What You’re Not Getting About Last Night’s BSG
By “you,” I mean Derek here and Brian at the ‘Verse, and a few others: The Cylons’ failure is an inability to separate the concepts of benevolence and control. Even Caprica-6 and Galactica-Sharon haven’t advanced so far in their thinking as to conceive of Cylon-Human relations that don’t involve Cylon governance of the humans. Thus they have no real alternative to present the harshest elements in the irreconcilable coalition that runs the occupation.
The Cylons could have simply detached themselves from humanity. They could have opened negotiations as equals. They could have thrown themselves on humanity’s mercy. They did none of those things, because what they can’t give up is the idea that, as God’s instruments, they must shape human destiny. Before they saw themselves as God’s way of scourging humanity for their sins. Now they see themselves as God’s shepherds. They remain incapable of seeing themselves as “slobs like one of us.”
So it all goes wrong. We join the occupation in media res, when the whole thing is well down the road of cosmic badness. The humans are already revolting, as some of them always intended to do, and the Cylons are already cracking down. The Cylons are developing their “Security comes first” mindset. C6 and G-Sharon dither, but because they’ve bought into the idea that benevolence requires control, they have no alternatives to offer except, be nicer.
Apparently the webisodes, which I haven’t seen yet, have more detail on the content of the early occupation. The theme of the first television episode is that the content doesn’t matter. The structure of domination and resistance is what matters. The human resistance logically justifies ever-greater enormities in the name of effectiveness; the Cylon occupiers justify ever-worse repression in the name of sending a message.
Brian calls the whole thing a “very very thinly veiled Iraq war commentary,” which is true as far as it goes: it’s a very very good Iraq war commentary. By this I don’t mean an inarguable Iraq war commentary – you could disagree on the substance of the show’s critique of “both sides.” But it is a coherent correlative of what happens when a powerful group sets out to “save” a weaker group that doesn’t want saving.
As I read Brian’s critique, it seems to come down to “I wish it was a different story entirely.” Specifically, Brian wishes for
a Life of Brian occupation, or a Caves of Steel occupation- the Cylons provide infrastructure and order, and live somewhere else and invite people to live with them, and proselytize, and paternalize, and keep them from smoking or overeating (which would have done crazy fat orange Lee some good), wearing seatbelts, getting educations, all that good stuff.
which is to say, Brian wishes for an occupation that a right-libertarian could hate with gusto, a very very thinly veiled nanny state commentary if you will. An uncomplicatedly “left” benevolent hegemony.
Which wouldn’t necessarily be a bad story! I could like it myself. Wouldn’t it be interesting to see Colonel Tigh plotting the suicide-bombing of a health club or whatever. You would need to spend a lot more time on New Caprica to tease out all the variations in dominance and resistance in that story line, but it could work.
The thing is that people like Brian and I already believe that the nanny state requires and fosters a vast apparatus of coercion anyway, so you still end up, at some point, with angry Cylons wanting to haul humans off in trucks for summary execution. You still have groups of humans trying to shock their fellows into throwing off the shackles. At some point it all gets very bad, because of the structures of dominance and rebellion.
What we get in this episode cuts to the chase. The fact of resistance itself preempts whatever the Cylons did plan for humanity. The fact that the Cylons couldn’t recognize that they were precisely the wrong folks to successfully bring the light to humankind – their lack of a modesty subroutine – makes the actual content of their hopes irrelevant. It doesn’t just have as little chance of working as democratizing a country pledged to an alien creed by force of arms.
It is as likely to work as bringing people to your God by flying planes into their buildings.
Comment by Brian W. Doss —
October 7, 2006 @ 10:23 am
Excellent counter analysis! Perhaps my faith in BSG is not yet gone.
Comment by Eric Scharf —
October 7, 2006 @ 11:08 am
It is as likely to work as bringing people to your God by flying planes into their buildings.
Which points up the most salient attribute of the Cylons (and, inevitably, the more “telegenic” elements of Al-Qaeda): adolescence. To stretch the analogy further, Americans (even Burkeans like George Will) are so used to thinking of themselves as the the Latest Thang in the history of civilizations that they balk at recognizing a movement from the Biblical Orient for what they are: disaffected teenagers.
