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

[NightGloom]

Aaaah! Jack as Sam's husband? That'd be HORRIBLE!!! The surgical/ medical reason would be a really good reason for the reduced screentime. I don't think that they would use a shippy reason. I'm just worried that they're going to drag it out, which they probably will.

[Hathor999]

I hope I'm wrong, but I just have a horrid feeling that when AT has to cut down her screen time they'll come up with a shippy reason for it; like she wants to spend more time on Earth with Pete/Jack/some terrifying hairy biker she met in a bar rather than off saving the universe. That would just be the final nail in the coffin of tough Sam; bury her next to tough skeptic Scully and strike up the requiem.

Please NO!

[Hathor999]

Aaaah! Jack as Sam's husband? That'd be HORRIBLE!!! The surgical/ medical reason would be a really good reason for the reduced screentime. I don't think that they would use a shippy reason. I'm just worried that they're going to drag it out, which they probably will.

I hope that you are right and we will never see this (I can life with a little shippy moment here and there for the fans who like it - but I´m sure THAT would kill my enthusiasm for the show). But do you know the spoilers for "Threads"?
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
If this spoilers are true than Jack will at last think about leaving the Air Force to be together with Sam...So I have the really bad feeling that something like that could happen...Maybe no marriage but they could be living together in season 9.

[NightGloom]

ACK! NO! NO! NO! No living together, no marriage, no kiss, NO MORE SHIP!!!

[Beta Candy]

Why Ship Always Sinks

We've all sailed one at some point. I remember basking on the sundeck of the Moonlighting, and enjoying the Northern Exposure from my below-decks cabin while I polished my Remmington Steele. It was a cruise from heaven, full of humor, excitement and drama.

Until the iceberg.

Until the kiss, the admission, the romp in bed, the whatever that signified the attempt of a ship to jump a shark, apparently unaware that ships can't soar.

As a bit of a writer myself, I always wondered why TV shows can't pull off ship. Even when the characters have chemistry and everyone's enjoying the unresolved tension, resolving the tension sends everyone packing - like a leering womanizer who finally got the chick he was chasing and lights up a cigarette while walking out of her life forever. And when the characters lack chemistry... well, if the shippers don't need to see the chemistry, why do they need to see the relationship? Sometimes imagination really is sweetest.

And here I sit, watching the show that survived losing a major character for a year - another nearly impossible feat - and wondering if they have enough sense to realize: at this point, you can disappoint half of your audience, or all of your audience. But if you disappoint the correct half, everyone will get over it and flock back to you in the end.

Allow me to explain.

Ship works in movies. They're self-contained, both in story and production periods, so the relationship can be plotted carefully, avoiding the problems of budget, of actors quitting, getting pregnant, getting an attitude. Ship does not work in TV because for shows to remain fresh, the story and characters must continually evolve despite the problems of budget dictating storyline and casting. Even a carefully plotted ship relationship on TV can be thrown into chaos when a couple of suited executives get a look at some numbers on a sheet of paper that make them unhappy, and start sending you "notes" about how a recent demographic study indicates that fans want to see a sexbot actress added into the show, a wedding in episode 18, and a troop of dancing monkeys.

When fans tell demographics experts (or spout all over the internet) what they want to see on a show, they're thinking on impulse. They're not considering how it will fit into the grand scheme, because that's not their job. It is the job of the producers and writers.

I understand the producers and writers are under a lot of pressure to give the fans everything they want - even the stuff that contradicts the other stuff. TV studios insist - despite all evidence to the contrary - that catering to every fan whim simultaneously is the best way to go. It's like giving a kid everything he wants, whenever he wants it. He may love you for it at the moment, but see how he feels about you when he's twenty. If he lives that long. If he lets you know what country he lives in.

The TV production community seems to think they have to either disappoint the shippers, or the non-shippers, or leave it ambiguous in a transparent and insulting attempt to keep everyone happy. Unfortunately, they are quite wrong: when the ship sinks, the shippers desert it along with everyone else.

But when you initially disappoint shippers by not giving them the longed for confirmation that "something" will "happen between" the two characters... but the show remains good and ends on a great note... the shippers will get over their disappointment and still love the show in the end. (Have you ever known someone to abandon a great, exciting, funny show because it became clear to them that X and Y were never going to hit the sack? Conversely, I still have post-traumatic stress disorder from Moonlighting and must run screaming from the room even when a great pre-ship episode comes on.)

Yes, I'm an anti-shipper, and not just with Stargate. So, yes, it's not surprising my answer is: blow the ship out of the water. But it also happens to be the common sense answer. If the ship is going to ruin the rest of the show, you will lose ALL your viewers in the long run, including the shippers. And if you disappoint the shippers in the short term, but give them a fine show to enjoy despite it, they will love you in the end, throughout a blissful syndication and inspiring DVD sales.

