Bloodlines (111)

[amconway]

Hmm... yes, good point! I was just agreeing with you in saying that her objections were short-sighted and I didn't buy it. But! Evenstar had a great point in saying that, to Sam, they were undercover and she did not want to draw any attention. Daniel was very much driven by his emotions and wanted his chance at revenge.

Great stuff, you two.

Thank to you for starting the ball rolling!
The reason the I don't share the belief that Sam was concerned with the need for secrecy isn't that I don't think it's a logical assumption, or that not being sneaky had bad results, it's that I don't recall there being any evidence to support that Sam was influenced by that in wishing to stop Daniel. She makes no mention of it, even in passing. Or have I forgotten something?

[EvenstarSRV]

Thank to you for starting the ball rolling!
The reason the I don't share the belief that Sam was concerned with the need for secrecy isn't that I don't think it's a logical assumption, or that not being sneaky had bad results, it's that I don't recall there being any evidence to support that Sam was influenced by that in wishing to stop Daniel. She makes no mention of it, even in passing. Or have I forgotten something?

I don't think she ever said it explicitly, but it's something that I kind of inferred based on her actions, training, and what happened after they left the temple. And since Carter is a military officer, I do assume that she'll be concerned with being covert on a stealth mission even if she never says it; same with O'Neill, it's part of their training.

Carter and Daniel were suppose to guard the gate and wait for O'Neill, but then they saw the procession to the temple and she decided to follow it out of curiosity, essentially not following Jack's orders. For Sam, I saw the scientist overriding the soldier at that point.

After they got what they came for at the temple, Carter starts to immediately leave, while Daniel is still fixated by the larva, to me thinking about Sha're and Skarra. For Sam, she's completed a bonus mission objective, but knows she'd better get back to the gate or she won't be able to support Jack and Teal'c, her primary objective. I saw the soldier start to reassert itself over the scientist at that point.

They leave the temple and are soon attacked by a Jaffa patrol, that Sam is able to temporarily fend off, but now they're really high-tailing back to the Gate. This also rushes the events with Teal'c, Bra'tac, and Ry'ac, and could have easily led to their capture had more Jaffa been guarding the gate.

[amconway]

I don't think she ever said it explicitly, but it's something that I kind of inferred based on her actions, training, and what happened after they left the temple. And since Carter is a military officer, I do assume that she'll be concerned with being covert on a stealth mission even if she never says it; same with O'Neill, it's part of their training.

Carter and Daniel were suppose to guard the gate and wait for O'Neill, but then they saw the procession to the temple and she decided to follow it out of curiosity, essentially not following Jack's orders. For Sam, I saw the scientist overriding the soldier at that point.

After they got what they came for at the temple, Carter starts to immediately leave, while Daniel is still fixated by the larva, to me thinking about Sha're and Skarra. For Sam, she's completed a bonus mission objective, but knows she'd better get back to the gate or she won't be able to support Jack and Teal'c, her primary objective. I saw the soldier start to reassert itself over the scientist at that point.

They leave the temple and are soon attacked by a Jaffa patrol, that Sam is able to temporarily fend off, but now they're really high-tailing back to the Gate. This also rushes the events with Teal'c, Bra'tac, and Ry'ac, and could have easily led to their capture had more Jaffa been guarding the gate.

This boils down to a difference in analytical method. I don't feel like I can assume things that aren't shown, verbally or non-verbally, by the actors. In this case, you make a very logical assumption, but the next person to join the argument, say, Joe-Bob Mallrat, might use the same method to infer that Sam doesn't want him to do it because she wants to take one home as a pet-we know she likes animals... We would have no way to counter that argument, because we would have already accepted your infinately more logical hypothesis. We need to have proof within the episode, or we are left in an uncomfortable position.

[EvenstarSRV]

This boils down to a difference in analytical method. I don't feel like I can assume things that aren't shown, verbally or non-verbally, by the actors. In this case, you make a very logical assumption, but the next person to join the argument, say, Joe-Bob Mallrat, might use the same method to infer that Sam doesn't want him to do it because she wants to take one home as a pet-we know she likes animals... We would have no way to counter that argument, because we would have already accepted your infinately more logical hypothesis. We need to have proof within the episode, or we are left in an uncomfortable position.

I agree is does come down to assumptions to a degree, but since we can't be shown everything on screen, I think certain assumptions have to be made based on what we know about the characters and their situation.

It's rather like whenever I watch an episode, I go in with the assumption that all of these characters care about each other. In Secrets after Apophis leaves with Sha're, both Jack and Teal'c are shown verbally trying to comfort Daniel, while Sam is shown dialing the gate and then leaving.

Based purely on what's shown on the screen, it may seem like Sam does not care about Daniel's pain at losing Sha're again, but I feel I can reasonably assume that, based on what I've been shown before concerning the two characters, Sam does sympathize with and care about Daniel even though it's not explicitly shown on the screen.

