the 12-step meetings?

Nmom

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 05:28 PM
ACK! No spoilers!!!
Hey, I kept it vague. You'd find worse in plot summaries or from talking to Joe. :P Or, at least, if you COULD talk to Joe, but he's been mysteriously absent of late. "Busy" they say. "Monkeys" I say. :P (Did I mention my "TPTB were replaced by trained monkeys" conspiracy theory here? Or was that another thread?)

Nolamom
May 26th, 2004, 05:31 PM
TPTB = Trained Primates That Brachiate?

ShadowMaat
May 26th, 2004, 05:33 PM
TPTB = Trained Primates That Brachiate?
Befuddle. Much more appropriate, given the circumstances.

Although technically, they do brachiate... Hmmm. Does that mean they're swingers? Could explain a few things...

Nolamom
May 26th, 2004, 05:35 PM
Yes, hand over hand, swinging through the trees...which may be one reason why virtually every alien planet has TREES!

Bagpuss
May 26th, 2004, 05:44 PM
Sheesh,all this is making sense to my fevered brain!
Definitely time for a sleep,methinks..........LOL!

Thanks for the "Trained Primates that Brachiate" stuff.Not to mention the reason for all the trees.........

Believe me,I needed that shot of fun! :D

Elwe Singollo
May 26th, 2004, 07:43 PM
Now i'm totally lost on what we are currently talking about :eek:

the dancer of spaz
May 27th, 2004, 09:43 PM
Hey guys! I'm back! How's it hanging?

Let's see... where should I start first? I just got on for the first time in a few days, so I apologize in advance if this seems a bit... wordy. :)


... The Sam that we saw in Season 7, was defined only by her relationship to Jack - she made bad decisions in the field, allowed her emotions to get in the way of her judgement, became distracted far too easily and commanded no respect from me, at least. The Sam that we saw in Season two, for example in Sprits, was someone who I could have believed would soon be ready to command the SGC's premier first contact team. But that was then, and I don't think that Sam has demonstrated over the last year that she's ready to command anything, or that military personnel would respect her enough to follow her when the going got tough.


The first half of season seven had absolutely NOTHING to do with the supposed Sam/Jack relationship, so I don't understand that line of reasoning. Also, I have to ask in WHICH ep Sam made bad decisions in the field? If you're talking about "Heroes: Part Two," someone please explain to me how she made a poor decision. I'm a little fuzzy on that. I have my own opinions on her possible reasonings, but I guess we'll get into that when someone can answer my question. Also, any "ship" aside, I don't see much of a difference between the Sam then and the Sam now. If anything, she seemed more different in season six than she does now - and I don't mean in a bad or good way.

I do agree with the idea that certain military personnel wouldn't respect her, but I think that stems from the behavior of ALL OF THOSE MEN in "Fragile Balance." If you're not talking about that, please let me know. Anyway, if you are, I think it has to do with the fact that Sam is a scientist, almost more than she has been a soldier. Because she is both a scientist and a soldier, not to mention a GIRL, all of those guys had a hard time listening to her because they weren't listening to their "equal," Colonel O'Neill. That's just my opinion, and I'm not a flaming feminist, so don't be offended.

Either way, if the other military personnel at the SGC (who also happened to be less experienced and younger than Sam, might I add) don't respect her, that's a prejudice that lies solely in their hands. Sam can't control what they think about her. She managed to prove herself to Colonel O'Neill professionally, and it would probably (hopefully) go the same way for some of those guys. ;)



Probably not, I doubt that any of the soldiers who saw her drop her weapon and go and stand in the line of fire over Jack and just stare at him would want her as their CO. I think though that Daniel and Teal'c would follow her out of loyalty, and since neither of them followed Jack *all* the time they'd be as likely to go their own way when part of Sam's team whether she was a good soldier or not. In Evolution2 she seemed ready to delegate decision-making to Bra'tac and Jacob; Teal'c's field experience is comparable to theirs - and like them he has far more experience than Sam, so maybe he will take a greater role in the leadership of the team, in which case losing Jack from the team might not be such a bad thing.


:p I think that was another reference to an ep in season seven, which has yet to be clarified. Daniel and Teal'c are about as likely to follow Sam out of loyalty as they are to follow Jack. No, they didn't always follow Jack, but Teal'c and Daniel wouldn't just stand by if they saw Sam making a bad decision. Sam, Daniel, and Teal'c have had to call something out to Jack in the past, and Sam isn't too perfect for that treatment either. People make mistakes, but learning from them is key. If Sam doesn't get the chance to prove herself, no one will ever know how good of a CO she can be. Also, Teal'c, as I've said before, has more experience than Sam and Jack combined, so I think he would have qualified to take a leadership position long before this upcoming season. Jack's presence/absence does not affect that.



Y'know, I just read that infamous interview with AT (thanks Madeleine) and I have to say, I no longer want to see Sam in charge of SG-1. She can't even command her own emotions, nevermind the SGC's premiere team! And the sheer shallowness of Sam's thinking in regards to the whole Pete/Jack thing make me fear what the rest of her reasoning/decision-making process will be. Lives will be on the line and she'll be worrying about her boytoys, the team will be in danger and she'll be thinking of her own needs.


First off, I thought that you didn't want to see Sam in charge of SG-1 in the first place, Shadow? That's not an accusation; I was just wondering. Second of all, this is the first season (7) that we've delved so heavily into emotions and feelings and extended backstory, since seasons 1-2, when we first learned about the series' version of Charlie, as well as Sha're, Ry'ac, Jacob Carter, etc.

Third, I don't even know where to begin. Obviously, Sam's human. That's not under dispute. But, people who are against Sam leading SG-1 have not explained how she doesn't know how to control her emotions. I believe Sam cried TWICE during the entire season, and both reasons were neither in combat nor baseless. (Sorry, I've tried to be as vague as possible concerning spoilers. Don't even know if it's necessary anymore...)

Also, "sheer shallowness" is subject to interpretation. You cannot connect her feelings for Pete OR Jack (now, at least) to her command capabilities, as neither will be out on the field with her, and she has never had a problem with following Jack's orders before.

FOURTH - Sam doesn't have boytoys. :) She never has, and I hope she never will. Jack was never her boytoy, Pete is not her boytoy, and as AT said, Sam has become a "pragmatist" when it comes to her relationship with Jack. She won't pursue it as she's going to explore the possibilities with Pete. No one can begrudge her that, as it's either THAT or overt, over-the-top, ship between the General and his Colonel, which is totally unacceptable at this point in time. :o

How can anyone accuse Sam of not caring about the team, or putting herself before other lives? Was it not JACK who refused to leave Sam in "Upgrades," thus putting his own life and potentially the lives of Daniel and Teal'c at risk? If Sam hadn't figured out why they were "lying," Jack would have died in "Divide in Conquer," and we wouldn't be having this conversation. Might I add that that was AFTER he volunteered to DIE for her. Then again, hehe, if Jack had died, the series would be over, but that's a completely different story.

Additional instances where Sam "showed too much emotion" could be in "A Hundred Days," when she worked really hard to save Jack's life. <What utter gall!> Or, in "Paradise Lost," when she did the same thing. <The nerve!> Also, in a certain ep this season, it was JACK who actually showed that he couldn't handle the situation when he was placed in the same position as Sam. :( Rather than actually working to help a fellow teammate, like two episodes prior, he became upset, angry, and sulky. No, I'm not bashing on Jack, here. I love the guy to death. But, let's face facts, people. The man was 2IC of the entire base, and he couldn't handle the idea of a certain one of his own being out in the universe all alone.



I'd say "Put Teal'c in charge instead" except that Teal'c obviously isn't a character TPTB have much interest in or they'd have done a better job developing him.


Yeah, I agree. What's up with that? :(



I reckon with Menopause creeping in, she'd be in even more of a mood swinging emotional mess, not knowing who to love and be with, Jack or Pete, let alone be self composed enough to lead SG1. Sam was just in an emotional wishy-washy state in S7, I'm not sure how well she would even take it now that her CO will barely be around for her to "moon" over in S8, IMO anyway.


:S Yikes. That's a bit below the belt don't you think? Besides the causticity (is that a word?) of that remark, I'm pretty sure Sam isn't old enough to start "feeling the heat." Again, I'd really like to see where she was wishy-washy in this season or any season. Please, I'm asking nicely, please give me examples of what she did that proved instability or a lack of decisiveness, so I can better understand all of your guys' arguments/statements/replies. In all honesty, it could be that I'm just REALLY dense.



And, she'd better be very glad that she will be leading Daniel and Teal'c.

Of course, no matter how weepy, and girly, tptb will make it all seem like everything she does is right. Even if she makes some huge mistake, it won't be reflected in the stories.


Because, you know, Jack's mistakes over the years have been dwelled upon like mad. :rolleyes: There's his initial treatment of Sam, his initial treatment of Daniel, his initial treatment of Jonas, his moral decisions in "The Other Side" and "Scorched Earth," his machoness in "The Tomb," and his attempt to murder in "The Red Sky," as well as his verbal gaffes in "Birthright" and "Fallout," just to name a few.

Time and time again, Jack has nearly gotten the team in big trouble because of his temper and sense of what is right and what is wrong, not to mention his sense of humor (that borderlines on childish at times) and his sarcasm. Now, I'm not saying that all of these instances were based on something trivial. But the fact of the matter is, Jack has been given a chance to REDEEM himself, whether it's among the characters, within himself, or, on a grander scale, among the fans. What I'm trying to say is, at the end of the day, we know that Jack is a good man, with a heart of gold, one that has been shielded because of past pain. We know, through his mistakes and failures, that he is human, with a brave heart and courageous spirit.



Totally agree, ShadowMaat. You know at this point I'm almost ashamed to share the same gender as she does.


Oh boy. You might wanna get that checked out. It could be serious. :D



Put anyone in charge of SG-1. Poochinski, even. As long as it isn't Sam "It's OK to toy with Pete's emotions to satisfy my own needs until I can have Jack" Carter.


Ouch. I think - and HOPE, HOPE, HOPE - that that is a gross misinterpretation of what AT said, or else, yes, we are going to have some problems in the future.


