Jammer's Review

Star Trek: The Next Generation

"Silicon Avatar"

1/2

Air date: 10/14/1991
Teleplay by Jeri Taylor
Story by Lawrence V. Conley
Directed by Cliff Bole

Review by Jamahl Epsicokhan

Just as a Federation colony is getting settled on a lush planet, the deadly crystalline entity — which consumes life as a food source — shows up and turns the entire world into a barren wasteland. The woman who would've been Riker's next conquest is among the colonists who are killed in the attack. The Enterprise is assigned to pursue the crystalline entity and attempt to make contact if possible — or destroy it if necessary. They take on Dr. Kila Marr (Ellen Geer), a scientist and expert on the entity whose son was killed many years ago in the entity's attack on Omicron Theta (see "Datalore").

There's a moment in "Silicon Avatar" that stands out for me: Riker has just privately made the case to Picard that the crystalline entity is a dangerous scourge that has already killed thousands, and perhaps the Enterprise's mission should be to destroy it to stop its killing spree instead of attempting to communicate with it. After the conversation, Riker leaves and Picard sits there ambiguously. Patrick Stewart's expression shows thoughtfulness without revealing what he's thinking. Does he disagree with Riker? Is he worried he may be right? It's a perfect performance that shows a man just thinking about what he has heard, and processing it carefully. Stewart makes such a brief, subtle moment so memorable.

But I also think this scene echoes my feelings about the episode in general, which is: I'm just not sure what I think about all this. Picard uses an analogy that compares the crystalline entity to a feeding whale, suggesting that it's a force of nature that has as much right to exist as anything else. Fair enough, but we're not talking about shellfish being consumed in mass quantities; we're talking about people's lives and entire M-class worlds being laid to waste. At some point, a line must be drawn. The episode acknowledges this question without quite dealing with it.

Then there's Dr. Marr, whose arc in this story is a little heavy-handed. At first she distrusts Data because his brother Lore betrayed Omicron Theta, leading to her son's death. Later, because Data holds the memories of her son, she weeps as Data reads a letter in her son's voice. Ultimately, she makes the unilateral decision to destroy the crystalline entity by turning the communication frequency into a weapon. I'm not fond of the contrived way she seems to instantly flip from rational to crazy as her revenge brings about "peace" for her son's memory. And the final scene with Data underlines the tragedy in a way that simultaneously feels too conveniently tidy and yet weirdly incomplete.

Previous episode: Ensign Ro
Next episode: Disaster

Season Index

31 comments on this review

karatasiospa - Fri, Apr 1, 2011 - 7:15am (USA Central)

Yes jammer but who drowns the line and how and where? Can we say that we have the right to destroy the crystalline entity but the entity itself has not the right to survive? becouse if we kill it for reasons of serfpreservation then it will not survive. So we will destroy other lifeforms in order to survive? and the shellfish has not the same right to survive? do we have somehow more right to survival than the selfish? If yes why?becouse we consider ourselves intelligent? you see these are difficult questions and i think that picard is right to pose the question. In the end the actions of Dr. Marr are exactly the kind of action that justify picard's question, they are the actions of a revengfull hunan who doesn't care at all about the entity's right to exist.And for all that the episode i think deserves 3 stars.

startrekwatcher - Fri, Apr 1, 2011 - 1:01pm (USA Central)

Silicon Avatar is a 3.5 star episode. Kila Marr's struggle with dealing with her guilt over leaving her son behind with friends to pursue her career leading to his death by the crystaline entity was well done and compelling, the scene where Data replays his logs in his voice was moving, and the final scene where we see an already broken mother get one more emotional punch to her gut when Data tells her her son would not approve was devastating. Plus the attack in the teaser and early first act added a nice bit of exciting action.

I don't quite understand your issue with the episode honestly. Picard's point was that does a human as a lifeform deserve to exist anymore than crystalline entity--they are both living creatures.

Rachael - Fri, Apr 1, 2011 - 4:05pm (USA Central)

The problem I had with Picard's "moral dilemma" was the idea that the concept of self-defense is somehow morally suspect. If shellfish could fight back against whales, wouldn't they? SHOULDN'T they? Why should any lifeform with the ability to fight back against its own imminent destruction decline to do so, or feel as though it should? Honestly, by season five, I was pretty well and tired of Picard's neverending "moral dilemmas" over issues that are self-evident on their face (such as the right to self defense, or the idea that being alive but "contaminated" is better than being dead and "pure" [See The Masterpiece Society]). TNG had mostly left such preaching behind by this point, making the occasional lapses that much more frustrating.

startrekwatcher - Fri, Apr 1, 2011 - 4:19pm (USA Central)

Picard isn't saying let's let the creature destroy us but he at least wants to make the attempt to communicate with it rather than just immediately deciding to destroy it.

karatasiospa - Sat, Apr 2, 2011 - 6:50am (USA Central)

I agree with you startrekwatcher. Otherwise we turn the right to survive into an amoral evolutionary struggle justifying everything in the name of survival.