That’s Adama’s role: crotchety old man (”Get off my lawn, you toaster punks!”).
Comment by Brian W. Doss —
October 7, 2006 @ 11:33 am
In case the TB doesn’t work, the response (in longer than allowable comment section form) is here.
Comment by Eric Scharf —
October 7, 2006 @ 12:01 pm
[My comments on Brian's responses will be posted here for the sole purpose of my convenience.]
What I would have liked to have seen is a bit more of the reason why Tigh only has 1158 people willing to fight against such a nightmare 1984/V for Vendetta/East Bloc lifestyle of random detention, violence, and reduced rations (er, the rations were always 25 grams…). Granted there is only ever a small few who’ll fight or engaged in full time resistance v. tyranny, but when I watched it I had a hard time believing that there is not general insurrection, general uprising, how the situation as described had not already led to the Cavils’ idea of paring down the population to a ‘managable’ number, since the attack at the Temple (webisodes) apparently brought mass demonstrations at Colonial One. Because we don’t see any plus side at all leaves the story cold (for me). Nuance, as they say, but only just a little bit. I don’t want a smorgasbord of nuance, just throw me a bone.
I’d like to jump in with my thoughts of how different people (humans) have variously responded to military conquest. I’d submit that the New Capricans have been severely demoralized to the point of losing faith in human governance.
How the Cylons were able to achieve the initial Holocaust is still generally unknown, but it’s been more than long enough for conspiracy theories and “stabs-in-the-back” to make their way around the population (even one without the Internets). The decision to settle on New Caprica and make themselves vulnerable was the direct result of a violently charged political struggle (remember Gina’s nuke?). The fleet vanished and has been unheard from for months, while the only humans taking arms against the Cylons have been (from the perspective of the typical New Caprican) misanthropic ogres like Tigh who don’t hesitate to inflict collateral damage on human families.
Then there’s the religious angle. What evidence do New Capricans have that the Cylons aren’t the instruments of the gods?
All the New Capricans lack is an unpopular subdemographic that can be cast as the Other and blamed for the humans’ defeat. If Moore & Co. suddenly discover a previously unmentioned religious sect (say, the Followers of Hades) among the New Capricans, I’ll be worried.
Comment by Brian W. Doss —
October 7, 2006 @ 2:10 pm
Interesting points Eric, it will be interesting if they explore that “we had it coming” angle, but so far it seems that the humans are resentful at least. When they inevitably exodus from New Caprica, perhaps they will have no faith in civilian governance anymore.
Comment by Jennifer —
October 7, 2006 @ 5:53 pm
How the Cylons were able to achieve the initial Holocaust is still generally unknown
I never felt the need to wonder about that; it would be quite easy for robots that are more-or-less immortal to destroy vulnerable flesh-and-blood beings. We know that computer viruses had something to do with the initial Holocaust, so it’s also easy to speculate that artificially intelligent robots would be better with computers than even the greatest computer genius.
I thought Tigh made a good point last night, when he said that he’s sent men off on suicide missions before, and whether you die in a Viper or die with a bomb-belt around your waist, you wind up equally dead.
Comment by Mr. Obscura —
October 7, 2006 @ 7:34 pm
While I thought the allegory was heavy-handed to the extreme, we can hope it was meant to catch up new viewers (See, the show is an allegory of America in the noughts, but always re-cast to put the sympathetic people on the other side).
I have never thought for a moment that the Cylons were an allegory for Al-Qaeda, rather they have always been the allegory of America – arrogant, paternal, bringing their ways to the benighted, breaking a few plates for the greater good. Casting them as an allegory to Al-Qaeda is a spectacular mis-reading of the series.
While I have learned the hard way that it is dangerous to over-analyze Moore’s themes; listening to his podcasts are an excellent way to see that he is Making This Up As He Goes Along, it is a testament to the series (or at least the acting) that we all leap in to do it again.
Comment by Andrew Olmsted —
October 7, 2006 @ 10:41 pm
I think that trying to overanalyze the episode in terms of politics is a mistake. Yes, there are some clear comparisons to the U.S. invasion in Iraq, but it’s hardly just a commentary on that. I give Moore credit for using that basic allegory to tell a pretty interesting story; I hope he keeps this going throughout the third season.
