Jack O'Neill/ Sam Carter - Part of a team, not a ship

[Beta Candy]

It's also not something I can respect when at least before Jack became General, it was so easy to go around. Transfer Sam so she wasn't under Jack's direct command. I know that wouldn't have worked for the show's purpose, but don't try to sell it as two star crossed lovers who we're supposed to admire. Since they were going to have Sam stay on SG1, then write her as honoring the rules of the job she chose to keep. In spirit as well as letter.

Exactly! What kept Romeo and Juliet apart was a family feud that neither had any part of creating. What keeps Sam and Jack apart is their choice to be on SG-1. Adulthood is all about making tough choices and living with them.

Do any of the fans see them as Romeo and Juliet, or is that just what the writers push? I thought most of the shippers I'd heard from wanted them to get together after they'd gotten out of the each other's chain of command, in some way that didn't dishonor them as officers.

[yasureubetcha]

I thought most of the shippers I'd heard from wanted them to get together after they'd gotten out of the each other's chain of command, in some way that didn't dishonor them as officers.

Same goes for most of the 'shippers I know, at least in RL.

(Threads)

Spoiler:

However, nobody had retired yet in Threads, and still the cuddling proceeded unrestrained.

That's what I personally have a problem with, not the speculation of 'shippers. My own 'ships are almost entirely speculation-based; what bothers me is when it's portrayed onscreen.

[Madeleine]

I came away from both of those scenes not feeling that Sam had taken responsibility for her actions, but feeling as though I had been instructed not to hold her responsible. The writers certainly don’t.

...

I don’t like what the writers are inadvertently saying about Jack, either, but, more than that, I don’t like how this convenient chain-of-command thing is used to absolve Carter of responsibility for her actions. It’s like Daniel and his ‘Get Out Of Death Free Card.’ Carter has this ‘Get Out Of Suffering The Consequences Free Card,’ courtesy of her commanding officer (who must take ultimate responsibility for her screw-ups and, golly, it’s not her fault, or the writers’, that that’s how it is).

... I don’t buy that Jack’s so besotted he can’t evaluate Sam fairly any more than I buy that she’s a scheming vixen. ... write them believably again and I'll come back to believing in them.

So you see The Story as saying that Jack is "pshaw"ing all of Carter's errors because of Ship? I can see that, although for me that's an option 3 explanation; it might be what the writers were trying to convey but it's not coming across to me. More compelling (option 2) is that the writers don't think there were any mistakes to gloss over in the first place, but wasn't Carter noble to try and take responsibility for her non-mistakes anyway.

But my overriding impression when I see stuff like Jack telling Carter that allowing a replicator free access to her brain, the Alphasite computers and (effectively) the SGC "wasn't your fault" is not shippy; instead it seems as if they careered headlong back towards that nice mentor/learner-protector/trustingfollower-with-undertones-of-uncle/niece relationship that they had in s1 and s2, but forgot to stop and ended up some way the other side of that with him actually treating her like a favoured niece. Wouldn't it be *better* for Ship if he bawled her out once or twice? Okay so he never can treat her as an equal but if he were to treat her as if she were a grown up Lt Colonel in life-or-death situations and planet-at-risk situations rather than a delicate and simple child whose actions have as much impact as blue paint spilled on a white carpet, then the whole ship angle that the writers relentlessly push would be slightly less ickky. Let him treat her as a nearly-equal at least.

[Tucker Case]

So you see The Story as saying that Jack is "pshaw"ing all of Carter's errors because of Ship?

No, all I "see" is the writers waving from the wings and telling me not to hold Carter responsible for those errors. I don't get much of anything from the story at all. Instead, I get thrown completely out of it.

More compelling (option 2) is that the writers don't think there were any mistakes to gloss over in the first place, but wasn't Carter noble to try and take responsibility for her non-mistakes anyway.

Yep. It's a variation on the "perfection" theme from 'Avenger,' where Carter saying she isn't perfect is just an example of how modest she is which only makes her more perfect.

