![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ST:TNG Deja Q; A Matter of Perspective
Oct. 16th, 2010 06:58 pmDeja Q is still fun. Q discovering 'Ow' and Data explaining about how humans need you to work in groups and also not call people minions even if your IQ is 2005 are high points. What I hadn't remembered was how much religious language is mixed in there. Talk about redemption and Q offering to become a missionary. Data says that would be noble. So what is the position of 24th century humanity on religion? How much is that language specifically religious and how much is it a relic, a trace of old dominants? It's interesting.
A Matter of Perspective was interesting too, especially for actors, so much of it being in the different performance. It's one of the story shapes you've got to try out at least once. With an established cast and setting the audience basically knows who to believe from the start... or they think they do. Farscape did fabulous things with that. Here though I think it leads to a nasty skew in the story: The difference between Riker and Manua's perspective of the scene in the guest bedroom. In Riker's version Manua tries to seduce him; in Manua's version Riker tries to rape her. Riker uses the word, only to deny it, saying he certainly didn't try that. And the audience, knowing Riker, believes it - but Troi says Manua was not being deceptive, she believed the version in her testimony. Which means there's a woman who believes Riker tried to rape her, we're shown it, told it in so many words... and then the story drops it. It's not the focus of the extradition request so that makes a certain amount of sense. But the problem is the writer level stuff, that the writer felt it was okay to drop an accusation of rape in there and treat it as if of course it is false and of course the audience won't believe it, because Riker doesn't believe it, even when the woman thinks it was assault. And that's a problem. All those of courses add up to of course you should believe a guy you're friends with rather than a woman you haven't met, even when you know she isn't lying. They just walk away from that, the story treats it as though it didn't need dealing with. Really big problem in the room right there.
It's a problem also because Riker can be all smiley and very directly appreciative about women and there's been stories that throw him into bed with the local dignitaries, but none where that causes a problem. Here there's a problem but the story treats it as being irrelevant, tangential, a red herring, probably even a mistaken reading of him. His behaviour is just not addressed. And sure, he thinks he's being reasonable and professional and the woman was throwing herself at him... but really, people do think that about themselves. He's not the only opinion in that room, and she wasn't lying. Troi says "It is the truth, as you each remember it." But her truth is just dropped. And sure, it could be her that has the tidied up memories, but why is that the story? Why does that story need telling again?
I know one writer answer, because they need a motivation that distracts you from the science stuff. But it ends up telling something ugly.
Also in this episode you get another example of the weird and unworky attitude to Federation wealth. How exactly does it work? What rewards can you get from success that you can't get elsewise? What's the advantage in selling to the Romulans or Ferengi? If everything you can dream of can come out of a replicator or a holodeck then what does wealth mean? And if there's limitations to that replicator tech, if the access to the holodeck is very limited, what's the structure on those limits? Do you have to live on a starship to live the way we've been seeing? How does it all work?
It's just a bit difficult to make the stories make sense if the economy doesn't.
A Matter of Perspective was interesting too, especially for actors, so much of it being in the different performance. It's one of the story shapes you've got to try out at least once. With an established cast and setting the audience basically knows who to believe from the start... or they think they do. Farscape did fabulous things with that. Here though I think it leads to a nasty skew in the story: The difference between Riker and Manua's perspective of the scene in the guest bedroom. In Riker's version Manua tries to seduce him; in Manua's version Riker tries to rape her. Riker uses the word, only to deny it, saying he certainly didn't try that. And the audience, knowing Riker, believes it - but Troi says Manua was not being deceptive, she believed the version in her testimony. Which means there's a woman who believes Riker tried to rape her, we're shown it, told it in so many words... and then the story drops it. It's not the focus of the extradition request so that makes a certain amount of sense. But the problem is the writer level stuff, that the writer felt it was okay to drop an accusation of rape in there and treat it as if of course it is false and of course the audience won't believe it, because Riker doesn't believe it, even when the woman thinks it was assault. And that's a problem. All those of courses add up to of course you should believe a guy you're friends with rather than a woman you haven't met, even when you know she isn't lying. They just walk away from that, the story treats it as though it didn't need dealing with. Really big problem in the room right there.
It's a problem also because Riker can be all smiley and very directly appreciative about women and there's been stories that throw him into bed with the local dignitaries, but none where that causes a problem. Here there's a problem but the story treats it as being irrelevant, tangential, a red herring, probably even a mistaken reading of him. His behaviour is just not addressed. And sure, he thinks he's being reasonable and professional and the woman was throwing herself at him... but really, people do think that about themselves. He's not the only opinion in that room, and she wasn't lying. Troi says "It is the truth, as you each remember it." But her truth is just dropped. And sure, it could be her that has the tidied up memories, but why is that the story? Why does that story need telling again?
I know one writer answer, because they need a motivation that distracts you from the science stuff. But it ends up telling something ugly.
Also in this episode you get another example of the weird and unworky attitude to Federation wealth. How exactly does it work? What rewards can you get from success that you can't get elsewise? What's the advantage in selling to the Romulans or Ferengi? If everything you can dream of can come out of a replicator or a holodeck then what does wealth mean? And if there's limitations to that replicator tech, if the access to the holodeck is very limited, what's the structure on those limits? Do you have to live on a starship to live the way we've been seeing? How does it all work?
It's just a bit difficult to make the stories make sense if the economy doesn't.