Y’know…I almost wish the show weren’t called “Battlestar: Galactica.” It’s just that much more difficult to convince people that this is one of the best dramas, bar none, currently on the air.
In the interest of full disclosure, I will reiterate that I’ve written a BSG novel. I don’t believe it shades my opinions; in fact, if I didn’t like the series, I wouldn’t have written the novel, so that tells you something. Spoilers follow:
The season ender of the previous year blew Adama away; this one blew me away. And I even knew major aspects of the story in advance since I was sent episode descriptions to aid me in writing the book.
BSG doesn’t have a ton of humor in it, but this one contained the single funniest moment in the run of the series: Dean Stockwell being hauled to the brig, loudly protesting, “I am NOT a frakking Cylon” until he’s suddenly face-to-face with his exact duplicate, at which point he acknowledges the jig is up with a sighed, “Oh…well, okay, then.”
In an episode filled with so many great moments, it’s hard to pick just one…hëll, no. I lie. It’s easy. It’s the revelation that Roslin, in the interest of trying to save humanity, is behind an attempt to rig the election. That’s party of the genius of the series. The obvious way to go is to have Adama, the military man, be the hawk, while Roslin, the woman and teacher, would be more–what’s the word–nurturing. Instead she’s more of a hawk than Adama, and it’s Adama who has to rein in her more aggressive impulses. “If we do this…we’re criminals,” he tells her upon learning of her duplicity, and claims the cancer will have moved from her breast to her heart. Tragically, one cannot help but think that there’s a lot of politicians out there who have engaged in such power grabs for a lot less altruistic motives, and probably don’t feel the least bit bad about it. Then again, it IS science fiction.
The one year jump was a brilliant move (if we could jump three years in “New Frontier,” why not BSG?) although, honest, guys, Adama’s mustache? Unfortunate.
And geez…October. Gonna be a long summer.
PAD
• 
Keep hearing about this show, should watch. Does the S.1 DVD set also include that mini-series? I’ve been hesitant to jump on because the pre-release and mini-series jibba jabba was very, very bad. (However, I still vote that the best drama on TV is 24.)
Yes, the miniseries is included. Frankly, when I first saw it, I was lukewarm on the miniseries. So if you watch it and are underwhelmed, trust me, the series does quickly improve.
PAD
Yes, the Season One DVD set includes the miniseries.
Yeah, don’t stop with the miniseries. I watched the miniseries and thought it was generally good, though a tad long and boring in places. It felt like it could have lost an hour of material and overall not suffered.
But the series finds its voice and groove immediately with the series premiere “33” and continues to kick ášš to this day. (That’s not to say there aren’t weaker episodes scattered throughout…they can’t all be home runs.)
It’s a fantastic purchase, and I’d highly recommend it. Just make sure you don’t get the “Best Buy exclusive” version of Season 1, which does NOT include the miniseries. I almost purchased it by mistake.
Yeah, check which DVD set you’re getting. The “Best Buy Exclusive” was a US release of the UK editions of S1, available just before the main US release of S1. The main differences are that the Best Buy / UK version didn’t include the miniseries too, and it used the UK version of the opening theme – which is what we now see in the US too, as of season 2.
“Also, it was Baltar’s 8 and the original Boomer that found New Caprica”
Aside from the previous correction that 8 should be 6 – note that this is one of the few model’s they’ve gone to the trouble of giving a specific designation to: Caprica Six. Saying Baltar’s Six makes me think of the Six in Baltar’s head, who may or may not exist in the real world, but either way, the real Caprica Six is a separate entity.
Also we don’t know which Cylons found New Caprica. What we saw was an invasion force, which presumably took a bit of time to assemble. And I’m not sure we know for sure which exact Cylons were the ones Baltar surrendered to. It certainly looks like the Six was Caprica Six. The Eight – well she was quite possibly the original Sharon Valerii, I admit. But she didn’t really do anything distinctive to indicate this one way or another.
“I think a light year is too far for her mind to “beam” itself into a new body.”
Also, if Gina had been in range of a Resurrection Ship when she died, she would have gone there immediately, and the Cylons would’ve known about New Caprica right away rather than a year later. Unless they were actually lying about that, but I think the simplest explanation is to assume that what we were previously told is still correct – after the destruction of the resurrection ship, any Cylons who die in the vicinity of Galactica are permanently dead.
