"Stargate Universe" Discussion/Speculation (Spoilers)

[bluealien]

So I decided to take my ramblings on the topic and compose something a little more coherent.

You can read it at my LJ if you like.

Do you think that putting everything under the umbrella of "science fiction" gives the writers the opportunity to touch on things that cannot be dealt with in other genres. How did you come to this conclusion. SGU is not based in any futuristic time or world, it is in the present. These people have been taken to another galaxy where they have come in contact with superior technology, but why should they toss their morals aside because they find themselves in a different part of the galaxy.

Do you think that moral and ethical dilemmas are only condusive to science fiction.. whether the characters are put in a morally questionable situation by using an unknown device from a far away galaxy or whether their morals are tested in their own front garden shouldnt make any difference. This testing of the human psyche has nothing to do with science fiction. It's to do with the moral standards of the individual. You can justify anything if you want it badly enough. It isnt any secret that we all have different moral standands and react differently to different situations. Some people thrive on pressure while others can succumb to temptation at the drop of a hat...

We live in a society where the human race is capable of all sorts of horrific and questionable acts, there is nothing new here, just the different levels that some are willing to stoop to for their own gain and gratification. So the writers wish to explore this topic on Stargate.. to pose scenarios where we see the main characters acting unfavourably and then we can all question the morality or the justification of such acts.. and where does that take us... how is that answering of even understanding any of the issues we have in everyday society... don't we have enough real life scenarios on these kind of issues without it being used for shock value on Stargate.

Will the writers just pose the scenario then leave the audience to fight over who was right or wrong... throw out some morally questionable situations and let us fight it out between us.. raising controversial topics but giving no insight or depth to them.... and giving the writers past history I have no faith whatsoever that the same writers that gave us Millers Crossing will impart any wisdom or insight into any morally questional topics.... invading someone elses body for sex, intimacy can never be justifed to me..no matter how you chose to spin it.. . This is not just depicting a flawed character but a weak and selfish one.. because they have given in to temptation to satisfy their own needs... there are people in our society who do this and commit atrocities in the process...so do we start justifying their actions as well.... whats the difference between using futuristic technology to abuse someone else's body or using an unsuspecting comotose person to experience intimacy..

I have no problem with flawed characters but I draw a line at tuning in to see characters who are only interested in their own needs and not those around them...

Spoiler:

Rush is so caught up in his own personal problems he doesnt want to go back to earth and it doesnt seem to bother him that probably everyone else on the ship wants to get home..

. this kind of character doesnt interest me.. I'm perfectly aware that there are many self absorbed people out there who put their own needs before anyone else.... and I don't need the SGU writers to point this out to me..

[PG15]

Also, Brian and David mentioned that they were up early for on-location filming today. PG also mentioned that they were still filming at UBC today...I wonder if the two are related?

If so...PG should rush out there because David, Elyse, Brian and Jamil are all (apparently) in the same on-location spot today.

[EDIT] Hooray! 1700 posts!

Actually, they're filming in Surrey, which is like the distant suburbs of Vancouver.

Believe me, I'm thinking about it. The thing is, I thought it was a little awkward stalking them in my own University yesterday, but at least I could've had legitimate reasons to be there (i.e. to learn). But this; if I go stalk them in Surrey, then it would literally be stalking, as there is no real reason I'm there other than to head them off. Plus, they'd probably remember me from yesterday, which makes it even weirder.

I was hoping that some other Vancouverite would go do the honors.

Congrats on 1700!! Only ~300 more until a custom Avatar!

Damn, can't green you. Oh well, mental green!

[Pandora's_Box]

Do you think that putting everything under the umbrella of "science fiction" gives the writers the opportunity to touch on things that cannot be dealt with in other genres.

These things are dealt with in every genre. Rape is almost always mentioned at one point or another on nearly every show. Countless books have big or small plot lines involving rape. Racism is portrayed in novels and shows of every genre because they portray a facsimile of real life and real life involves racism unfortunately - and discrimination of all sorts.

I don't think putting everything under the "umbrella of science fiction" gives writers the opportunity, I think the nature of writing gives writers the opportunity. Since the early days of the Greek philosophers we have been questioning our very existence, what makes us human, what makes us good and bad and everything in between. Only by continuing to ask those questions and explore the possibilities of every type of situation can we ever hope to come to the semblance of a conclusion.

