Ex Deus Machina (907)

[jree]

Okay SG-1 has a lot of enemies and/or rivals now: the Ori, Ba'al (plural), other Goa'uld, hostile jaffa, and the Lucian alliance. Got rid of the replicators and Anubis but they still are getting more and more enemies. It would be totally cool to see how this plays out the rest of the season.

[Albion]

Sorry, I don't see Mitchell as the "lead character" either. I think Daniel would have that position long before Mitchell with all of Daniel's experiences so far. That said, however, there are no leads on SG-1; it's a team effort

I'd like to agree with you on this one. But I think it's been made pretty clear by TPTB that they brought BB in as team leader/leading man. He's first in the titles - I greatly suspect that if we still had the old titles we had before, he'd have his name above the title as RDA did - and the publicity has focused on him as such.

I think you have to see this in a different light between production needs and characters. The two are quite different animals. Not the same thing at all.

If you're talking about characters in the SGC universe and how they would interact, I see no reason why Mitchell or Daniel should be elevated to a position higher than anyone else and if you're talking about who leads SG1, then it seems to me that Carter makes the most logical sense character-wise.

But I'm not talking about this aspect, but production needs. What TPTB want for the show to bring in the big bucks and the highest ratings. And for that, they do seem to have decided they need a hero - a leading man to take the place of the one they had for 8 years - Jack. Enter BB. That's what he was brought in to be, it seems obvious from the publicity already done on S9, and that's the role he's been paid to play.

So I would be mighty surprised if he doesn't take charge of SG1 soon and start doing hero stuff.

As I say, character-wise, it's going to be a hard sell for me because of all the aspects of the characters we've seen so far. Mitchell doesn't strike me as the team leader type. I just don't get that vibe from him. But that may change. We'll have to wait and see, I guess.

However, I also suspect that there is not going to be a lot of "orders" being thrown around. Seems to me that it’s going to be more of a consensus thing. Not sure how that’s going to work in some situations but that’s what it is looking like. Besides Daniel and Teal'c are both civilians whom Mitchell begged to be on the team, so if they don’t follow one of his orders what is he going to do? Put them on report? Have them thrown off the team? It would be mildly interesting to have an ep deal with such a thing (ala Rodney Mckay), but not if it got oppressively contentious for too many eps.

And, of course, Daniel has more than once in the past proven to be very defensive of Carter's position in the team, often arguing that she should be in charge, even when she didn't want him to. So it could be an interesting dynamic. Although I tend to agree with the poster who said the probable upshot will be that TPTB just ignore the issue and pretend it's not there. Pity, because it could be an interesting character dynamic to play out.

I agree with you too about Mitchell being the type of team leader who won't exactly be commanding, leading more by concensus than firm rule. And this is what is concerning me about him, a little. Jack goofed around, but you always knew that offworld, when the chips were down, he could take command of his team and the situation in a heartbeat. Plus, he had a lot of field experience, knew all the tricks, the ways to bend the rules to get you out of a tight spot.

I just don't get that vibe from Mitchell. And a looser, less firm command style is fine when the situation the team is in is as in EDM. But I'm less sure it's going to pass muster offworld when the bullets are flying. At such a time a team needs to know absolutely what the command structure is and who they should be jumping to obey.

Course, looking at the promo for next week, looks like we may find out whether Mitchell has the leadership experience and skill to pull it off then. And it's partly for that reason that I'm curious to see this one.

Albion

[Schrodinger82]

I don't care if you feel I'm being transparent. My own sources didn't contradict me, they completely validated me.

THen why do the examples listed on the wikipedia article not fit your desscription? For instance:

In William Golding's Lord of the Flies, at the end of the book, when no resolution is in sight, the boys are saved by the royal navy.

The book in "Lord of the Flies" mentions ships throughout the book. Trying to get a ship to rescue them is one of the main plots, and we actually see a ship pass by early in the novel. Yet despite that fact, we still considered to be a Deus Ex, because the "central plot" of the story is still unresolved for the main characters.

