Stargate College Class! Help!!!

[chyron]

Okay, this may seem weird, but follow me for a second before you start scratching your heads in bewilderment. At my college, UC Berkeley, there's an option for students to *teach* their own elective classes, about whatever frivolous topic they want. They're called Decal classes. The topics range from pop culture to politics to medicine to whatever. Some classes focus on TV shows. This is treated as a legitimate class, that gets college credit (pass/no-pass). The student simply chooses the topic, and heavily prepares for the class the semester before (and goes through a whole bunch of hoops before being allowed to start their own decal class). For obvious reasons, they're extremely popular among students and is truly a one-of-a-kind opportunity that doesn't exist in many other colleges. I, myself, have attended two decal classes over the last year: 1.) Simpsons and Philosophy. 2.) Batman: The American Mythology. Both have been entertaining and, quite simply, a great experience.

The reason I'm bringing this up is because I'm starting my own decal class next semester, and am in the middle of preparation right now. My class will focus on 'Feminism in Science Fiction,' which will range from TV shows, movies, to books. I'll talk about how feminism in sci-fi is unique and different from most conventional feminist definitions. I'll talk about the pros and cons of most stereotypical females in science-fiction, and how that relates to images of women in real life.

Basically, I'll talk about a variety of deep-seeded feminist issues, but I'll relate it to popular female science-fiction characters.

For instance, one day, I'll cover Ripley from Aliens, then Dana Scully from the X Files, then Hermione Granger in HP. I'll take about the characters and how their image relates to the underlying themes and motifs that permeates through science fiction. Why are these women popular? Do real life women, like me, relate to them? Are they merely fantasies with no tangible connection to real life? Etc . . .

I also want to devote at least a day or two to the Stargate universe, and the women in it.

My question is, how do I go about discussing the females of Stargate? My personal fav is Weir, but I don't want to be biased towards her, 'cause Sam and Teyla deserve major props, too. Also, should I bring up Vala? Fraiser? What examples should I use? How should I describe these women? Are each of them good examples of typical science fiction women, and do they portray women in good light? I wanted to get some input from you guys on this, so any feedback or recommendations would be highly appreciated.

You may want to DEFINE Science-Fiction as there appear to be a wide-variety of options about what is and what is not Science Fiction. First, HP isn't Sci-Fi as it is clearly Fantasy. If you're not familar with the wikipedia you'll find it quite usefull in research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_science_fiction

While you may need not actually introduce the information in the articles above, they will definetly help to round you out & polish you as an instructor.

Now, if you haven't already heard, you may want to also include the following characters & shows

Babylon Five - Deleen & Susan Ivanova
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon_5

Andromeda - Rommie & Beka Valentine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_%28TV_series%29

Earth: Final Conflict - Lili Marquette, Renee Palmer* (Significant Role!), Juliet Street
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth:_Final_Conflict

(and of course don't forget the babe of all babes Babe #1 and Babe#2 and the Supreme Babes of the Universe and their treacherous fallen sister who betrayed them for LOVE. The latter appearing in what is generally considered to be Sci-Fi equivalent of The Lord of the Rings. (Please not that it is only the original 5 books that are considered on par with TLOR, not their recently release prequels by the author's son.) Sorry about the Babe reference, however I'm writting my own screenplay and have gotten attached to the name HERO BABE as a place keeper for the heroine/lead female role.

Of course, you'll also want to investigate Majel Barrett as she was provided a *great* deal to the genre as the wife of the deceased Gene Rodenbury(sp). I would also sugggest that you *FIRMLY* define feminism/women in that there have been series & characters that could be considered feminine without being human per se.

[Whistler84]

You may want to DEFINE Science-Fiction as there appear to be a wide-variety of options about what is and what is not Science Fiction. First, HP isn't Sci-Fi as it is clearly Fantasy. If you're not familar with the wikipedia you'll find it quite usefull in research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_science_fiction

While you may need not actually introduce the information in the articles above, they will definetly help to round you out & polish you as an instructor.

Now, if you haven't already heard, you may want to also include the following characters & shows

Babylon Five - Deleen & Susan Ivanova
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon_5

Andromeda - Rommie & Beka Valentine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andromeda_%28TV_series%29

Earth: Final Conflict - Lili Marquette, Renee Palmer* (Significant Role!), Juliet Street
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth:_Final_Conflict

(and of course don't forget the babe of all babes Babe #1 and Babe#2 and the Supreme Babes of the Universe and their treacherous fallen sister who betrayed them for LOVE. The latter appearing in what is generally considered to be Sci-Fi equivalent of The Lord of the Rings. (Please not that it is only the original 5 books that are considered on par with TLOR, not their recently release prequels by the author's son.) Sorry about the Babe reference, however I'm writting my own screenplay and have gotten attached to the name HERO BABE as a place keeper for the heroine/lead female role.

