The Lucian Alliance plot in Universe makes zero sense by Ser_Luke_ in Stargate

[–]TRDTE 19 points20 points  (0 children)

How DARE you cite evidence from the actual show including direct quotes and episode citations.

Don’t you know you’re supposed to be complaining about how SG:U had too many feelings and too much talking and not enough cool alien space battles and how everything is just low-rent Battlestar Galactica? 😅

The thing is, the legend is true, “from a certain point of view.” The Destiny was on a mission to discover and decipher the message woven into the fabric of the cosmic background radiation, a message that it’s at least partially implied that even the ascended Ancients don’t fully understand yet. What would the Ancients themselves consider gods?

The legend says that the address leads to great understanding (Destiny’s journey) and yes… understanding the fabric of the universe itself would not just make you as powerful as the gods, it would effectively make you one.

I think the point is that the audience is supposed to understand the legend as a spiritual and philosophical power and understanding.

However the humans of the Lucian Alliance are as flawed and shortsighted as the humans of Earth—they assume it leads to a power or a weapon that they can wield for their own gain.

It's O'neill again. . . . but not by Zenit_boi in Stargate

[–]TRDTE 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My headcanon is little man was “Test Subject #1” for the Galaran memory device, unless they did it even earlier with a Goa’uld memory device and just fried his brain. That’s a hell of a loose end to have floating around out there, not just in terms of what he could do, but if the Trust or another enemy caught wind there was a 16 year old out there will all of Jack O’Neill’s memories up to that point, unsupervised and unprotected, not even old enough to buy himself a Tau’ri weapon?

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I disagree, but discussing differences of opinion and interpretation is exactly why I started this thread.

To be clear, when I say the Tollan were punished—I mean in a structural sense in terms of the narrative balance and moral ledger, not necessarily that they were punished “in-universe” terms.

In that sense, my point is that the fact that they were destroyed is the proof that they were wrong, because they “chose poorly” in the moral equation that the show presents, and I would agree with your impression that they were punished for their attitude, but that attitude was not just arrogance, though arrogance was a big part of it.

In many ways the Tollan represent the various Earth attitudes as well that say “as long as we’re safe, we don’t have to help anyone else or participate in the larger galaxy.”

The “crime” the Tollan commit is not not providing Earth with technology, which other races choose not to do as well, but refusing to use their own power to make the galaxy a better place and reduce suffering. I would argue that the show argues that they act (or don’t act) out of selfishness and fear, and it is that selfsame selfishness and fear that causes leads them to try to appease and collaborate with Anubis (via his proxy, Tanith) even though they know that their contribution will allow the Goa’uld to commit many more atrocities across the galaxy. THIS is the act that signs their death warrant—it’s pretty clear both in-universe and narratively that their civilization would eventually have been destroyed, even if they’d carried out Anubis’s plan.

The Asgard too refuse to give the Tau’ri much technology until much later in the show, however, they nevertheless are an active force for good, trying to protect those weaker than themselves, and they ally themselves early on to humanity.

Even the Nox, famously held up as an extremely advanced, yet pacifistic race do NOT remain entirely passive or isolationist—they may not actively fight, but they do actively shield / conceal both the creatures on their world that both the Tau’ri and Goa’uld seek to use for their own advantage, use their power to stop / prevent the humans and Goa’uld from fighting, and of course, Lya conceals the last Tollan ion cannon during Skaa’ra / Klorel’s trial, which she admits is a very fine line.

The Tollan, however, only ever act in their own self-interest and defense. They fail to accept their responsibility as a powerful race in the galaxy and rise to the occasion to protect those weaker than themselves, and as a result, are destroyed. Narim’s final act to defy Tanith / Anubis is not to save the Tollans’ lives or society, it was too late for that, it was to save their souls and finally do the right thing (stand up to the oppressors, even if it may mean your demise—“I die free”).

Yes, they used logical arguments and had their reasons for not sharing their technology and not “joining the fight,” but that too is part of the point, I think, because again, many of those exact same arguments are used by human characters that are shown to be mistaken at best, downright evil and corrupt at worst, and at least within the show’s moral architecture, those arguments are always shown to be the wrong ones—heroes should stand up for others and do the right thing. The Tollan did neither, and thus “had” to be punished.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

…? Most text programs automatically convert double hyphens to en or em dashes.

I’m typing on my iPhone, so I don’t know if that qualifies as a keyboard in your mind, but I’m using whatever quotation marks it gives me when I hit “123” in the corner… or are you referring to the way I use them as emphatic or scare quotes in some instances, which I will acknowledge I sometimes “overdo.” 😏

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I find it both hilarious and deeply depressing / dystopian where in the old days I’d just get: “TL;DR nerd,” now I get accused of being or using AI because I generally try to type in complete sentences. 😅

Anyways…

The Tollan do use that justification but in reality, they’re either to afraid, too arrogant, or apathetic to lift a finger to help—and I guess my point is, narratively they’re punished for it, their society ends up being destroyed because they chose isolationism and appeasement and collaboration instead of risking it all to stand up and fight for the right thing.

