Sfdebris.net

Given what he's said in "Bliss" and elsewhere, my feeling is that he tends to think the same as Mike Wong does in his ST vs. SW database, that the Crystalline Entity should have been put down on principle because it's a danger to human beings, but then he also praises the episode for saying at least they try to do something new with the concept while for Gene it was just "it's a giant space lifeform, what more do you need?" I dunno, what do you guys think?

I'm sure I remember him saying somewhere something about the Crystalline Entity, and not being at all impressed by it (rather than an opinion on the episode), that it fell down completely because of Gene's view. I can't for the life of me remember which review it was in.

I think it was "Datalore."

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Fri Oct 12, 2018 9:47 am Given what he's said in "Bliss" and elsewhere, my feeling is that he tends to think the same as Mike Wong does in his ST vs. SW database, that the Crystalline Entity should have been put down on principle because it's a danger to human beings, but then he also praises the episode for saying at least they try to do something new with the concept while for Gene it was just "it's a giant space lifeform, what more do you need?" I dunno, what do you guys think?

Picard at one point compares the deaths of thousands of people to being no more problematic than a whale eating fish. He is going to crucify the episode.

No kidding. And for my money, there is no comparison. People's lives mean more than animals.

I'm curious about this too. While we all know Chuck can really rip into characters at times, I also think he lets characters off pretty easily on occasion (Riker in Chain of Command, for example). I'm hoping he really lets Picard have it though, he is at or near his worst here.

Whether you blame the character himself or the writing for failing to provide sufficient justification for his actions, it looks like Picard is almost criminally negligent in his duties to protect innocent civilians and unusually callous toward the many deaths caused by the entity.

For how he should have handled it, you can look no further than Kirk in episodes like The Man Trap and The Devil in the Dark. Kirk's not out for revenge, and he sympathizes with Spock's regret over the destruction of a unique lifeform- but he doesn't for a second let his curiosity interfere with his duty. Picard does. He also seems to have forgotten that the entity actually conspired with Lore back in season 1.

That is true. The Horta had never been shown to conspiring with another creature that was so clearly devious and had an ulterior motive - it was just protecting its young. And lest we forget, Kirk did initially want to kill it.

"Silicon Avatar" was my first "I want to slap Picard" moment. Then I told myself that people in the 24th century can have different ethics than I do -- not necessarily better, just different -- and pretty much let it go. But that meant a certain detachment, a little less identifying with the characters, and a little more watching it analytically.

Don't get me wrong, I can agree with Picard to a degree. I dislike the idea of revenge, or hunting someone down to brutalize them in revenge. No good can come from that. That's why we have an impartial system, and you should only resort to something like, say, vigilante justice when the system fails. But other than that, the idea of, say, murdering or torturing or even raping someone out of revenge, in hatred... it sickens me and twists my stomach. So I can sympathize with the idea of not wanting to take vengeance on another creature. Though as the franchise would later prove, that's not the case, and secondly, that even if they can bargain with the entity, it should face some form of justice for the lives it's taken, the worlds it's destroyed. Just because you don't want to torture it to death slowly doesn't mean you can't, say, maybe lock it up inside a nebula or something. Just my view.

Yukaphile wrote: ↑Sat Oct 13, 2018 6:17 am Though as the franchise would later prove, that's not the case, and secondly, that even if they can bargain with the entity, it should face some form of justice for the lives it's taken, the worlds it's destroyed. Just because you don't want to torture it to death slowly doesn't mean you can't, say, maybe lock it up inside a nebula or something. Just my view.

I could see a future where no-one is interested in that sort of justice and they take the view that someone or something is either still a threat so needs to be locked away, or even killed if it comes to that, simply because that's the only way of stopping it from causing more harm, but not out of any sense that it's just to do so (and it's not really what we do now).