Of course, you'll also want to investigate Majel Barrett as she was provided a *great* deal to the genre as the wife of the deceased Gene Rodenbury(sp). I would also sugggest that you *FIRMLY* define feminism/women in that there have been series & characters that could be considered feminine without being human per se.

OMG! Uh, thank you. You really did a lot of research for this, didn't you?

[wikeja]

I think Ivanova from Babylon 5 would be an excellent choice for how to write a female part. First of all, B5 was set in the future so you should expect less sexism in the workplace and I think this was done well.

[chyron]

OMG! Uh, thank you. You really did a lot of research for this, didn't you?

No I didn't, I've just watched all the series over the past 10 years or so. Which BTW they should all be out on DVD. Hmmm...maybe I need to run to Best Buy. Of course its a shame that my screenplay hasn't been finished since you would probably include Hero Babe in the class as an example of Classical Feminism. Her adopted father chose to train her secretly in the Fighting Forms of the Warriors in her society and contray to tradition. He trains her though not for the purpose of killing but for the stricktly purpose of defense and spying. Although she dies in a blaze of glory at the side of her suitor*, the idea is that she is the inspiration for the formation of the Amazons (although that's no revealed in the film).

*The relationship is a secret one to pretty much everyone. They have not been married nor have they been sexual. It is very pure, proper and Adult. Their death in battle being a marriage of sorts uniting them as they would have been in marriage and/or in a sexual relationship.

[wikeja]

35 year old American Male here.(for demographics purposes)
I think that's essential to note considering the topic.
I have some views and ideas that are, perhaps, not in keeping with some of the posters here but are, nevertheless, important for a well rounded complete discussion.
First, I must ask
Do you intend to pose of the class the question..."Do you require female characters in scifi to be based on reality or the reality you desire for women?"

Feminism, being somewhat an ideology, has its pros and cons.
The feminist movement has been the single most important vehicle in furthering the rights of women and I am wholeheartedly supportive of it.

Having said that, I believe being a feminist may scew a persons real expectations just as being a Christian may make one expect people to act on a certain moral code or being a Democrat or Republican may make one expect others to interpret political conundrums to left or right.

I know those reading are not here to read a book so I will try to give a short example then welcome any discussion:

In my life's experience, only an infinitely small percentage of women have tried to hide their external beauty. Almost all, in all circumstances,(workplace, funerals, grocery store, bookstore, vacation, etc.), dressed attractively. This is a small statement with broad implications. Beauty is subjective after all. The statement makes the assumption that my multitude of life experiences are largely universal (atleast in the Western world).

Having said this, let's assume my assumption is true that women as well as men like to accent their redeeming physical attributes.
If I am a scifi fan who likes my characters to be realistic, wouldn't I want or even expect Teyla(SGA) to dress alluringly or Wier(SGA) to wear makeup.

What can be wrong with physical portrayal if the internal beauty or ugliness of the character is allowed to manifest?

Thank you for this opportunity. Looking forward to the discussion.
Please keep in mind, your truth may not be the same as mine.

[Purpleyin]

Are you going to cover Farscape and Firefly too? I haven't seen Firefly yet, but only hear good stuff about it and it's characters, including all the interesting female roles. Farscape's vital too, not just for Aeryn as chyron pointed out, but Zhaan, Chiana, Jool, Sikozu, even Grayza and Xhalax (Sun - Aeryn's mother).

Chiana (and Grayza to some extent) is in a similar category to Vala (as is I've heard one of the Firefly characters), i.e. not above using her sexuality to her advantage and not being ashamed of it, but the writers have pulled both those characters off alot more sucessfully than Vala, which is interesting. What exactly do they have in terms of characterisation that makes them tolerable to lovable? Did Vala just have too many one liners (and not enough hints of depth) or did she lack something else that means people don't identify with her? I never had a problem with Farscapes writing of women, there was variety and believability, though I'm sure they had some leeway since they're all alien female roles we're talking about. Anyway, I found a newbie guide to Farscape and if you scroll down and look at the Letterman list and #5

Another strong female role I'd recommend, is Olga Vukavith in Seven Days. A lesser known sci-fi show but I always found her interesting, though I only saw 1/2 a season sadly.