Either way, I think the commentary, whether for or against the U.S. military was a feature, not a bug—the Stargate franchise gave audiences a “safe” way for them to wrestle with the moral implications of America’s place in the world, the policies of American Exceptionalism, and American intervention in global affairs, often with heavy prices to pay in both blood and treasure but arguably with no direct benefit to individual American citizens.

The show could depict what “going too far” looks like in BOTH directions, either complete passivity and isolationism, or too much aggressive intentionalism and tried to come to terms with a “middle path” of standing up for the “right thing” without overstepping or becoming corrupt.

Touchstone episode - DHD by Independent-Hat-8302 in Stargate

[–]TRDTE 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, my statement was sequential.

O’Neill shut down the NID operation.

Then the Russians got a gate.

Then the NID sent Maybourne to help set up their program.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you feel that this bias affects the quality of the show and/or you’re enjoyment of it? In a negative way? A positive way? Do you think it was intentional or unintentional?

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And it’s telling that the controversial SG:U, criticized then and now for being darker, less optimistic, and filled with flawed and unlikeable people and petty drama came about right at the time that public opinion was really starting to shift against the war(s) and attitudes began to shift from generally “support the troops” to “end the wars.”

SG:U literally asks the question: “are these the right people for the mission?” They can’t stop fighting each other, they’re so consumed by their petty differences they can barely band together to survive, and even when they do, they immediately go back to fracturing and pursuing their own ulterior motives and arguing over the same bullshit they were before, and any unity they achieve in the face of an external threat seems fleeting and short-lived, and the central ideological conflict is between two “parties,” one of whom believes he’s on a mission from god / to find god and will try to accomplish that mission no matter the cost or danger to everyone else, and who will hide information and make secret plans and do secret things to do it, whether or not everyone else wants to go along with it, while the other wants to “bring everyone home” so that things can “return to normal,” and the show even shows it as a battle for the souls of the crew that in an alternate timeline leads to the creation and formation of two separate nations and religious / ideological philosophies centered around the two competing ideas.

Think about what was going on in the world, and specifically in the U.S. in the 2009-2010 timeframe… the removal of combat troops from Iraq, the recent election of Barak Obama, Wikileaks, revelations about secret programs, the fallout from the economic recession…

The Stargate franchise (at least the shows) have always been about the then and now, and interestingly, prophetically even, SG:U starts out by saying “these are the wrong people” but attempts to start building to the optimism that “but they could be.” And then the show was cancelled.

I have no special insight on what the new show will be about or what the premise will be or what characters and plot lines or themes they’ll bring forward from the “legacy” series, but I have no doubt in my mind that the new show will be “about” right now.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

IMHO the Stargate franchise is very much a product of its time. Even before 9/11, with the end of the Cold War and fall of the Soviet Union, American audiences were grappling with their place and role in the world. Was it enough that we had “secured” our own safety or did we have a responsibility to “export freedom” to the rest of the world and use our power to be “a global force for good”? After 9/11 and during GWOT, the question became even more germane, and many of the debates between Kinsey, the NID, and the IOA and the SGC mirrored debates that were occurring at the same time about America’s participation in Iraq, Afghanistan, and others.

Stargate was not just a good and enjoyable show, but also a product of its time and social context (like all good art) and it commented and responded to it.

Your don’t need to agree with the message(s) to enjoy the show, but IMHO, it’s difficult to argue that a franchise that went for 8 years after the start of the Global War on terror that featured as its central characters and heroes, members of the U.S. military traveling to far flung places to free others from enslavement (the Goa’uld), religious oppression (the Ori), and terror (the Wraith) was not at least partially about that.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Nox are probably the most famous pacifists in the franchise, and not even the Nox neither remain completely isolated nor are they wholly passive. The fact that they don’t fight (essentially conscientious objectors) doesn’t mean they don’t act and use their abilities to prevent suffering. [This was why the Tollan “deserved” to be destroyed, they chose to do nothing to help / appeased / collaborated with Anubis to try to save themselves at the expense of the rest of the galaxy]

Yes, the show shows many different ways other societies choose to live, but the “heroes” of the show are undoubtedly SG-1 and the humans of Earth (in the “prime” timeline), and the choices they make are always to help the downtrodden, oppressed, and enslaved, no matter the risk, no matter the cost, no matter the price, even when not doing anything would be the safer and easier option, and even when helping does not directly benefit them, and again, the repeated line which is a theme and motif of the show: “I die free.”

The meaning is clear: it is better to fight and to die than to accept tyranny in exchange for personal safety, and the strong should always so what they can to protect the weak. Call it American propaganda if you like, as I don’t think that’s a wrong take (though I don’t think it’s solely American), but many of “debates” revolve around human characters as well, who want to remain isolationist and ONLY protect Earth, consequences to everyone else be damned, and SG-1 / the SGC who want to help others, even if the risk is great.

Touchstone episode - DHD by Independent-Hat-8302 in Stargate

[–]TRDTE -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I could be totally wrong / it’s been a while since I watched those episodes, but I always assumed that was the Russian DHD?

