Star Trek: Deep Space Nine

"Hippocratic Oath"

3 stars

Air date: 10/16/1995
Teleplay by Lisa Klink
Story by Nicholas Corea and Lisa Klink
Directed by Rene Auberjonois

Review by Jamahl Epsicokhan

"It smells like a garbage dump."
"I'm sorry I couldn't find a nicer place to crash-land. Should we try again?"

— Bashir and O'Brien

Nutshell: Not up to the first two episodes of the season, but a good show with a good argument.

When an accident allows a Jem'Hadar soldier named Goran'Agar (Scott MacDonald) to free himself of the drug dependency that keeps the Jem'Hadar masses under direct control of the Founders, he captures Bashir and O'Brien—ordering them to help him in his mission to free his military unit from the drug as well.

Well, "Hippocratic Oath" can't really live up to the first two installments of this season, but considering those first two installments what do you want? This episode is, however, another good outing, featuring an interesting twist in the Jem'Hadar, showing that they do have their own internal vulnerabilities. Given the right circumstances, this idea could show up again in future episodes, possibly as an undoing of the control the Dominion has over its military.

Although this show is not always on-the-money, it is a good premise, and the writers do capitalize on the opportunity characterwise. We again get a closer look at the Jem'Hadar and their lifestyle, which is no more than that of a 24-hour soldier. However, it's interesting to note how Goran'Agar becomes more and more able to think independently and question his service to the Founders now that he has freed himself of his drug addiction. He begins to develop his own moral structure.

Bashir begins thinking about helping Goran'Agar overcome the addiction—which puts him in major conflict with O'Brien on the matter. O'Brien, more of a hardened soldier himself, has doubts about Goran'Agar's sincerity. Besides, what if freeing the Jem'Hadar from the Founder's short-leash control leads the Jem'Hadar to go out on a conquering spree of the Alpha Quadrant? O'Brien refuses to help them. Bashir orders him to. O'Brien disobeys the orders. The result is a rather unsettling clash of these two ideals and their friendship. Kudos to the writers for threatening one of the series most well-defined friendships over a high-staked polemical topic that these two see in completely opposite ways. This is what defines the heart of "Hippocratic Oath" and makes it work.

The resolution of the Jem'Hadar plot line goes basically the way it has to go. Bashir is ultimately unsuccessful, partly because O'Brien intervenes in (well, actually destroys) his attempts to free Goran'Agar's troops. Although the overall results of the plot are not exactly earth-shattering, it is quite possible that we will see this element of the Jem'Hadar again. And the character dynamics in this episode are terrific.

A subplot featuring Odo and Worf at odds with each other on security measures makes a whole lot of sense and has a number of relevant points. It shows Worf trying to adapt to his new position and drives home the point of how differently these two characters go about doing things. In a reassuring scene between Sisko and Worf, the Captain tells him that starship officers often find it a bit awkward learning the unofficial rules of the station. "You'll fit in, Commander," he tells him. "Just give it time."

Previous episode: The Visitor
Next episode: Indiscretion

◄ Season Index

105 comments on this review

Ospero
Sat, Nov 3, 2007, 10:42pm (UTC -6)
This is one of the few cases where my opinion is different from Jammer's. I consider this episode (or, more precisely, the A-story) one of the best character pieces done on DS9, and Goran'Agar is one of only two Jem'Hadar ever to transcend the "universal soldier" stereotype (the other is "Rocks and Shoals"'s Remata'Klan). Were it not for the rather unnecessary B-story (why exactly is it that Odo investigates stuff that goes beyond the station? Isn't that exactly what Worf is supposed to do?), this would rate at four stars in my book, and as it is, I still give this three and a half.

Admittedly, this episode is easily overlooked following the two stellar starter episodes of the season. But I for one hold it as an equal to "The Way of the Warrior" and not as far behind "The Visitor" as a three-star rating would imply.
Jayson
Wed, Jan 30, 2008, 6:10am (UTC -6)
I really like this episode because it deals with a very interesting theme of controling soldiers through the use of drugs which is an idea that goes all the way back to Encounter At Farpoint when Q shows the crew a dark period in earths past.
Damien
Thu, Jun 11, 2009, 9:11am (UTC -6)
I also liked this one more than Jammer and would put it on equal footing with the season's openers as an intelligent exploration of character motivation and perspectives on free will. I even liked the B story, though I still have no idea what Worf's job actually is. What does someone whose duty is to 'coordinate all Starfleet activity in this sector' actually do?
Maaz
Sat, Sep 18, 2010, 3:27pm (UTC -6)
Jammer, although I usually agree with your reviews, I gotta say that I just loved this one.

