From: tiverson@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Thor Iverson)
Subject: Re: DS9 Grade Report: "Emissary"
Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:07:53 GMT

In article <rawdon.726734690@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>Spoilers for the DS9 episode, "Emissary"...


>I was really bowled over by none of the characters.  At the moment, all are
>stereotypes, entirely cardboard.  (Well, almost all.  See below.)  Sisko is
>the Stolid Commander.  Kira is The Bitch.
    	    	    	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sorry Michael, but now that you've joined us in Boston you're fair game. ;-)
This is one of the most appalling things you've said in a while.  But it
_is_ the typical respsonse to really strong, non-"feminine" female characters.
"Oh--what a bitch!"  There've been plenty of similarly-constructed male
characters in TOS and TNG that have not drawn the epithet "bitch" from
reviewers.  But show us an equally obnoxious (though I would say strong-willed)
female character and people start whining "bitch"...

Of course, as I found Kira the most compelling character on the screen,
as well as the most fully realized, I must admit to a certain bias in
favor of her character.

>The other bright spot is Odo, who shows strong signs of being more than Just
>Another Star Trek Alien.  In his element, he is forthright, aggressive, and
>even arrogant ("Who the hell are you?"), but when Bashir needed him to help
>tend to the wounded, he became squeamish.

Not surprisingly, I was most uncomfortable with Odo in the first episode,
though I thought he was better in the second.  I didn't see any justification
given for the general anger and surliness, nor was I entirely happy that
we seem to have an alien immune to purely physical violence.  Presumably
phasers and such (as well as the inevitable "Odonite" that Tim Lynch mentioned)
will affect him, but this ability bears close watching to avoid abuse (like
Troi's empathic abilites, Spock's mind-meld technique, etc.)  I was a good
deal happier with the general cast of the character in the second episode,
however, and I expect Rene I'm-Going-To-Have-To-Learn-How-To-Spell-His-Last-
Name-Soon was feeling a bit surer of his performance at that point.

>I also liked the fact that he's often called "Constable". :-)

Agreed.  Nice touch.

>However, there is a reason why the characters came across as so skimpy in this
>particular episode, and that's because the story focused to a much greater
>extent on the plot than on its protagonists.  This in itself would not have
>been so bad, had the plot not been so fragmented.

The plot was a bit jumpy, true.  I was actually happy that we didn't get
full bios of all the characters in the first episode, because this gives
the writers more freedom to explore and develop in future episodes.  I was
never a big fan of Roddenberry's more rigid guidelines for characters,
given what a good writer can do if allowed some free reign (for instance,
John Ford's Klingons and Diane Duane's Vulcans and Rihannsu, or the writers
of "Family" and "The Inner Light")

Just a few brief notes about the other characters--the doctor is definitely
written too campishly (is that a word?).  Quark--finally a Ferengi who's
not a cookie-cutter greedy fool.  Dax worries me--while I was satisfied
with the performance, I felt the conflicts created for the other characters
were missing in Dax over the first two episodes, and the character may well
go the way of Tasha Yar unless some kind of tension can be introduced.
I also despair of Trek's ever writing a convincing child--it seems we are
to be treated to Jake, the recalcitrant hoodlum-in-training as opposed to
Wesley, the boy genius and all-around great kid who occasionally screws
up.  Hopefully, some kind of balance can be struck by the writers, though
I would not be adverse to some kind of continuing and unresolved tension
between Jake and his father that would be more typical of real adolescents.
And I agree with an early reviewer--bring Kai Opaka (sp?) back!  An exploration
of spirituality in some form would be nice to see once in a while.

I also enjoyed Jennifer, though going back to this character again would
probably be a mistake.

>Why did they return Dax to DS9 and not Sisko?

Several people have asked this.  Might not the simplest explanation be that
Sisko addressed himself to the "orb," and Dax did not?

>The Cardassians also seem remarkably stupid [...]

Well, there was some nice variety in Cardassians over the first two episodes,
which is also nice to see from Star Trek, which tends to stereotype enemies.
But this did seem a bit like creating unnecessary conflict.