Also did a bit of looking round for articles and the like on the topic and found a review for a very interesting book called Women of Wonder. Found many other interesting links: Women changing scifi?, Scifi Research index with many feminist scifi resources, Elle Scifi for women community (thought you might be able to get some good discussion going there too ), the old scifi bboard Scifi and Gender section, women in sci-fi wiki, influence of women on scifi, Star Trek women listing, research bibliography with some scifi feminism books on it, some interesting thoughts with recommendations for non-mainstream scifi with different gender roles etc, guide to women in scifi, another great sounding book on the topic, another article, about BraScape movement, redefining womens power through scifi, feminist scifi site, another article, article on Leia, Feminism and the women of Farscape, Lesbian/feminist scifi, another article on writing women in scifi, by a female author, list of scifi books on gender issues, gender analyis of 2000 tv lineup - progress or problematic?, feminist critic talking on women in fantasy, women without men article on gender politic in leterary forms, military command in women's scifi and feminism in sci-fi part 1

And oooh black women in scifi, with Rachel Luttrel as Teyla up there and apparently this one is written by someone who went to high school with her!

And only slightly related but interesting, Lara Croft: Feminist icon or cyberbimbo.

It only took me an hour to dig around and find all those, and there's so much interesting stuff I wish I had more time to read up on it - if only I could do my dissertation on this!

EDIT: The Lara article is actually fairly relevant, I'm reading it and it mentions the rise of female 'bimodal' roles like Buffy in the 90's - characters that appeal equally to male and female audiences, as well as the concept of 'stunting bodies' like Trinity from the Matrix (and possibly Teyla?) that undermine the reality of the female body through their performance of extraordinary feats (or abilities?). I'm not sure I agree on the last concept but the article makes for interesting reading with many viewpoints represented.

[chyron]

Oh and DUH! I forgot the Cinnamon Bun Babes - Leia & Padme. For their role in Sci-Fi you'll probably want to read up on Campbell. He's also a reference that you'll want to check for Trinity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell

[Whistler84]

First off, thank you for the suggestions!!! You guys rock, because I'm still in the priliminary stages of planning the class, and your recommendations are valuable. I just have to run it by my partner-in-crime (a.k.a. my co-instructor) and we'll narrow down the list. We only have 16 weeks of class, and that's only one and half hours per week. We gotta be smart in allocating our time. I'm actually trying to get my co-instructor to come here and sign up at this forum, but she's not a fan of Stargate! I know, I know!!! Poor misguided soul. But don't worry, I'm wearing her down. Slowly and methodically. She'll be a fan, yet.

Now, onto discussion.

35 year old American Male here.(for demographics purposes)
I think that's essential to note considering the topic.
I have some views and ideas that are, perhaps, not in keeping with some of the posters here but are, nevertheless, important for a well rounded complete discussion.
First, I must ask
Do you intend to pose of the class the question..."Do you require female characters in scifi to be based on reality or the reality you desire for women?"

Feminism, being somewhat an ideology, has its pros and cons.
The feminist movement has been the single most important vehicle in furthering the rights of women and I am wholeheartedly supportive of it.

Having said that, I believe being a feminist may scew a persons real expectations just as being a Christian may make one expect people to act on a certain moral code or being a Democrat or Republican may make one expect others to interpret political conundrums to left or right.
I know those reading are not here to read a book so I will try to give a short example then welcome any discussion:

In my life's experience, only an infinitely small percentage of women have tried to hide their external beauty. Almost all, in all circumstances,(workplace, funerals, grocery store, bookstore, vacation, etc.), dressed attractively. This is a small statement with broad implications. Beauty is subjective after all. The statement makes the assumption that my multitude of life experiences are largely universal (atleast in the Western world).

Having said this, let's assume my assumption is true that women as well as men like to accent their redeeming physical attributes.
If I am a scifi fan who likes my characters to be realistic, wouldn't I want or even expect Teyla(SGA) to dress alluringly or Wier(SGA) to wear makeup.

What can be wrong with physical portrayal if the internal beauty or ugliness of the character is allowed to manifest?
Thank you for this opportunity. Looking forward to the discussion.
Please keep in mind, your truth may not be the same as mine.

Wikeja, thanks for your input. You're right. There are a lot of definitions to feminism, and in essence, it is an ideal. To apply those strict standards to real life may be unrealistic. But, then I suppose my rebuttal is, sci-fi isn't exactly based in reality.