Dan R - Sun, Apr 3, 2011 - 7:03pm (USA Central)

We already knew that the cystalline entity's intent was evil from previous episodes; that it would kill before; that it had killed thousands. Picard's naive attempts to communicate with it almost begged the question: is EVERY menacing destructive life form on this show always "misunderstood"? Are there EVER any circumstances that would justify the killing of a life for to prevent the slaughter of millions of people?

Few here would argue, I am sure, that a species technologically and physiologically superior to us is under a moral "obligation" to try to listen to our communication before annihiliating us if we are perceived as a threat.

Here, we were faced with a deadly killing machine. Dr. Marr killed it. And the show, through Data, in the final scene, wags its finger at her, saying "Shame on you".

Shame on the show. The ending made me sick. Dr. Marr did the right thing, and people who can't even understand (if not embrace) that point of view can be as narrow minded as the "evil" humans they so easily trash.

karatasiospa - Mon, Apr 4, 2011 - 6:43am (USA Central)

Picard just tried to explore the possibility of a compromise through communication nothing more or less. But Marr didn't let him do it she only wanted revenfe and for that shame on her.

Eric Dugdale - Mon, Apr 4, 2011 - 1:06pm (USA Central)

What the hell kind of compromise would be possible? "Oh, don't randomly kill thousands of us at a time - we'll offer you some sacrifices to keep you alive from time to time. Hey, look at all that Romulan space..."

Seriously, the thing's existence depends on an act that humans cannot tolerate. No workable compromise is possible.

Angel - Tue, Apr 5, 2011 - 10:32am (USA Central)

How would you know no workable compromise was possible? That was precisely what Picard was hoping to find out until Marr decided to take matters into her own hands.

Eric Dugdale - Wed, Apr 6, 2011 - 8:43am (USA Central)

Reading posts *before* responding to them is advisable, Angel. The answer is in my 2nd-to-last sentence.

karatasiospa - Wed, Apr 6, 2011 - 10:26am (USA Central)

With all due respect your answer is typical of people who shoot first and ask questions later.

Rachael - Sat, Apr 9, 2011 - 10:51am (USA Central)

They didn't "shoot first and ask questions later." They were, to continue the metaphor, essentially letting the crystalline entity go on an unabated shooting rampage while wringing their hands about whether they had the "right" to stop it from massacring more people. It absolutely blows my mind that people don't think sentient beings have the right to self-defense. Yeah, this episode ranks as one of the worse examples of naive Star Trek why-can't-we-all-just-get-along "morality".

Also, why do so many parents feel compelled to abandon their children on TNG? I love how Dr. Marr just left her son alone "with some friends" on the colony so she could run around and be a scientist. She couldn't take him with her? I had a hard time feeling sorry for her loss since her kid was obviously pretty low on her totem pole of priorities to begin with...

angel - Sat, Apr 9, 2011 - 11:11am (USA Central)

Picard admits to Marr that there is the possibility that they may have to destroy the entity. But he didn't want to resort to that until he had exhausted all other options, which Marr kept him from doing when she destroyed the entity.

Marr's son was a teenager, so maybe he was at the age when he wanted to be on his own (for a while, anyway).

Rachael - Sat, Apr 9, 2011 - 12:21pm (USA Central)

Every kid wants things that they shouldn't have. I wanted a pet lion and an airplane when I was a kid. Fortunately, my parents saw the wisdom in not getting me whatever I wanted. Abandoning your kid for no good reason is not good parenting, and it's something that shows up time and again on TNG. It drives me insane.

I would have found Marr's "revenge" a little more credible if she hadn't up and left her kid because she decided he was a hindrance to her career.

angel - Sat, Apr 9, 2011 - 3:18pm (USA Central)

I see what you're saying but giving a kid a wild animal for a pet and allowing a teenager to spend time away from home with friends are two different things.
Although this was never specified, the friends he was with may have been school/childhood acquaintances whom his mom trusted.

karatasiospa - Sun, Apr 10, 2011 - 5:53am (USA Central)

It seems some people just don't like TNG's morality and Picard's attempt to communicate (just an attempt to communicate, Picard didn;t abandon the right to self preservation, that's a misunderstanding at best or a perversion of the truth at worst ) becouse it is "naive" ( how many times i heard this accusation?) while shooting someone without even trying to communicate it's o.k. for them . So let us be naive and if you don't like TNG's "naive" morality don't watch it.

Eric Dugdale - Mon, Apr 11, 2011 - 1:59pm (USA Central)

"With all due respect your answer is typical of people who shoot first and ask questions later."

Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. Does that mean that it's wrong? If so, then you should be able to give the reason *why* instead of resorting to polemics.

kratasiospa - Tue, Apr 12, 2011 - 9:04am (USA Central)

You don't shoot someone and you don't kill someone before you even try to find another solution. It's as simple as that.Becouse if you do it means that you are not even intersted to avoid the shooting. And that says a lot but i will avoid the apropriate term for such a behaviour becouse i'm not interested in "polemics".

Eric Dugdale - Fri, Apr 15, 2011 - 6:45pm (USA Central)

So far, they had tried allowing it to live. That path resulted in many deaths.

You trivialize the lives that were lost, and those that are still in danger of being lost. I realize it's hard to empathize with other sentient beings (humans) when they're on TV. It's easy to see them as expendable, since they're fictional. But within the context of the story, their safety is important.

How many lives do you think would be a reasonable price to pay in order to learn more about the CE?

angell - Sun, Apr 17, 2011 - 9:43pm (USA Central)

How exactly had they 'tried allowing it to live'?
Our heroes hadn't seen the CE since "Datalore" so it's not like Picard could've just decided one day to seek it out and talk to it.
And for the last time, PICARD ACKNOWLEDGED THAT IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO DESTORY THE CE!!!
His meeting with it would have determined whether its destruction was imperative until Marr decided to skip a few steps.

Eric Dugdale - Wed, Apr 20, 2011 - 4:50pm (USA Central)

They "tried allowing it to live" by virtue of having, for various reasons, been allowing it to live.

And I agree that there was nothing to lose by attempting to communicate with it; they could always outrun it and kill it afterward. I just don't see what they could have gained by it, either.

angel - Fri, Apr 22, 2011 - 11:04am (USA Central)

Picard: "If we can determine what its needs are, we may find other sources to supply it."

Eric Dugdale - Fri, Apr 22, 2011 - 1:36pm (USA Central)

Such as other life-forms. Non-humans. How altruistic.

Lenore - Sat, Apr 23, 2011 - 4:27pm (USA Central)

The problem I had with this episode was the whole idea that it was so hard to communicate with the Crystalline Entity, when in Datalore, Lore just flipped on the communicator and spoke to the thing verbally. Even as recently as Brothers, Data tells Soong that Lore conspired with the entity - he clearly knew that communication, even co-operation, was possible. So how come all of a sudden they're reduced to tickling the thing to get a reaction?

angel - Sun, Apr 24, 2011 - 9:07am (USA Central)

"Such as other life-forms. Non-humans. How altruistic."

Picard didn't say other life forms, he said other SOURCES

Charlie - Tue, Apr 26, 2011 - 11:17am (USA Central)

Just a guess, but I think Lore talking to the CE was just a way of giving it an arrow toward the flying candy store that's the Enterprise.

Elliott - Fri, May 13, 2011 - 6:23pm (USA Central)

This moral issue had been done and would be done far better in the Trek canon. This one feels like an excuse for unnecessary continuity with season 1--the CE was a really hokey idea to begin with, I didn't need to see it again just to learn absolutely nothing new about it.

Marr's interaction with Data serves the purpose of letting us see the emotional emptiness of Data himself and how emotional distance leads to altruistic behaviour, a staple of Federation values. For that, I appreciated the story, but Marr herself is overplayed and rather uninteresting.

Fair rating. Maybe 2 stars.

Jay - Sun, Sep 25, 2011 - 8:22pm (USA Central)

@ Rachael...there was one set of parents that took their child with them...her name was Annika.

We know how that turned out...I bet she wished she;d been left with friends.

Jay - Sun, Sep 25, 2011 - 8:28pm (USA Central)

ALong the line sof Elliott's comments about the hokeyness of the CE...he's right. As presented here, the Crystalline Entity is a a singular being, which begs the question of its origins. Does it have a mother, does it have children? Was this THE same entity that we've seen before? Neither the characters nor the episode itself bothers to ask.

Captain Tripps - Mon, Oct 3, 2011 - 12:40pm (USA Central)

Was a lot harder to kill this thing in Star Trek Online.

Tom - Mon, Oct 24, 2011 - 9:31am (USA Central)

What I find strange here is how was everyone so 100% sure that the modified photon torpedos would destroy it (or a resonance for that matter)? I would have seen the communication attempt necessary first hand since firing the creature would almost certainly deny any attempts to find other possible resolutions. By this logic the "let's shoot first" tactic could have been the undoing of all nearby life. I also don't see how any communication attempts could "rob" them of their chance to *try* to kill it. If it was then absolutely sure that they could destroy it, I don't see how the "last words of the accused" would have any danger in them.

Where do these accusations of "letting it live" come from? By trying to speak to it, they were slowing it down if anything.

Also, the doctor was obviously a typical annoying woman. As in "The Drumhead." Probably a ESFJ person, who so easily becomes the victim of hysterization and emotions. Always trying to justify their actions with "reason." And oh yes, that kinda of people do exist.

Submit a comment

Season Index