(It) seems as if they careered headlong back towards that nice mentor/learner-protector/trustingfollower-with-undertones-of-uncle/niece relationship that they had in s1 and s2, but forgot to stop and ended up some way the other side of that with him actually treating her like a favoured niece.

It's like the scene in 'A Christmas Story,' where Ralphie's so overwrought and beside himself after kicking the stuffing out of the neighbourhood bully, swearing like a sailor and being caught in the act by his mother and, instead of handing him a bar of soap to suck on, she helps him clean up, sends him to bed with a cold compress and then covers for him with his father. The poor kid had snapped, the terror he'd felt just waiting for his father to come home was probably punishment enough and he's her little boy, after all (but she still didn't want him to have a BB-gun, and he did practically shoot his eye out when he got one). It's a Mom thing.

Or when your cat knocks over your Tiffany lamp and, really, there's no point in getting upset with anyone but yourself, because cats will be cats and you were an idiot for keeping a Tiffany lamp where the cat could reach it.

But there's a reason they don't allow cats or people with ten-year-old temperaments on elite military teams.

Okay so he never can treat her as an equal but if he were to treat her as if she were a grown up Lt Colonel in life-or-death situations and planet-at-risk situations rather than a delicate and simple child whose actions have as much impact as blue paint spilled on a white carpet, then the whole ship angle that the writers relentlessly push would be slightly less ickky.

It would at least imply that he expected better from her, that he has a high enough opinion of her to think she's capable of much, much more, and doesn't just think of her as a cat on a Tiffany planet and himself as the one - the only one - who should have known better.

Daniel and Teal'c, of course, come across as the kids who try to cover for the cat - "We were chasing it! Kitty tried to avoid the lamp, in fact I think we might have knocked it down, and you should have seen Kitty trying to hold it up with her tail!" - for fear Mommy or Daddy will take it to the pound because it was bad.

Really does wonders for Carter's image, don't you think?

TC

[Mr Prophet]

Okay so he never can treat her as an equal but if he were to treat her as if she were a grown up Lt Colonel in life-or-death situations and planet-at-risk situations rather than a delicate and simple child whose actions have as much impact as blue paint spilled on a white carpet, then the whole ship angle that the writers relentlessly push would be slightly less ickky. Let him treat her as a nearly-equal at least.

Or at least we could get the implication that he's okay with it because of his implicit belief that Sam can deal with it; that there's never been a science problem that she couldn't fix. Then we could see how that pressure - which would be hideously unfair - affects Sam.

Actually, I can buy Daniel and Teal'c covering for Jack, because neither one of them comes from a military culture, however steeped in it they may be from the last eight years.

Daniel is an academic and will view Sam's behaviour as a friend and an individual, not as an officer. It would probably take him a while to twig that her role has changed, as well. Don't they usually give an officer newly promoted to a command role a command she isn't familiar with? It's confusing enough for professional soldiers to deal with their friend and comrade now being their CO, but Daniel's just going to see Sam as the same old Sam.

Teal'c, meanwhile, comes from a weird, warrior culture of self-sacrifice and risk-taking. To him it isn't part of a field commander's job to keep the team alive; even having changed his priorities, he's still far more at home with suicide tactics than anyone in the USAF. 'It worked' is always going to carry more water with him than 'it might not have worked'.

But there's a reason they don't allow cats or people with ten-year-old temperaments on elite military teams.

Bang goes that Schrodinger plot bunny...

Actually, though, I'm not convinced that Jack's treatment of Sam is anything to do with 'Ship, so much as it is to do with the general specialness of SG-1. In previous seasons, SG-1 were the flagship offworld reconnaissance and expeditionary team. Of late, they seem to be the SGC's premier investigative, assault and diplomatic corps and general-purpose saints. They have more leeway, they're less professional in their behaviour and they never get into trouble with anyone who isn't a scumbag like Kinsey.