How did you come to this conclusion.

I've read many books and watched many shows.

SGU is not based in any futuristic time or world, it is in the present. These people have been taken to another galaxy where they have come in contact with superior technology, but why should they toss their morals aside because they find themselves in a different part of the galaxy.

I've never said they should toss their morals aside. I have said that I think we should explore what happens when people lose track of their morals or when their morals stop being black and white. What happens in that gray area? How does a person discern right from wrong then?

This testing of the human psyche has nothing to do with science fiction. It's to do with the moral standards of the individual. You can justify anything if you want it badly enough.

I'm sorry what? Did I ever say I was justifying rape by calling it science fiction rape? Did I ever say that it wouldn't be rape if it was science fiction rape? Did I ever say that I would even allow the writers off the hook for condoning rape?

What I said was...

A writer is not racist for simply writing a racist character nor is he sexist for writing a story in which sexism occurs. Delivery matters and even a bad delivery does not necessarily signal rampant homophobia in a writer, merely a poor case of expression and development, one that may be resolved with practice and further study. Not to ignore the situations where writers write such things because they are racist or sexist etc…, but given that the episode has not aired, there exists no proof of this either way.

I refuse to make a judgment on whether or not the episode condones such things until I see it.

So the writers wish to explore this topic on Stargate.. to pose scenarios where we see the main characters acting unfavourably and then we can all question the morality or the justification of such acts.. and where does that take us... how is that answering of even understanding any of the issues we have in everyday society... don't we have enough real life scenarios on these kind of issues without it being used for shock value on Stargate.

It only takes you as far as you want to take it. You want to discuss it and learn from it, then you will. You want to be pissed off about it, then you will. You want to ignore it, then you will.

But don't presume to censor people (the writers) because it's something you don't wish to see on SGU.

As for your comments about "justifying" sex in another body, firstly you don't know that it'll be about justifying it, and secondly you don't know it will happen. For goodness sake, all of this uproar is circulating around rampant speculation blown widely out of proportion. I more worried about the fact that so many people, based on how little we've heard about the episode, have already decided that the sex will happen. Maybe that was the point of all of this, to see where people's minds immediately take them with the tiniest provocation and how they react with absolutely no concrete evidence.

I'm perfectly aware that there are many self absorbed people out there who put their own needs before anyone else.... and I don't need the SGU writers to point this out to me..

And I don't need you to point out to me that you don't need it pointed out to you. Most people don't need it pointed out to them. But look, here you are pointing out your perspective on the issue anyway. And here I am responding. Neither of us need this, but we do it anyway. Why? Because that's what people do. They discuss and they talk and they argue and they interact in whatever form that interaction may take.

You trying to tell me that the writers of a television show don't also have that right because you don't feel like listening?

[Helmar]

Do you think that putting everything under the umbrella of "science fiction" gives the writers the opportunity to touch on things that cannot be dealt with in other genres. How did you come to this conclusion. SGU is not based in any futuristic time or world, it is in the present. These people have been taken to another galaxy where they have come in contact with superior technology, but why should they toss their morals aside because they find themselves in a different part of the galaxy.

Do you think that moral and ethical dilemmas are only condusive to science fiction.. whether the characters are put in a morally questionable situation by using an unknown device from a far away galaxy or whether their morals are tested in their own front garden shouldnt make any difference. This testing of the human psyche has nothing to do with science fiction. It's to do with the moral standards of the individual. You can justify anything if you want it badly enough. It isnt any secret that we all have different moral standands and react differently to different situations. Some people thrive on pressure while others can succumb to temptation at the drop of a hat...

We live in a society where the human race is capable of all sorts of horrific and questionable acts, there is nothing new here, just the different levels that some are willing to stoop to for their own gain and gratification. So the writers wish to explore this topic on Stargate.. to pose scenarios where we see the main characters acting unfavourably and then we can all question the morality or the justification of such acts.. and where does that take us... how is that answering of even understanding any of the issues we have in everyday society... don't we have enough real life scenarios on these kind of issues without it being used for shock value on Stargate.