Comment by David —
October 8, 2006 @ 5:55 am
Season 3 spoiler interview w/ Moore.
Via Battlestar Wiki
Trackback by Samizdata.net —
October 8, 2006 @ 12:51 pm
Battlestar brilliance…
U.S. blogger Jim Henley has some interesting thoughts about the politics of ace science fiction adventures series Battlestar Galactica. In my typically languid British way, I have just about started munching my way through series 2, which I find rather…
Comment by COD —
October 8, 2006 @ 5:39 pm
I don’t think Moore was making a point about Iraq as much as we was about suicide bombing in general. Here in the US, suicide bombers are undeniably bad. By having “the good guys” in BSG commit that act, he forces us to rethink that, doesn’t he?
Further, doesn’t Tigh sort of makes the point that all military attacks are suicide? The difference is that with the lone bomber, you know in advance exactly which soldier is committing suicide.
Comment by Andrew Olmsted —
October 8, 2006 @ 8:00 pm
Speaking as a soldier, I’d argue strenuously against the notion that all military attacks are suicide. Historically speaking, that is far from the case, of course. Even most ’suicide’ missions are far from guaranteed to result in the death of the soldiers involved.
On a separate note, I don’t see nearly as much controversy with suicide attacks as I do with attacks against nonmilitary targets. Kamikaze attacks, for example, while devastating as a tactic, did not inspire nearly the degree of outrage as suicide bombers who walk into a crowd of civilians and detonate themselves, and with good reason, I think.
Comment by Ivan —
October 8, 2006 @ 9:46 pm
The cylons attempted genocide. Worse than genocide. A species war. There is no reconcilliation like Jews and Germans in WWII. Both those parties were human — the same basic beings.
There is no reason to trust another species that has already tried to eliminate your species. The result is a very serious rebellion.
This can’t really be compared to Iraq. The US didn’t try to kill every Iraqi. The insurgency is largely composed of former dictatorial elements.
I find the opening of the season interesting precisly because they have the skill to write about oppression and an insurgency without resorting to a proxy-iraq-commentary.
At heart, they’re writing about humanity. The cylons are simple enough to act as a clear foil to the diverse human reaction to the situation.
I’m very happy with the opening.
Comment by jows —
October 9, 2006 @ 9:06 am
Basically all of the metaphores for the Iraq war are based on myths. The only honest things that remain in the show are the hot buzzwords like “insurgent” and “occupation.”
I got the feeling that the suicide bombing aspect was not at all part of the drama in the show, but was just another leftist attempt to teach those dumb fuckin proles why they deserve to be murdered by terrorists.
When the show did not deal with “ripped from the headlines” pablum, it worked.
Comment by Walt —
October 9, 2006 @ 9:54 am
Jows: let it go.
Comment by Jim Henley —
October 9, 2006 @ 10:01 am
jows, I think you have to be looking for that particular interpretation (”just another leftist attempt to teach those dumb fuckin proles why they deserve to be murdered by terrorists”) to find it. Since contemporary “conservatism” amounts to little more than looking for “leftist” things to be offended by, though, I’m not surprised that some people would take the show that way.
Comment by Jon Swift —
October 9, 2006 @ 1:22 pm
Many liberals and even some conservatives seem to be missing the point of this show. The Cylons are the good guys.
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 9, 2006 @ 3:09 pm
If we were dealing with run-o-the-mill human characters fighting over something of strategic value, I could buy into the whole repression bit. But we’re not. We’re dealing with machines who we’ve been told have an uncanny ability to manipulate humans into doing what they want. Gaius Baltar is prime example number one. Starbuck, Adama and Rosslyn have explicitly stated as much time and again. The Cylons also programmed their own people to blend in with humans so seamlessly that they cannot be detected unless they show up in the same room with another copy, as happened with Cavil at the end of season two. So, please, don’t give me this line about history repeating itself. This isn’t history in the human sense of the term. We’re dealing with something outside of history, or at least we should be.