In this episode, I feel an unvoiced concern for stealth is a reasonable assumption based on the fact that Carter is a military officer in a military situation.

[amconway]

I agree is does come down to assumptions to a degree, but since we can't be shown everything on screen, I think certain assumptions have to be made based on what we know about the characters and their situation.

It's rather like whenever I watch an episode, I go in with the assumption that all of these characters care about each other. In Secrets after Apophis leaves with Sha're, both Jack and Teal'c are shown verbally trying to comfort Daniel, while Sam is shown dialing the gate and then leaving.

Based purely on what's shown on the screen, it may seem like Sam does not care about Daniel's pain at losing Sha're again, but I feel I can reasonably assume that, based on what I've been shown before concerning the two characters, Sam does sympathize with and care about Daniel even though it's not explicitly shown on the screen.

In this episode, I feel an unvoiced concern for stealth is a reasonable assumption based on the fact that Carter is a military officer in a military situation.

I agree that it's reasonable, but I think it's too much of a leap to assume it here, in that we aren't shown anything to coroborate it. The assumption is based entirely on her being a military officer unlike the assumption that Sam cares for Daniel which we have seen explicitly demontrated in virtually every episode. It's much less specific. And we have seen Sam make some decisions that are rather dubious in a military light (ignoring orders and staying with Cassandra, without even radioing O'Neill to tell him that she'd figured out they wouldn't die, even though there was a radio in the same room)

[EvenstarSRV]

I agree that it's reasonable, but I think it's too much of a leap to assume it here, in that we aren't shown anything to coroborate it. The assumption is based entirely on her being a military officer unlike the assumption that Sam cares for Daniel which we have seen explicitly demontrated in virtually every episode. It's much less specific. And we have seen Sam make some decisions that are rather dubious in a military light (ignoring orders and staying with Cassandra, without even radioing O'Neill to tell him that she'd figured out they wouldn't die, even though there was a radio in the same room)

But I would say that Carter has been portrayed as a pretty by-the-books military officer for the most part, so I personally feel comfortable assuming that unless there are mitigating factors, she's going to follow military protocol.

It's kinda like in Torment of Tantalus, it initially struck me a quite odd that Daniel wanted to stay behind on the planet, considering his previously shown devotion to finding Sha're. But on reflection, I saw it as the archaeologist/explorer part of Daniel temporarily overwhelming his emotions for his wife, and when given a moment to rethink his decision, he clears his head and leaves. There wasn't anything explicit in the episode about Sha're, but I felt comfortable assuming that Daniel still loved his wife despite being distracted by the database.

In this episode, I saw the scientifically curious part of Sam overwhelming the military part, then once her objective was complete she cleared her head and her all her actions after the temple were entirely in line with her military training. Same with Singularity, where her emotions as a woman temporarily overwhelmed her military discipline, or when in her excitement to test her and Daniel's theory in Cold Lazarus she forgot to ask permission for Teal'c to use his staff.

[amconway]

But I would say that Carter has been portrayed as a pretty by-the-books military officer for the most part, so I personally feel comfortable assuming that unless there are mitigating factors, she's going to follow military protocol.

It's kinda like in Torment of Tantalus, it initially struck me a quite odd that Daniel wanted to stay behind on the planet, considering his previously shown devotion to finding Sha're. But on reflection, I saw it as the archaeologist/explorer part of Daniel temporarily overwhelming his emotions for his wife, and when given a moment to rethink his decision, he clears his head and leaves. There wasn't anything explicit in the episode about Sha're, but I felt comfortable assuming that Daniel still loved his wife despite being distracted by the database.

In this episode, I saw the scientifically curious part of Sam overwhelming the military part, then once her objective was complete she cleared her head and her all her actions after the temple were entirely in line with her military training. Same with Singularity, where her emotions as a woman temporarily overwhelmed her military discipline, or when in her excitement to test her and Daniel's theory in Cold Lazarus she forgot to ask permission for Teal'c to use his staff.

You raise some very good points there, but isn't it equally plausible then that her concern that Daniel is about to make a moral error in judgement also overwhelms her military training, that her morals take precedence here? Not only because she believes it to be wrong, but because she doesn't want Daniel to go down that road?

[EvenstarSRV]

You raise some very good points there, but isn't it equally plausible then that her concern that Daniel is about to make a moral error in judgement also overwhelms her military training, that her morals take precedence here? Not only because she believes it to be wrong, but because she doesn't want Daniel to go down that road?

Yeah, I'd say that's equally plausible. When I watched the episode I was more focused on Teal'c's storyline and the action after the temple, so familial and military concerns were on my mind far more than moral ones, but you make a good point.

I guess my main issue was the description of Sam's actions as short-sighted and wrong while Daniel was clear-sighted and right. I don't see either characters' actions as wholly right or wrong, just that each has different motivations for their actions. I happen to agree with Sam's perspective more, whether what I inferred militarily or was stated morally, but I also understand Daniel's motivations.