I don't think women should hide their beauty whatsoever. That is not, I don’t think, anyone’s concern or gripe here. We’re not saying to hide their beauty, the point I believe most are trying to make is that we don’t want women to be subjugated for their beauty. It’s *how* the beauty is portrayed. The distinction is actually a fine line, and many miss it entirely. Having beauty is great, but it should not be the be all or end all for a character. The beauty should not define the character. And how it is presented should not distract from the character itself, either.

For example, take Teyla. Here’s a women that embodies strength, bravery, and integrity. She is largely a spiritual women, who has the responsibility of leadership for her people. I think she’s actually a vastly multi-faceted character that we’ve only thus begun to understand. However, in season one, many people could not get past the veneer of the ‘sexy alien babe’ because of her clothing. The discussions of her, in general, did not include the Athosians. They did not talk about her calm, collected manner. They did not discuss her strengths. She was written off as the stereotypical space alien babe. Why? Because the PTB dressed her up like one, and that’s how people saw her. That’s what they focused upon. The beauty.

*Both* pro-Teyla fans and anti-Teyla fans focused on that. You want an example of this? I’ll try to find a thread I saw a while back at some other forum, in which practically every posts discussing Teyla says she’s hot. Some use it as a reason to justify their liking of Teyla. Others disparagingly say, “yeah, she’s hot. But otherwise, she’s nothing else.” It’s practically in ninty-nine percent of all posts in that thread! How her beauty is portrayed became the focus! Her beauty overtook practically all other discussion of her character. That’s my problem. (I’ll try to find this link, and post it up soon.)

When you dress up a person in a certain way, people are going to judge them by it. That’s realistic. There’s nothing feminist about this outlook. It’s the way of life. I ask, why couldn’t the ptb have dressed Teyla in regular clothing? Would that have taken away from her beauty somehow? No. Rachel Luttrell, the actress, wears jeans and regular T-shirts. Is she any less beautiful? No. You don’t need to put that women in absurdly small clothing to emphasize that. But she was, to the detriment of her character. It distracted from the essence of her character, which was a women about grace and poise.

People just saw her as a space alien babe, and refused to see much underneath that.

God, I really hope that answered your question. I'm in major need of caffine right now, and this post may have not made entire sense. If it didn't, can somebody else take a crack at Wikeja's post? He deserves a coherent answer.

[Osiris-RA]

And Fraiser? What’s so great about her? (Note: I am a fan of her, but work with me here). Do you think she’s a prime example of sci-fi women? Do you think she’s not special enough to be awarded a position next to names like Xena and Scully? Etc . . .

Well, Fraiser probably isn't a prime example, but from what I gleaned of the character, she was sort of the home element of the show. She's also the healer element, the mother element and the morality element that is usually present in a sci fi show. Basically, she kind of brings the whole place together - which is why I was so pissed when they killed her off. Yeah...still dwelling on that one...

I sometimes wonder if the view on these things aren´t way too biased by American morals regarding sex and nudity in general. Now don´t take this the wrong way but Americans can be incredible prudes at times (the whole Janet Jackson thing is enough prove of that).

You know, that's kind of a funny thing about American culture. I thought that whole Janet think was incredibly hypocritical when we have Playboy, Vogue, porn channel galore, women are practicaly falling out of thier dresses on TV and in real life - often smack in front of kids, and the networks that publicize these same women shake their finger at Janet for having a costume accident. As if hers is the first boob they've seen!

But back on topic, also another slightly interesting female character that might be worth bringing up is Max from Dark Angel. A short lived show, but I think the character had some pretty good depth and potential to be looked on as something of an...empowering influence? That the right word? Women and young girls in this day and age need to have role models to be able to emulate and look up to - especially the younger girls, the blank slate minds - they need good role models who will be able to shape thier image of what they should or could be as they mature in a good, wholesome way. So in discussing sci fi women, you could aim for those characters that women might be able to look at or young girls are able to look at and say, they want to be like them or they want their girls to grow up something like them. The world's in need of good role models. Yep yep.

My two cents.

[chyron]

I'm actually trying to get my co-instructor to come here and sign up at this forum, but she's not a fan of Stargate! I know, I know!!! Poor misguided soul. But don't worry, I'm wearing her down. Slowly and methodically. She'll be a fan, yet.

"She will turn to the Dark Side of the Force or die."

Opps, this is Stargate not Star Wars...backup, erase that...