And that’s my beef. Now that season three has begun,I’m supposed to forget the first season and a half, and now believe that the cylons have somehow become goose-stepping morons from an Indiana Jones movie. That makes no sense on the series’ own terms. Moreover, it makes no sense in the larger fictional arena of robotics v. humans. If the robots want to crush all human dissent and keep loyal followers, then all they needed to have done was offer the sweet life to those who want it, and then, destroy the rest after giving them some false promises about leaving them be.
What’s worse, this whole approach has trivialized the philosophical question Adama raised in the series, because it doesn’t really challenge us to ask if humans deserve to survive. When robots play nazi and humans fight back, it doesn’t say much one way or the other about humans. Yes, they’re fighting for survival, but so what? We know they do that? But do they deserve it, as Adama asked?
If the robots came offering sweet delights in exchange for submission, and the humans resisted or accepted, it would have confronted Adama’s question head on.
To end this long post, let me leave by giving you one example from the episode to show insulting it is to the audience. Remember the scene where Baltar is made to sign the death warrants with a gun at his head. He does this because, as Cavil notes, the cylons want it to be legal in the eyes of God. They don’t want to commit “murder.” Well, WTF are they doing if they shoot Baltar? WTF are they doing when they compel him to sign something under duress? Murder. A simpleton can see the logic of it. But none of the cylons–who are supposed to be logic-crunching robots given to theological and moral speculation–even raise that point. This is sloppy, unimaginative writing at its worst. If you want to call it good drama, you’re entitled to your opinion, but I call it putting lipstick on a pig.
Comment by Hesiod —
October 9, 2006 @ 4:02 pm
I think the Iraq allegories are pretty obvious. There are some key differences, though.
Tigh isn’t deliberately targetting “civilian human targets,” in a nihlist streak or religious fervor.
And while our occupation of Iraq has, at times, been heavy handed. We haven’t sent out the summary execution of all the prisoners order yet.
I think, actually, BSG’s braintrust may have in mind the Battle of Algiers as much as Iraq. Watch that movie and you will see some stylistic echoes.
In any case, while I appreciate Jim’s attempts to save the BSG franchise, I think it’s gone completely off the rails.
For one thing, the motivation of the Cylons to suddenly do an about-face on Humanity seemed rather strained and questionable even last season.
Now, it’s wholly ridiculous.
I agree with others that it would have made a much more compelling story to see the Cylons at forst get greeted, somewhat, as iberators after a shitty year on New Caprica. Especially if hey come bearing peace and development.
It’s sad to say, but the old TV show “V” did a better job than the BSG crew with respect to plot. In fact, half of BSG 3’s plot ideas seem to have been ripped off directly from V.
If you recall in that series, the Visitors come initially as great benefactors to humanity, and give us all sorts of neat tungs such as medical technology. Over time, you get creeping fascism, and totalitarianism. And a budding risistance movement, that gains more power and effectiveness over time.
BSG is lightyears ahead of V in terms of acting, special effects, storytelling style and even dialogue. But it’s not an improvement in terms of plot.
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 9, 2006 @ 6:26 pm
Would you actually see this with cylons? Why do you think the cylons would automatically go to the oppression stage? That might be true if they were human, or even wholly organic. But they’re not. They’re machines, or at least cyborgs, and they run on a different set of standards–or at least they should run on a different set of standards.
I can’t speak for Brian, but this is the problem I have with the story. It’s not a matter of telling a story I don’t like or taking it in another direction. It’s a matter of the writers not being true to their own freaking story.
Maybe, but the moral equation changes. It’s one thing to blow up collaborators when they’re dragging your fellow man to the killing pits, but it’s another when you’re killing them for choosing luxury over hardship. In fact, they’re both no-brainers. The first is moral and the second isn’t, and using the second scenario would force the writers to put aside the stupid gunplay and actually think about the issues the series is supposed to address.
As for those who say the cylons are being oppressive because they’re only acting like humans, I will admit that this does at least answer the question Adama posed in the miniseries*. In the negative.
*Does the human race deserve to survive?