[amconway]

I guess my main issue was the description of Sam's actions as short-sighted and wrong while Daniel was clear-sighted and right. I don't see either characters' actions as wholly right or wrong, just that each has different motivations for their actions. I happen to agree with Sam's perspective more, whether what I inferred militarily or was stated morally, but I also understand Daniel's motivations.

Heh, whereas I feel certain that Daniel was correct. Those Goa'uld needed to be deadified.
This truly is one of the most interesting episodes in that the character's actions can be seen in so many ways, all with equal plausibility!

[EvenstarSRV]

Heh, whereas I feel certain that Daniel was correct. Those Goa'uld needed to be deadified.
This truly is one of the most interesting episodes in that the character's actions can be seen in so many ways, all with equal plausibility!

My main problem with the thought that those Goa'uld larva needed to be killed is that while they obviously have the potential to do evil, at this point in their lives they literally haven't done anything good or evil, they just exist. The preemptive judgment that they must die personally makes me quite uncomfortable. I feel it's akin to saying all Jaffa should be killed because of their potential to do evil, but that denies the possibility of Jaffa or even some symbiotes (like the Tok'ra) doing good, which we've seen happen several times in the series.

I also find it interesting that while the symbiotes can become hosts and kill, in their immature state they can also save lives, and one did indeed save Teal'c.

[amconway]

My main problem with the thought that those Goa'uld larva needed to be killed is that while they obviously have the potential to do evil, at this point in their lives they literally haven't done anything good or evil, they just exist. The preemptive judgment that they must die personally makes me quite uncomfortable. I feel it's akin to saying all Jaffa should be killed because of their potential to do evil, but that denies the possibility of Jaffa or even some symbiotes (like the Tok'ra) doing good, which we've seen happen several times in the series.

I also find it interesting that while the symbiotes can become hosts and kill, in their immature state they can also save lives, and one did indeed save Teal'c.

Well, we know that they are evil from birth, but the characters don't at this point, so we have to go with what they know. (We also know that it is possible for queens to create offspring without the genetic memory, but they don't know that either. We also know that Egeria was the only queen to do so in the history of the Goa'uld. That makes the Tok'ra rather a statistical anomoly)

Each one of those larval Goa'uld is going to take multiple senitent hosts, subsuming their free will. They have no reason to think this won't be the case, given their prior history with the Goa'uld--the free will part, that is. They know for a fact that they will take multiple hosts. How would they explain that to the families of the victims? 'Sorry, we knew they'd enslave lots of people, but since they hadn't done it yet...' That's what Goa'uld do, they know it.

They can save Jaffa, but at the expense of their immune system, and making them dependant on the Goa'uld for survival. That kind of sucks the 'good' out of it.

To me, there's a big difference between a soldier who is coerced and lied to, and a parasite using sentient beings for its own benefit.

[EvenstarSRV]

Well, we know that they are evil from birth, but the characters don't at this point, so we have to go with what they know. (We also know that it is possible for queens to create offspring without the genetic memory, but they don't know that either. We also know that Egeria was the only queen to do so in the history of the Goa'uld. That makes the Tok'ra rather a statistical anomoly)

Each one of those larval Goa'uld is going to take multiple senitent hosts, subsuming their free will. They have no reason to think this won't be the case, given their prior history with the Goa'uld--the free will part, that is. They know for a fact that they will take multiple hosts. How would they explain that to the families of the victims? 'Sorry, we knew they'd enslave lots of people, but since they hadn't done it yet...' That's what Goa'uld do, they know it.

It's that very preemptive judgment against the infant Goa'uld that just I can't agree with, it's too much allowing the ends to justify the means for me, and I have major issues with that line of reasoning.

I just have a very hard time condemning anyone or anything to death until they've actually done something to deserve it. I can't agree with killing anyone based solely on their potential.

[amconway]

It's that very preemptive judgment against the infant Goa'uld that just I can't agree with, it's too much allowing the ends to justify the means for me, and I have major issues with that line of reasoning.

I think we've reached an impass at this point, because i just can't see that at all, knowing that they will take hosts, enslaving them. To me, that gives every justification. The only practical alternative is to wait until they take hosts and kill them then, which would be less than ideal.

[EvenstarSRV]

I think we've reached an impass at this point, because i just can't see that at all, knowing that they will take hosts, enslaving them. To me, that gives every justification. The only practical alternative is to wait until they take hosts and kill them then, which would be less than ideal.

Less than ideal yes, but more fair in my opinion. I just cannot condemn children for being born into a bad environment or with a bad heritage/ancestry.

So impasse it is.

[amconway]

Less than ideal yes, but more fair in my opinion. I just cannot condemn children for being born into a bad environment or with a bad heritage/ancestry.

So impasse it is.

But you're okay with killing hosts whose slavery could have been prevented?
I feel the need to point out that we aren't talking about children with bad parents, here. We're talking about snakey alien parasites. A better comparison would be tapeworms...