"She will kneel before her god"

David H

[wikeja]

... then I suppose my rebuttal is, sci-fi isn't exactly based in reality.

My definition of great scifi is putting realistic people in unrealistic circumstances and allowing them to overcome various obstacles through the use of human ingenuity and spirit.

...*how* the beauty is portrayed. ...it should not be the be all or end all for a character. The beauty should not define the character. And how it is presented should not distract from the character itself, either.

For example, take Teyla. Here’s a women that embodies strength, bravery, and integrity. She is largely a spiritual women, who has the responsibility of leadership for her people. I think she’s actually a vastly multi-faceted character that we’ve only thus begun to understand. However, in season one, many people could not get past the veneer of the ‘sexy alien babe’ because of her clothing. The discussions of her, in general, did not include the Athosians. They did not talk about her calm, collected manner. They did not discuss her strengths. She was written off as the stereotypical space alien babe. Why? Because the PTB dressed her up like one, and that’s how people saw her. That’s what they focused upon. The beauty.

*Both* pro-Teyla fans and anti-Teyla fans focused on that. You want an example of this? I’ll try to find a thread I saw a while back at some other forum, in which practically every posts discussing Teyla says she’s hot. Some use it as a reason to justify their liking of Teyla. Others disparagingly say, “yeah, she’s hot. But otherwise, she’s nothing else.” It’s practically in ninty-nine percent of all posts in that thread! How her beauty is portrayed became the focus! Her beauty overtook practically all other discussion of her character. That’s my problem. (I’ll try to find this link, and post it up soon.)

When you dress up a person in a certain way, people are going to judge them by it. That’s realistic. There’s nothing feminist about this outlook. It’s the way of life. I ask, why couldn’t the ptb have dressed Teyla in regular clothing? Would that have taken away from her beauty somehow? No. Rachel Luttrell, the actress, wears jeans and regular T-shirts. Is she any less beautiful? No. You don’t need to put that women in absurdly small clothing to emphasize that. But she was, to the detriment of her character. It distracted from the essence of her character, which was a women about grace and poise.

People just saw her as a space alien babe, and refused to see much underneath that.

I feel I must make a statement here. It may be hard to believe but the following is absolutely true. When I was first introduced to Teyla, I immediately noticed she was attractive. Before the episode was over, I saw a strong, trustworthy, loyal, already deep character. What this says to me is those few who frequented the threads you referenced were probably more shallow and less introspective than the average, intelligent (male or female) viewer. I find it difficult to comprehend how anyone could view Teyla as anything other than the redeeming character she has always been. I cannot comment on TPTB's choice of her attire because I do not watch her to see if she is showing more flesh this ep than last but to see what I learn about her as a person. Perhaps I do not fit the normal stereotype of a red-blooded male but I can assure you I lust as much as the next. Perhaps if TPTB had created a shallow character I would feel differently. However, from my view, it is better that she is dressed as I would expect an exceptionally attractive woman to dress. It breaks the stereotype that a woman must dress conservatively to be taken seriously. I certainly take her seriously. I feel I must applaud TPTB in all respects on the developement of her character.

Again I welcome all discussion, agreement or not, because it is important to properly explore all sides of the issue.

[chyron]

My definition of great scifi is putting realistic people in unrealistic circumstances and allowing them to overcome various obstacles through the use of human ingenuity and spirit.

If that's YOUR definition of scifi, that's your decision to make. However, your definition would make The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter Science Fiction. Where prey tell is the Science in either work? Regardless if its hard science fiction or soft science fiction, science and advance technology is always a key component. That component may be prominent or downplayed, but it is still there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_science_fiction

and keep in mind
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction

[majortrip]

I feel I must make a statement here. It may be hard to believe but the following is absolutely true. When I was first introduced to Teyla, I immediately noticed she was attractive. Before the episode was over, I saw a strong, trustworthy, loyal, already deep character. What this says to me is those few who frequented the threads you referenced were probably more shallow and less introspective than the average, intelligent (male or female) viewer. I find it difficult to comprehend how anyone could view Teyla as anything other than the redeeming character she has always been. I cannot comment on TPTB's choice of her attire because I do not watch her to see if she is showing more flesh this ep than last but to see what I learn about her as a person. Perhaps I do not fit the normal stereotype of a red-blooded male but I can assure you I lust as much as the next. Perhaps if TPTB had created a shallow character I would feel differently. However, from my view, it is better that she is dressed as I would expect an exceptionally attractive woman to dress. It breaks the stereotype that a woman must dress conservatively to be taken seriously. I certainly take her seriously. I feel I must applaud TPTB in all respects on the developement of her character.