It brings home what was so good about Hammond. Hammond liked his team, but he held them to the same standard of behaviour as everyone else.

[Beta Candy]

But there's a reason they don't allow cats or people with ten-year-old temperaments on elite military teams.

Or on the production staff of a hit TV show.

No.... wait....

[Tucker Case]

Or on the production staff of a hit TV show.

No.... wait....

Hmm.

Just flipped over my daily cat calendar and found, on today's page, this quote from Aldous Huxley: "If you want to be psychological novelist and write about human beings, the best thing you can do is keep a pair of cats."

He might have wanted to add a caveat about taking that too literally.

TC

[yasureubetcha]

Actually, though, I'm not convinced that Jack's treatment of Sam is anything to do with 'Ship, so much as it is to do with the general specialness of SG-1. In previous seasons, SG-1 were the flagship offworld reconnaissance and expeditionary team. Of late, they seem to be the SGC's premier investigative, assault and diplomatic corps and general-purpose saints. They have more leeway, they're less professional in their behaviour and they never get into trouble with anyone who isn't a scumbag like Kinsey.

It brings home what was so good about Hammond. Hammond liked his team, but he held them to the same standard of behaviour as everyone else.

Personally, I see a lot of favoritism in Jack's treatment of Sam, from placing all the Avenger blame on Felger, to promoting her to Lt. Colonel. But I think it has a lot more to do with cliqueyness than 'shippyness. If it had been Daniel and Rothman, for instance, who had fouled everything up, I can easily see Jack blaming Rothman and excusing Daniel the same way he did for Felger and Sam.
I think the promotion reeked of favoritism, but I saw it more as a desire to keep "his" team together, and an overestimation of Sam based on friendship, than anything else. SG-1 has an amazingly cliquish mentality, and I think THAT compromises Jack's judgment more than 'ship does, at least up until the time of Threads.
In Divide & Conquer, Jack divulged that he cared about Sam because the Tok'ra device saw him ommitting how he was feeling at the time. But I don't think that, even without that motivation, he would've left. What nobody mentions when talking about the D&C situation is that Teal'c and Daniel also didn't leave.

(Gemini)

Spoiler:

He did blow off the whole Replicarter thing...but maybe he didn't want to deal with the fact that the Replicator situation (Fifth's desire for revenge on Earth and the creation of Replicarter) is largely his fault, as well as Sam's.

I just saw Zero Hour last night, and I'm not even sure how Sam's decision was such a mistake. Enemies are as likely to come through the gate as from anywhere else, as they have on many previous occasions. Furthermore, leaving their backup at the gate was exactly what Jack did in COTG and any number of other instances without it being deemed a mistake. Besides that, Jack has gotten plenty of "pshaw-ing" from Hammond over the years, even if it wasn't so eloquently worded. And I think most people agree there's no 'ship issue between Hammond and Jack.

As much as I think Jack's judgement probably would be compromised by 'ship after the events of Threads (which makes me glad he's leaving) I'm not sure it has been up to that point.

[Tucker Case]

If it had been Daniel and Rothman, for instance, who had fouled everything up, I can easily see Jack blaming Rothman and excusing Daniel the same way he did for Felger and Sam.

Thing is, maybe you can see it in your head, but we haven't seen it on our screens.

Sam isn't the only character to make mistakes in Season 8, but she is the only one whose mistakes were routinely declared either "not her fault" or "not mistakes at all." We may not have seen the other characters receive an on-screen dressing down but at least we were afforded the luxury of being allowed to see their mistakes, ourselves, for what they were and be disappointed in the characters and believe they should have known or done better (or, conversely, mount our own defence, if we thought there was one, without any coaching from the wings).

We're allowed to expect more from Teal'c, Daniel and Jack. With Sam, we're not. She gets praised for countermanding orders, not according to her better judgement, but out of petulance, because she's in a sulk over General Mother Hen sending a babysitter and - Hmph! - she'll show him, and that's the best we're allowed to expect from her. The story won't let us walk away thinking she could have done better.