It's the only way to win in the long run.

[astronomicalchick]

Why Ship Always Sinks

We've all sailed one at some point. I remember basking on the sundeck of the Moonlighting, and enjoying the Northern Exposure from my below-decks cabin while I polished my Remmington Steele. It was a cruise from heaven, full of humor, excitement and drama.

...snips...

Unfortunately, they are quite wrong: when the ship sinks, the shippers desert it along with everyone else.

But when you initially disappoint shippers by not giving them the longed for confirmation that "something" will "happen between" the two characters... but the show remains good and ends on a great note... the shippers will get over their disappointment and still love the show in the end. (Have you ever known someone to abandon a great, exciting, funny show because it became clear to them that X and Y were never going to hit the sack? Conversely, I still have post-traumatic stress disorder from Moonlighting and must run screaming from the room even when a great pre-ship episode comes on.)

Yes, I'm an anti-shipper, and not just with Stargate. So, yes, it's not surprising my answer is: blow the ship out of the water. But it also happens to be the common sense answer. If the ship is going to ruin the rest of the show, you will lose ALL your viewers in the long run, including the shippers. And if you disappoint the shippers in the short term, but give them a fine show to enjoy despite it, they will love you in the end, throughout a blissful syndication and inspiring DVD sales.

It's the only way to win in the long run.

I totally agree with this, and I would be what you would call a shipper, although I tend to like it subtle so I can just play with it in fanfic and whatever.

And yes I remember Moonlighting, what a car crash...although I loved Northern Exposure, but my fav ship pairing didn't happen there...

Anyway, great post...

[Zoser]

OK. You have a point there. If the writers are COMPETENT, then they can write ship/innuendo. Morgan & Wong actually did a very good job of it in X-Files. In my extremely biased opinion, anyway. I wasn't a Mulder/Scully shipper, but I liked the way they wrote things. They kept it SUBTLE. I can deal with subtle, I can even appreciate it. But it's a fine balance. XF tipped the scales after M&W left. SG-1 has done the same thing and I'm afraid of what might happen on Atlantis.

Lost has gone too heavy, too fast as well. *sigh*

Forgive the stupid question - Is there ship on Atlantis? I haven't noticed.

[ShadowMaat]

Forgive the stupid question - Is there ship on Atlantis? I haven't noticed.

There's potential right now, I think. I noticed a lot of Shep/Teyla stuff in the first ep or two, but then it mostly disappeared and TPTB have been swearing up and down and sideways that there won't be any ship on Atlantis. Personally, I have my doubts. I got burned on SG-1. I'm not stupid enough to fall for their lies again.

People have also seen ship between Shep and Weir. I don't see that at all. I thought Weir had more ship potential with McKay, but I'm fairly confident that's just a side effect of the intensity of their scenes in one ep.

[NightGloom]

First off, Beta Candy, great post!

Second of all... I don't see any ship on Atlantis either. Especially when everyone said that it's going to be Sheppard and Teyla cause I don't see any chemistry there at all. Shep/Weir I can kinda see a itty bitty bit, but not too much. They better not write any ship in... I will cry... no, wait...actually I don't cry I break stuff.

[yoojoo]

i have seen no ship in atlantis!!!*looks around* don't tell the shippers i said that or i shall be shunned!!)

Uh oh....i think shadows subliminal sig message has corrupted me!! Nooooooo!!! *runs screaming*

BTW, *waves* to everybody! Hiya

[astronomicalchick]

There's potential right now, I think. I noticed a lot of Shep/Teyla stuff in the first ep or two, but then it mostly disappeared and TPTB have been swearing up and down and sideways that there won't be any ship on Atlantis. Personally, I have my doubts. I got burned on SG-1. I'm not stupid enough to fall for their lies again.

People have also seen ship between Shep and Weir. I don't see that at all. I thought Weir had more ship potential with McKay, but I'm fairly confident that's just a side effect of the intensity of their scenes in one ep.

I think you have a tendency to ship or not, if you do you look for it, if you don't you don't. Then (according to my theory) it all tends to be subjective, depending on the characters you like best, or the characters you have chemistry with the most if you like and depending on what you think is romantic. I personally don't see McKay/Weir at all, but I see Sheppard/Weir, because I probably see Sheppard in a romantic light (ie he's gorgeous) more than I do McKay (McKay is cute in his own way), so it just becomes a matter of taste for me.

And that's where ship should stay. In the realms of subjectivity and personal taste. Season 7&8 has been complete mess because of the Sam/Jack stuff, mixed in with Pete, who I didn't like as a character and was basically a plot device to inject some angst. Well it was clumsy and stupid, if that's the best they can do, don't bother is all I can say.