Darn, I just posted something in another thread that probably should have been posted here OK, here goes...
I am a woman and I do not think Teyla is dressed seductively. I have theorized that some of her costuming may be culturally based (Athosian culture, that is) but most of the time we see her in BDUs. Rachel Luttrell is a beautiful woman playing a strong, spiritual character. THAT's my focus. I take her seriously. I don't think she was terribly underdeveloped in S1- we actually know a lot about her. I agree that anyone who does not take Teyla seriously, sees her as useless, or who bashes the character for any other reason are generally shallow themselves. Beauty is completely subjective. Anyone watching a character in whatever media who cannot get past looks definitely needs some character development himself (or herself). Oh, and I expect to see characters from planets other than Earth dress differently. It helps me recognize they are not Earthlings.

[Carterslave]

Agreed. A lot of fans have remarked that the ptb don't know how to write female characters because they're all men, and don't quite have a grasp of the elusive female mind.

Carl Binder on SG:A writes well for women, IMO, particularly Before I Sleep. Martin Gero doesn't do too badly, either, although he's backslid a bit in the last couple of episodes. Brad Wright has had his moments, too, particularly in 2010.
To his considerable credit, Jonathan Glassner used a wide variety of writers, including several women, of whom Heather Ash displayed particular distinction. With the rise of the Robert C. Cooper regime, it's become more & more of a boys' club at Bridge Studios. Perhaps one reason why SG:A seems livelier at the moment is that the writing staff hasn't calcified into SG-1's old boys network. For my money, the best S9 episode was also the one written by someone (Alan McCullough) new to the franchise: Prototype. There's a lesson there, methinks.

[Uber]

Seeing as it was never developed upon, the scene is up to how each viewer interpreted it. It just seemed to me personally that Sam so strongly wanted to be with Jack (note the passionate kissing scene), and knew that they could only be together if one of them left the military, so the idea of her giving everything up for him became something of a legitimate route for her to consider. Obviously there was no intention on the part of TPTB to have Sam quit her position, but it did show what she would be willing to do in order to be able to be with Jack.

Grace is one of those eps either people get or they don't. I happened originally to fall into that second category.

Grace was about Samantha Carter the person. We've seen Samantha Carter the scientist, the soldier, the hero, the friend, the daughter...Grace rolls all of that up and gets past all the things that usually defines her (typically the way she pulls a solution out of her...uh...head) and just leaves her.

She's typically a force of nature who blazes through the stargate on a near daily basis and lives off of the adrenaline fueled rush she gets from her work...but here, she's just herself. And the hallucinations begin...each a different aspect of her personality...each either helping or hindering her from figuring things out.

So there she is, all by herself, marooned on a space ship with a serious head injury. She has to save herself but everything she tries, fails...leaving her time to think; about how to escape, sure, but also about her life, her goals, her objectives.

And for the first time in who knows how long, Samantha stops and really considers what she wants for herself beyond the naquadah reactors and P90's. Her "father" helps her see that she's missing out on a deep, rich committed relationship because she feared that any serious relationship would end in heartache. "Jack" helped her consider the possibility that maybe her feelings for him were based on the fact that he was out of reach.

So Grace was a Samantha Carter introspective...where she was FORCED to confront the areas of her life she'd been ignoring. It showed her as Sam the human being...not Sam the soldier or Sam the scientist...but just a woman who was taking a moment to consider her priorities in life and try to figure out if she was truly getting everything out of life she wanted and needed.

Samantha Carter is brilliant, brave, strong, etc...yet still fallible and entirely human. The same woman who can blow up a sun and take out a slew of enemy soldiers advancing on her position while hardly breaking a sweat gets nervous and jittery and clumsy with anything having to do with her personal feelings...which I personally enjoy because I know what it's like to have feelings for a guy who's out of your reach at the time. But did she ever put her feelings over duty here? Nope. Responsibility and duty and honor came first for her. Did she and Jack respond correctly with regard to their feelings all the time? Heavens no. But that adds depth and reality to her character. Great with professional stuff...terrible with personal stuff.

This is what makes her such a compelling character for me to watch and a genuine role model in this genre or in tv as a whole...as she's someone who is gifted, for sure...but who makes mistakes; but then doesn't let her mistakes keep her down.

She perseveres...and for me, that inspires.