Of course, after OYL I think the Cylons have had ample time to build another resurrection ship and get it out in the vicinity of New Caprica.
“Even so, I didn’t see a new resurrection ship among the basestars,”
Why on earth would the Cylons want to jump that thing into the middle of a potential combat zone? Admittedly not much of a zone, it turns out, but still. We know that in the past, the resurrection ship worked over a distance, and didn’t have to be part of an attacking fleet to be effective. It also can’t be too far away, sure. But at this point I would expect that the cylons probably have a new resurrection ship nearby, kept out of sight most of the time.
“maybe the new Sharon/Caprica Six alliance has embraced their mortality when they rejected the cylon god.”
Maybe. I’m not convinced anyone really rejected the Cylon god though. I think it’s quite possible that was just part of the lie, to get the humans to believe the Cylons wouldn’t be coming back. Note that in the final voice-over at the end of the episode, one of the Sixes (presumably Caprica) says: “…and like God, our infinite mercy will be matched only by our power… and complete control.” Doesn’t sound like she’s given up on monotheism to me…
BSG is ok, Babylon 5 is still better in my book. That said, taking the series at as whole moving from Season 1 to Season 2 I have to say the the high level of season 1 has fallen off a little bit. But for all its short comings, its still the best drama on TV.
Who’s to say that the Cylons didn’t detect the nuke when it went off and have been waiting to see what would happen?
The Cylons (and Adama for that matter) have noted in the past that perhaps humanity didn’t deserve to exist. Societies themselves have a massive amount of inertia in terms of morals, laws, traditions, etc. What if the Cylons’overall plan was to decimate humanity to see how their society would reform with a clean slate? What if New Caprica is, for all intents and purposes, an ant farm? And now, a year later, maybe the Cylons have seen enough…
Who’s to say that the Cylons didn’t detect the nuke when it went off and have been waiting to see what would happen?
Because, unless the cylons were pretty much in the same system when the nuke when off, they couldn’t possibly have known about it. The radiation signature only moves as fast as the speed of light you know.
In an earlier thread I expressed the opinion that BSG was a very good show that nevertheless had its flaws. I lamented its unrelenting dark tone (and yeah, I agree, this SHOULD be a dark show, I just thought an occasional small change of rhythm whouldn’t hurt), accused its directors of “directorial excess,” and complained about Baltar’s character failing to develop.
Well. What a difference a few episodes makes.
I’ve changed my opinion of the show from “very good” to “outstanding.” And now that I understand what they were leading up to, I have a new-found respect for the earlier episodes.
The show is about 12 planets’ worth of humans being reduced to a population of 50,000 people (actually, fewer than that now) by a devastating attack by an unrelenting enemy. So, yeah, an unrelenting dark tone is appropriate.
And Baltar’s character progression kinda snuck up on me. I realize now that the seeds of who he’s become were planted beginning with his first appearance in the miniseries. And the revelation that Caprica Six was “haunted” by Baltar the way Baltar’s been haunted by Six just adds to the fascination.
I still find some of the directing to be scenery-chewing stuff that sacrifices style for story, I’ve come to the opinion that for the most part the directing is highly innovative. It reminds me that television can be an art when it’s created by the right people.
And that one year jump: ballsy! The season premiere jumping five years ahead: even ballsier! Stories that take risks are often the best stories.
That said, my DVR cut off the last minute or so of the show! I got to the point where Baltar stood before the Cylons in his office, saw Number Six coyly raise an eyebrow in Baltar’s direction, and then — blooey! The recording was cut off.
I understand from these posts that Baltar surrendered to the Cylons. Not surprising. I just hope I didn’t miss a line of dialogue that hints at what’s to come. If anyone wants to fill me in, I’d be grateful.
I should know better than to enter the “opinions — objective or not so much” firestorm. PAD, I agree that some opinions are wrong — if they’re based on flawed premises. The Flat Earth Society’s opinions about the shape of the earth are a great example; they can be refuted with scientific evidence. Another example would be if I complained about your portrayal of Spider-Man as a child molester in “Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man;” it would be an invalid opinion because you NEVER depicted Spider-Man in such a way, and documentary evidence proves it.
But there is no way to scientifically measure the greatness of a piece of art. And two people can watch the same show, understand it equally well, and come to diametrically opposed opinions about its quality. At that point, how do you decide who’s right and who’s wrong?