[keshou]

I think you have a tendency to ship or not, if you do you look for it, if you don't you don't. Then (according to my theory) it all tends to be subjective, depending on the characters you like best, or the characters you have chemistry with the most if you like and depending on what you think is romantic.

I think your tendencies can also change. I used to enjoy ship a lot more than I do now. I was on board with Laura and Steele, Maggie and Joel in Northern Exposure and Mattie and Dave in Moonlighting and Lois and Clark, etc. etc. I think my first ship (when I was very young) was Ann and Donald on "That Girl". I have just become a lot pickier about my ships and how they're handled as I've gotten older.

I've seen how a poorly realized love scene or on/off chemistry or (egads!) marriage between the couples can kill a show. (See BetaCandy's excellent post above). If a show is structured for a married couple (see Hart to Hart or McMillan's Wife or even some of the excellent comedies like Mad About You) it can work. The show doesn't rely on the tension of "will they or won't they" to keep the viewers hooked. But after a romance becomes RST most of the shows really don't know what to do with it because their show wasn't structured to deal with the couple, it was structured to feed off the romance and the UST.

I'm also pickier about the chemistry. I really, really have to see it, not *want* to see it. With John & Aeryn - they just sucked me in with their fantastic chemistry. It was a love story set in space. I really, really don't see much chemistry between Jack & Sam. I wouldn't care that much - chemistry is in the eye of the viewer - but I think it's been handled poorly and has ended up affecting the show. On a scifi/action show with a team concept I think you have to be extremely cautious when you interject ship between two of the team members.

And that's where ship should stay. In the realms of subjectivity and personal taste. Season 7&8 has been complete mess because of the Sam/Jack stuff, mixed in with Pete, who I didn't like as a character and was basically a plot device to inject some angst. Well it was clumsy and stupid, if that's the best they can do, don't bother is all I can say.

I agree. Pete is just "plot-device Pete". Sam has ended up looking wishy-washy as heck. Clearly still in love with Jack but willing to go ahead and try to "make do" with Pete. Jack - is he supposed to be in love with Sam?? He plays the least convincing ship I've ever seen. At first it was subtle UST and I thought it was fine. In S4 they escalated the ship, then dropped it, then brought it back, then did goodness knows what to it in S7. Maybe they'll pull this thing all together and give us a S8 ending everyone will like. Hope so but I'm not going to be counting on it.

Whatever happens, Jack isn't going to be around much in S9 and there will be changes. Be interesting to see what they're going to do as far as the ship goes. I think it will be a huge mistake to marry the characters and have Jack go off to be a house-husband or a rarely-seen civilian stationed at the SGC. BORING. I actually think they may do something far more interesting than that. Feeling optimistic today.

[Liv]

I agree with many, many points of your post, Beta Candy. Not all of them, though, which is why I'm gonna ramble on a bit here. Bear with me, I'm sure there's a point hidden somewhere. I think.

Until the kiss, the admission, the romp in bed, the whatever that signified the attempt of a ship to jump a shark, apparently unaware that ships can't soar.

As a bit of a writer myself, I always wondered why TV shows can't pull off ship. Even when the characters have chemistry and everyone's enjoying the unresolved tension, resolving the tension sends everyone packing /.../

Ship works in movies. They're self-contained, both in story and production periods, so the relationship can be plotted carefully, avoiding the problems of budget, of actors quitting, getting pregnant, getting an attitude. Ship does not work in TV because for shows to remain fresh, the story and characters must continually evolve despite the problems of budget dictating storyline and casting.

I'm about, say 90%, with you on this. I've been an intense Anti Sam/Jack shipper ever since I saw the "Now why'd you have to go and do that for?" scene/s in Divide and Conquer. In SG-1 the shippy scenes are forced and contrived and there is no way they can resolve it that will make me forget all the previous scenes wherein the ship dominated the story. There are episodes I will probably never rewatch, solely due to the shippyness and what they mean in terms of character development. Grace is one of them. That's a real shame and this is where they've taken the ship too far for me to even try to ignore it.

I'm as much Anti Sam/Jack ship as ever, and will continue to be so but there are ships that have worked for me in other shows. The Aeryn/Crichton relationship was such an integral part of the Farscape storyline that it never even occured to me not to want them to be together. Not to mention that the writing was there. The chemistry was there. Wow, was the chemistry there! The screen was close to setting itself on fire when they were together. Same thing with Buffy/Angel (s1-3). Very much a part of the overall storyline and sparks, sparks flying everywhere. Them being together didn't hurt the story; if anything it made it even better. Those two pairings are the examples that I first and foremost come to think of where ship definitely worked. IMO, of course.