>The "battle" (such as it was) was passable, but except for the rare bit of
>combat in second-generation Star Trek, it seemed rather content-free.  (I did
>like O'Brien's interactions with the computer, though.)

See above.  I would like to see a future scene in which O'Brien is having
difficulty with the transporter (or some other gadget) and looks up in
exasperation, whereupon Kira will comment sarcastically, "Why don't you
give it a good kick?"

>Lastly, we have Sisko dealing with his wife's death.  Now, the opening
>sequence of "Emissary", with the Borg, was easily the high point of this
>episode.  (My comment at the time was:  If that was indicative of the series
>to come, it's gonna be pretty good!  Sadly, so far, it hasn't been.)  But I
>didn't really find Sisko's "holding on" to the event to be very innovative or
>exciting, especially as the resolution was couched mainly in exposition
>involving the maddeninly vague aliens.  I also thought much of what power
>there WAS was drastically undercut by the poor acting job of the actress
>playing Jennifer.  (She seemed terribly wooden, to me.)

I find this hard to take coming from you, as you have often complained that
there is no trauma-induced continuity in TNG.  Here we have something
which has affected Sisko for however many years between the destruction
of the Saratoga and his posting to DS9, and has taken control of his
career and personality.  I actually agree that the resolution wasn't handled
as well as it could have been, but I think it (and the second scene with
Picard) were too easily resolved.  This kind of struggling with internal
demons is one of the new aspects I hoped to see from DS9, as it got away
from the sometimes nauseatingly perfect TNG characters.

>On the whole, I think that this story would have functioned much better with a
>more subdued resolution to the claiming of the wormhole, and with the excising
>of as much as possible of Sisko's catharsis.  It would have made for a leaner,
>more to-the-point episode.

I disagree totally, for the reasons stated above.  TNG had set the stage
for the conflict over a possible stable wormhole a few seasons ago, and
I expect the conflict over this one (in a more lawless area of space) to
be even more heated.  And the "catharsis" was underdone (not specifically
in this episode, but in general).

>Finally, there are the peripheral considerations.  The acting I considered
>adequate at best, with even Avery Brooks (an actor I've long admired)
>strangely turning in a rather stilter performance.  Maybe they're all just
>warming up to the characters, yet.

Exactly.  I saw definite signs of, for lack of a better word, confusion
on the part of both Brooks and Rene Ab...(you know I can't spell this
yet!)  The powers-that-be would do well to let Brooks define his character
the same way Stewart has been allowed to--as they are both connsumate actors,
one hopes for similar results.  I actually found the acting to be pretty
good--certainly better that much of TOS or most of TNG's first season.
And as I said before, I found Nana Visitor perfect (less so in the second
episode, but it seemed to be the fault of the dialogue she was given in
that case).

An aside--do you think that Trek has now set a precedent, with Stewart and
Brooks, that its future commanding officers must have incredible voices?
Does this mean that they'll have to get Kathleen Turner for Star Trek--The
Generation After The Last One?  ;-)

>(Even the main title theme is unexciting.  It sounds like a weak variation on
>Copland's "Fanfare For The Common Man".  I like the sparse arrangement, but
>the melody doesn't evoke ANYthing in my mind.)

Regarding the oft-voiced complaints about DS9's music--I didn't pay much
attention to the incidental music, but I too found the main theme banal.
And, to silence some objections--I _am_ a musician, and "got" the in-jokes
about the previous themes.  But it evoked absolutely no emotional response
in me whatsoever.  Contrast this with the TNG theme as used in ST-TMP, which
I watched a few weeks ago--the music sounded incredible in that setting.

>Grade: C-

I gave it an A (A+ if they would have cut it to 90 minutes).  I was
pleased to see that you enjoyed the second episode, though.  That got
only a B from me--perhaps the only time in recorded history that you've
enjoyed an episode more that me!!!  ;-)

>Michael Rawdon				  rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu
>University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department,  Madison, WI

Thor Iverson
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current