In Isaac Asimov's I, Robot it is used as a part of the description of the relationship between humans and robots.

In this case, robots themselves are considered a Deus Ex, even though robots are the center of the story! Hence, it doesn't fit your description. I think Isaac Asimov would understand Deus Ex Machina better than yourself.

The character of Puck ends William Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream" with a decidedly deus ex machina flair.

In this case, Puck is considered a Deus Ex Machina, even though he appears early in the play! Why? Because he is not a main character, and his actions are not part of the "central plot."

In The Wizard of Oz, just before Dorothy and her companions reach the Emerald City, the Wicked Witch of the West produces a giant field of poppies that puts Dorothy, Toto and the Cowardly Lion to sleep. The Scarecrow and the Tinman cry for help, and Glinda, the Good Witch of the North, produces a snow shower that wakes everyone up.

Again, we already know Glinda's a good Witch, we already know she has magical powers. But it's still considered a Deus Ex, because the main characters don't solve the problem on their own.

At the end of the film Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story, the treasure chest containing the main character's gambling winnings has the phrase "Deus ex Machina" written on it. (The joke being that the prize money will be the thing that solves the problem in a flash)

Here's one just for fun. If the "very definition" of a Deus Ex was something not pre-established, then how does the money being a Deus Ex factor into "Dodgeball?"

In Metal Gear Solid, the ending finds Solid Snake and a companion (either Otacon or Meryl Silverburgh, depending on a choice the player makes) trapped under a crashed Jeep after attempting to escape Liquid Snake and the bombing of the island. Liquid, armed with an assault rifle, staggers forward, about to kill the two. The deus ex machina occurs when a virus known as "FOX-DIE" (unknowingly injected into Solid Snake to spread throughout the base, killing the terrorists and silencing the hostages) activates, causing Liquid to suffer a fatal heart attack. We later learn in a special section of the sequel, Metal Gear Solid 2, that Naomi Hunter, the woman who programmed FOX-DIE to kill Solid Snake because he killed her brother, Gray Fox, set FOX-DIE to randomly activate at no predictable time after it came into contact with Snake's DNA. Liquid and Solid were both clones of the same man, and therefore genetic twins.

Again, if you played the games, we already see the virus show up within the first chapter, and it's described in-depth as the game progresses. Yet the appearence at the end is still considered a Deus Ex, because Solid wasn't the one who stopped Liquid on his own.

In Adaptation, the main character (who is a screenwriter writing a screenplay of The Orchid Thief) takes a screenwriting class and is told by the script guru not to end his movie with a deus ex machina. Because of this, he deliberately uses the device.

And finally, let's have a look at this one. Just out of curiousity, how does this one factor into your definition? By all accounts, it's a Deus Ex Machina, in fact that's the very way in which this ending is introduced! Yet, by your definition, it would not be a Deus Ex Machina, because the very idea of "Deus Ex Machina" in itself was already "pre-established" early in the movie.

etc., etc., etc.

Ignore them all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that your own source still contradicts you on this matter. Claiming that they do not would basically be lying. You wouldn't want to be a liar, do you?

You were wrong, and I feel I totally proved it.

Uh-huh. And where, exactly did you do that?

Was it the part where you cited a page full of examples that contradicted your definition? Because I don't think that worked.

How about the part where I pointed out that even classical Deus Ex machina, as in the very technique that the Greek playwrights were referring to when they used the term, wouldn't work under your description either? To which you replied... nadda. But I guess that showed me, huh?

ou did make some points, and I acknowleged them when you did, but you just kept banging on with the "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality that shows me that you know you were wrong.

"Hello, Kettle? You're black!"

My point, which I've been trying to make, and you have been completely ignoring is that the being stuck on an asteroid at the end of the episode was irrelevant.