You don’t.
Opinions about art, no matter how “refined,” no matter how “educated,” come down to, “I didn’t like this and I did like that.” I mean, what proof can you cite to refute the opinion that the “Mona Lisa” is crap? That other more intelligent and more educated people say otherwise? That’s just backing up an opinion with another opinion. But how do you “prove” the “experts” opinions?
Especially in light of the fact that at one time, there were experts who believed that every story had to have unity of time, place and theme. Were that the case, BSG would’ve trod over all three. The show has taken the characters to many locales, skipped ahead in time and explored many, many, many themes.
Opinions based on premises that are assertions of fact can be evaluated based on the quality of the premises, and the quality of the logic used to draw a conclusion from those premises. Opinions about art are purely subjective, having no facts upon which to base them (other than the content of the art itself, as I’ve mentioned above).
PAD wrote: “There has to be such a thing as objective greatness; otherwise anything can be dismissed out of hand by anyone, and greatness doesn’t mean anything.”
That’s an example of the logical fallacy of “begging the question.” You’re starting with the conclusion that greatness must mean something, and since it must be objective to mean something, greatness must therefore be objective. But that begs the question: must greatness mean something? If so, what?
My subjective answer is that greatness in art means what you believe it means. If you believe something is great, it is great: to you. And yeah, your belief can be “dismissed out of hand by anyone,” and you can’t prove the person doing the dismissing is wrong. Why does that make you so vertiginous? Just because someone can validly disagree doesn’t make your opinion any less valid.
I doubt you and I will see eye-to-eye on this, which is fine. Just thought I’d express my view, for whatever it’s worth.
There’s taste and then there’s quality. Obviously some people can sing better than others. William Hung is a bad singer. Celine Deon is a good singer. Obviously, some people would prefer to listen to Hung over Deon. But everyone can agree who’s more talented…
Celine Deon sucks.
Indeed. One need not like the show to acknowledge that it is well done.
I have to go rewatch the closing, Mr. Myers, but a Six had a voiceover speech whose exact content I don’t recall, but the gist of which was that they were going to “do right” by humanity by loving the humans – “…and like God, our infinite love and mercy will be matched only by our control.”
Sounds like things won’t go well for anyone who values freedom on New Caprica…
I think the Lee/Karen break has been a long time coming. If her drunkenly talking smack about him and his girlfriend wasn’t the last straw, I imagine that her, of all people, buying into the Cylons’ story and giving up on her duty to shack up with her boytoy would very likely be the final breaking point.
-Rex Hondo-
“Sounds like things won’t go well for anyone who values freedom on New Caprica…”
It suddenly occurs to me that many of the people on New Caprica might not care about freedom at first.
It really depends on how they wright the next season. If they write it so that the Cylons start making penicillin and building more weather-proof structures to live in, they could justify people not wanting to rebel. When you’ve been cold a long time and someone puts a roof over your head, intangibles like freedom can seem less attractive. Long term, people would regret that decision, but at first it might be hard to gather support for a rebellion.
And might we actually see some people actually convert to the Cylons’ religion?
-Rex Hondo-
First, Jonathan (the other one), thanks for filling me in.
The ending you’ve described has me wondering now if Caprica Six and the troubled Number Eight she befriended are the driving force behind the Cylons’ decision to abandon their pursuit of humanity’s annihiliation in favor of a “benevolent tyranny?” Or will the two of them aid the humans in mounting a resistance? I’m guessing it’s the former, but that’s what I love about BSG: you just never know.
Rex, I’m not sure what you mean by Kara’s “buying into the Cylon’s story.” Are you inferring that she bought their story solely by virtue of her settling on New Caprica, or did I miss something she said or did in the season finale?
Jason M. Bryant, given the conditions in which the colonists were living on New Caprica, I could see them lacking the will to resist. On the other hand, the Cylons nuked the 12 colonies and destroyed the vast majority of humanity, and that’s hard to forget. But it may be a moot point, as the colonists on New Caprica seem to lack the means to mount any viable resistance.
Man, I love the new BSG! October is way too long to wait for a new episode.
Sorry for the confusion, Bill. That was pure speculation on my part as to what could have happened (From Lee’s perspective at least) in the intervening year to cause such a rift between Karen and Lee.
-Rex Hondo-
“… you’ll see that reference to specific politics has been pretty minimal.”