Clearly it can't compete with the earlier two, but its a very good way to bring things back to the large threat of the Dominion and at the same time, add character to the Jem'Hadar soldiers.

Here you have a unit commander, who, when it boils down to it, wants the best for his men. He wants freedom, he wants to end their servitude. And you have Bashir, who, once he sees that its possible for him to be more than a programmed killer, allows his healing nature to come out. And O'Brian, the soldier, who sees this as untying their enemy's hands. Its not until the end, in that last dialogue on the planet, where Goran'Agar says to O' brian "you are a soldier? Than you explain" and O'Brian tells Bashir "he's their commander, they trusted him, he can't abandon them". That made a lump in my throat.

We knew how it was gonna end, there were more seasons of the Dominian war so their soldiers wouldn't be free yet. But that didn't mean they didn't want to be free.
Jay
Tue, Oct 18, 2011, 5:38pm (UTC -6)
In other episodes it is restablished that ketracel white is all the Jem'Hadar need (no drink, no food, no sleep)...so presumably it is not just a drug, but also their only source of nourishment (and presumably water, unless they drink that separately), so being "immune" to the white would seem to result in eventual starvation.
David
Mon, Nov 26, 2012, 1:40am (UTC -6)
@Jay
Replying 12 months too late, but oh well. I just rewatched this episode and Goran'Agar isn't said to be immune, in fact Bashir detects that his body is somehow generating its own supply of ketracel-white, but he can't find any sort of gland or organ that is the origin. Which is sufficiently mysterious that we can't nitpick it too directly, haha.

If the white is their source of nourishment, that would mean his body is feeding itself! Not sure how that works, but oh well. He's still breathing, I suppose a sufficiently advanced lifeform could synthesise it from oxygen. Or something. I'm just making crap up now, which is technobabble in a nutshell really.

Regarding the rating, I'd rate it over some of the other three star episodes from this season, but under others. I guess that just means a four-star rating system can only have so much fidelity, eventually you have to lump some varied episodes into the same category.
Aaron
Wed, Feb 27, 2013, 2:55pm (UTC -6)
I thought this was an extremely good episode. 3.5 to 4 stars. I am just now watching this series, and I had no idea it got so good. Why didn't more people talk about it? I like both the A and B stories.

At first it seemed like a no-brainer to find a cure to the Jem'Hadar addiction, but O'Brien brought up an interesting point: what if they use their freedom to go on a rampage? The Dominion at least is not actively invading the Alpha Quadrant. How do we know which situation is better? This is a Prime Directive episode with no mention of the Prime Directive.

Nitpick: Dr. Bashir knew a heck of a lot about Jem'Hadar physiology from a prior episode and could even synthesize the drug. In another episode, he would have have easily been able to technobabble up a cure.

I hope they don't push the reset button on Bashir and O'Brien's friendship, but I'm sure they will.
Kotas
Wed, Oct 23, 2013, 12:43pm (UTC -6)
Another solid episode. Season 4 starts very strong.

7/10
Quarky
Sat, May 24, 2014, 5:07am (UTC -6)
O'brien really gets on my last nerve in this ep. Bashir is his commanding officer. He should have obeyed Bashir. Bashir even gave him the option to leave. I don't care if Obrien thought he was saving bashir's life. He never would have acted this way toward Picard or even Sisko. He didn't respect Bashir. He talked down to him and yelled at him. I find obrien yells a lot at people. He's kind of grumpy. Bashir should have brought obrien up on charges and we could have had a few episodes of obrien in the brig. Very disappointed in the chief in this one.
Yanks
Tue, Aug 5, 2014, 11:10am (UTC -6)
I have a problem with Sisko here:

"SISKO: And I do encourage vigilance in my officers. But remember, Odo is chief of security on this station, and you're the strategic operations officer. Your primary duty is to coordinate all Starfleet activity in this sector, not to catch smugglers.
WORF: Understood. I will not let this matter interfere with my duties.
SISKO: Very well. Dismissed."

Worf's response dodged Sisko's direction. "Very well. Dismissed" let's Worf off the hook. Poor leadership there. But then we wouldn't have had a "B" story. :-)

While Goran'Agar is an outstanding character, Obrien takes a huge step back IMO.