Comment by Eric Scharf —
October 9, 2006 @ 8:09 pm
We’re dealing with machines who we’ve been told have an uncanny ability to manipulate humans into doing what they want. Gaius Baltar is prime example number one.
The ability to manipulate such a complete narcissist as Baltar is hardly uncanny. I’m confident I could get a research grant out of him, and I’m way less…persuasive than either Tricia Helfer or Alan Sokal.
(A less flippant reply will be forthcoming when I’m no longer at work.)
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 9, 2006 @ 9:41 pm
We’re not just dealing with Baltar here. They had a number of agents who blended in so well with the human population that no one knew of their existence until the Galactica put in at Ragnar station. The Lucy Lawless character blended in perfectly as a reporter. Dean Stockman blended in as a priest, an unorthodox priest at that. You don’t get to do these kinds of things without skill.
Also, you have the words of Adama, Rosslyn and Starbuck, who have all commented on the Cylons skill at deception, manipulation and blending in.
I’m sorry, but the whole bit about the cylons being incompetent or Jim’s claim that they can’t set aside their arrogance just does not square with what we saw in the first two seasons.
Comment by Eric Scharf —
October 9, 2006 @ 11:42 pm
Also, you have the words of Adama, Rosslyn and Starbuck, who have all commented on the Cylons skill at deception, manipulation and blending in.
I’ll give you the bit about blending in, but if any of these people made any kind of objective assertion that the Cylons were qualitatively better than humans at deception or manipulation, I don’t remember it. What I do remember are those people repeatedly inveighing that Cylons are untrustworthy, which ain’t the same thing.
Perhaps I’m biased because my greatest fear has always been that the Cylons were super-sophisticated long-range meta-plotters, and that everything that has happened in the series was part of their (intertitled) Plan. For example, it was all too easy to suspect that the Cylons wanted the humans to find Kobol, retrieve the arrow, and locate Earth, so that then the Cylons would spring their final trap and either finish the genocide, or enslave humanity into their breeding program, or some other undisclosed Grand Scheme. All other achievements by the characters we had come to care about would be for nought. Ron Moore would look terribly clever, and many of us would lament that he hadn’t spent the 90s writing for Chris Carter instead.
So for me, the revelation that the Cylons are incompetent, riven by factions, and assailed by doubts is very welcome news. And while I would be the first to guffaw at the notion that Moore & Co. are incapable of being inconsistent, I don’t think they’ve betrayed anything here.
I think the misapprehension that the Cylons must be colossally competent is understandable because—here we go again with the analogies—many Americans had a similar response to 9/11: the terrorists hit the World Trade Center and the Penta-fucking-gon. What else could they do? Anthrax! Anthrax in the mail! SARS in the water supply! Omigod—lookit all our ports! Sleeper cells—quarantine Dearborn!
The Cylons plotted for decades and got in one, monstrously effective first strike. After that, all they had were sleeper agents, the distribution of which might have been either deliberate or simply accidental—we still don’t know. Given that the humans originally couldn’t visually identify any of the Cylon models, I was initially suspicious that the sleepers weren’t more effective in either giving away the Fleet’s location or otherwise sabotaging it. At first, this simply fed my Cylons-as-humanherds suspicions, and if Derek was supposedly alert to signs that Moore & Co. had betrayed their presentation of the Cylons as ruthlessly competent and manipulative, he should have lodged his complaint as early as “Litmus,” the Season One episode in which a Doral model on board Galactica blows himself up, causing no permanent damage but recklessly giving away the sleepers’ greatest advantage by making their existence known to the general public.
As it was, we were giving the Cylons too much credit. Not all of their plans come to fruition, and many of them seem to be improvising. Badly.
In short, from the perspective of many New Capricans, it might be entirely reasonable to attribute hypercompetence and inevitable dominion to the Cylons, but the audience has long known (or should have known) better.
Comment by Mr. Obscura —
October 10, 2006 @ 4:43 pm
At the risk of being flamed, I’d like to point out that the Cylons are not logical machines. They are, in fact, characters in a drama. As such, they represent human beings, or a type of human being, or some other dramatic construct to illustrate the writer/producer’s impressions of humanity. Again, because it is a drama, internal consistency, while highly valued by the viewers (including me), is not mandatory. Listening to a few of RDM’s podcasts should convince you of that fact.