Will the writers just pose the scenario then leave the audience to fight over who was right or wrong... throw out some morally questionable situations and let us fight it out between us.. raising controversial topics but giving no insight or depth to them.... and giving the writers past history I have no faith whatsoever that the same writers that gave us Millers Crossing will impart any wisdom or insight into any morally questional topics.... invading someone elses body for sex, intimacy can never be justifed to me..no matter how you chose to spin it.. . This is not just depicting a flawed character but a weak and selfish one.. because they have given in to temptation to satisfy their own needs... there are people in our society who do this and commit atrocities in the process...so do we start justifying their actions as well.... whats the difference between using futuristic technology to abuse someone else's body or using an unsuspecting comotose person to experience intimacy..

I have no problem with flawed characters but I draw a line at tuning in to see characters who are only interested in their own needs and not those around them...

Spoiler:

Rush is so caught up in his own personal problems he doesnt want to go back to earth and it doesnt seem to bother him that probably everyone else on the ship wants to get home..

. this kind of character doesnt interest me.. I'm perfectly aware that there are many self absorbed people out there who put their own needs before anyone else.... and I don't need the SGU writers to point this out to me..

At first I have to argue that SGU is very much science fiction, it doesn't matter if it plays in the future. Secondly I concur when you say it isn't necessary for it to be science fiction to touch all these topics, but I have to add that gives the show a lot more realistic touch if it includes these dark sides of humans.

Then generally, there are, even today, very few common accepted morals and ethics that can just be applied to human society. There are some commonly accepted standard but they are mostly a little fuzzy when it comes to apply them on a special case. Forgive me to cite the German constitution and not the USs, but I don't want to read it up, "§1 The human dignity is untouchable... §2 It is acknowledged that the human rights are the basics for all human societies... " (free translation)
I think this or something is written in any western constitution and the rest of the laws is based on it. That's definitely great, I think we don't have to argue that and all of us who live in countries where these is respected can be happy. But if you ask all of the seven billion people these might be the only things they can commonly accept, if at all.

Now coming to some details, note that these are objectively presented facts, beginning with some easy stuff, alcohol.
Alcoholic beverage is forbidden in many muslimic countries due to religion, it is a crime to possess, brew or distill or drink it. In the states it is mostly allowed when you turn 21 I think and in most of Europe at least drinking beer is allowed from your 16th birthday on. Distilled and other stronger alcohol sometimes from 18 on.

I could list the same for driving a car, where it is a little the other way round. And the actual knowledge and experience you need to have to drive is also very interesting. Not to talk about weapon possession and your holy second constitutional amendment, which isn't even imaginable over here.

Turning to some more interesting laws and law enforcement the first thing to mention is of course the death penalty, the U.S. has it at least in dozen states if I'm up to date and Canada, I think all of Europe don't have it. Say what you want that is an enormous moral difference how a society treats it's criminals. Same for health care (I know hot right now) and most important education and who gets it and in what quality. All very interesting but within the western world these differences aren't that bad that we would have serious trouble.

Now talking about some law which was last year accepted by the Afghan parliament, don't ask me about the letters, but it said something like, "a married woman has to sleep with her husband as often and when he wishes". The agitations spread the globe and the softened it somehow, I didn't follow the debates. They called it rape paragraph and it originally kinda was.

If you now want to make a list and compare just the written laws from all over the world, keep it to real democracies if you want, you will get a hell of a difference in the moral basics, all coming from history and with great parts of religion - in worst case old testament like.

Naturally everyone has this matrix of his own moral standards from the society he or she lives in and tries to put it over every situation and judge by them as always. Starts with little things of politeness, which are ignored if they don't match and over things you find perhaps disgusting but still can ignore to the bad things, injustices you can't ignore anymore.

Starting with two people there are two of those matrices and the more different the people are, or the more people there are the more incompatibilities occur. Taking this back to the science fiction level this rapidly expands when aliens join. And then the really interesting questions are asked...