Phew. I'm done. Thanks for reading - if you even made it to this part without falling asleep. I might post later on, but I just thought I'd get that off my chest before the replies started piling up. You know how it is... :)

Have a good weekend!

ps - please don't flame!

epiphany
May 27th, 2004, 10:35 PM
>>If you're not talking about that, please let me know. Anyway, if you are, I think it has to do with the fact that Sam is a scientist, almost more than she has been a soldier. Because she is both a scientist and a soldier, not to mention a GIRL, all of those guys had a hard time listening to her because they weren't listening to their "equal," Colonel O'Neill. That's just my opinion, and I'm not a flaming feminist, so don't be offended.

Either way, if the other military personnel at the SGC (who also happened to be less experienced and younger than Sam, might I add) don't respect her, that's a prejudice that lies solely in their hands. Sam can't control what they think about her. She managed to prove herself to Colonel O'Neill professionally, and it would probably (hopefully) go the same way for some of those guys.>>

Actually yes she can. As an officer it IS up to her to earn their respect and even if she can't do that to at least use the wieght of her rank and personality to get them to listen to her. That is what all military officers, male or female, need to do. Sam showed absolutely NO capability for doing that whatsoever in Fragile Balance. It was embarrassing the way she let them walk all over her. A male officer never would have stood for it. He would have put them right in their places. They didn't push their questioning and get those smirks on their faces because she was female, her gender didn't come into it, but because she, as an officer, didn't do anything to wipe those smirks off.

Equal my foot--she's superior to them. It's got nothing to do with equality. She has the power of her rank behind her, she's got seven years experience in the program, she's got first hand knowledge of the technology. It all came down to force of her personality. Leadership doesn't just come from the rank, it comes from force of personality and she quite frankly hasn't shown she's got that since an appearance once or twice in before Season 4. In Foothold, I might have been to able to see it. That was pretty much the last time.

I'd actually say people who don't think Sam has proven herself capable of leading the SGC's premier team in this thread have explained themselves quite well and given ample examples of the reasons they believe she isn't. Leaving her position in the middle of firefight, without permission, to stand straight up, run across the field to Jack and then just...stare at him(Heroes Part 2). There were many others who were closer to Jack than she was--that alone would at least get her reprimanded if the show even tried to have some semblance to reality. In Lost City Part 2, the very first thing she tries to do after she has been given command is talk about her inappropriate personal feelings. Again. So there those are two examples of inappropriate behavior right off the top of my head. I'm sure others will fill in some of the blanks as well.


I also don't see it as a gross misinterpretation of what AT said to say that Sam is using Pete. He's a toy and not much more. Something to keep her busy and er...satisfied until "something better" frees up. I don't see any other way to interpret AT's remarks. Sam's using Pete, she's toying with his emotions to satisfy herself. It's selfish and thoughtless at the least. She ought to be more than mature enough to know better.

Sometimes I can't believe this is the same person who was on Seasons 1 to 3, that Sam had spark and spunk and brains and if Emmett had asked her about inappropriate feelings for her CO she would have given him whatfore and then some! The one who was warm and caring while still being a very good and always improving professional soldier.

Bagpuss
May 28th, 2004, 01:33 AM
For what it's worth,I have no idea at all ,of what AT did or didn't say.
Other GW Posters seem to have read all the article in question.Obviously not all,so I'm a bit "At sea" on the subject!! :o

The Posted Transcript had to be Snipped for Copyright reasons,as it came from another Site,so I've no wish to read any Translations!

I'm sure ALL the opinions stated,must have some basis in truth,but I can't see any relevant link to the way ANYTHING will play out for real, in the, as yet unseen, Season 8.

There are a lot of very strong feelings and opinions being bandied about on this Thread,and I can understand why.

Surely most of us really are criticising the PTB,though?
IMO,most criticisms of "Sam",and AT,are really founded in the overall writing and production,but surely some of the blame lies in the Editing process too?

A scene can be played in one way,but because of editing,actually come out entirely different on- screen!

Just thoughts really! No intention to annoy Posters intended.

I still like "Sam",and hope Season 8 brings better development for her as a capable Leader.(I also want the Team/adventure stories to be the PTB's top priority!)

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 28th, 2004, 01:40 AM
Actually yes she can. As an officer it IS up to her to earn their respect and even if she can't do that to at least use the wieght of her rank and personality to get them to listen to her.
Darn straight. And you notice that the *teenage boy* doesn't have to do much to get them to sit up and take notice. It's the force of his personality that gets the officers sitting in front of him to see past the physical appearance and show respect.... Sam should have been able to get that reaction from them within seconds of them starting to question her. She didn't.





I'd actually say people who don't think Sam has proven herself capable of leading the SGC's premier team in this thread have explained themselves quite well and given ample examples of the reasons they believe she isn't. Leaving her position in the middle of firefight, without permission, to stand straight up, run across the field to Jack and then just...stare at him(Heroes Part 2). There were many others who were closer to Jack than she was--that alone would at least get her reprimanded if the show even tried to have some semblance to reality. In Lost City Part 2, the very first thing she tries to do after she has been given command is talk about her inappropriate personal feelings. Again. So there those are two examples of inappropriate behavior right off the top of my head. I'm sure others will fill in some of the blanks as well.
Well I've already said all I'm going to say, here and elsewhere, and I'm tired of typing the same old, same old. But for me the season was littered withe examples like this.





I also don't see it as a gross misinterpretation of what AT said to say that Sam is using Pete. He's a toy and not much more. Something to keep her busy and er...satisfied until "something better" frees up. I don't see any other way to interpret AT's remarks. Sam's using Pete, she's toying with his emotions to satisfy herself. It's selfish and thoughtless at the least. She ought to be more than mature enough to know better.


I agree completely. Once you get to Sam's age, you should be more aware of the effect that you have on other people and more sensitive to the damage that you can do to them. Frankly, the argument that Sam can behave this way because she's only 'finding herself' is the argument one might expect from a teenager who hasn't yet developed proper social and empathic life-skills. And we wonder why the divorce rate is one in two in this country....

If there are, indeed, 101 ways to 'bash' this character at the moment, it's because the programme-makers have laid themselves open to that bashing through sloppy writing and their blinkered love of what they perceive to be the 'feminine' aspects of the character.

Eken95
May 28th, 2004, 03:29 AM
[QUOTE=Madeleine_W]Probably not, I doubt that any of the soldiers who saw her drop her weapon and go and stand in the line of fire over Jack and just stare at him would want her as their CO. I QUOTE]

Hi Madelaine

I've seen a few people say that Sam just stood and stared at Jack. I haven't watched it for a while but my recollection was that she dropped down and checked him out to see where he was hit. Am I rememering it wrongly?

erika

KatG
May 28th, 2004, 05:44 AM
If there are legions of Sam fans out there who LOVE her current development, then by all means, speak up! I'd like to see some different perspectives, maybe get a read on some alternative interpretations.

Okay. I will.

I personally have really enjoyed Sam's character development in S7, especially the latter half. I don't see the emotions and indecisiveness as being out of character. What I do see, is a woman, approaching or at 40, who is re-examining her life.

Having hit that particular milestone myself a little over a year ago, I can vouch that it does make you think about where you are, where you've been, and where you're going. You wonder about the what ifs, and if what you've accomplished up to that point is what you wanted to accomplish and if accomplishing it was worth the sacrifices. In the process, you might do something a little out of character, especially if you feel that what you've given up may have been to great of a sacrifice.

So, with Sam, what I see from Grace, is that she knows that she's accomplished a great deal, and she's proud of it, but she's also wondering if what she gave up - a chance for a home and family - was worth it. She's also examining whether or not she's been using her feelings for Jack as an excuse. Does she really feel something for him, or is he just a safe bet? The only way she's really going to figure that out is if she tries it without him. Hence we have the events in Chimera.

I see Pete as an honest attempt to get on with her life. Does that mean that her feelings for Jack just automatically go away? No. The feelings are there, whether she's using them as an excuse or not. And having to see him on a regular basis makes it harder to just push them aside. But she is trying and apparently she's going to give it her best effort in S8 too. Whether in the long run, she sticks with Pete, or if she realizes that Jack is who she wants and finds a way to make that work remains to be seen.

Who knows, the more she gets to know Pete, the more she may realize that he's the love of her life, and that what she felt for Jack was really inconsequential. Then again, she may realize that no matter how nice a guy Pete is, she will never be really truly happy with anyone but Jack. And who knows, she might just decide that being single is the perfect choice for her. But how will she know any of these things if she doesn't explore her options.

KatG
May 28th, 2004, 05:48 AM
I don't remember it being this crazy even when people made the references to Season Six ("The Season Which Will Not Be Mentioned" or something like that).

You don't? I still have nightmares about fandom during S6. :eek:

Madeleine
May 28th, 2004, 05:57 AM
Teal'c, as I've said before, has more experience than Sam and Jack combined, so I think he would have qualified to take a leadership position long before this upcoming season. Jack's presence/absence does not affect that.

I disagree. Teal'c has seen Jack as a leader right from the start. Jack was the one who unilaterally offered him sanctuary and made sure the USAF followed through on his promise. Jack has always led, was the leader before Teal'c joined the team, and has Teal'c's loyalty as leader. Teal'c has always been on a much more equal footing with Sam; she is a follower, he is a follower - when he chooses to be. I'm not saying that he *wouldn't* see her as a leader if the command was given to her, or even that he'd naturally try to take some of the responsibility, just that it's a possibility in my mind. On that I'm sure the writers will not see, and which will never becomer a 'canon' interpretation, but it's that time of year when all we have to play with is speculation and flights of fancy :)





Because, you know, Jack's mistakes over the years have been dwelled upon like mad. :rolleyes: There's his initial treatment of Sam, his initial treatment of Daniel, his initial treatment of Jonas, his moral decisions in "The Other Side" and "Scorched Earth," his machoness in "The Tomb," and his attempt to murder in "The Red Sky," as well as his verbal gaffes in "Birthright" and "Fallout," just to name a few.

Time and time again, Jack has nearly gotten the team in big trouble because of his temper and sense of what is right and what is wrong, not to mention his sense of humor (that borderlines on childish at times) and his sarcasm. Now, I'm not saying that all of these instances were based on something




Jack's mistakes have frequently been touched on, if not dwelt on. when he killed Odo, Sam's shocked face in the final shot made it clear that in the Stargate Universe Jack did something very wrong. In Red Sky, his team called him off before he could commit murder, and the fact that their wishes prevailed over his and he acquiesced showed that he realised how wrong he was. His treatment of Daniel, how was that bad? Ditto Jonas? As for Sam, he was taking the measure of a junior officer, and she took everything he threw at her, what's to apologise for? Verbal Gaffes are not serious character flaws.