The biggest problem, for me, in all of this is that, because even Sam's mistakes are perfect, she's afforded no redemptive grace from the story.

In the near-cataclysmic aftermath of 'Gemini'

Spoiler:

it was Daniel who got the final showdown Sam should have had with RepliCarter. He got to be the one to see right through her, to use her overconfidence, and her desires, against her (the way RC used Carter’s against her), to beat her at her game and get what he most wanted out of their encounter handed to him on a silver platter. The very twist I was looking for, from Sam, at the end of ‘Gemini,’ came at the end of ‘Reckoning,’ only it was Daniel who made it happen, Daniel who cried “Gotcha' now!” and had me cheering from the floor.

Sam never got her own back in that storyline because the writers can’t even see that she lost anything - she didn’t get her redemptive triumph because the writers were too busy telling us there’s nothing to redeem.

I can sit here till the cows come home trying to rationalise her behaviour and make excuses for it, but I can only do it by lowering my expectations and/or estimation of her and abandoning any hope that she'll haul herself up and fight her way back.

That isn't doing her any favours at all.

TC

[yasureubetcha]

I agree with most of what you say; what I'm saying is I don't think it's 'ship that causes Jack or anyone else (except Felger) to excuse Sam's mistakes.

[jckfan55]

We're allowed to expect more from Teal'c, Daniel and Jack. With Sam, we're not. She gets praised for countermanding orders, not according to her better judgement, but out of petulance, because she's in a sulk over General Mother Hen sending a babysitter and - Hmph! - she'll show him, and that's the best we're allowed to expect from her. The story won't let us walk away thinking she could have done better.

I didn't see it as countermanding orders or being petulant at all. O'Neill routinely left the backup team to secure the gate. For me, the problem was her later acting all insecure about that decision.
[QUOTE]
The biggest problem, for me, in all of this is that, because even Sam's mistakes are perfect, she's afforded no redemptive grace from the story.

I can sit here till the cows come home trying to rationalise her behaviour and make excuses for it, but I can only do it by lowering my expectations and/or estimation of her and abandoning any hope that she'll haul herself up and fight her way back.

That isn't doing her any favours at all.

TC

I'm hoping the writers get their act together this next season.

[Tucker Case]

I didn't see it as countermanding orders or being petulant at all.

The writing set her up perfectly for that interpretation, first in the briefing room when she was clearly thrown with Jack's decision, later when she used the word "sulking" herself (and Daniel and Teal'c were obviously trying to make her feel better), later still with Reynolds' reaction to her orders, with Jack asking him why he wasn't there to see what had happened to them (pretty strong indication that he expected Reynolds to be watching their backs and not the gate) and probably most of all with her questioning her actions later. If she wasn't doubting the soundness of her decision, then I have to believe she was questioning her motives for making it.

I can't see my way through to any other intepretation. And I probably would have been okay with it if the story had stayed with her and SG-1 for the rest of the episode so she could be seen dealing with the ramifications and making up for it.

But the story wasn't about Sam. They set her up to get her team lost under circumstances that Ba'al could take advantage of, not to give her a story and show her growing into her new role, but to give Jack a story and show him growing into his new role.

That they used Sam this way once was bad enough. That they went and did it again, in the same season, on a much larger scale, only made it worse.

The trouble for me, personally, is that I feel, when I try to make excuses for Carter, I'm excusing the way the writers have misused her. It's a "me" thing, and I don't mean for it to reflect on anyone else's interpretation or justifications.

I agree with most of what you say; what I'm saying is I don't think it's 'ship that causes Jack or anyone else (except Felger) to excuse Sam's mistakes.

No, I think it says more about the writers' feelings for Sam than Jack's, but I'm not always sure it's entirely un-ship-related.