Which was why I commented. I liked that. But your right I overreacted.
“In fact, there’s as many posts comparing Baltar to Doctor Bashir as Bush.”
Personally I didn’t care about the comparisons to Bush (which was a bit of a stretch for me.) I just cared about having the thread high-jacked. Which was really none of my business, so again, apologies.
Moving on. Back to your regularly scheduled program …
It’s Kara, not Karen Rex.
How long was the episode?
We usually set the VCR to start 2 minutes eraly and then run about 5-10 late, but the tape cut off after 6 did Pres. Baltar and then was sitting on the floor with the bomb…
It was billed as a 90-minute episode, but actually ended up running something like 93, I believe. My TiVo cut out right at the verge of the surrender. Luckily, I watched it on Monday night (was out of town for the weekend) in time to record the Monday reshow. 🙂
It. Was. Incredible. is pretty much my in-depth review of the ep….
I’ve been trying to watch this series for a while now. I can only watch about five minutes before turning it off. I suspect this is because:
a) I didn’t like the “original” all that much
b) I tend to avoid “no hope – end of the human race” type shows/movies.
Couldn’t get into Kirby’s Kamandi books or those Planet of the Apes movies for the same reason. I suspect I’m a cynic that thinks such things self-fulling prophecies. Or maybe I’m just another victim of Gene Roddenberry’s programming…
PS – apologies for the typos/grammatical errors in previous post. That should have been “self-fulfilling”. I’ve got to learn to preview THEN post…
There is a scene in Dead Poets Society in which they read from a textbook how the beauty of a poem can be graphed on the vertical axis and relevance on the horizontal. The intrinsic worth of poems can then be plotted and quantitatively compared.
And I would tend to believe Mr David would agree with the instructor that the entire passage should be ripped from the text book and thrown away.
Objective standards of greatness?
“Objective standards of greatness?”
Objective, not mathematical.
Look, it’s real simple: I heard a couple of teens talking once at a video store, and they were dicussing how stupid their parents were saying that “Casablanca” and “Citizen Kane” were great films. Their reason? Both films were in black and white. As far as they were concerned, no film could be great if it wasn’t in color.
Some would have me shrug that off and say, “Oh well, everyone’s entitled to an opinion.” But that implies that all opinions are equal. I’m sorry, no: Their opinion was a stupid one. They don’t need people reinforcing it by giving it even the slightest semblance of credence. They need someone to tell them, “You’re idiots. You need to go to film classes. You need to read books about these movies. You need to sit down and watch these films over and over and over again until you freaking GET IT, because dismissing such films and many others as automatically second-rate because they’re black and white is STUPID. It’s a stupid opinion. It’s dumb. It’s wrong. It is wrong on every level, including objectively.
PAD
Peter,
I understand what you’re trying to say, and agree with it, to a point, but “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”
Just because you think something is great, doesn’t mean everyone does. And trying to force that, well, there’s a name for trying to force everyone to think alike and like the same things.
This is an argument you cannot win. In any creative endeavor, there’s will be those who think it is genius, and those who think it’s just a cross in a jar of urine. And until some god proves his existance and says one way or the other, both sides are right.
I’m on the side of recognizing that something might be good, or well done, even if I don’t “get” why. I like some art. I know a little art history. Mona Lisa is just a painting of a not too attractive woman to me. I could take it or leave it.
But I understand that it is one of the great Works of Art. I couldn’t tell you why, but I know good when I see it.
PAD brings up Casablana, and younger generations failing to recognize it’s worth. On it’s own, it’s a great movie. You don’t have to like it to understand that. I see how someone raised on movies like Star Wars would fail to like a B&W classic. But saying it’s bad, or worse, it sucks, simply because it’s B&W doesn’t really express an opinion. It expresses ignorance.
Wy wife likes a lot of hip hop, and some rap. I don’t really care for much of it. But I know enough about music to know when something is good, or bad. There’s a difference between value, and appeal. Anyone’s personal opinion as to appeal is valid. But when it comes to value, an uninformed opinion is just wrong. You can have it, you can express it, and you can cling to it, if you want, but all you’ll be doing is expressing your ignorance.