Obrien's inability to see past his war experience with the Cardassian's here and see the bigger picture is puzzling and disappointing. Not expected from the "seasoned" Obrien. It’s obvious that Bashir’s life wasn’t in danger as they could have killed him easily at any point.

I also have an issue with Bashir's recognition of the situation regarding Goran'Agar. It is revealed in the beginning that Goran'Agar had no tube, so despite what he has said (his presence on this planet, blah, blah), he has NEVER been addicted. What did Goran'Agar do, pull his tube out? Did Bashir even ask? Pretty difficult I imagine because it's grown as part of the body. Bashir didn't even suggest that Goran'Agar was never addicted until the end.

I can see a situation where if Obrien hadn’t acted like a child, it’s possible that Bashir and Obrien could have convinced Goran’Agar to return to DS9 with them.

Who fixed the crashed shuttle?

Scott MacDonald was outstanding as Goran’Agar. “Die with Honor!!” …. No wait, “Victory is Life!!”

2.5 stars for me.
DLPB
Mon, Aug 18, 2014, 8:06pm (UTC -6)
O'Brien is right. The doctor is a short-sighted idealistic fool. The only facts that he has available to him is that they were shot down and are being forced to help under the threat of death.

Helping someone like that isn't trendy or cool. It's ridiculous.
Yanks
Mon, Aug 18, 2014, 10:00pm (UTC -6)
Better than being dead I suppose. I guess finding a way to rid the Jem'Hadar of the need to white isn't cool.
Robert
Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 10:40am (UTC -6)
Yanks, I'm about 102% sure Goran'Agar pulled his tube out, ya.

"GORAN'AGAR: It was not by choice. Three years ago, I was on a ship that crashed on this world. The rest of the crew died and I was left with only enough white to sustain me for three days. I rationed my supply and managed to stretch out the drug for eight days, and then it was gone, and I was ready to die."

Unless he had a magically special way to take the white, he used to take it... ergo he had a tube.
Yanks
Tue, Aug 19, 2014, 10:45am (UTC -6)
Ah, very good Robert. Thanks!
MsV
Sat, Nov 15, 2014, 9:16pm (UTC -6)
I totally agree with DLPB. Julian is an idiot. The Dominion has already told them that the Federation is the enemy they have already killed many Bajoran and Federation citizens in the Gamma quadrant, why was Julian so ready to commit suicide over this one incident? Being a good doctor and healer doesn't give him the right to force Miles to make a bad decision. All through DS9, Julian has made ridiculous statements because of his lack of understanding of the predicament they were in, such as, when the Defiant crew were going to rescue Dukat and the council members, he wanted to remind Sisko that he wasn't suppose to use the cloaking device in the Alpha quadrant. He could be such a meathead at times.
Halane
Sun, Jan 25, 2015, 8:46am (UTC -6)
@MsV But that is what makes Julian a good doctor. He has to put saving lives over war strategy. He is idealistic, of course, but that is what he is supposed to be when it comes to saving lives. I can understand both sides, but ultimately I would try to help to, as Julian did, because no matter how terrible the Jem'Hadar are, I am not cut to kill or let die. I admire O'Brien for his strength, though, because it is a hard decision.
However, I agree with @Quarky: O'Brien would never do this to Sisko or Picard, probably not even to Worf or Riker. Even if he believed they were making the wrong decision, he would have obeyed. He doesn't respect Julian as an officer because he is young and somehow naïve, and I think he even resents him a little for having a higher rank. Their friendship is always tainted by this slight paternal attitude from Miles.
MsV
Thu, Feb 12, 2015, 5:21am (UTC -6)
Hey Halane I understand your point of view, my oldest son feels just like you do about Julian. I just think being a good doctor (best Star Trek doctor ever) doesn't mean you have to be a fool. Julian changed quite a bit during the war, he still was an excellent doctor, but he matured and common sense kicked in.
Icarus32Soar
Tue, Mar 3, 2015, 9:39am (UTC -6)
Did no one notice the title Hippocratic Oath? This is a deeply moving episode of the ethical dilemmas doctors face. A mature character study of Bashir, played superbly by Siddig, by far the most accomplished actor on DS9.Must be the British drama school training.O'Brien comes across as a moron by comparison, mindlessly phasering his way out of everything. This episode is light years greater than the moronic The Visitor.
Darknet
Sun, May 17, 2015, 2:24am (UTC -6)
I have to agree with @Quarky. Obrien has always been a bit of a dick to Bashir but this episode was too much. He disobeys his orders and talks down to him. He treats him like a child and has no respect for him as an officer. He single handedly sabotaged a mission that would likely have divided the dominion and gave the federation a tactical advantage. And in the end Bashir is still talking about playing darts in few days? Their friendship should have been over. He should bought him up on charges or at the very least threated him with court martial if it happened again. I really hope there is a future episode where Bashir just gets fed up and puts him in his place.
DLPB
Tue, Aug 18, 2015, 12:03pm (UTC -6)
Can anyone clue me in on why any man would choose to marry a woman like Keiko? She is rude, overbearing, obnoxious, and comes across as some kind of condescending man-hater, or feminazi. Seriously, every time I see her interact with O'Brien I am hoping he tells her to go find some other fool to trample on. Was it the writers desire to make her so selfish and condescending?
methane
Thu, Aug 27, 2015, 8:06pm (UTC -6)
We have commenters saying O'Brien is clearly right and Bashir is an idiot; we also have commenters saying Bashir is totally correct and O'Brien is all in the wrong.