I accept that there are times - Scorched Earth comes to mind - where Jack needs to get a right dressing down, and if it happens at all it's offscreen, but the point remains that he does, at times get pulled up for his errors. Sam doesn't. Ever. She used to; in Matter of Time her insensitivity was noticed internally, by Jack, as opposed to merely externally by viewers. Sam bounced back and Saved The Day though and I love her in that ep. I like her more *because* of Jack's comment to her, just like I'd like Jack in TOS a little less if it hadn't been for Sam's look at the end.

She seems to me to still make errors, but none which ever get noticed or which have a payoff internally. It makes her less interesting to me.

Madeleine
May 28th, 2004, 06:02 AM
[QUOTE=Madeleine_W]Probably not, I doubt that any of the soldiers who saw her drop her weapon and go and stand in the line of fire over Jack and just stare at him would want her as their CO. I QUOTE]

Hi Madelaine

I've seen a few people say that Sam just stood and stared at Jack. I haven't watched it for a while but my recollection was that she dropped down and checked him out to see where he was hit. Am I rememering it wrongly?

erika

You may be right, it's a while since I saw it. Still, she was in the line of fire with no weapon, and not trying to drag Jack out of the exposed position he was in.

It's all about Suspension of Disbelief. It doesn't bother me all that greatly, and if I'd liked Heroes a lot more I'd make any excuse under the sun for that bit, which I think was not too well realised. I watched it only a week after the "He's given more to this programme than anyone I can imagine" comment, and two weeks after Grace, so it just seemed to me like yet more Turning Sam Into someone Completely Wet.

I need to watch Foothold again soon, to remind myself how Sam is at her best ;)

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 28th, 2004, 08:45 AM
It's all about Suspension of Disbelief. It doesn't bother me all that greatly, and if I'd liked Heroes a lot more I'd make any excuse under the sun for that bit, which I think was not too well realised. I watched it only a week after the "He's given more to this programme than anyone I can imagine" comment, and two weeks after Grace, so it just seemed to me like yet more Turning Sam Into someone Completely Wet.

;)
Oh my goodness yes, that was just a cringeworthy moment. I could not believe they put those words in her mouth. Sam 'I am just such a groupie' Carter rears her head never more obviously and painfully than at that moment.

Plus, any self respecting officer should have had Bregman by the curlies at that point for his sly and obvious implications in his question. It was sexist and patronising and she should have shut him down, fast and brutally (There is a REASON in this country why prospective employers are not allowed to ask female interviewees if they are planning to have children...or any other similar leading question. It's called prejudice. It's called discrimination). And she played along with it, which was absolutely not the smartest thing she could have done.

the dancer of spaz
May 29th, 2004, 12:34 AM
Actually yes she can. As an officer it IS up to her to earn their respect and even if she can't do that to at least use the wieght of her rank and personality to get them to listen to her. That is what all military officers, male or female, need to do... It was embarrassing the way she let them walk all over her. A male officer never would have stood for it. He would have put them right in their places.


Let's take a moment to look over this statement again. I tried not to take it out of context. For the record, I only omited one sentence. Alright. Now that we've read it. Can ANYONE point out the sexist comment? Anyone? Five points to the first person who can... Now, an additional ten points to whoever can explain why this is not applicable to the SHOW, Stagate SG-1. First clue: It's a television show... with only 45 +/- minutes to spare. Ring any bells for anyone?


It all came down to force of her personality. Leadership doesn't just come from the rank, it comes from force of personality and she quite frankly hasn't shown she's got that since an appearance once or twice in before Season 4. In Foothold, I might have been to able to see it. That was pretty much the last time.


It's also about EXPERIENCE. Experience, experience, experience. RDA was always around to be the commanding officer. His name comes before the freaking title for a reason - you know, so they could use him. Plus, he's got a charisma that TPTB like to use whenever they can. I think EVERYONE - including us - took for granted his presence, which would be why seasons 7 and 8 seem so drastically different. If Jack O'Neill had been in a couple of eps, while in a different capacity, so that Sam Carter could lead a mission, we'd have more valid arguments as to how she handles a mission as a team leader. As it stands, we have little, lame examples that don't amount to much in the long run.



I'd actually say people who don't think Sam has proven herself capable of leading the SGC's premier team in this thread have explained themselves quite well and given ample examples of the reasons they believe she isn't. Leaving her position in the middle of firefight, without permission, to stand straight up, run across the field to Jack and then just...stare at him(Heroes Part 2). There were many others who were closer to Jack than she was--that alone would at least get her reprimanded if the show even tried to have some semblance to reality. In Lost City Part 2, the very first thing she tries to do after she has been given command is talk about her inappropriate personal feelings. Again. So there those are two examples of inappropriate behavior right off the top of my head. I'm sure others will fill in some of the blanks as well.


First one: The Heroes example is... bad. I'm sorry. It's just bad. Everyone who uses that example should promptly stop. People keep blowing it out of proportion, so I think we should ALL (including myself) try to find that scene in our archives and watch that part again, because I think we all saw/interpreted it differently. Here's what I saw: Jack gets hit with one of the Super Soldier Mega-Weapons (you know, the deadly ones). Sam, who WAS NOT THAT FAR AWAY FROM HIM, runs over, KNEELS DOWN, with GUN IN HAND, and CHECKS HIS WOUND, right before they cut back to another part of the firefight. I could be wrong, but I think that's the way it went. Either way, I'm gonna check what I recorded. I'm no military guru, so I don't know how that's bad, but again, these people go through blue puddles of goo to other planets. I think they have a margin of error when it comes to team members who have worked together for seven + years, you know? It could just be me, though.

Second one: I've got nothing. ;) Basically, I think it was better timing than when they were about to get their rear ends sizzled. If she had done it then, it'd be different. Instead, it was in seclusion, with not a lot of activity happening, and they both knew that it was possible for him or both of them to die. Sorry, but I don't find anything wrong with that. Both Daniel AND Teal'c got to do their thang as well, and no one had a problem with it. Why should Sam be any different? We don't even know what she was gonna say.



I also don't see it as a gross misinterpretation of what AT said to say that Sam is using Pete. He's a toy and not much more. Something to keep her busy and er...satisfied until "something better" frees up. I don't see any other way to interpret AT's remarks. Sam's using Pete, she's toying with his emotions to satisfy herself. It's selfish and thoughtless at the least. She ought to be more than mature enough to know better.


Please see KatG's response, which was posted earlier on in this thread. It rocks. :)



Frankly, the argument that Sam can behave this way because she's only 'finding herself' is the argument one might expect from a teenager who hasn't yet developed proper social and empathic life-skills. And we wonder why the divorce rate is one in two in this country....


Ahh... it all makes sense now. Psychologists, marriage counselors, Census bureau members, etc. should all be questioning Sam Carter when it comes to what the number one reason for divorce/break-up is. I get it. You know, it's studies like these that really make it to the talk shows. Oprah would have a field day. I sure hope no one above the age of the typical teenager is trying to "find themselves" while traversing on this thread, or else they might get a nice, abrupt, and blunt wake-up call. Welcome to the Real World, Folks! You can no longer date for fun!



Teal'c has seen Jack as a leader right from the start. Jack was the one who unilaterally offered him sanctuary and made sure the USAF followed through on his promise. Jack has always led, was the leader before Teal'c joined the team, and has Teal'c's loyalty as leader. Teal'c has always been on a much more equal footing with Sam; she is a follower, he is a follower - when he chooses to be. I'm not saying that he *wouldn't* see her as a leader if the command was given to her, or even that he'd naturally try to take some of the responsibility, just that it's a possibility in my mind.


I understand that, because I know that Teal'c has always willingly followed Jack, and, at times, it seemed like he'd follow him to the ends of the earth. Frankly, though, I think there's a reason why some people see him as going back to Chulak in the end to continue on as a leader. He was the first, well-known Shol'va of this century, and his treason is the reason why other Jaffa took action against the Goa'uld in the first place. I'm sure it would have happened sooner or later, but it's a combination of Jack and Teal'c, which started it off.

If Jack hadn't asked for down-and-out treason, Teal'c wouldn't have taken it upon himself to help. If Teal'c hadn't helped, and had taken the coward's way out instead, the series would have been over before it started. That's why he considers Jack a brother, I think - because they are equals. Jack and Daniel are close, and Daniel and Teal'c are close, but neither combo have had the word "brothers" linked between the two in a canon way, you know what I mean?

I also think that there's a bit of an underlying prejudice at the SGC (or perhaps Air Force?) that precludes any aliens from leading an off-world team. And, just as Sam would have to prove herself to three men in a combat situation, Teal'c would have to prove himself to those same three men, without his brute strength getting in the way. :D



Sometimes I can't believe this is the same person who was on Seasons 1 to 3, that Sam had spark and spunk and brains and if Emmett had asked her about inappropriate feelings for her CO she would have given him whatfore and then some! The one who was warm and caring while still being a very good and always improving professional soldier.


Believe it, baby. This person is the same as that woman, and she's about to be promoted to Lieutenant Colonel, with the CO of SG-1 as a gift-wrapped present to boot, courtesy of one General Jonathan O'Neill. Also, I don't think she would have known how to answer during seasons one through three, even if someone HAD had the testicular fortitude to ask her about her feelings for him, because she wasn't quite JADED by all that she'd seen. I still think she's improving, and I still think she's warm, caring, and good. She just has other priorities.

Finally, I conclude with:



Surely most of us really are criticising the PTB,though?
IMO,most criticisms of "Sam",and AT,are really founded in the overall writing and production,but surely some of the blame lies in the Editing process too?

A scene can be played in one way,but because of editing,actually come out entirely different on- screen!

Just thoughts really! No intention to annoy Posters intended.

It's all about the editing. Canon, unfortunately, is not based on the Director's Cut, so we may never see what he (or she?) was trying to get across, because of time crunches. Sad, but true. Alas, one hour is not enough.



Wordy again... sorry folks. I guess I should have had a "go to the bathroom" or "go get a snack" warning. I don't mean to do this, honest! You guys just post too dang fast! ;)


Again, flames are for human sacrifices, and human sacrifices are... bad. :)

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 29th, 2004, 01:11 AM
You can no longer date for fun!