You need to sit down and watch these films over and over and over again until you freaking GET IT
OK, getting a LIT-tle scary now… 😉
You example of the ignorant kids in the video store is well take. But they are being ignorant. I believe I largely agree with the view that there are some things widely recognized to be “great”, and that one could even (if you wanted to) come up with a list of what specifically made it “great”. (The acting is top notch, the themes are universal, the character development is intriguing, the dialog is realistic, the effects serve the story, etc…)
But I balk at the idea that there are indisputable objective standards. A knowledgeable, open-minded person could look at BSG or the Mona Lisa or Hamlet and honestly say “Eh, it doesn’t do that much for me. Frankly, I found that Cheers/the grafitti over there/the latest John Grisham thriller to be more moving to me.” They could probably even provide a list as to why.
And having a knowledgeable, thought out personal opinion that differs, even from a majority, on a creative work is valid. To say that “Well, you’re just wrong.”… I don’t see how you can really do that.
I mean, you could. But then you’d just be wrong. 😉
“Just because you think something is great, doesn’t mean everyone does. And trying to force that, well, there’s a name for trying to force everyone to think alike and like the same things.”
Conservatives?
“This is an argument you cannot win.”
I don’t believe in the no-win scenario.
“But I balk at the idea that there are indisputable objective standards. A knowledgeable, open-minded person could look at BSG or the Mona Lisa or Hamlet and honestly say “Eh, it doesn’t do that much for me. Frankly, I found that Cheers/the grafitti over there/the latest John Grisham thriller to be more moving to me.” They could probably even provide a list as to why.”
And I have no problem with that, as I said earlier. For instance: People highly laud “The Sopranos.” I am fully ready to concede that it is a great series based on its acting, its complexity, its characterization and its writing virtuosity. But I personally don’t watch it because I find the characters repugnant and I’ve no one to root for. I don’t dispute matters of personal preference.
I wouldn’t bother to get my father to try and watch BSG. Why? He doesn’t like science fiction. Can’t relate to it. He only likes series grounded in real life.
There’s nothing wrong with having personal preferences. What pìššëš me off is when people make sweeping comments about the quality of a series (or movie or book) based upon ignorance, just as you noted yourself.
PAD
“Just because you think something is great, doesn’t mean everyone does. And trying to force that, well, there’s a name for trying to force everyone to think alike and like the same things.”
Conservatives?
Nah. Compare the National Review’s blog (The Corner) with Dailykos. Draw conclusions. They’ll be very broad generalizations but that’s clearly no problem.
I wouldn’t beat my head for too long trying to convince someone that they are missing out on greatness. If they are too thick or stubborn to see that Citizen Kane is great, well, they probably don’t deserve the pleasure of watching it. Pearls before swine.
What pìššëš me off is when people make sweeping comments about the quality of a series (or movie or book) based upon ignorance, just as you noted yourself.
So no disagreement there. Cool.
But I still don’t agree that, of course, there is such a thing as an objectively great TV show and that there has to be such a thing as objective greatness. There may be a popular consensus, even a wildy popular opinion that something is great. But it does remain an opinion and a thoughtful opposite opinion has as much validity.
Posted by: Bill Mulligan at March 17, 2006 10:12 PM
If they are too thick or stubborn to see that Citizen Kane is great, well, they probably don’t deserve the pleasure of watching it.
*************************************
How’s this for sticking my head in the lion’s mouth: I’ve never seen Citizen Kane.
I’m not much of a film buff. I far prefer comic-books to any other storytelling medium. I believe sequential art is one of the most powerful forms of expression out there, and you can tackle any genre or subject matter in comics. Watchmen, Maus, From Hëll, Cerebus, Strangers in Paradise… the only limits are your imagination.
That said, I find myself gravitating more and more towards older movies. Maybe I’m becoming a fuddy-duddy. But I saw the re-make of Cape Fear when it came out in theaters. Years later I saw the original Cape Fear on cable and liked it much better. It left things to the imagination, heaven forbid.
So maybe I should make it a point to get a copy of Citizen Kane on DVD. I realize Citizen Kane is far more than just an “older movie.” I’m just saying, given my recent fondness for older movies, I might like it… and perhaps understand why so many hail it as one of the greatest movies ever made.
Actually, I envy you. One of the disadvantges of having been so into movies at so early an age is that it kind of spoils you. It’s become pretty difficult to find a classic that I haven’t seen or read so much about that it’s almost as though I have seen it.
Of course, none of us watching Kane now can get the full effect of what viewers at the time felt. What was innovative then has becoem the common laguage of film now (that said, Kane still amazes. Unbelievable cinematography.).
