Who should lead SG1?(Spoilers)

[the dancer of spaz]

I agree 100% with you. But the fact is, it seems they aren't. Case in point, in GUP we found out PJ's DO have shields, if you are willing to sacrifice the cloak.
SO was JM right, wrong or just not detailed enough?
He said PJ's don't have cloaks but he also said it was a wraith shield on the PJ.
Now GUP was written by MG. So are MG and JM just on the wrong page? Is it that Joe really doesn't know enough detail about Atlantis to comment?
These the inconsistancies between what we see on screen (indisputable cannon) and the backdoor stuff the writers tell us.
However, I agree. There should be an agreement known to ALL of what is what on major details.

Sounds right to me. JM either wasn't properly informed, or the explanation for how they were going to save Rodney came later on in the form of a shield. He IS entitled to mistakes, of course, but this small mistake is rather indicative of staff where the left hand doesn't always know what the right hand is doing.

Again, I agree. But Joe is just one cog in a wheel. It's not solely his call for any of it really. He was just the unlucky front man. And yes, reading his post, I also felt he was saying they were trying to keep everyone happy. WHich is pretty much impossible without some sort of mind control drug.

Yeah... if you look at the Camelot thread, I think there are a couple of test subjects floating around there. It seems to be working on them OK.

[Lightsabre]

Oh, I see. Cameron's ego is fragile. And he must be treated as such, because we don't want his feelings to get hurt. If Cameron's got an inferiority complex, then that's one of many reasons why he shouldn't be leading the team. If he has some crazy desire to prove himself to the rest of the team, then perhaps his subconscious and logic are rearing their ugly heads again, reminding him why he was so nervous and concerned from the beginning.

Hmm, let's look at this.
You claim he has a fragile ego and must be handled delicately. Further you suggest he has an inferority complex.
When did I ever say this?
I said that if the "big 3" as you like to call them, would cut him some slack, then he might not do the more outragous things to 'prove himself' and yes, he does and will have a desire to prove himself to the rest of the team. That's not logic, or subconcious or anything like that, it's simply human desire to be acknowledged as skillful and useful by your peers. When you peers are people like DAniel, Sam and Teal'c, people who HAVE done extrodianary things, the desire to prove yourself worthy of them and esp of leading them can be quite strong.
If they would calm him down a bit, talk to him like an equal and not call him things like "New Guy" or put him down to foreign diplomats, then maybe he wouldn't do the things that make you lot yell and scream about him.
Food for thought.

Either way, it would appear to me that during the first seven episodes, the rest of SG-1 gave Cameron quite a bit of respect. It was exactly when he started acting like a complete idiot in "Babylon" that they started to just let him do his own thing. They never showed him any disrespect before that episode.

Really? I didn't see that.
And how exactly was he an idiot in babylon?

Yeah, I'm sure they see him as doing that, too. But I'd bet each of them hopes that the other two are helping in the rescue mission as well. You know, just to be safe.

Umm, what?

[Lightsabre]

Sounds right to me. JM either wasn't properly informed, or the explanation for how they were going to save Rodney came later on in the form of a shield. He IS entitled to mistakes, of course, but this small mistake is rather indicative of staff where the left hand doesn't always know what the right hand is doing.

Which is exactly why I don't think writer comments count as cannon.

Yeah... if you look at the Camelot thread, I think there are a couple of test subjects floating around there. It seems to be working on them OK.

Hmm, scary.
I'll have to finish watching Camelot first tho, I'm only half way through.

[stargate barbie]

So he called himself SG Leader in Prototype because??

because he was leading that particular mission. carter has lead other missions. and they have had joint leadership on other missions. i'm going from the evidence i see on screen. i'm an insightful viewer, who doesn't need everthing spelled out for them through exposition.

that and saying i'm the "co-leader" sounds a bit superfluous.

and, was carter there when he said this?

i'm not going to debate the other points in this post, because we've been over them. i know your opinion on it, you know mine. its pointless.

(ps, slightly freaky, but at the time of this post, we have made the same number of posts. coincidence? or something more sinister? )

and for the part that you quoted about appreciating and respecting the post? you do know that it was in reference to dani347's post? the one that i was responding to? i'm just wondering why you quoted it is all. no offense meant.

anyway. i wasn't planning on responding to this at all, as i'm taking a break from this thread for a short while. so i'll just leave it at that for now.