And you seem to have missed the point entirely. There is nothing wrong with dating for fun, whatever age you are. Absolutely nothing wrong with it. But when it becomes clear that one person considers the relationship to have developed far beyond mere 'fun' into a potential life long, committed relationship, and when their behaviour has made that quite clear, then it really does take the self-absorbtion of someone amazingly selfish to keep deluding themselves that it's just 'fun' and go on behaving that way when the other person is clearly setting themselves up for getting their heart broken.






If Teal'c hadn't helped, and had taken the coward's way out instead, the series would have been over before it started.


And that is what is known as 'external plot logic'. There are a lot of examples of external plot logic in film, television, and even in literature, but the fact that there is much of it doesn't make it A Good Thing.

External plot logic tends to rear its ugly head when writers become unable to supply a meaningful 'internal plot logic' to substitute for it. In the case above, I think that the motivation they supplied for Teal'c was good enough to stand on its own, therefore the old 'there wouldn't be a show if it hadn't happened' isn't a valid argument. Teal'c made a decision that was appropriate to that moment, and consistent with his later revealed personality.

There are, unfortunately, other examples of external plot logic during the course of the show which are NOT balanced out by appropriate internal motivations. They are the kind of things which destroy 'willing suspension of disbelief' and drop the viewer out of the internal world of the show.





I also think that there's a bit of an underlying prejudice at the SGC (or perhaps Air Force?) that precludes any aliens from leading an off-world team. And, just as Sam would have to prove herself to three men in a combat situation, Teal'c would have to prove himself to those same three men, without his brute strength getting in the way. :D


And Teal'c has had exactly the same amount of time (ie eight years) to prove himself as Sam Carter has. So?






Believe it, baby. This person is the same as that woman, and she's about to be promoted to Lieutenant Colonel, with the CO of SG-1 as a gift-wrapped present to boot, courtesy of one General Jonathan O'Neill.


And there is not one single person in the SCG, who, on hearing of this promotion, will not think to themselves at least once, that maybe she slept her way to that promotion. Some of that will be because some people in the armed forces ARE prejudiced against women - but a lot of that will be because of Sam's behaviour over the last few years.

ShadowMaat
May 29th, 2004, 06:07 AM
And there is not one single person in the SCG, who, on hearing of this promotion, will not think to themselves at least once, that maybe she slept her way to that promotion. Some of that will be because some people in the armed forces ARE prejudiced against women - but a lot of that will be because of Sam's behaviour over the last few years.
Oh, I dunno. I think there are probably a few people who are so absorbed with their work they won't notice or care what Sam does or how she got there ("Sam who? Oh yeah. Good for him. Her? Whatever. Can you hand me that book on your way out?"). ;) Otherwise, though, you're right, and I hadn't considered that aspect of it. It adds another reason for the military personnel not to trust her and from an "inside" perspective (looking at it within the context of the show itself), I think they'd be right to be doubtful. How very sad it all is...

epiphany
May 29th, 2004, 12:25 PM
And there is not one single person in the SCG, who, on hearing of this promotion, will not think to themselves at least once, that maybe she slept her way to that promotion. Some of that will be because some people in the armed forces ARE prejudiced against women - but a lot of that will be because of Sam's behaviour over the last few years.

Damn straight. Sam's behavior over the last few years has not only invited but encouraged such thinking. She also hasn't done anything to prove herself worthy of leadership of the premier Stargate team. Whenever she has had command in the last few years either it's been command in name only(like Evolution Part 2, daddy was more in charge of that mission than Sam was) or she's been over emotional(for example Paradise Lost scientific team and Lost City Part 2 with her attempt to comment on her inappropriate feelings--which just point blank should NOT be mentioned and at the end when Daniel the civilian for god's sake, was more in control and thinking more clearly than she was).

They'd be absolutely right IMO to think she is not getting this promotion based on merit but on favoritism.

Elwe Singollo
May 29th, 2004, 01:46 PM
I do agree, at least we see a side of the character that not all people like.

KatG
May 29th, 2004, 02:50 PM
Please see KatG's response, which was posted earlier on in this thread. It rocks. :)

*blushes*

Aw gee. Thanks. I'm quite enjoying your responses too. As well as the dissenting opinions, well dissenting as opposed to yours. I haven't had this much fun on Gateworld in quite awhile. :)

Shipperahoy
May 29th, 2004, 03:46 PM
I just have to say that despite certain writing flaws in the latter half of season 7 that may have cast Sam in an unflattering light I still believe her fully capable of leading SG-1. She's got the smarts and the field experience. And I think that when push comes to shove she would be able to make the tough decisions. I think that Daniel and Teal'c respect her and would listen to her. Daniel might argue with her, but he argued with Jack too. So I'll watch season 8 and until she freaks out over breaking a nail or starts wearing high heels on missions I'll enjoy seeing her in command.

Bagpuss
May 29th, 2004, 04:02 PM
I just have to say that despite certain writing flaws in the latter half of season 7 that may have cast Sam in an unflattering light I still believe her fully capable of leading SG-1. She's got the smarts and the field experience. And I think that when push comes to shove she would be able to make the tough decisions. I think that Daniel and Teal'c respect her and would listen to her. Daniel might argue with her, but he argued with Jack too. So I'll watch season 8 and until she freaks out over breaking a nail or starts wearing high heels on missions I'll enjoy seeing her in command.

I'm with you on those sentiments,Shipperahoy.

I'm looking forward to seeing Sam in command too,so I can see what differences in style she shows,with actual command,and a chance to prove herself in an effective way.

However,I'm sceptical about the PTB actually writing/directing/editing Season 8 any better than they did in some Season 7 eps. :(

I'm afraid it's really a case of "Wait and see".......

the dancer of spaz
May 30th, 2004, 01:22 AM
There is nothing wrong with dating for fun, whatever age you are. Absolutely nothing wrong with it. But when it becomes clear that one person considers the relationship to have developed far beyond mere 'fun' into a potential life long, committed relationship, and when their behaviour has made that quite clear, then it really does take the self-absorbtion of someone amazingly selfish to keep deluding themselves that it's just 'fun' and go on behaving that way when the other person is clearly setting themselves up for getting their heart broken.

Um... you got all of that from his behavior in one ep? What with Sarah/Osiris running around in Daniel's mind and the conversations between all four characters, you got that he wants to... take it to the next level? I'm sorry... I just didn't see that kind of evidence in that ep, but I'll be looking for it in season eight, because you're right, if she does continue to lead him on under the guise of being a "pragmatist(?)," she should stop.

I'm also very interested in this external plot logic dealio. I know it's kinda O/T, but could you explain that a little bit more? I just really like plot/character development, so I'm interested in the theory, or whatever it is. ;)



And Teal'c has had exactly the same amount of time (ie eight years) to prove himself as Sam Carter has. So?

"It's all in the writing!"
hehe... and it is. Teal'c leads missions with other Jaffa. It seems that everyone in the SGC considers him strictly a leader of the Jaffa, someone to take on the liaison position should Bra'tac die before his time. I suppose the same would go for Carter now, or would have gone to Martouf, should Jacob die. However, unlike Sam, where we've seen her do "some" command stuff, we have not SEEN Teal'c lead a group through the Gate. He has made an excellent 2IC in the past, but I think it's his basic fundamentals in what is right and what is wrong, his "Jaffa Revenge Thing," if you will, that sets him apart from the typical SG-leader. Maybe it's been tamed over the years, and we just haven't seen it. Maybe not. Either way, Teal'c rarely gets a chance to say some lines, let alone the chance to LEAD people. :)



And there is not one single person in the SCG, who, on hearing of this promotion, will not think to themselves at least once, that maybe she slept her way to that promotion. Some of that will be because some people in the armed forces ARE prejudiced against women - but a lot of that will be because of Sam's behaviour over the last few years.

Um, I'm still a bit shaky about that external plot logic theory, but isn't this statement kinda the same thing? This is suggesting that MOST of the people in the SGC are around Sam/Jack long enough to see a difference in her behavior. I've heard of references in FANFICTION to the SGC rumor mill, but I don't think I've ever canonly seen it. I think that this all would be based on the assumption that the SGC isn't a large metropolis of people, and that people do talk... alot... about no one but Colonel O'Neill and Major Carter. But isn't that assuming just a bit much? As interesting as those two can be considering the SHIP will-they-or-won't-they? aspect, I think people might have enough respect for the man and woman who are members of the team which has saved Earth a dozen times over.



Sam's behavior over the last few years has not only invited but encouraged such thinking. She also hasn't done anything to prove herself worthy of leadership of the premier Stargate team. Whenever she has had command in the last few years either it's been command in name only(like Evolution Part 2, daddy was more in charge of that mission than Sam was) or she's been over emotional(for example Paradise Lost scientific team and Lost City Part 2 with her attempt to comment on her inappropriate feelings--which just point blank should NOT be mentioned and at the end when Daniel the civilian for god's sake, was more in control and thinking more clearly than she was).

I thought it was just her behavior this past season. Now it's "the last few years?" Yikes. Where have I been? I own the four most recently released seasons of Stargate: SG-1, and I don't remember her encouraging such thinking.

All four members of SG-1 are first and foremost a family. They live, fight, and die together. At least, that's how I'd like to picture them. Teal'c, Sam, Jack, and Daniel have all made open and public sacrifices for certain members of the team, depending on what's happening. You see Sam near tears for one of the few times during the series, when Daniel is going "crazy" in "Legacy." You see her kiss him on the cheek when that old guy switches bodies with Daniel - even when it's an old, wrinkly guy who looks nothing like Daniel, she still knows it's him and kisses him to let him know that she's there for him. Daniel and Jack have also had a very close relationship, as have Teal'c and Jack and Teal'c and Daniel. Let's just say that all of the guys have been consistently close for years. :D The same thing is true for Sam and Daniel.

The problem, I suppose for most people, occurred when they CANONLY showed stronger feelings for Sam and Jack. People had been speculating for a long time, but people speculate about Daniel and Jack, as well as any other combination you can think of. The fact of the matter is, this is a gender issue, plain and simple. People know that Jack and Daniel are never gonna "get it on" on the show, so they have no problems with the two of them showing displays of friendship. The same thing goes for all of the other combos I've just mentioned. When Sam and Daniel are close, those who still believe in Sam/Daniel ship can project ship, but cannot substantially support it, because of the ramifications of Season Four.

However, if Sam and Daniel had been having a romantic relationship, it still would have been against the regs, as would a relationship between Daniel and Jack. Sam would have continued being the way she is, caring for Jack as a friend and all of that, and no one would be complaining, because they'd know that Sam and Daniel are together. Sam would get her promotion, while still breaking the regs, and no one would question it.