The 'invading someone's body for sex' thing isn't what Rush is doing, he is the counterpart in that scenario as far as we know. How clear it is to him who is in Camile's body's control we can only guess right now, so that's not really to discuss or to judge, but it is clearly affects the darkness of the moral gray area.
So first question, who is the rapist? Rush? Perry?
Assuming the sex itself - assuming there will be sex - is consensual is Rush a rapist then?
Assuming he knows it is not Camile, what then?
Assuming he knows it is not Camile and he knows she wouldn't want sex with him, anything changes?
Assuming Perry knows that Camile doesn't want sex with Rush, what then?
Assuming Perry tricks Rush, making him truly believe her being Camile, is he a rapist? She?

I'm sure there are more, but if it's rape is not really the point I think, the effects are the interesting thing. Do Camile and Rush speak with each other, does Camile stays of the LRC or does she still want to return to earth to her love?

Generally talking how to handle the body switching?
Is a kiss still okay or yet completely off limits. What if it's only on the cheek, what if it's with tongue, I don't need to picture the whole scale here the point should be clear.
Every person draws these lines somewhere else, assuming willing use of the LRC probably most people somewhere between don't touch anything, just talk and a friendly hug. But surely there are people for whom kissing at least would be okay.


So where do you draw the line between a flawed character and a weak and selfish one?
Is using the elevator when you don't have to and thereby block a person in a wheelchair from using it selfish? Weak? Or just a little flaw? (Hey you were in a hurry, he can wait...)

How is the definition of a flawed person versus the one of a selfish one. Isn't selfishness a flaw and can range greatly in intensity? I think what I tried to explain with the moral standards applies as well to the judgement of a person's grade of flawedness.

I think it's just a tv series what better place to ask these questions? And to ask the tough ones you have to show tough things.

P.S. This kinda got really general and we will see how much it relates on SGU, but I hope they ask more tough ones than they did before.

[prion]

I personally hope they dont do that and stick with what they have controversial or not. Even if when it comes down to the final product and i dont like it, id have more respect for TPTB if they stand their ground. The saying "you've made your bed, so sleep in it" comes to mind.

TPTB may not make changes for the fans, but they will if it means it could mean advertisers could pull out. As long as people pay to put the show on the air, there is that chance. Too many advertisers pull out and well, kiss the show goodbye.

[Madwelshboy]

TPTB may not make changes for the fans, but they will if it means it could mean advertisers could pull out. As long as people pay to put the show on the air, there is that chance. Too many advertisers pull out and well, kiss the show goodbye.

At the end of the day, I'd rather that happen. Once a creative team, bow to the wants of the network or fan groups, *cough*Heroes*cough* the show in question, loses its focus, the rating and quality drop and it dies a slow painful death.

[jelgate]

ETA: You edited that. Now I just read dumb.

Surely you are use to it by now.

Now my turn to ask, what did I miss the past days?

Any big spoilers?

[Coronach]

Surely you are use to it by now.

Now my turn to ask, what did I miss the past days?

Any big spoilers?

I don't think you've missed anything, to be honest. It's relatively quiet now that the majority of the "Sabotage" ranting is over with.

[Eternal Density]

Why do people keep talking about changing/reshooting scenes to 'fix' Sabotage? For one thing, the perceived 'problems' might not even exist in the current script, and as for reshooting parts, I didn't think they'd actually shot any of the relevant scenes, because they have to finish casting the character on whom the controversy is centered.

[Tawny]

Why do people keep talking about changing/reshooting scenes to 'fix' Sabotage? For one thing, the perceived 'problems' might not even exist in the current script, and as for reshooting parts, I didn't think they'd actually shot any of the relevant scenes, because they have to finish casting the character on whom the controversy is centered.

This. And I'm really hoping that they don't back down and just film it as it was meant to be filmed, not how people think it should be filmed.

[PG15]

They haven't shot anything for Sabotage yet, actually.

[Coronach]

They haven't shot anything for Sabotage yet, actually.

Clarification question: Is "Sabotage" still in the reviewing phase, and then it'll get sent back to Barbara (?) for the rewrite?

[Eternal Density]

They haven't shot anything for Sabotage yet, actually.

Exactly.
I hope they don't roll over for the few complainants, and I hope they succeed in casting a great actor to play this role.

[PG15]

Sabotage is 2 episodes away. They should be shooting "Lost" next.

[Eternal Density]

Sabotage is 2 episodes away. They should be shooting "Lost" next.

Which is, incidentally, not the first Stargate episode name that is the name of another series.