Clearly the writers did a good job; this is a real dilemma with both sides having points in their favor. With the stakes so high, the characters were willing to risk their friendship to do what they believe in.

If Bashir was right, curing the addiction could lead to peace, saving countless lives. If O'Brien was right, curing the addiction could lead to never-ending war (perhaps Jem'Hadar never make peace once freed from control) that would cost countless lives. We don't know which one is truly correct.
jayLB
Thu, Oct 1, 2015, 11:30am (UTC -6)
I liked how the episode started out letting you think it was gonna be another Chief-Doc-Bromance and then subverted it by pitting them against each other, culminating in Bashir pulling rank. Nice!

@DLPB
"Can anyone clue me in on why any man would choose to marry a woman like Keiko? She is rude, overbearing, obnoxious, and comes across as some kind of condescending man-hater, or feminazi"

O'Brien is the grumpiest human on Star Trek, beaten out only by Worf (the grumpiest Klingon) and all the Vulcans. The guy never smiles, never has a good time. Even when he's with his buddy Bashir, he's always just grumpy.

I'd become Keiko too if I were married to that.
Del_Duio
Fri, Oct 2, 2015, 10:43am (UTC -6)
^^ He could have got that way BECAUSE he was married to Keiko too, you know! ^^

Aside from she's pretty, I'd probably want to spend 20 hours a day away from that too. These two never had any chemistry (I've said this before, and it's still true). A weird pairing that they probably never thought would have lasted more than a couple episodes on TNG but of course expanded the crap out of things eventually.
William B
Sun, Oct 25, 2015, 6:58pm (UTC -6)
Yeah, so, I've been meaning to do a writeup of this for a while but I keep getting stuck. Suffice it to say that I liked this one a lot. The biggest problems I have with it have to do with rushed aspects of the Jem'Hadar behaviour, some of which could not really be helped and some of which could probably have been dealt with better by eliminating the Worf subplot (which was okay but did not need to be in this episode). I will *hopefully* come back to this, but for a quick summary, note the way Bashir finds himself attached to Goran'Agar, who turns out to be some kind of mutant, genetically different in some way, nonviolent relative to the Jem'Hadar mean, forward-thinking, wanting to bring in a new era; O'Brien does not exctly like him, but the person who understands O'Brien the best (and vice versa) is the "ordinary Jem'Hadar" second, who is a veteran with a sense of duty, propriety, and order from the past. As well as using the Jem'Hadar as a backdrop, this is arguably the first time that the Bashir/O'Brien dynamic leads to a good to great story: Bashir is exceptional and elitist, progressive and bleeding heart, forward-thinking and foolish, whereas O'Brien is stable and ordinary, sensible and reactionary, steady and closed-minded. They are both brilliant in their way, but Bashir has his head in the clouds and O'Brien is on the ground, and this is one of the best instances of Trek crafting a moral dilemma where there are two legitimate positions which are well-developed and expressed. I think this deserves a 3.5. (We'll see if I do talk about this more later.)
William B
Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 12:50pm (UTC -6)
I guess I will keep talking about this episode in increments. On the subplot:

There's a particularly funny line of dialogue here:

SISKO: And I do encourage vigilance in my officers. But remember, Odo is chief of security on this station, and you're the strategic operations officer. Your primary duty is to coordinate all Starfleet activity in this sector, not to catch smugglers.