NOW, though, in THIS REALITY :D, Sam has only THOUGHT about a relationship with Jack. She has not enticed him, she has not really asked him, she has not broken regs because of her LOVE for him, and she has not put the team anywhere NEAR danger because of the supposed love for him. They haven't even DISCUSSED it in three years, FCOL! This means nothing, though, because she's THINKING about it, and that's all there is to it. She gets her promotion, but no one looks at her merit or how many times she's saved the earth, saved lives, saved her team's lives. They only look at what has been seen/considered/canoned over the past year (at the most). Is that right? Is it fair?

Is it fair for Sam to bare the brunt of ship, when Jack was the one we saw confess for the za'tarcs, when Jack was the one who had "the meaningful look" in WoO (not to mention our first willing whopper of a kiss on Jack's part), or when Jack was the one (and the only of the two, might I add), who actually reinforced the truth about his "feelings" in BtS? We never saw Sam reciprocate those feelings, either in D&C or in BtS, we simply saw the plot continue on. It was never properly addressed for people to be blaming Sam for all these years. Now, they see Sam get upset about Jack being off-world on a planet with seemingly no gateway back home, and they become angry. They see Sam crying on Teal'c BECAUSE of this, and they begin to hate Sam Carter. Forget about the fact that she also cried when Daniel died, or that she was crying because it would be TWO FRIENDS dying within the same time period. That means nothing.

I guess all I'm trying to say is (to make a long argument even LONGER :o ) that people are allowing ship to cloud their judgement of who Sam Carter really is. She'd still be the same caring person she always has been, no matter WHO she was "shipping" with. I think that people who don't like ship, should consider her concern for Jack that of a friend's, and nothing more. Then, you won't be offended so much... maybe. :p It's worth a shot, isn't it?

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 30th, 2004, 03:02 AM
Um... you got all of that from his behavior in one ep?
Yes.




I'm also very interested in this external plot logic dealio. I know it's kinda O/T, but could you explain that a little bit more? I just really like plot/character development, so I'm interested in the theory, or whatever it is. ;)
Try reading Tolkien's 'On fairy tales' It explains author sub-creation far better than I ever could.




Um, I'm still a bit shaky about that external plot logic theory, but isn't this statement kinda the same thing?

No. There is a difference between logical projection within the established secondary universe and just planting something from outside to serve the particular plot progression you want.

The 'potential' for this rumour mongering had reached as far as the White House (Inauguration). While Kinsey was clearly flying a kite with his accusations, the old saying 'there's no smoke without fire' comes to mind, and it was made clear that Sams emotional behaviour in Paradise Lost had been documented in official reports - which makes it serious enough to comment upon officially. This does not reflect well on Sam.



I think people might have enough respect for the man and woman who are members of the team which has saved Earth a dozen times over.

Well I don't see any more evidence for that than you see for the opposite point of view.




You see Sam near tears for one of the few times during the series, when Daniel is going "crazy" in "Legacy." You see her kiss him on the cheek when that old guy switches bodies with Daniel - even when it's an old, wrinkly guy who looks nothing like Daniel, she still knows it's him and kisses him to let him know that she's there for him.

And the only two examples you came up with were both in the first three seasons. When the show WAS much more emotionally balanced between the four of them, and they were believably a close, bonded unit that all cared for each other equally.





NOW, though, in THIS REALITY :D, Sam has only THOUGHT about a relationship with Jack. She has not enticed him, she has not really asked him, she has not broken regs because of her LOVE for him, and she has not put the team anywhere NEAR danger because of the supposed love for him. They haven't even DISCUSSED it in three years, FCOL! This means nothing, though, because she's THINKING about it, and that's all there is to it. She gets her promotion, but no one looks at her merit or how many times she's saved the earth, saved lives, saved her team's lives. They only look at what has been seen/considered/canoned over the past year (at the most). Is that right? Is it fair?

Not broken regs? Not put anyone in danger? I think THAT is also a matter for discussion. One that I've had elsewhere and don't intend to have again because I'm frankly getting bored with going over the old ground over and over again. Clearly you see one thing, and I see another. I HAVE seen behaviour that I would consider unprofessional in the last two years, and most of it has come from Sam, and has been a result of her emotions. If she cannot suppress her emotions enough to make objective tactical decisions, she does not belong in charge of a unit which habitually goes into dangerous situations. She has not proved to MY satisfaction that she can do that - I hope she will, in the next year. But I also hope that in doing so the share of screen time that she gets doesn't increase any further with the result that the other two are marginalised even further than they have been this year.





Is it fair for Sam to bare the brunt of ship, when Jack was the one we saw confess for the za'tarcs, when Jack was the one who had "the meaningful look" in WoO (not to mention our first willing whopper of a kiss on Jack's part), or when Jack was the one (and the only of the two, might I add), who actually reinforced the truth about his "feelings" in BtS? We never saw Sam reciprocate those feelings, either in D&C or in BtS, we simply saw the plot continue on. It was never properly addressed for people to be blaming Sam for all these years. Now, they see Sam get upset about Jack being off-world on a planet with seemingly no gateway back home, and they become angry. They see Sam crying on Teal'c BECAUSE of this, and they begin to hate Sam Carter. Forget about the fact that she also cried when Daniel died, or that she was crying because it would be TWO FRIENDS dying within the same time period. That means nothing.


You're right. It means nothing. It means less than nothing, to me. Because at the time that episode was originally shown, that was exactly the way I saw it. The last time I saw it, the message that came across was entirely different. Season seven has wrecked for me what came before.





I think that people who don't like ship, should consider her concern for Jack that of a friend's, and nothing more. Then, you won't be offended so much... maybe. :p It's worth a shot, isn't it?
Oh that this was possible. It WAS possible, in the fourth and fifth, and even in the sixth seasons, to have this attitude and peacefully ignore all the not-so subtle hints that were being dropped. I was perfectly happy doing this. But the ship has been so overt, so clumsy, so obvious, in this last season that I can't avoid it any more. It sets my teeth on edge. It's a big purple elephant sitting in the room and it won't go away no matter how much I want it to. And it's become obvious, utterly obvious, that the program makers want me to see it. And I hate it. I don't have words for how much I hate what it's done for the show I loved.

Elwe Singollo
May 30th, 2004, 07:14 AM
So ur saying, that thing that changed in the show made you stop loving it?

keshou
May 30th, 2004, 07:46 AM
I personally have really enjoyed Sam's character development in S7, especially the latter half. I don't see the emotions and indecisiveness as being out of character. What I do see, is a woman, approaching or at 40, who is re-examining her life.

Having hit that particular milestone myself a little over a year ago, I can vouch that it does make you think about where you are, where you've been, and where you're going. You wonder about the what ifs, and if what you've accomplished up to that point is what you wanted to accomplish and if accomplishing it was worth the sacrifices. In the process, you might do something a little out of character, especially if you feel that what you've given up may have been to great of a sacrifice.

So, with Sam, what I see from Grace, is that she knows that she's accomplished a great deal, and she's proud of it, but she's also wondering if what she gave up - a chance for a home and family - was worth it. She's also examining whether or not she's been using her feelings for Jack as an excuse. Does she really feel something for him, or is he just a safe bet? The only way she's really going to figure that out is if she tries it without him. Hence we have the events in Chimera.

I see Pete as an honest attempt to get on with her life. Does that mean that her feelings for Jack just automatically go away? No. The feelings are there, whether she's using them as an excuse or not. And having to see him on a regular basis makes it harder to just push them aside. But she is trying and apparently she's going to give it her best effort in S8 too. Whether in the long run, she sticks with Pete, or if she realizes that Jack is who she wants and finds a way to make that work remains to be seen.

Who knows, the more she gets to know Pete, the more she may realize that he's the love of her life, and that what she felt for Jack was really inconsequential. Then again, she may realize that no matter how nice a guy Pete is, she will never be really truly happy with anyone but Jack. And who knows, she might just decide that being single is the perfect choice for her. But how will she know any of these things if she doesn't explore her options.

I really, really like this post Kat, so I'm leaving the whole thing quoted. :) I think I'm one of the few non-shippers who liked Grace a lot and it's for many of the reasons you articulated so well. Grace (IMO) was the visual depiction of Sam having a case of the midnight heebie-jeebies, as I like to call them.

I've also noticed, since I've *ahem* hit 40, that you tend to enter a period of self-examination. I've seen it in my friends as well. Your life is half over, you wonder how it would have been different if you'd made alternative choices. You may be perfectly happy but some missed opportunities may nag at you, pushed aside when you're busy and happy during the day, coming out to annoy you when you're most vulnerable -- as Sam was in Grace.

I wasn't offended by Sam's conversation with DreamJack, should she have taken a different road, is she just using those feelings to bury herself in her work. Heck, I even actually saw *some* romantic chemistry between Sam and Jack in Sam's "hallucination". For at least one episode. *g*

I welcomed Sam's decision to move on and see if she can have a life outside the SGC with Pete. But frankly articles that spend one paragraph talking about Sam's promotion and three paragraphs talking about Sam's love life and how Sam thinks Pete is a great guy, although Jack is more fantastic (but sadly unavailable), don't inspire confidence that Pete was intended as anything more than a plot device to delay the resolution of the S/J ship.

I'm reserving judgement until I see how they write it and I *am* looking forward to seeing Sam in command of SG-1. I think she has the right stuff if they write it well. I'm also looking forward to the change in the dynamic between Sam and Daniel and Teal'c. I hope we get to see a lot of them together as a *team*

Elwe Singollo
May 30th, 2004, 09:39 AM
I totally agree, i want to see some team interaction in season 8, i thought we were missing that in season 7. I hope they write Sam's character differenly this year, although i am one of those few people who still loved Season 7 :)

epiphany
May 30th, 2004, 12:37 PM
"Ship" is not causing people's judgement to be clouded to who Sam Carter really is. Ship is now part of who she really is, it is how she is in large part being defined. So-called "ship" changes who she is. It's there in canon as of Grace, which also affects backstory.

She isn't the same caring person she always was. Now she cares first and formeost and apparently really only for Jack because he is ever upper most in her mind.