They were trapped in abort, running out of air, with no way to get back on Earth. It was a life or death situation for the team. If the former happened, then no more show.

I would call that pretty darn relevant.

The main plot of the episode was stopping that asteroid. SG1 stopped the Asteroid completely on their own, without aid from the Tok'ra. Jalen's arrival at the end was just a postscript to the plot.

Irrelevant. Once again, look at the defintion that you posted:

In Greek and Roman drama, a god lowered by stage machinery to resolve a plot or extricate the protagonist from a difficult situation.

The definition still holds up. The heroes are in a difficult situation, and the Gods have been lowered down on stage to rescue them. The example fits the definition that you yourself posted on Deus Ex Machina.

By denying that the definition does hold up, you are therefore contradicted by the very source that you posted.

Good job.

Which just shows that you didn't understand that one either. A "walking dues ex machina" would be someone who always has the ability to resolve the plot when he/she enters the story, no matter how bleak.

You mean like showing up in the nick of time while the team was still stranded in orbit?

The Asgard didn't just show up out of nowhere, they were called.

Funny, I know I sure didn't see an exception in the definition that said, "In Greek and Roman drama, a god lowered by stage machinery to resolve a plot or extricate the protagonist from a difficult situation -- unless they were called first, in which case it's not."

Again, by that logic, classical deus ex machina wouldn't qualify, since the chorus in greek plays would frequently evoke the gods in their dialogue, make sacrifices and offerings, etc. For instance:

ATTENDANTS enter, singing. They move to worship at the altar of ARTEMIS.

HIPPOLYTUS
Come follow, friends, singing to Artemis, daughter of Zeus, throned in the sky, whose votaries we are.

ATTENDANTS
Lady goddess, awful queen, daughter of Zeus, all hail! hail! of Latona and of Zeus, peerless mid the virgin choir, who hast thy dwelling in heaven's wide mansions at thy noble father's court, in the golden house of Zeus. All hail! most beauteous Artemis, lovelier far than all the daughters of Olympus!

Guess who shows up in the end in a classical Greek examples of Deus Ex Machina?

No, really, guess.

This is what I mean when I say that you're in over your head on this. You simply lack the background to discuss this topic in terms of contextual meaning.

The Tok'ra though, more often then not will not help them out of a situation unless it suits them, and just as often wind up getting them into trouble. They are not used as a "get out of jail free" card that can be used to resolve any situation. IMO, the Tok'ra are often just this side of useless most of the time.

Wow, and the same applies for the Gods in classical literature as well!

Now, you're going on the ignore list. You could have chosen to debate, you chose to get arrogant and frankly insulting. I can't imagine you'll say anything I'll lament missing.

-IMF

http://www.somethingawful.com/articles.php?a=2715

"3) IF LOSING AN ARGUMENT, FEIGN FRUSTRATION AND THEN CLAIM YOU'RE BLOCKING THE PERSON. Every person on the Internet harbors a secret fear of having their communications blocked by somebody, particularly when they're devastating that person in an argument. If you ever make a critical mistake and discover you cannot match either the intensity or intelligence of the person whom you're facing up against, simply descend into a spiral of frustration, one ending with a curt goodbye and notice that this person will never, ever, ever, ever be able to contact you again because you are putting them on your fabled ignore list of doom."

[SGalisa]

* Teal'c speaks!
And shares his truest feelings, too! (resting at the SGC is better than resting at Dakara, or anywhere else.) I guess he's witnessed too many Kinsey incidents, so he knows what's about to happen next in Jaffa-land.

Interesting idea what they did with the building - beaming it out into space.

* Sam: not exactly single, ehh? engaged then?

* Ba'al: Ba'al is bailing out? *that* is so unlike him, unless he's pretending to be the next Ming the Merciless character.

In the meantime, will the real bad Ba'al please stand up? Is that *why* the goa'uld have suddenly abandoned the use of their unique, deep voices? Jacob never used a device with the Tok'ra to create the voice, so how are the goa'uld able to do this?