As for ship on Atlantis, I was very open about how anti-ship I was when threads started to pop up after only the first couple of episodes had aired. I had been so burned with the overt and taking over scenes in a "no good can come of this way" with Sam/Jack, that I was close to shouting from the rooftops: No ships on Atlantis!

So, imagine my surprise when I saw the potential for ship between Sheppard/Weir in The Eye and actually didn't object to it. I was flabbergasted (neat word, had to work that in there ) at myself and have even ventured into said ship thread to have some discussions about it. I was very clear that I approached this from the "I like what I saw, but I'm still treading along very carefully here" angle. There was a question raised about the possibility of being an anti-shipper on one show and a shipper on another.

That was interesting to me, because I have been so very, very Anti Sam/Jack that it didn't even occur to me that I could possibly feel different towards Sheppard/Weir. I feel like there is an intriguing dynamic between these two characters, I also feel like the chemistry is there - albeit not in the way that the abovementioned A/C and B/A share (but that's pretty much impossible to top and there have, after all, only been half a season's worth of episodes of Atlantis, so any comparison between them is a bit unfair). There is also the business of worrying about the writing, because even though the shows - and the characters - are different, it is still a Stargate show. Therefore my main concern is that if they pursue any type of ship between Sheppard and Weir, then they will eventually paint themselves into a corner. Just as they have with the ship on SG-1. So, there's that.

I don't want any will they/won't they scenes stretching out for what seems like forever with the main characters on Atlantis. Honestly, I'm not even sure WHAT I want, at this point. I DO know that I'm enjoying their scenes together and that the particular scene I'm referring to in The Eye was very sweet. Sooo... not a shipper, but not exactly an anti-shipper either. Somewhere in between and on slightly new territory I'd say.

Still an Anti Sam/Jack shipper to the core, though.

[Mr Prophet]

I posted this in another thread, but it seems to have some place here, especially in terms of discussion of Divide and Conquer.

I liked what they did with the ship in Divide and Conquer however, because what they did was kill it. They dragged it out of its hole, put a spring-loaded bolt against the side of its wretched, squirming, vermin head and shot it dead with one line:

"Sir. None of this has to leave the room."

Sam is a professional military officer and so is Jack. They both know that she isn't saying 'we'll keep this a secret', especially not with Janet, an Air Force doctor, present. What she is saying is: 'ain't no thing here'. With Jack's confession, if there were feelings that they did not feel able to repress, one of them should have transferred; the fact that they don't means that whatever feelings there are are not sufficient to prejudice the chain of command.

Of course, they later resurrected this Jason Vorhees of ships to stumble zombie-like and hockey-masked through most of seasons seven and eight, spreading terror and confusion in its wake and turning perfectly good episodes into tedious angst-fests, but such televisual necromancy is neither here nor there. The fact is that the only episodes in which they actually gave the slightest thought to how a potential ship would interface with the military nature of the show (basically, D&C and Beneath the Surface) they shoot it dead.

Sheppard/Weir could work - I haven't seen Atlantis and I can't tell from the transcripts - because it at least has the potential to go somewhere.

[Jonisa]

Sooo... not a shipper, but not exactly an anti-shipper either. Somewhere in between and on slightly new territory I'd say.

I'd say this description fits me as well. I've definitely shipped for shows--my biggest was one of yours. I absolutely adored the John/Aeryn relationship on Farscape. I don't think I've ever seen two actors spark that way onscreen. It was incredible. I also liked both Buffy/Angel and Buffy/Spike on BtVS, Josh/Donna on The West Wing and I think Charlie/Claire on Lost are absolutely adorable.

I don't even mind Sam/Jack when it's open to interpretation. It's such a personal thing, and if the shippers see ship where I don't, hey, more power to them, I say. Different strokes and all that. What I don't appreciate is forced, awkward scenes between the two of them specifically designed to promote a ship I'm not interested in and don't enjoy watching, trying to beat it into my head with a two-by-four that these angsty looks between them mean they are destined for each other.

Why? Because I don't see it. I've looked in vain for the much ballyhooed chemistry that I've read about between these two and I come up...empty. Every scene that's obviously meant to be shippy feels forced and artificial to me. I don't find their relationship all that compelling or interesting, especially when they do the staring-at-each-other thing. So, the reason I tend toward anti-ship with Jack/Sam is that I just don't see anything there, which make the obviously shippy scenes all that more excruciating for me. It's like trying to get water from a stone. MHO, of course.

But anti-ship in general, for all shows? Nope, I'm with you. There are some great 'ships out there, and I'd hate to miss them.