Daniel's kidnapped? She looks put out that Jack's going(love that litttle downturned eyes thing on her terse answer of "good"). That scene was meant to be shippy, it was played that way, it's right in the dvd commentary. Concern about Daniel isn't a part of the equation in that picture, he's just the object that is keeping Sam and Jack apart. Jack's been ordered to go(in effect, because if he doesn't then no one is going to rescue Daniel and Dr. Lee and that would truly make him look too cold and callous to be explained away).

Janet's dead? Cassie's a "tough kid who'll survive" the loss of her second mother but Sam, grown up, military officer needs to go weep on the shoulder of her commanding officer(the same commanding officer she's been mooning over and getting all schoolgirly in her answers to Emmet's questioning only a little earlier). She's standing there practically asking for it, eyes all wet and looking up, biting lips--all screaming "Oh please hug me, I'm so needy"(and before anyone brings up Daniel in Needs in the storeroom, Daniel just totally broke down uncontrollably, he didn't seem to be looking for it, it was a very different situation--Sam was in situation where she could have excused herself).

Jack's got the ancient's repository downloaded into his brain? Daniel and Teal'c walk in because they too want to spend time with their teammate and friend and Sam looks annoyed they've interrupted her little tete a tete with Jack, instead of being glad that they are all there together to share this time with him. They are interruptors and intruders, confirmed in her later attempt to broach the subject of her unprofessional feelings(and right after she's been given command of the team).

What you describe between the guys and in the early years with Sam was behavior equal among teammates. Entirely different from what we are told exists between Sam and her Commanding Officer.

You mention the lives she's saved--so have all of SG-1. Being good in her area of expertise, which is scientific, does NOT mean she is worthy of being leader of SG-1. She has not shown any kind of real leadership ability. She has shown she's good at following orders. Lots of soldiers are good at following orders and it's important but it doesn't mean she's a leader, except perhaps of a scientific team which would deal with her area of expertise.

epiphany
May 30th, 2004, 01:23 PM
<<<Try reading Tolkien's 'On fairy tales' It explains author sub-creation far better than I ever could.>>>

Yes, Magnolia absolutely. "On Fairie Stories" is an amazing, amazing essay by Tolkien. Personally I think every one of the writers, directors and producers on Stargate ought to be made to read it, until they can repeat it by heart! Actually it mightn't be a bad idea for the actors to read it as well.

David85
May 30th, 2004, 05:03 PM
A lot is two words.

Elwe Singollo
May 30th, 2004, 05:08 PM
David85 is five syllables :)

KatG
May 30th, 2004, 06:07 PM
I really, really like this post Kat, so I'm leaving the whole thing quoted. :) I think I'm one of the few non-shippers who liked Grace a lot and it's for many of the reasons you articulated so well. Grace (IMO) was the visual depiction of Sam having a case of the midnight heebie-jeebies, as I like to call them.

Thanks Kes. Midnight heebie-jeebie is a perfect phrase for what Sam was experiencing.



I welcomed Sam's decision to move on and see if she can have a life outside the SGC with Pete. But frankly articles that spend one paragraph talking about Sam's promotion and three paragraphs talking about Sam's love life and how Sam thinks Pete is a great guy, although Jack is more fantastic (but sadly unavailable), don't inspire confidence that Pete was intended as anything more than a plot device to delay the resolution of the S/J ship.

I'm actually probably one of the few shippers who liked Chimera. I like seeing Sam experiencing life, even if she makes some mistakes in the process. Let's face it, life is messy. It's never just cut and dried. To me it makes Sam more realistic, instead of Super Sam.

Pete probably is a plot device as far as the writers are concerned. And AT is probably astute enough to realize that. But I don't think that Sam the character necessarily sees him as someone to tide her over until she can have Jack. I think she's honestly trying to get on with her life. Just because the feelings for Jack keep getting in the way, doesn't mean that she sincerely isn't making an attempt. And who knows, if the chemistry between Pete and Sam seems to explode in S8, Pete may just stick around for the long run.
Whatever happens, as long as its a good story and it's believable to me, I'll keep watching.

As for Sam in command, I don't necessarily think that how she's handles her personal life, is telling of how she will handle command. Let's face it, Jack's past personal life wasn't exactly what most would consider idealic. He had a lot going on, but he managed to command just fine.

I know that for myself, my personal life and emotions can be a total wreck, but I'm perfectly capable of handling my job responsibilities in spite of it. You just compartmentalize it, and get on with what you have to do.

Elwe Singollo
May 30th, 2004, 06:44 PM
I'm one of the few who liked Chimera :) I liked the episode because it showed Sam in a different way, although i didn't like it 100 percent, i still loved the idea of the episode, and in plus, Sarah is back :)

the dancer of spaz
May 30th, 2004, 10:41 PM
Hola! Alright... someone said before that the quotes probably aren't necessary, but I need them to keep my mind straight. If I didn't have any references, I'd be an even bigger babbling idiot than I already am. ;)



Not broken regs? Not put anyone in danger? I think THAT is also a matter for discussion. One that I've had elsewhere and don't intend to have again because I'm frankly getting bored with going over the old ground over and over again.


Ummm... OK... Sorry for asking. :S



Clearly you see one thing, and I see another. I HAVE seen behaviour that I would consider unprofessional in the last two years, and most of it has come from Sam, and has been a result of her emotions. If she cannot suppress her emotions enough to make objective tactical decisions, she does not belong in charge of a unit which habitually goes into dangerous situations. She has not proved to MY satisfaction that she can do that - I hope she will, in the next year.


I guess responding to this statement would be considered "going over the old ground over and over again," eh? Then again, I think we've been doing that for several posts, so... whateva. :o



But I also hope that in doing so the share of screen time that she gets doesn't increase any further with the result that the other two are marginalised even further than they have been this year.


Absolutely. I agree. The show is first and foremost about the team. No arguments from me.



You're right. It means nothing. It means less than nothing, to me. Because at the time that episode [Paradise Lost] was originally shown, that was exactly the way I saw it. The last time I saw it, the message that came across was entirely different. Season seven has wrecked for me what came before.


How can an ep that was shown nearly a year before season 7.5 have its entire meaning changed because of the current/new eps? They surely didn't know that they were going to go all shippy for season seven during production of season six. Does that mean that the supposed "better team comraderie" that was existent in seasons 1 through 3 is changed, too?



Oh that this was possible. It WAS possible, in the fourth and fifth, and even in the sixth seasons, to have this attitude and peacefully ignore all the not-so subtle hints that were being dropped. I was perfectly happy doing this. But the ship has been so overt, so clumsy, so obvious, in this last season that I can't avoid it any more. It sets my teeth on edge. It's a big purple elephant sitting in the room and it won't go away no matter how much I want it to. And it's become obvious, utterly obvious, that the program makers want me to see it. And I hate it. I don't have words for how much I hate what it's done for the show I loved.


Haha... why don't you tell us how you really feel? :P
Anywho, that's one of those subjective statements, where I can't say that you're wrong, but I have a hard time even agreeing because you're basically saying that all of those fans who LOVE the ship don't matter. Maybe not. Maybe you're not saying that but something different, however that's what I'm getting from your statement - which is OK, in respect to everyone's varying opinions... I just think it's a bit harsh. Your condemning the very thing that keeps a lot of fans coming every week.

If shippers were doing the same thing, I think it'd be a bit different, but they aren't. They're actually LIKING ship, instead of condemning ship. And when they're disappointed, it's because ship hasn't happened, not because it has. Most shippers aren't condemning the relationship between the team as a whole - and that relationship should never and could never truly be threatened anyway, IMO.



"Ship" is not causing people's judgement to be clouded to who Sam Carter really is. Ship is now part of who she really is, it is how she is in large part being defined. So-called "ship" changes who she is. It's there in canon as of Grace, which also affects backstory.

She isn't the same caring person she always was. Now she cares first and formeost and apparently really only for Jack because he is ever upper most in her mind.


I don't see how she's changed, so I suppose this statement doesn't really apply to me. :D However, I'll say again that there has always been a canonly-created strong relationship between all of the guys, and that is not a problem, nor will it ever be a problem. It's all about the gender.

Also, whether or not Sam's still a caring person is subject to opinion. She and Teal'c have become WAY closer over this past year, whether you look at "PL" of S6 or "Space Race" of this season. I don't remember much meaningful interaction between those two in the past, and now it's grown. I suppose that means that Jack should be threatened? Or maybe that means that Sam might ditch Jack AND Pete for Teal'c... you know... because they're so close now. :rolleyes:

WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! This is a point-by-point part of the post. Just thought I'd be kind... :)



Daniel's kidnapped? She looks put out that Jack's going(love that litttle downturned eyes thing on her terse answer of "good"). That scene was meant to be shippy, it was played that way, it's right in the dvd commentary. Concern about Daniel isn't a part of the equation in that picture, he's just the object that is keeping Sam and Jack apart. Jack's been ordered to go(in effect, because if he doesn't then no one is going to rescue Daniel and Dr. Lee and that would truly make him look too cold and callous to be explained away).


Daniel's kidnapped? Sam looks apprehensive and pensive about the upcoming mission. It could be their last, and she might never see Daniel again. She looks even more apprehensive considering Jack is going to find him alone. Yes, she and Teal'c will be the only portion of SG-1 going, but at least they'll have Jacob and Bra'tac. Daniel and Jack could be stranded in South America with no back up. The look when she said "good?" That was worried; not terse. OK, so the scene was meant to be shippy. Does Sam suddenly forget about Daniel - the man, the brother-like figure, she's known for nearly eight years of her life? No. Plus, Jack isn't exactly FORCED to go find Daniel. He probably trusts Teal'c and Sam & Co. to get the job done without him, while giving him a chance to use his retired-Special Ops skills.



Janet's dead? Cassie's a "tough kid who'll survive" the loss of her second mother but Sam, grown up, military officer needs to go weep on the shoulder of her commanding officer(the same commanding officer she's been mooning over and getting all schoolgirly in her answers to Emmet's questioning only a little earlier). She's standing there practically asking for it, eyes all wet and looking up, biting lips--all screaming "Oh please hug me, I'm so needy"(and before anyone brings up Daniel in Needs in the storeroom, Daniel just totally broke down uncontrollably, he didn't seem to be looking for it, it was a very different situation--Sam was in situation where she could have excused herself).