This line is meant to, in-story, remind Worf that he is not security chief anymore, but it also is pure exposition, in that "Way of the Warrior" did not actually bother to define what a "strategic operations officer" is or does. And, for that matter, I'm still not clear after this episode. It does seem to me that Worf is now doing something of what Sisko was doing in, say, "The Maquis" -- being expected to coordinate with other people nearby on, uh, "strategic operations." And I get the idea that this job is necessary now that there are so many conflicts about which DS9 is at the centre. But the show does not really go out of its way to explain why this position suddenly exists, or what exactly Worf's day-to-day duties are.

Anyway, while the ending has Worf chastened and Odo smug, it's notable that it really *is* partly Odo's fault. Even if you argue that Odo owed Worf no professional courtesy to explain what his plan was, which I can see Odo at least believing, Odo said he was aware of Worf's tracking him, and decided to incorporate it in his plan. The moment Odo starts to make Worf's behaviour part of his plan is the moment Odo has to stop crying foul about Worf making a legal arrest at an inconvenient time; it is sloppy for Odo not to have thought of that contingency. In order to get the twist ending, the episode also has Quark acting as inside man for Odo, which is not really traditionally what we've seen, though it's not wholly unbelievable.

Anyway, I find the subplot predictable in its "Worf fails to listen to people telling him not to step on Odo's toes, screws up" structure, and Sisko's "shades of grey" speech is a little too obviously meta for me. Still, it's mostly short, and the idea that Worf instinctively wants to continue his security job and has to learn to let someone else handle that is pretty okay. The subplot also implicitly ties in with the main plot, where Worf and Odo's approaches actually hurt each other, even though they have the same general goal, which ties in with Bashir and O'Brien coming to conflict in the A-plot; it does not live up to the A-plot for various reasons, but one is that the conflict ends with one party taken by the characters as being entirely right and the other entirely wrong, making it a more superficial "lesson" story.

Sisko working on that thing in the final scene with Worf reminds me a lot of that thing from "Dramatis Personae." "IT'S A CLOCK!"
William B
Fri, Oct 30, 2015, 7:05pm (UTC -6)
OK, so back to the A-plot...

O'Brien does a Henry Higgins-style "Why can't a woman be more like a man," and in particular wondering why Keiko can't be more like Julian. He has so much more in common with Julian, and they can avoid the conflicts that seem to crop up in marriage, right? To test whether Bashir and O'Brien have their own differences putting a strain on their closeness, they detect a signal. Officer Bashir says little as non-com O'Brien decides they should land.

What I love about the A-plot is that real effort has been made to present the pros and cons of both Bashir and O'Brien's perspectives, and to give reasons for us to side with both of them (and against both of them). The traditional chain of command gives Bashir the authority, but this is undermined through the episode -- O'Brien basically makes the decision to land on the planet, and Bashir's level of security concern is such that he instantly, without much thinking about it, gives up all their secrets (including mentioning how they found the planet in the first place, which immediately leads to the Jem'Hadar covering up the signal so that Bashir & O'Brien won't be found). Notably, though, Bashir steps forward with information to protect O'Brien, the first of many instances in which the buddy relationship between Bashir and O'Brien is inverted and shown to work against at least one of the pair's desires.

So the plot comes down to the realization that Goran'agar is free of the Ketracel-White. To *some* degree, the episode cheats in order to present its character/moral dilemma, and the cheats do weaken the episode (though not that much, IMHO). Elsewhere, the White is sometimes played like a drug, but it does not seem to be psychoactive (except when absent), and nor does it seem to reinforce blind obedience or violent intent. In this particular episode, Goran'agar's having been freed from the White is the opening to him questioning everything about the Founders, and seemingly quickly moving toward the adoption of humanistic principles. In effect, able to see that the White is a symbol of his servitude, Goran'agar is able to break free of all the Founders' conditioning.

He forces Bashir to help him, but before long it does not take too much forcing: seeing Goran'agar's progression engages Bashir as a scientist, as a humanist, and a progressive. I don't want to get too explicitly political, though it is hard to avoid with certain episodes, but I think that Goran'agar really strongly appeals to a certain worldview shared by bleeding hearts everywhere (myself included -- and the use of bleeding heart semi-pejoratively is deliberate): freed from the circumstances of his birth, freed from his oppressive religion and addictions, the violent soldier is revealed to be capable of compassion and conscience; his monstrous behaviours are not intrinsic but are the result of external circumstances, which *can be cured*. The attempt to find a cure for the White very quickly moves from Bashir trying to solve this particular issue to Bashir having dreams of providing a positive revolution in Jem'Hadar society, one which, if successful, could save the Jem'Hadar from themselves *and* save the Gamma and Alpha Quadrants from them. Goran'agar is the perfect symbol of a particular kind of optimism and positivism. Moreover, Bashir basically responds as a doctor in the purest sense: he sees a patient, he will try to cure him; he sees the possibility of making an individual or indeed a *species* better, he jumps at the chance to improve their life, immediately neglecting other concerns, in particular whether the treatment of this particular ill can create an imbalance that can do more damage in the long-run. Somewhere in here is buried the notion that what is wrong with the world is fundamentally the result of a corruption of a good, natural state, and that once treated people will be healthy personally and ethically.