[Lightsabre]

because he was leading that particular mission. carter has lead other missions. and they have had joint leadership on other missions. i'm going from the evidence i see on screen.

Ok, cause this is NOT what I thought you were saying earlier.
You said:

cameron asked them to reconsider their decision, and to come back to the sgc so that he could join the team that he requested to join. this went around for about 7 episodes or so, until he succeeded in his goal.

Which I thought meant that once he got them all together again he joined them and therefore wasn't leading.
I've got to say, I still don't see evidence of co-leading. It could just as easily be Cameron deffering to Carter's greater experience and asking her opinion where he needs it. I don't think there's ever been a situation where one of them has commanded the other OR told the other that THEY were in command for his mission.

i'm an insightful viewer, who doesn't need everthing spelled out for them through exposition.

Hmm, so am I. However, as I've said over and over, it's NOT clear and it needs to be MADE clear.

that and saying i'm the "co-leader" sounds a bit superfluous.

and, was carter there when he said this?

Yes, co-leader does. And yes, Sam was there.

i'm not going to debate the other points in this post, because we've been over them. i know your opinion on it, you know mine. its pointless.

(ps, slightly freaky, but at the time of this post, we have made the same number of posts. coincidence? or something more sinister? )

Let's go with coincidence.

and for the part that you quoted about appreciating and respecting the post? you do know that it was in reference to dani347's post? the one that i was responding to? i'm just wondering why you quoted it is all. no offense meant.

I have no idea, it was there and I left it there. I knew exactly who it was too. Don't worry, I didn't think you were complimenting ME

anyway. i wasn't planning on responding to this at all, as i'm taking a break from this thread for a short while. so i'll just leave it at that for now.

HAve fun!

[Dani347]

i'm an insightful viewer, who doesn't need everthing spelled out for them through exposition.

Okay, I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I'm an insightful viewer too, but I do need some things to be explained. I mean, I couldn't just assume that the guy with the gold tattoo is an alien just because I've never seen someone from Earth with a tattoo like that. I mean, I could guess it by using my insight, but I'm glad that they said that this guy was Teal'c, a Jaffa from Chulak.

And, to me, the co-leadership isn't clear, because the idea that there was a co-leadership never would have come into my head by what I had seen on screen if it hadn't been planted there off screen in the first place. So, it wouldn't be using exposition or spelling it out to state it on screen, it would be clarifying it. I accept that Mitchell is leader because of what Landry said (and I've already stated why I think Landry's words still hold). I would have accepted it if there was a scene maybe right after Sam came back, where Landry said he felt it was best that Sam and Mitchell share command. I mean, I could have assumed that Mitchell was told to lead SG1 without the scene with him and Landry, just by the mere fact that he was interviewing people, and trying to get the old members back. But, I'm glad they actually had Landry say that Mitchell was there to lead SG1.

[DEM]

And, to me, the co-leadership isn't clear, because the idea that there was a co-leadership never would have come into my head by what I had seen on screen if it hadn't been planted there off screen in the first place.

Heh, months ago on another forum someone asked for people's opinions on the leadership situation. I gave mine (which was something like co-leadership -- don't remember exactly what I said), cited a scene or two, and then was promptly informed by some wise empath that the only people who could 'see' co-leadership were the ones who'd read Joe's blog. That displeased me.

So, yeah, different perceptions: I look at eps like Prototype & Scourge (I'm not in the mood to dredge thru the eps, those examples will have to suffice), and find it hard to understand how anyone could think Carter is under Mitchell's command. "SG-1 leader" aside, no matter how I contort myself and squint my eyes, I simply cannot see it. Therefore, I reason, if Carter is not under Mitchell's command yet she's a member of SG-1, logic dictates that either co-command applies or she's in some sort of permanently-attached independent consultant position -- which would be even weirder... but, at this point, probably preferable IMO.

Then again, eps like Crusade and Camelot make me think this is all becoming rather moot, because I'm hardly seeing a military team when it comes to these four. Ugh, now I'm irking myself, so time to go.

[scarimor]

Heh, months ago on another forum someone asked for people's opinions on the leadership situation. I gave mine (which was something like co-leadership -- don't remember exactly what I said), cited a scene or two, and then was promptly informed by some wise empath that the only people who could 'see' co-leadership were the ones who'd read Joe's blog. That displeased me.