Janet's dead? Well, it prompts Sam to tears, but she doesn't go to Jack until HOURS after he's been admitted/checked out/left unconscious. In fact, they do this whole huggy-thing ONCE the entire time, nearly two-thirds of the way through the ep. That means that both Sam and Jack had other priorities besides even seeing each other - because, God forbid, one team member check on another. After that, we never see them together in that capacity, if at all, again. Yes, Sam is vulnerable. It's her best friend. Would it be any better, if she had thrown herself into Jack's arms? Again, she was apprehensive, and almost stayed back and away. It's awkward between these two, always has been. If Daniel hadn't been grieving in his own way (which I guess is still part of the Descension Process), she probably would have done it with him as well.

Teal'c came soon after, and in a much more intimate setting, if you ask me. I don't see any ship between them, but I do see a friendship which is getting way better. Does that mean that Cassie has been forgotten? No. They didn't even show the kid at the memorial service. How do we know she's even in town, in the country? She would have clearance, too, if she were. It's just one of those things where the writers felt it was unnecessary to have her daughter there to be seen. I don't agree with it, but it's not the characters' faults, by any means.

Also, I don't understand your Need references. Sorry. :(



Jack's got the ancient's repository downloaded into his brain? Daniel and Teal'c walk in because they too want to spend time with their teammate and friend and Sam looks annoyed they've interrupted her little tete a tete with Jack, instead of being glad that they are all there together to share this time with him. They are interruptors and intruders, confirmed in her later attempt to broach the subject of her unprofessional feelings(and right after she's been given command of the team).


Jack's got the ancient's repository downloaded into his brain? Both Sam and Daniel have identical reasons for stopping over to his house. Coincidence? I think not. Sam looks annoyed, yes, because both she and Daniel seem to have bad timing, and because she's seemingly incapable of articulating her feelings (whatever they are). If I ever saw Sam consider Teal'c or Daniel "interruptors" or "intruders," I would be disappointed, but I see no evidence of that. Yeah, she tries to broach the subject again. So do Teal'c and Daniel. And Daniel had been spending the most time with Jack from the beginning. Again, no one sees a problem.

TOPICS ON WHICH I WILL CONCEDE:

1. The team dynamic has changed. Period.
2. Each character, individually, has changed.
3. Certain one-on-one relationships have changed.
4. Sam has been given a chance to show more emotions that Jack, however,
5. Jack was the first one to actually come close to breaking regs in the beginning.
6. Pete does seem like a tool (for other plotlines ;) ), an aspect of him that is completely at the hands of the writers - no one else.
7. Poorly written ship between two characters has the power to ruin the series, although
8. It brings in a LARGE portion of the ship-lovin' demographic of males and females, alike.
9. No one has seen much more action than Sam/Jack (though that doesn't bother me as much as some).
10. Soap Opera ship is bad and should be wiped from the face of this earth. :D

THE BIG UNIT
May 31st, 2004, 03:06 AM
Spoilers if you havent seen Singularity and Heroes.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I'm not sure about this but i thought Cassie had a device (a bomb) inside her which would harm her if she got to close to the Stargate and explode if she went through. I think in Singularity they said it was shrinking not that it Disappeared - though it may have, i dont know. But i still would have liked to have seen her, maybe the Actor that last played Cassie couldn't make it, at least she was mentioned, there are many characters who were never visited again.

MagnoliaAnaglypta
May 31st, 2004, 05:12 AM
I have a hard time even agreeing because you're basically saying that all of those fans who LOVE the ship don't matter. Maybe not. Maybe you're not saying that but something different, however that's what I'm getting from your statement - which is OK, in respect to everyone's varying opinions... I just think it's a bit harsh. Your condemning the very thing that keeps a lot of fans coming every week.

I am saying nothing of the sort. I am saying I hate it. ME, no one else. It is a demonstrable fact that a lot of people agree with me on some or all of my points of dislike, and equally a lot of people disagree with me. Some people think the show is improving. Some people think ship has improved the show. I DON'T. That's it and all about it. Everyone else is free to have their own opinions and express them. Yes, I want the show to change. Other people don't. Just because I wan't it to change doesn't mean it's magically going to, and that will dissapoint all of those people who don't want change. I don't have that kind of power. The only power I do have is the same power that everyone else who watches has - the ability to express my opinion. I have not personally attacked the fans. I have not personally attacked the actors or the showrunners outside of their professional association with the show, which is not against the forum rules. I have said what I feel - and I have been *very careful* to continually say 'for me' while I am making my points. So if anyone chooses to interpret that as an attack on other fans, then I'm afraid that is their problem.

ShadowMaat
May 31st, 2004, 05:56 AM
I have said what I feel - and I have been *very careful* to continually say 'for me' while I am making my points. So if anyone chooses to interpret that as an attack on other fans, then I'm afraid that is their problem.
I, for one, have enjoyed your posts and I never saw them as attacking anyone or any thing. You speak passionately at times, but that isn't the same as needlessly attacking someone. Speaking passionately can be a good thing and frankly I think this board needs more passionate speakers, especially ones who aren't afraid to go against groupmind and speak up when they don't like something. Thank you for being non-conformist. ;)

Dani347
May 31st, 2004, 06:05 AM
What, there's something wrong with disliking something erely because some other people like it? So what if some of us condemn J/S ship? And, how does doing that translate into shippers not mattering? I can bring up a slew of things I dislike, which I would condemn with as much force as the J/S ship, if I ever got into a conversation about them. Mathematics, for example. I hate all these things. I can rant against these as long and as viciously as I rant against J/S ship. Does that mean I think the people who enjoy math don't matter? (Heh, don't let my math geek brother know)


because you're basically saying that all of those fans who LOVE the ship don't matter. Maybe not. Maybe you're not saying that but something different, however that's what I'm getting from your statement - which is OK, in respect to everyone's varying opinions... I just think it's a bit harsh. Your condemning the very thing that keeps a lot of fans coming every week.

If shippers were doing the same thing, I think it'd be a bit different, but they aren't. They're actually LIKING ship, instead of condemning ship.

Couldn't you just as easily say that the J/S shippers are saying the anti ones don't matter. Because they don't care that there's something that keeps them from enjoying the show each week.


I have not personally attacked the fans.
No, you haven't. And, as far as I know neither has anyone else who has expressed an opinion against ship. Ship and shippers are NOT the same thing, and people can be against one without being against the other.

ShadowMaat
May 31st, 2004, 06:13 AM
Couldn't you just as easily say that the J/S shippers are saying the anti ones don't matter. Because they don't care that there's something that keeps them from enjoying the show each week.
Absolutely. Shippers want ship, and that's all there is to it, as far as most of them are concerned (if you'll pardon the massive generalization).

Whenever an anti-ship person says they hate ship and don't want to see it, a pro-ship person comes along and says, "But what about US? WE want ship! Don't we deserve to be happy, too?" But reverse the situation and have the anti-shippers wail and the sentiment seems to be "Oh well, too bad. Ship is canon now, deal with it."

I would, however, like to point out that this convo likely belongs on the Ship Discussion Thread (http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=88&highlight=ship+discussion) as it's only remotely relevant to the "Sam in charge" subject of this thread. ;)

Elwe Singollo
May 31st, 2004, 07:35 AM
I am saying nothing of the sort. I am saying I hate it. ME, no one else.Although i totally don't agree with you, i think everyone deserves a opinion of any such.

Bagpuss
May 31st, 2004, 07:42 AM
Although i totally don't agree with you, i think everyone deserves a opinion of any such.

Shouldn't that be "Don't Totally",lmj? ;)

Or have you suddenly gone on a DR Pepper fuelled assertiveness course? :D

Before anyone thinks I'm suddenly attacking your POV,if you check that's the correct wording,I'll delete this query!

Don't want ya getting any more "Headaches"!

Elwe Singollo
May 31st, 2004, 07:47 AM
Shouldn't that be "Don't Totally",lmj? ;)

Or have you suddenly gone on a DR Pepper fuelled assertiveness course? :D

Before anyone thinks I'm suddenly attacking your POV,if you check that's the correct wording,I'll delete this query!

Don't want ya getting any more "Headaches"!I don't see a difference, my drpepper had tooken over my brain, haha...

Bagpuss
May 31st, 2004, 07:58 AM
I don't see a difference, my drpepper had tooken over my brain, haha...

Holy C###! :o
Seeing as how you put my bit in your reply,no point in me deleting the original query!

OK my fellow Dr Pepper Addict,I won't patronise you ............but there IS a slight difference ;)

Trust me on that!! :)

*Passes over Virtual Painkillers again!*

Oh well! :D

keshou
May 31st, 2004, 08:35 AM
I'm actually probably one of the few shippers who liked Chimera. I like seeing Sam experiencing life, even if she makes some mistakes in the process. Let's face it, life is messy. It's never just cut and dried. To me it makes Sam more realistic, instead of Super Sam.

I also like Sam being challenged, doubting herself, not always having all the answers. That's one reason I'm interested in seeing her in charge of SG-1. Just don't like seeing Sam become someone who can't answer a question from a reporter about her commanding officer without embarrassing herself.


Pete probably is a plot device as far as the writers are concerned. And AT is probably astute enough to realize that. But I don't think that Sam the character necessarily sees him as someone to tide her over until she can have Jack. I think she's honestly trying to get on with her life. Just because the feelings for Jack keep getting in the way, doesn't mean that she sincerely isn't making an attempt. And who knows, if the chemistry between Pete and Sam seems to explode in S8, Pete may just stick around for the long run.
Whatever happens, as long as its a good story and it's believable to me, I'll keep watching.

Yep, instead of StalkerPete he should be PlotdevicePete. You seem more optimistic than I am that Sam is going to get some real growth out of this arc. I can't help but see Pete as being Mr. Speedbump on the highway of S/J love. *sigh* I'll watch, though and hope its a good story and it's believable.



As for Sam in command, I don't necessarily think that how she's handles her personal life, is telling of how she will handle command. Let's face it, Jack's past personal life wasn't exactly what most would consider idealic. He had a lot going on, but he managed to command just fine.

Jack's made some mistakes but he's a darn fine CO, a natural leader. I'm not sure Sam is that natural a leader, I think she's had to learn that and I'm looking forward to seeing her strut her stuff. That's the story arc I'm interested in for Sam but I get discouraged when almost all they talk about in these interviews is Sam and Pete vs. Jack, etc. Maybe I should just quit reading the interviews, huh??

Elwe Singollo
May 31st, 2004, 09:06 AM
Holy C###! :o
Seeing as how you put my bit in your reply,no point in me deleting the original query!