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 10, 2006 @ 8:41 pm
Adama noted it in Flesh and Bone, and Starbuck said the Cylons are “…good at making us look like idiots…” to Helo in the Season 2 premier.
Comment by Consumatopia —
October 11, 2006 @ 3:51 pm
What if the Cylons gave everyone a share of property (a homestead, if you will) and undemocratically imposed a market capitalist system on everyone?
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 11, 2006 @ 8:58 pm
It would still represent an improvement over what they had under Baltar.
Comment by late to the party —
October 13, 2006 @ 1:30 pm
So Derek, if someone is able to manipulates you and make you look like an idiot because you simply don’t see it coming, that’s objective proof that that person is qualitatively good at manipulation and deception in any and all circumstances?
Is it not equally plausible to assume that maybe they got lucky, but that now since you’re on to them it’s a fairer fight?
You’re entire dismissal of the episode is based on the one assumption that we’ve been led to believe for two seasons that the cylons are these supreme evil geniuses, but frankly, I just don’t see it. And it will make for a far better story if there is some tit for tat, with the cylons and the humans both screwing up every so often.
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 13, 2006 @ 4:07 pm
All of the principal characters have said this, including the ones the writers have shown to be the best of human society–Adama, Starbuck, Helo, Roslin, etc. You can deny and make excuses for this turnaround if you like, but I’m not going to go along with it.
One can argue that they weren’t “geniuses”, but one cannot argue that they were not bright and capable when it came to manipulating humans and be taken very seriously.
And my dismissal of the episode is based on a lot of things. This just happens to be one of the most salient problems I have with it, and I find it most cogent because only the most forgiving of viewers would deny this 180 on the writers’ part.
Comment by Derek Copold —
October 13, 2006 @ 4:56 pm
To flog this dead horse a bit further, the other contradiction in this show is the suicide bombing on the part of the Colonials. Ron Moore wanted his Iraq Allegory no matter the cost, so inserted suicide bombing into the mix. Well, does it flow? Not really. The Colonials, we were shown, are a secular society with a bit of pagan spirituality. Even the Gemelemadingdongs aren’t really that far out in their beliefs, which center on an eternal recurrence. How does this society produce suicide bombers, when every other society that features them does so in a religious context that promises an otherworldly paradise (something eternal recurrence excludes)? Yeah, I can buy one upset and unstable person taking himself out, and maybe two, but not enough to wage a campaign, as we’re being shown in BSG.
So now, not only has Moore completely shredded what he established for the Cylons, but he’s done it for the Colonials as well.
Comment by Kief —
October 14, 2006 @ 7:57 am
I think the folks who are thinking the Cylon behaviour in this season is inconsistent with the earlier ones are forgetting the key aspect of their motivations – they are a bunch of religious nuts.
Religious nuts bent on converting heathens aren’t going to offer a choice, “join our religion if it strikes your fancy”, because heathens are too ignorant to be able to make such a choice. They must be conquered and forced to wear pants, have monogomous marriages, and follow the other trappings of the “right” way, so that eventually they will see the light.
Comment by Donald Johnson —
October 19, 2006 @ 3:41 pm
To flog this dead horse a bit further, the other contradiction in this show is the suicide bombing on the part of the Colonials. Ron Moore wanted his Iraq Allegory no matter the cost, so inserted suicide bombing into the mix. Well, does it flow? Not really. The Colonials, we were shown, are a secular society with a bit of pagan spirituality. Even the Gemelemadingdongs aren’t really that far out in their beliefs, which center on an eternal recurrence. How does this society produce suicide bombers, when every other society that features them does so in a religious context that promises an otherworldly paradise (something eternal recurrence excludes)?
Wrong. His conclusions are controversial, but one thing that Robert Pape showed in “Dying to Win” is that suicide bombing is not necessarily connected with a belief in the afterlife or any religious belief. Often it is done by secular nationalists trying to drive out a foreign occupier.
The Tamil Tigers are among the leading practitioners of suicide bombing, iirc, and I think they are Marxist in ideology.