Anyway... is Ba'al really on earth or hiding elsewhere somewhere in a distant galaxy... and maybe making plea bargain deals with the Tok'ra for refuge? (that'd be a switch! the bully seeks shelter from the more compliant personalities of its species.)

[Traveler Enroute1]

That would be the greatest best kept secret of Stargate history.

I think it’s pretty clear that Mitchell is going to be "in command". Although I think Carter has been more commanding so far (2 eps) and is far more qualified for the job (8 years). I agree this begs for a scene between Mitchell and Carter where she says something like "you want the paper work, the meetings and the 24X7 on call paging... go for it." But I suspect in best TPTB form they will simply ignore the entire subject and Mitchell will just be "in command" in the next ep no further explanation.

However, I also suspect that there is not going to be a lot of "orders" being thrown around. Seems to me that it’s going to be more of a consensus thing. Not sure how that’s going to work in some situations but that’s what it is looking like. Besides Daniel and Teal'c are both civilians whom Mitchell begged to be on the team, so if they don’t follow one of his orders what is he going to do? Put them on report? Have them thrown off the team? It would be mildly interesting to have an ep deal with such a thing (ala Rodney Mckay), but not if it got oppressively contentious for too many eps.

So from the show and USAF perspective he will be "in command" but when it comes down to whats actually going on On Screen I suspect you will get more of a feeling that whoever has the most experience on whatever subject the ep is dealing with will be in charge.

Once upon another thread, I said something similar, only I used the words, "shared command." I got zatted and staff blasted no end! Main comment: "Shared command would be disaster waiting to happen." Reason being well put by Albion:

And a looser, less firm command style is fine when the situation the team is in is as in EDM. But I'm less sure it's going to pass muster offworld when the bullets are flying. At such a time a team needs to know absolutely what the command structure is and who they should be jumping to obey.

If they're going to base things on Air Force guidelines, only one or the other will be designated the leader of the team. Of course, this being Sci-Fi and tv and all, how the two work it out amongst themselves is up to the writers and directors. Not a problem for me, although I'm with the Carter-has-earned-command camp.

Time will tell...well, most. IN TWO WEEKS -

Just sayin'.

[Giantevilhead]

If the Jaffa council does an autopsy of Baal, which they probably won't, they'll find that there's no naquadah in the symbiote's blood and realize that it's not the real Baal. If they capture any more Baals, they could keep him imprisoned for a week to see if it goes through sarcophagus withdraw, if he doesn't then it's not the real Baal.

[Gargen]

Well they are all the real baal they all have the same memories, and the same DNA both host and human, thats the point if anyone of them gets killed another one just pops up.

[Snork]

But the question is do symbiotes clone as well as human host bodies do? Remember the clone killed by Gerak did do the little glowing eyes number... and I'm assuming the "real" Ba'al was the one who walked out of the room to go to bed. But having said that... it was an interesting twist to have that many Ba'als. Quadruple the fun!

Remember that in Tin Man, the first robot made from Teal'c had his symbiote's mind and personality.
I would assume that they just cloned the Goa'uld Ba'al's mind (along with the inherent genetic memory) and planted it in the empty body of his host, as opposed to cloning the host and the Goa'uld separately, and then implanting each cloned host with a Ba'al Goa'uld.
I'm not sure about the glowing eyes bit though. I would assume that only happens if you have a Goa'uld in you, but whatever.

[Giantevilhead]

If they're all perfect clones of Baal, they would all be power hungry and would eventually turn on each other, I think that the original Baal was smart enough to make the clones follow him unquestioningly.

[binkpmmc]

Traveler Enroute1: (My ability to respond using the Quote is not working so I cannot quote your post). Many moons ago I used the term shared command and some agreed and I explained that what I meant by that was that Landry will designate who leads which mission so while they are on any mission it is absolutely clear who is in charge. Carter leads some, Mitchell leads some.