I’ve told my wife that if I ever suffer some debilitating head inury where I wake up every morning unable to remember anything (The 50 First Dates scenario) I just want her to pop in the same movie every day and let me enjoy it. It’s be fun to see Godzilla for the first time again.
SPIDER MAN IS A CHILD MOLESTER!?!?! PAD WROTE THIS?!?!?
Just kidding but, you know how these internet rumors take on a life of their own. Congrats on FA by the by.
Reading through the thread and absorbing what has been written, a few things struck me.
While people are writing parallels between BSG and the current admin. I have to wonder if the show’s creators aren’t finding themselves pointed into a direction more akin to the Palestinian/Israeli conflict in that you have two very distinct societies trying to co-exist, unable to forget the past and also having many different elements of both societies pull in conflicting directions with some wanting to find a way to mutually co-exist and others just wanting to continue to fight.
I am fairly certain we saw Baltar’s Six at the end of the season finale, if only in the way the two interacted with each other. Again, I can’t help but wonder if we aren’t seeing a splinter group of Cylons who were unwilling to give up on their monotheistic beliefs and branch off from the main Cyclon host when it was decided Cylon society was trying too hard to emulate human society.
I happen to like the point made about the Cylons potentially “watching” what humanity would create from its ashes and then deciding to take a more active role based upon the result depending upon the result. The series pulled no punches as it was fairly clear that once the refugees had settled somewhere old vices and hostilities reared their ugly heads again.
Baltar has become a much more rounded character in the new series. At times you think there is something redeeming about the character only to find his true nature reasserting itself. Each time Baltar does something good he seems to make up for it by committing an even more grievous transgression – saving Roslyn, giving up the nuke – conceding the election, only to totally revert to form once office was given to him.
Sometimes I wonder if the series with all its religious overtones isn’t pointedly based around Baltar’s own redemption.
What I want to find out about is what’s in store for Starbuck with the Leo Baun model. That episode with Starbuck interrogating him was one of the more powerful episodes and it was apparent he “got to her.” Looks like he wasn’t finished with her either.
As far as the resurrection ship being too far out for the Gina Six, I think it’s more a matter of wait and see. The resurrection episode conveyed a certain amount of disorientation and unease stemming from the whole experience and given the characters’ already damaged psyche it is unwise to assume she would immediately surrender the location of the refugees.
If no one minds a very late addition to the “objective greatness” debate…
I think people might be confusing “greatness” with “something I like.” I accept, for example, that there is such a thing as cheap-ášš tequila and there is such a thing as objectively great, high-quality, hand-crafted tequila. Either way, I don’t want to drink no tequila. (One bad night in college ruins you on that stuff.)
To continue the liquor analogy: Maybe some people prefer the cheap-ášš tequila to the good stuff. But liking it better doesn’t mean it’s better — it means it’s more to your tastes, yes, but it doesn’t mean it’s better.
If we say there’s no such thing as objective greatness, we have to go all the way. We have to say that BSG is in no way objectively better than “Battlefield: Earth.” And that ain’t a world I want to live in.
Posted by mister_pj at March 18, 2006 04:51 PM
SPIDER MAN IS A CHILD MOLESTER!?!?! PAD WROTE THIS?!?!?
Just kidding but, you know how these internet rumors take on a life of their own.
*********************************
Good night. If that turns into an Internet rumor I’m gonna slit my wrists.
Posted by: Matt Sullivan at March 18, 2006 09:54 PM
If no one minds a very late addition to the “objective greatness” debate…
I think people might be confusing “greatness” with “something I like.”
*****************************
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I am not conflating the two. I understand the difference. I think the difficulty you’re having is accepting that I *understand* your position and I nevertheless disagree with you.
And, you know, we can agree to disagree. I personally don’t see arguments as a win-lose proposition. Intelligent, civil arguments force me to hone my thinking and expose me to other points of view. Even if both of us come away without having persuaded the other, I still think the exercise is valuable.
Posted by: Matt Sullivan at March 18, 2006 09:54 PM
If we say there’s no such thing as objective greatness, we have to go all the way. We have to say that BSG is in no way objectively better than “Battlefield: Earth.” And that ain’t a world I want to live in.