I look back at Season 8, see Carter tripping herself up, see other characters paying for her mistakes (some with their lives) and then used as "Pshaw!"-ing puppets in order to maintain her perfect façade, and I think: "I'm seriously supposed to want more of this? I'm supposed to want Mitchell to step aside and hand the leadership role back to Carter so I can have another year of Col. Kitty on the Tiffany Planet?"

And my next thought is always, "But would it be like that without Jack around?" I don't believe that Hammond would have handled her with same kid gloves Jack did and, however much I might think the writers are crushing on Sam (and crushing her in the process), I'm still not at all certain they'll have Landry giving her the kid-glove treatment, either.

And that uncertainty suggests, to me, that I must think the mollycoddling is somehow specific to "Sam & Jack," that it is somehow a reflection of his "relationship" with her (and that Daniel and Teal'c, when they get dragged into it, are being used to prop, not just Sam, but Jack's brushing off her mis-steps).

It may not be "shippy," in the strictest terms, but I am left to wonder why it's only General O'Neill I can imagine treating her this way (and, again, why it's only her he's seen treating this way).

Honestly, I don't know, either way.

TC

[jckfan55]

The writing set her up perfectly for that interpretation, first in the briefing room when she was clearly thrown with Jack's decision, later when she used the word "sulking" herself (and Daniel and Teal'c were obviously trying to make her feel better), later still with Reynolds' reaction to her orders, with Jack asking him why he wasn't there to see what had happened to them (pretty strong indication that he expected Reynolds to be watching their backs and not the gate) and probably most of all with her questioning her actions later. If she wasn't doubting the soundness of her decision, then I have to believe she was questioning her motives for making it.

What I didn't see as being put out or pouty was ordering Reynolds to guard the gate. O'Neill did that all the time with the backup units, and they got into trouble all the time. But I see what you're saying. Having her later question her decision does indicate that it wasn't strictly a standard operating procedure decision.

But the story wasn't about Sam. They set her up to get her team lost under circumstances that Ba'al could take advantage of, not to give her a story and show her growing into her new role, but to give Jack a story and show him growing into his new role.

Very true. It would have been much better to have just had it be a standard mission where they took backup and happened to get into trouble. The whole "he doesn't trust me," "did I make the right decision" thing seemed out of sync with what we know about Carter's competence. I wish they hadn't even made it an issue.

[Tucker Case]

It would have been much better to have just had it be a standard mission where they took backup and happened to get into trouble. The whole "he doesn't trust me," "did I make the right decision" thing seemed out of sync with what we know about Carter's competence. I wish they hadn't even made it an issue.

It was pointlessly contrived. They took something that, as you said, we've seen numerous times before, twisted, bent it, pointed at it and made faces at it until it became a "mistake" on Carter's part (if not in the doing, then in the reason for doing it), and to no end except to make O'Neill the victim of circumstance in his terrible, horrible, no good, very bad week.

Love Jack, just wish it didn't have to be Carter's fault or Dr. Lee's fault or the squabbling delegates' fault or Ba'al's fault that he's feeling out of his depth in the new job, y'know?

If all they needed was for SG-1 to go off world, leave their back-up at the gate and get lost, then that's all that needed to be written. If they wanted to make an issue out of anything, they should have had Jack give in to Carter and Daniel (who was also out of sorts about the initial decision, they just let him get over it) and send them off on their own so that, when they got lost, our intrepid threesome would have been feeling a bit chagrined and Jack could have questioned his decision, they all might have learned something (Teal'c very quietly to himself, of course) and nobody would be left wondering if the problem was rooted in the "Jack & Sam" thing.

TC

[theStormWeaver]

I have come to this thread, to make an apollogy.

About six months ago, I made a post that was obscenely rude and opinionated. I offer my deepest apologies and hope that all of you here could some day forgive me.

I would have apologized earlier, but i did not return to the forums until recently. When I saw the pms, and realized what I had said, I was shocked, and ashamed. I was so embarassed and ashamed that I felt sick to my stomache. I don't know why I said those things but I hope that you can all forgive me.