In experience, knowledge, common sense, logic, etc., etc., Carter SHOULD lead after 7 years as 2IC (and leader when appropriate during those 7 years) and 1 year as leader to the elite team but, for the sake of having a "male lead", they have to do something with BB and as others have said, if he does not have some sort of leadership thing to grab on to then he brings zip to the party, IMO, since the team of Sam, Daniel and Teal'c has pretty much all that is needed to be SG1.

All I am saying is that, thus far, as far as I can see, Mitchell brings absolutely nothing to the team that makes SG1 any better than it was and, for me, he fills no real role such as diplomat, soldier, leader, scientist, warrior, etc., etc., because between Sam, Daniel and Teal'c they already have all of those things.

[DarkQuee1]

Sam's 'Not exactly'. Very nice touch. Vague enough to suit everyone, doesn't tie anything down, yet is enough to get the shippers' minds burning overtime with the possibilities. ). Must admit I had begun to nod off in my seat until that point, at which time my shipper radar pricked up and went 'hel-lo'.

Considering not only "Threads", but also the following Q&A with JM (from a Q&A thread here on GW) makes things a lot more definite:

"Question 1: On behalf of the Sam/Jack shippers (wait, please keep
reading! It's not that bad! ), will S9 provide any intentional hints
as to the status of their relationship? I say "intentional" because we
S/J shippers have the uncanny (annoying?) ability to find "ship" in
almost anything.

- Maybe. Check out Ex Deux Machina."

So..S/J shippers, go ahead and break out the bubbly! <<g>>


I agree with the posters who don't think that TPTB will ever really deal with the command issue--it has possibilities for real dramatic tension and even blowups down the road. (Heck, I'm still waiting for them to deal with the fact that Daniel screwed up and opened the galaxy to the Orii [not to mention, getting two people burned to death]. TPTB don't seem to really care about consequences.)

So far, despite all the buildup--some of it unbelievable. I have yet to figure out why Mitchell got the MoH for doing nothing more than his job--Mitchell has been pretty much of a cute nonentity.

I'm always glad to see Ba'al, but IMO, the most important thing would be to resolve the history between Jack and Ba'al, which clearly ain't ever going to happen!!

[CueBa'al]

Spoiler:

I have to admit, seeing a roomful of Ba'als was a rare comedic treat. That and Jaffa storming an office building made it a really comical episode for me. Good stuff. Wonder if SG-1 can convince the Ba'als to turn on one another

[Traveler Enroute1]

Traveler Enroute1: (My ability to respond using the Quote is not working so I cannot quote your post). Many moons ago I used the term shared command and some agreed and I explained that what I meant by that was that Landry will designate who leads which mission so while they are on any mission it is absolutely clear who is in charge. Carter leads some, Mitchell leads some.

In experience, knowledge, common sense, logic, etc., etc., Carter SHOULD lead after 7 years as 2IC (and leader when appropriate during those 7 years) and 1 year as leader to the elite team but, for the sake of having a "male lead", they have to do something with BB and as others have said, if he does not have some sort of leadership thing to grab on to then he brings zip to the party, IMO, since the team of Sam, Daniel and Teal'c has pretty much all that is needed to be SG1.

All I am saying is that, thus far, as far as I can see, Mitchell brings absolutely nothing to the team that makes SG1 any better than it was and, for me, he fills no real role such as diplomat, soldier, leader, scientist, warrior, etc., etc., because between Sam, Daniel and Teal'c they already have all of those things.

binkpmmc: Just to clarify, I AGREE WITH YOU. I was just putting out my experience with a similar thought when I posted it on another thread. Carter has all the qualifications necessary to be team leader. I'm so aware that the need for a male lead (to replace Richard Dean Anderson/O'Neill) is at play here. I'm just hoping that the coming episodes will solidify Mitchell's qualities that placed him above Carter for command.