And O'Brien has lived a lot longer and is skeptical. O'Brien can hardly bring himself to consider that Goran'agar could have changed or is doing anything other than manipulating Bashir. And this itself plays into the portrayals of O'Brien's slight racism against the Cardassians; this accusation both denies actual evidence of growth on the part of Goran'agar and also does not make that much sense (since when are Jem'Hadar these expert manipulators that O'Brien is suggesting?). Let's not forget, too, how much O'Brien would give up for a slave-fighter who did not quite realize he was a slave when O'Brien let himself get to know him ("Captive Pursuit"). He does not quite listen to Bashir and glides past what Bashir is saying. And while he has a point that the Jem'Hadar get out from the Dominion's control, they might be very dangerous, his contention that the Dominion is doing a good thing by keeping the Jem'Hadar under control is a weirdly frightening statement -- the idea that genuinely evil mastermind dictators controlling mad dogs is a better prospect than mad dogs going loose is a pretty uncomfortable one. And yet, obviously O'Brien is right that Goran'agar's change, even if it is legitimate, says next to nothing about the rest of the Jem'Hadar, that Bashir is getting carried very far away from what he can reasonably predict, that what little evidence they have about the Jem'Hadar points a very dim picture of them. O'Brien is the one with actual combat experience, and he recognizes that one a person starts fighting it is hard to bring them back to civilization safely ("it's not you I hate, Cardassian, it's what I became because of you"), so that even if the Jem'Hadar's violent instincts would somehow dissipate once Bashir improbably found his miracle cure, there's still the fact that they have an entire civilization built around fighting the enemy, which still happens to be them. Finally, O'Brien emphasizes that Bashir has seemingly *completely forgotten* that the whole reason they are in this situation is because Goran'agar is holding them hostage so that Bashir can work on this cure -- something which Bashir, his head in the clouds and full of dreams of saving the Jem'Hadar and the quadrant (fueled mostly by hope but with some dollops of egotism), has pretty much forgotten. Somewhere buried in O'Brien's worldview is the idea that corruption is part of the fabric of the world, and it is the job of good people to do what they can to keep things from falling apart, without ever forgetting that the natural way of things *is* that they will fall apart.

As Bashir latches onto Goran'agar, O'Brien finds a kind of kinship with the Jem'Hadar Second, who is willing to follow Goran'agar to a certain degree but eventually turns on him. Goran'agar, as I said in a previous post, turns out to be a mutant; whether or not his mutation could be used to find a cure for the other Jem'Hadar is left undiscovered, because O'Brien destroys Bashir's work. Within the episode, the Bashir : O'Brien :: Goran'agar : Second parallels suggest how Bashir is, in some ways, the Starfleet equivalent to Goran'agar: he is something of a genius, thinking far to the future, and increasingly isolated as a result of it, to the point where he eventually loses touch with the rest of his men completely. Goran'agar and Bashir both end with their respective "men" (one in Bashir's case, a series in Goran'agar's) mutinying, which is partly because they are just so forward-thinking (Goran'agar is free of the addiction! Bashir is a genius!) and partly because they stopped paying attention to anything but their narrow goal which could change the galaxy. They lose touch with reality. O'Brien and the Second come to lose faith in their respective "leaders" and view their actions as flights of fancy. Bashir maybe really is that smart, and maybe he could find a cure for the Jem'Hadar, but he lost track of all the sensible advice O'Brien gave. Meanwhile, it may be that Bashir can only find solutions that work for people who think in the particular "advanced" way he does, which might not actually be that much more advanced. If everyone were like Bashir and Goran'agar, there would be no need for O'Brien's defying Bashir's orders, but, while it's a little unpleasant for O'Brien to recognize this, he does understand the mentality of the Second. O'Brien is not the unthinking soldier that the Second is, but O'Brien's time as a soldier makes him understand the Second's behaviour a little bit more than Bashir does, and so he is able to recognize more than Bashir does why Bashir's miracle cure might not work. I am trying to choose my words carefully, but I'm also writing quickly so I want to be clear: in some respects, Bashir really is exceptional, in ways that the show develops more as it goes on, but his relative certainty about this (which ties in with his insecurities, too) often leads him to neglect that his exceptionality is only in a few specific areas, and that O'Brien has just as valid a POV as Bashir has.