OK my fellow Dr Pepper Addict,I won't patronise you ............but there IS a slight difference ;)

Trust me on that!! :)

*Passes over Virtual Painkillers again!*

Oh well! :DOk back to the topic of discussion :) (Thanks for the painkillers :))



Jack's made some mistakes but he's a darn fine CO, a natural leader. I'm not sure Sam is that natural a leader, I think she's had to learn that and I'm looking forward to seeing her strut her stuff. That's the story arc I'm interested in for Sam but I get discouraged when almost all they talk about in these interviews is Sam and Pete vs. Jack, etc. Maybe I should just quit reading the interviews, huh??
I totally agree, i also get discouraged with Sam and Pete vs. Jack. I'm also looking forward if she'll be a good leader or not, but yah, if she doesn't, i'll still be happy for her character.

epiphany
May 31st, 2004, 02:01 PM
What, there's something wrong with disliking something erely because some other people like it? So what if some of us condemn J/S ship? And, how does doing that translate into shippers not mattering?

And of course the thing about "ship" is that it can exist without it ever being acknowledged or in anyway put into the story, the same way "slash" does or Sam/Daniel ship does or whatever. Keeping it out of the story in now way stops people from projecting it, but putting it into the story does cut off other avenues for projections and it also stops the possibility of seeing the team friendships in the same way. So team fans are denied as are fans of other pairings--whereas keeping the team as teammates and friends.

Now, with regards to what dancer of spaz as for the idea that is is just gender, yes it is and no it isn't. It is in the minds of TPTB because they never would have paired Sam and Jack up if she weren't female. However that isn't the problem in the minds of those who dislike ship--I personally don't have a problem with her having the same sort of relationship the others have with Jack, she used to have that. She doesn't anymore and that isn't my doing, that is the doing of TPTB who decided "she's a girl, so she and Jack need to have the hots for each other becaue after all what else does a girl have to do, she can't just a friend and teammate, geesh".

Also, with regards to what happened in Lost City part 1. What she and Daniel were doing was totally different. Note Daniel had Teal'c with him and most likely would have had Sam as well had she been around for him to ask(but she was out going to Jack's alone). He was going to spend time with his friend and was bringing along another friend of Jack's who he knew wanted to do the same. Sam excluded them, Jack's other teammates and friends. She did view them as interruptors, besides the look on her face there is also the fact that as soon as she tried to broach the subject again(inappropriately as soon as she'd been given command of the team), she specifically mentions Daniel and Teal'cs "interruption" of her prior attempt.

ShadowMaat
August 1st, 2004, 10:15 AM
Bringing this to the fore again since questions are once more being raised... :P

ES2018
August 1st, 2004, 10:49 AM
Wasn't Sam in combat situations in the Gulf War? Maybe there were situations that showed her ability to lead that makes her a natural to lead SG-1. She has shown herself strong and capable in combat situations. I don't think I could say she is a scientist first. She has many skills that work together to make her a valuable part of the team. I think she has earned the right to lead!

Elwe Singollo
August 1st, 2004, 10:59 AM
I think she is Mcgyver lite version, haha... Because shes smart and strong, although i don't think she could make a nuclear reactor with gum and some rubberbands haha...

Ancient 1
August 9th, 2004, 04:21 PM
I don't know why they don't want her to lead, I personally think that it's the best thing next to having Jack lead and that might be the answer there, people don't mind having Sam but they would rather have Jack
I don't know why either, but with Jack being kicked upstairs, Carter has to take over. no one would accept TBTB bringing in an "unknown" to start giving orders to the SG-1 team!

Elwe Singollo
August 10th, 2004, 03:45 PM
I think people thought her feelings for men would get in the way, but i don't it has :)

Ancient 1
August 11th, 2004, 06:13 PM
Actually that's probably not totaly true. I would suspect that there are other officers who have had just as much if not more experience, AFAIK Ferretti is still around there somewhere and he, at one point, was in command of SG-2. Whereas Sam has not had much command experience at all, and almost none of it has been off-world.



Which would actually be a good reason to keep her grounded.

Don't get me wrong though I am looking forward to seeing Sam in command, I'm just trying to point out a few facts. :p
With both her and Jack being promoted she had to take command. She has 7 years under O'neill (so to speak, pardon the pun and all that crap),so she is more than ready to take command. Now they need another warrior-type for backup....Haley???

Elwe Singollo
August 11th, 2004, 07:20 PM
Haley imo is like a mini-sam, haha... So i would think it would be a good idea, although i don't want it to happen, cause yah, i'm not too interested in the character.

Ancient 1
August 17th, 2004, 01:28 AM
Actually, I should think that would make it more challenging. When you issue orders to a soldier, you can be at least 99% certain they'll follow orders, but with Daniel especially under your command, it's a lot harder to predict what he's going to do. ;) Teal'c, while no doubt very good at obeying orders (all those years rising through the ranks to First Prime), will also have his own motivations and ideas about what he should be doing (especially since he's been doing it for longer than Sam and Daniel and probably even Jack have been alive). And let's not forget the Jaffa Revenge thing. ;)

I'm not saying either of them won't obey orders, I'm just saying that depending on the circumstances they could act a lot less predictably than actual military personnel. ;)

Me, I'd like to see Sam in command. Assuming we get our old Sam back- the strong, independant woman whoi can take charge of her own life as well as those of others. The one who has a backbone. The one who actually has a brain! Because if we get more of S7 Sam the wishy-washy, inconstant, featherbrained cliche of a girly girl who sits around mooning about Jack and getting all teary-eyed about her love life, then no, I wouldn't want to see her in charge. She'd get them all killed their first mission out because she'd be too busy wondering what her dearest loving Jack was doing and wishing she could be with him. Bleah.
:cool: This is why they need a 4th; someone I like to call Haley. She may be a bit of an egghead too, but she will keep Daniel and Teal'c in line. She's feisty! :D ;)

ibwolf
August 17th, 2004, 01:52 AM
:cool: This is why they need a 4th; someone I like to call Haley. She may be a bit of an egghead too, but she will keep Daniel and Teal'c in line. She's feisty! :D ;)

You can't have Haley on the team for the same reason you can't have Jonas. They are too much like Sam and Daniel (respectively). Not just in terms of 'characters' for the show, but also in terms of specialities for the team, something that would have to be taken into account when assigning the team a new member.

Personally I don't mind Sam taking command of SG1, but I do hope that the writers do a good job of it. I didn't like what I was seeing in Zero Hour, but in her actions in Icon were better. I guess we'll have to wait for the first full 'offworld' ep. to be able to tell.

Ancient 1
August 17th, 2004, 03:22 AM
Well, then to replace what O'neill brought into the mix, besides leadership, you have to have another warrior type so he, or she, and Teal'c can cover Daniel and Sam's butt while they go about doing their special things.

Don't know if I said this befor on this thread, but they need to go get themselves a 'Quantum-Mirror' Kawalski or someone akin to what the was.

yaaayoubetcha
August 17th, 2004, 06:03 AM
Yeah we don't wanna end up as sterotypical as the Stargate russians, how long d'ya reckon it'l be until they start talking about Nuclear Wessels.

ROFL

Alameda? I am looking for the nuclear wessels.....nuclear wessels?

the dancer of spaz
August 17th, 2004, 05:03 PM
Well, then to replace what O'neill brought into the mix, besides leadership, you have to have another warrior type so he, or she, and Teal'c can cover Daniel and Sam's butt while they go about doing their special things.

From what I've seen, Sam no longer does the scientific things she used to do when Jack was in charge. We haven't had much of a chance to see them do some actual recon things, because there's always been something going on. Plus, the team is more of a First-Line of Defense Team, so... It's kinda up in the air. Either way, I don't see Sam doing the same things she used to do. The things she did in Zero Hour (sorry, trying to be vague!) seem to be the appropriate extent of what she should do for the rest of her time on SG-1.

Also, as loathe as I am to agree with some people's sentiments, I have to say that I was a little concerned during Zero Hour. I have a heckuvalot of faith in Sam, but it just seemed a little... light, when it came to proving to everyone that she was ready to be out there as the CO of SG-1. And THEN, in Icon and Avatar, we were able to see her in Colonel Mode, which was very refreshing. I think Sam can pull it off, but I've thought that since The Lost City, so... Whateva! :)

Anyway, I think SG-1's new role at the SGC provides a little bit of leeway for SG-1, considering the fact that it's probably the only three-man team, Teal'c, Sam, and Daniel are undoubtedly Jack's favorites, it's the flagship team, and they're only used as a Major Defense Team.

If they were to add a fourth person, they'd have to put someone like Lieutenant Ford from Stargate Atlantis. He's a really good young guy, and he really is very likeable. :D

the dancer of spaz
August 17th, 2004, 05:03 PM
Well, then to replace what O'neill brought into the mix, besides leadership, you have to have another warrior type so he, or she, and Teal'c can cover Daniel and Sam's butt while they go about doing their special things.

From what I've seen, Sam no longer does the scientific things she used to do when Jack was in charge. We haven't had much of a chance to see them do some actual recon things, because there's always been something going on. Plus, the team is more of a First-Line of Defense Team, so... It's kinda up in the air. Either way, I don't see Sam doing the same things she used to do. The things she did in Zero Hour (sorry, trying to be vague!) seem to be the appropriate extent of what she should do for the rest of her time on SG-1.

Also, as loathe as I am to agree with some people's sentiments, I have to say that I was a little concerned during Zero Hour. I have a heckuvalot of faith in Sam, but it just seemed a little... light, when it came to proving to everyone that she was ready to be out there as the CO of SG-1. And THEN, in Icon and Avatar, we were able to see her in Colonel Mode, which was very refreshing. I think Sam can pull it off, but I've thought that since The Lost City, so... Whateva! :)

Anyway, I think SG-1's new role at the SGC provides a little bit of leeway for SG-1, considering the fact that it's probably the only three-man team, Teal'c, Sam, and Daniel are undoubtedly Jack's favorites, it's the flagship team, and they're only used as a Major Defense Team.

If they were to add a fourth person, they'd have to put someone like Lieutenant Ford from Stargate Atlantis. He's a really good young guy, and he really is very likeable. :D

Ancient 1
August 17th, 2004, 10:35 PM
I think the PTB will use Sam's Leadership and Geek potential as needed per episode. :p I still believe, for the reasons stated earlier, that any 4th member needs to be a skilled fighter type....perhaps a Ranger or even a Green Beret. ;)

Rambo! :D