However, I think Mitchell is a character in progress, and so far I like him. He's smart without being, well, Jack. He has a check mark in my book for at least being able or willing to hear and understand Carter, and even come up with a solution. OK, a far-fetched solution but what the hey. If TPTB don't find a way to make him work for his presence, they risk the series itself. I often wonder that with RDA's leaving, if they plan to end the series this year anyway. Hope not.

Just sayin'.

[ShimmeringStar]

Remember that in Tin Man, the first robot made from Teal'c had his symbiote's mind and personality.
I would assume that they just cloned the Goa'uld Ba'al's mind (along with the inherent genetic memory) and planted it in the empty body of his host, as opposed to cloning the host and the Goa'uld separately, and then implanting each cloned host with a Ba'al Goa'uld.
I'm not sure about the glowing eyes bit though. I would assume that only happens if you have a Goa'uld in you, but whatever.

And in Tin Man it had disastrous consequences for the Teal'c clone since the two minds couldn't exist in one body. Memory of the host I don't have issue with... most of the cloners -whether they've been Asgard or others - have ways of "saving/storing" the human clonee's memories in a database or other storage device until its time to place it in the cloned body.

What I was just wondering/trying to remember was if there'd ever been a storyline that included cloned symbiotes in the past 8 seasons. (vs. cloned humans) I do remember 2 times when different groups forced Goa'uld Queens to birth larval symbiotes against their will - S6 "Cure" where and most recently in S7 "Evolution 1&2," and those queens made sure their symbiote offspring were unstable and that they didn't pass on the genetic knowledge, but I couldn't think of a time when anyone had tried cloning a symbiote.

The glowy eyes indicating the symbiote is the 'whatever' that interested me because any of the characters who can 'sense' a Goa'uld's presence would know right off the bat that they're not dealing with the real Ba'al if B. didn't find a way to successfully clone his symbiote. It wouldn't be enough to clone his symbiote's mind for implantation to the human host - those glowy eyes and the symbiote's presence to send tingles up his enemy's spine would have to be there for the characters to completly buy into that they were dealing with the 'real' Ba'al...

[Amakusa]

I have yet to figure out why Mitchell got the MoH for doing nothing more than his job--Mitchell has been pretty much of a cute nonentity.

Cheap shot, considering I can't think of any career military who had to go out of their way (jump through the ring of fire while everyone is shooting at him/her while carrying a baby-like) to get medals. They do their job, yes, but they also do the right thing at the right time and still get a big fat 'Mission Accomplished' on their record.

I quote: (excerpt from http://www.medalofhonor.com/recipients/airforce.html)

" The Medal of Honor is awarded for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of one's life, above and beyond the call of duty. This gallantry must be performed either while engaged in action against an enemy of the United States; while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or, while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.

For award of the Medal of Honor there must be no margin of doubt or any possibility of error. To justify the award, a person must clearly render himself conspicuously above his comrades by an act so outstanding that it clearly distinguishes his gallantry as being beyond the call of duty. It must be the type of action which if not done would not leave him open to criticism, but must be done without detriment to his mission or to the command to which he is attached. Further, the recommendation must be submitted within three years of the act, and the medal must be awarded within five years of the act (there have, however, been exceptions to the rules governing the timing of recommendations and awarding the Medal of Honor)."

The mission: Defend the cargo ship/outpost in Antarctica until SG-1 comes up with a more permanent solution (?)
The enemy: Anubis
The allies: US Air Force Prometheus and fighter complement, unknown weaponry in outpost

What happened: Mitchell shot down the craft making an attack run on the cargo ship while the (mission-critical) crew was still inside.

Maybe it was his job, but he did it. He also got shot down because of it (although I freely admit I don't remember if him getting shot down was a consequence of going to save SG-1's ship).


Does that sound like it's not deserving of a Medal of Honor? Did blowing-up two Motherships in Earth's orbit deserve a Medal? Did you know some good (real-life) officers had to die to get their Medal?