And so they become more and more committed to their different views until they have to come into direct conflict. O'Brien uses his wise-middle-aged-man voice to try to put an end to the discussion, and then Bashir, for the first time, pulls rank. They fall back on different forms of authority. And then they go beyond that: since Bashir's authority is final, O'Brien simply mutinies, and finally destroys Bashir's material, which once again parallels him with the Second who mutinies against Goran'agar.

Of course, the Second is a Jem'Hadar through and through, and O'Brien is a human. O'Brien's giving up on Bashir's cause is in direct opposition to the Second's giving up on Goran'agar, because O'Brien *does not give up on Julian himself* -- in fact, his caring about Julian is probably his primary motivator. Which leads to the betrayal, where eventually O'Brien not only plans his escape against Bashir's instructions, but also destroys Bashir's work. Overall...I guess for me personally, I mostly think that O'Brien's mini-mutiny is kind of justified up until he is ready to escape, and Bashir tells him to just go. At this point, Bashir gives up the pretense that he is "really" O'Brien's SO and releases O'Brien from any requirement for Miles himself to die because of Bashir's high-risk mission. This goes against the chain of command, and I am not trying to articulate that this is how a military organization should be run, but on some basic level I think that Bashir's plan is sufficiently risky, and O'Brien is sufficiently experienced, that I give him a certain amount of leeway to change the plan to protect himself. However, that is as far as I extend it -- at this point in the story, O'Brien destroys Bashir's work, and as he explains later, this is so that Bashir has no reason to stay (and thus no reason to die).

Now...O'Brien raised a point earlier that the Jem'Hadar unchained might be a greater risk. But that is not his reason here: he is Bashir's friend and he does not want Bashir to die. And that is deeply sympathetic, and if it were a matter of purely intervening in Bashir's suicide (ahem, file this point away) that would be one thing. But Bashir genuinely *has* a goal here, which could have good results, whose probability of success O'Brien is not really in a position to evaluate. As far as I'm concerned, if Bashir is willing to risk *his own life* for a noble cause, it is not up to O'Brien to stop him. That O'Brien cares about Bashir is undeniable, but O'Brien also sort of treats Bashir like a child who does not and cannot know what is good for him. This, to some extent, is justified by Bashir's various indications that he does not exactly know what he is doing -- which muddies the waters (and is part of why I don't particularly hold O'Brien's rebellion up to this point much against him). But Bashir is still an adult, and, more to the point, while he may be a lousy soldier, he is a brilliant doctor, to the point where O'Brien really cannot understand the nature of Bashir's work and how likely it is to succeed.

In saving Bashir but destroying Bashir's work, is O'Brien proving that he really does love Bashir, or that he does not understand him at all? In staying behind on what may have been a fool's errand, was Bashir basically indicating he cared more about some science project/alien social revolution more than his best friend and his own life? The ending maintains a balance, somehow: Bashir turns out to be right about Goran'agar's honour, but O'Brien is the one who understands Goran'agar's dedication to duty. (Note: I could have done without O'Brien explaining what Goran'agar meant about his soldiers WHILE JUST STANDING THERE, GET TO THE RUNABOUT FIRST GUYS.) O'Brien says Bashir can bring him up on charges, and Bashir does not quite know what all this means. There is something a little pat in the final conversation, when Bashir suggests that all will maybe be normal in another week, but it's still an effective scene.

While there are still some weaknesses this is actually one of my favourite episodes, with high-quality character and philosophical work. 3.5 stars.
William B
Fri, Oct 30, 2015, 7:13pm (UTC -6)
I should add, while I don't know if this episode gets followed up on directly, I do think that some of the things explored in the Bashir/O'Brien friendship come up again (at least) in "Hard Time," "Dr. Bashir, I Presume," and "Statistical Probabilities," so that I think this episode does feel comfortably a part of the series to me (even if it may not have direct effect on continuity).
Quarkissnyder
Wed, Dec 2, 2015, 8:26am (UTC -6)
The beginning of the episode got on my nerves. What were Bashir and O'Brien doing in the gamma quadrant on such an extended mission that they expect to arrive back to DS9 a "few days" early? Doesn't the station need its only doctor and its chief engineer? What mission could possibly require the two of them, and only the two of them? They have no skills suited to planetary exploration or mapping.