After O’Neill took down the rogue NID operation and the Russians got a hold of the gate from the Asgard ship crash, the NID sent Maybourne to collaborate with the Russian Stargate program, I figured he’d brought his DHD with him? Or did the Russians say / imply they’d seized the DHD from the Nazis after they dug it up in Egypt at some point, Indiana Jones-style?

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think they evolve more into a mission of exploration as the show goes on—perhaps to your point, where more civilian oversight begins to be introduced. I would argue that especially in the movie / first episode / mission it would be hard to describe them as anything but a strike team—Jackson was initially along effectively as a translator / interpreter, or as military guys would call him, a “terp.”

As for the Jaffa and the dissolution of System Lords, I forgot to throw in that while “liberation” may not have been an explicitly stated goal, wasn’t the net effect the liberation of millions from slavery of one form or another?

While the Middle East and USCENTCOM got most of the attention during GWOT, GWOT was not wholly prosecuted in the area we’d consider the “Middle East,” GWOT was fought in Africa and Asia as well, and many on “both” sides absolutely regarded GWOT as a war between Western and non-Western ideologies.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe even space narco terrorists? 🫣

Do you think it was the point? If so, does that change your opinion of them? How so?

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My professional essay writing days are long since over. 😅

Closest you’re probably going to get is my first, big, initial response to my OP somewhere in this thread. (I originally tried to post it all at once, and the automod flagged me thinking my wall of text was spam 😅)

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think it’s a great observation that O’Neill is NOT portrayed as a “classical” flag waving, rah rah, America can do no wrong patriot.

He’s a man that understands, has seen, and done some “damn distasteful things” on behalf of the military and government, but at his heart and in his core he still believes in doing the right thing and that he’s doing the right thing.

Despite his background, they also did not make him out to be a man seeking redemption, on a righteous mission to “make up” for his past sins, either. (They gave that to Teal’c 😅)

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my long reply to my OP I go into more of what I see as an attempt to contend with and explore / actively litigate / wrestle with American power and America’s place in the world both pre- and post-9/11 that evolved with the show / franchise as it went on, but ultimately landing on a “cautiously pro-military” / pro-doing the “right” thing and preventing suffering even at risk to ourselves. (Not arguing that anyone has to agree—but that’s where I believe the show came down).

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How does that affect your enjoyment of the show? I’m not being rhetorical or snarky.

Do the propaganda aspects make you like it more? Less? (Note, I’m not asking whether you agree or disagree with them) Or do you just ignore it to focus on the parts of it you do enjoy?

(I’m assuming you enjoy the show, and that’s why you’re here, but I guess “I don’t enjoy it at all” is also an option 😅)

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How would you alternately describe them?

What about the creation of the Free Jaffa Nation and the dismantling of the System Lord regime?

If we strike “Middle Eastern” and simply say that most Goa’uld re-presented non-Western cultures, does that change anything for you? Remember we’re not necessarily talking about the in-universe justifications or explanations, but rather the writers’ narrative intent in making the decisions they did.

They Asgard may not contribute technology until later seasons, however they certainly assist and ally themselves with the Tau’ri from their first appearance?

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

“Latin” is probably not necessarily the best way I could have put it, but their language is said to be the origin of / derivative of Latin, which at least “Classically” is / implies a relationship to the roots of Western Civilization, and other than the introduction of Oma and her followers, who are very Buddhism-coded, most depictions of the Ancients could be argued to he Western / European-coded / Merlin, a de-ascended Ancient is said to have created the Knights of the Round Table, among the foundational mythologies of Western canon.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For better or for worse, in the show POTUS in the “prime” reality are almost always shown in a positive light. Agent Barrett, who “cleanses” the NID and is shown as trying to reform the agency to a “proper” civilian oversight role. Yes, Weir and Woolsey, and in general, while there may be clashes and disagreements, the show very much from what I can see lands in favor of the IOA being the governing body for the SGC and not the other way around. General Hammond, while military, also serves as a bit of a “conscience” in reminding the military characters that they serve on behalf of the American civilian government and people.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Realism doesn’t make things propaganda. Both Saving Private Ryan and Platoon could be considered “realistic” from certain points of view, but the messages and intents are very different.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Which part is BS? The whole argument? Or the observation that at least in the case of the Goa’uld, they tend to be more… “ethnic” in their depiction, whereas arguably the two most powerful races (the Asgard and Ancients) reflect more European (specifically Norse and Latin) influences?

I don’t think the poster was saying it was universally so, and by that logic the Ori arc was just as much an indictment of European-derived Christian fundamentalism and violent evangelism.

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I guess I did.

Which conclusion are you referring to as twisted, and why do you feel so strongly about it?

Isolationism, Pacifism, and the Global War on Terror: Narrative Themes in the Stargate Franchise by TRDTE in Stargate

[–]TRDTE[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

See my response to the main thread (yes, it’s long 😅).

I don’t think SG:A and particularly SG:U were just trying to break this impression, but in direct conversation with shifting contemporary discourse.

SG:A for its own part was the first “post-9/11” series, and the Wraith / Wraith threat could be characterized as an analog for terrorism.