Indeed. I assumed Carter and Mitchell were sharing command as soon as I saw Ex Deus Machina - I simply took my cue from what happened on screen and from the dialogue, and the fact that they are the same rank... and everything that's happened since reinforced it. When someone asked the specific question of the writers and they came back with the same answer, I didn't bat an eyelid, obviously.

Interesting - later when I realised people were aguing over it, I asked a friend of mine who watches SG-1 regularly but isn't part of the on-line fan community who she thought was in command of SG-1. She said Carter. As an ordinary viewer, she'd simply seen Carter come back to her team to resume her position, with the obviously much less experienced Mitchell following her. Anything else didn't make sense to her.

Moreover, Landry's conversation with Mitchell when he first arrived at the SGC clinches this for her: Landry told Mitchell he was here "to lead SG-1" only because Carter wasn't there - hence Mitchell's dismay at being told he was to lead. For her, Carter being on SG-1 and Mitchell having any kind of leadership position on it are mutually exclusive.

So it's true that regular viewers who haven't read the writers' clarification don't necessarily see a co-command in operation - some of them think Carter's in sole charge, and I can understand why.

[Formerhost]

You really should ask this "Who should lead and who really leads SG-1?" question to Amanda at the Vancouver Con this month...

[GateGipsy]

We're never going to have a forum policy or ruling on what is canon. On the website there is most likely one, for writing the omnipedia and certain other sections.

It is generally accepted that only what is seen on the show is canon. Everything else is subject to change. Joe Mallozzi could state that Sam always wears purple pj's, but then it could in a later episode suit them to have Sam hate purple pj's and swear that she'd never wear them, and that is exactly what they'd do.

Also the script is subject to a lot of change. RDA is infamous for changing his own lines off the cuff. Or even having them change the script. An example is Bane. The ending should have been Jack and Tealc standing next to each other, but when he saw the script and that Tealc still had a water pistol he knew what would happen so used his pull to get it changed so that Daniel was standing there and he was the one who got the soaking

And then there's the director, he or she has a lot of say in what happens and how the script is interpreted, and that could be different to the writer as well.

So at the end of the day the only thing we can rely on is the finished product, the episodes themselves.

[scarimor]

So at the end of the day the only thing we can rely on is the finished product, the episodes themselves.

And what is shown in one episode may contradict what is shown in another - e.g. what medal ribbons the characters are wearing on their dress blues (wardrobe exerting their powah! )

The canon question crops up in a much wider discourse of artistic theory anyway - one can get very bogged down in theories of authorship and interpretation. As far as I can see, it's a bit of a non-starter re. the rather wobbly issue over who's da leadah in season 9 - it's just not in the league.

Shows like the Star Trek franchise and Stargate generally have a bible so that writers know (or are meant to know) what page they're all on - especially useful for incoming writers as a reference to make sure they don't drop a clanger. I'm not sure that Stargate has a decent bible though - even on screen they contradict their own "canon" rather a lot.

[GateGipsy]

And what is shown in one episode may contradict what is shown in another - e.g. what medal ribbons the characters are wearing on their dress blues (wardrobe exerting their powah! )

LOL yes it sure does make being a fan hard!

[ShardsofGlass]

Here's some more anecdotal evidence, for what that's worth. I asked two coworkers "Who's the leader of SG-1?" The one coworker said, without any hesitation, "Mitchell, of course." And she gave me a look like I was crazy for asking. And I should add that she is brand new to the show this year. My other coworker is a die-hard fan who's been watching it since S1. She has all the DVDs and was a huge Jack fan. When I asked her who the leader was, she had to think about it for a long time. Then she said, "Well, it has to be Mitchell, right? Because Sam was at Area 51 when the season started, and he put the team back together."

So there ya go. And for me, I always thought Mitchell was the leader because that's what had been said on the show. Landry said he was there to lead, and Mitchell identified himself as the leader at least twice in different episodes, and one of those times was after Sam was back.

[DEM]

Yup, there we go: Perceptions differ.

And I still say Carter should lead SG-1.

[scarimor]

Yup, there we go: Perceptions differ.

Yup, and it blows the "canon is what's on screen therefore objective" notion out the water, because people are seeing different things on screen - so canon is fluid.

And I still say Carter should lead SG-1.

Absofrakkinlutely ... and so does the poll