**********************************
Well, yes and no. While opinions about the “greatness” of art are in my opinion subjective, I don’t think all opinions are of equal value. The opinion of someone who cares enough to watch/read/listen to a work of art before expressing an opinion on it is of far greater value than someone who says, “I haven’t seen this but I know it must suck because all stuff like that sucks.” Moreover, I think the opinion of someone who’s bothered to learn about the art form in question holds greater value than the opinion of someone who hasn’t.
Objectivity requires the application of standards. But critical standards change over time. Hence my example of the “three unities” that were considered by many ancient Greeks to be the fundamentals of all good storytelling. We now believe you can tell a good story without the “three unities.”
I certainly don’t think all opinions are created equal. I believe someone who is applying critical standards that are based on a knowledge of an art form will have better opinions than someone who looks at something and says, “Eh, didn’t like it.”
But ultimately, there’s no way to “prove” which standards are correct. Therefore, it’s impossible to declare them “objective.”
So no, I don’t believe in objective standards of greatness. But that doesn’t mean I have to admit Battlefield: Earth is on a par with Battlestar Galactica.
Just watched the BSG finale last night, and I’m really confused on one part of season 2. Maybe you guys could help me out, cause I think I must have missed something.
How did Adama and the others NOT know about Gina? Admiral Cain, her XO, and what seemed like the entire crew of Pegasus knew about her. I assume the entire crew did cause Cain mentioned that Gina used to eat and joke around with them as a member of her crew (kinda like how everyone on Galatica knew about Sharon).
Not to mention, the crew knew enough to assume that Sharon would now be getting the same treatment that Gina did under Cain, which they mentioned to some of Galactica’s crew. That’s how Tyrol and Helo knew enough to stop the attempted rape of Sharon.
Then Gina kills Cain and escapes. The XO knew that Gina was now gone, and I’m assuming Pegasus had to have investigated Cain’s death. They probably put two and two together and figured that Gina did it. Gina is now missing, and yet there’s no mention what so ever of looking for her or any mention of finding Cain’s killer.
How can Adama and Galactica’s crew not know about Gina? Not to mention, Gina was probably in Cain’s logs, which Adama now has access to since Cain and her XO are dead.
Was this explained at some point and I just missed it, or is this a big gaping hole? It’s been bothering me ever since Cain was killed and I kept waiting for them to explain it. Now that Gina’s dead, I don’t see that happening.
Also, someone posted above that they’re going to jump 5 years ahead in the season premiere. Is that true?
Posted by: Michelle at March 20, 2006 03:50 PM
Also, someone posted above that they’re going to jump 5 years ahead in the season premiere. Is that true?
***************************************
I’m the one who posted that nugget. It comes from an official BSG podcast that includes commentary from Executive Producer Ronald Moore among others. If you want to hear it for yourself, you can download it for free via iTunes.
Oh, and you can listen to it even if you don’t have an iPod. If you have a computer with Internet access, you can download the iTunes software for free, then navigate to podcasts and search for Battlestar Galactica. You can also find the podcasts via SciFi’s Web site.
I may have gotten the number of years wrong — for some reason now I’m thinking they may have said three years. But it was definitely a multi-year jump.
Quoting Bill:
“So no, I don’t believe in objective standards of greatness. But that doesn’t mean I have to admit Battlefield: Earth is on a par with Battlestar Galactica.”
Now realizing that we’re basically continuing an argument that started with Plato, I’ll agree that we’ll likely have to agree to disagree.
I doubt you and I really disagree that much, actually. And at least we can all agree on Battlefield: Earth.
And one more thing: I also heard that five-year jump comment on the podcast. I’m fairly certain they were kidding around.
Now, while I would agree that there is not an objective way to measure artistic merit, there ARE measurable standards by which to judge the quality of craftsmanship invested in a work of art. For example, Bram Stoker’s Dracula is considered a literary classic. It could be considered “great,” based on the indisputable and pervasive influence it has had on our culture even until this day. It is, however, a tremendously poorly written book.
-Rex Hondo-
Posted by Matt Sullivan at March 21, 2006 01:49 AM
And one more thing: I also heard that five-year jump comment on the podcast. I’m fairly certain they were kidding around.
**************************************
I went back and listened to the podcast, and yeah, they did chuckle when they said it. Perhaps it’s wishful thinking on my part to believe they were serious. I love stories that shake up the status quo and take risks, and jumping ahead five years in time really would be a delightfully risky move.