Other than that, I thought the A plot was interesting and good.

I also liked the B plot, although I recognize the holes in it. I think I liked it because of the holes. Sisko's speech at the end: "Everyone here follows their own set of rules and if you understand their rules you understand them" is either a guide to life or a stunning admission that every character on the show is flat and predictable.
Diamond Dave
Sat, Dec 19, 2015, 8:00am (UTC -6)
Another very strong episode. Indeed, if it weren't for what amounts to a disappointingly light B-story it would be another 4 star contender.

Again, the strength of this lies in the performances rather than the fairly standard premise. A genuine difference of views strains the friendship of Bashir and O'Brien and it's all played out brilliantly - and the divergence of comments as to who was right and wrong suggests the writers got the balance completely correct. At the same time, we learn more about the Jem'Hadar, and it's entirely in keeping with DS9's darker premise that there's no Hugh type resolution here - Goran'Agar could be the catalyst for change in the whole Dominion but is never given the chance.

While it's fun to watch Worf and Odo butting heads, there's nothing much to detain us here. 3.5 stars overall.
Luke
Mon, Mar 28, 2016, 8:15am (UTC -6)
O'Brien and Bashir crash on a planet in the Gamma Quadrant that just happens to be where a unit of rogue Jem'Hadar are hiding while trying to free themselves from their addiction to ketracel white. What results is a fairly by-the-numbers story. Everyone knows pretty much how it's going to end - with the Jem'Hadar characters either dying or otherwise not embracing Federation principles. The intent is obviously to humanize the Jem'Hadar in some way and yet, in my opinion, the episode fails to do so. When faced with the consequences of being freed from Dominion control (becoming "soft" and "weak" like Humans) the nameless Jem'Hadar decide that they would rather not get rid of their addiction. In other words, they act like stereotypical, mindless super-soldiers. Even Goran'Agar, the one who is given the most development by the episode, succumbs to this stereotypical way of thinking - refusing to abandon his men because he was their commander. For a guy who was determined to be free of the Vorta and Dominion rules, he sure seems unwilling to actually change. If he had decided to go back to DS9 with O'Brien and Bashir and seek asylum from the Federation, some "humanizing" would have taken place. Instead, he acts just like I expected him to.

This A-plot, however, isn't bad, just predictable. What makes it good is that it involves two main cast characters at diametric odds with each other - something rather rare for Trek. Having O'Brien and Bashir come to two completely different conclusions allows some good moral questioning and examination to take place. Given how the Jem'Hadar (even Goran'Agar) eventually act, however, I think I side firmly with the Chief on this matter. And I have to give massive props to the writers for having O'Brien just straight up destroy Bashir's work instead of working to find some kind of compromise or non-violent solution to the situation - something that would be so typically Trek.

Meanwhile, over in the B-plot, Worf acts like a complete dipshit who doesn't do his job (gee, two senior officers are overdue from the Gamma Quadrant, that's not job for someone tasked with strategic/tactical planning, is it?!) and who fails to understand the concept of an undercover investigation. Joking aside, this is actually the part of "Hippocratic Oath" I like the best - for two reasons. First, it allows Worf to slowly acclimate to life on the station. Second, it's kind of a subtle jab at how Security Officers often function on Trek. SFDebris has often complained about Security and Tactical duties being performed by the same person and I have agree with him. It makes no sense for the person firing the weapons to also deal with ship-side security threats. Worf has spent seven years in Security doing just that. In fact, he's spent most of that time only being a Tactical Officer. Now he has to get used to the idea that these two very different duties are handled by two different officers. Odo handles things like gem smuggling while Worf deals with tactics and strategy. And watching Odo slap Worf down by basically saying "look you dumbass, you're not my boss and I don't usually broadcast secret investigations" is genuinely entertaining, I can't lie.

7/10
James
Sun, Apr 24, 2016, 11:43am (UTC -6)
The reasons O'Brien and Bashir give for their own points of view involve a lot of speculation. As Picard said in an episode of TNG, "Can we confine our discussion to the FACTS?" No, I guess not. O'Brien is convinced the Jem'Hadar, once freed of the drug, will go on a killing spree; Bashir thinks anything is possible. Since Bashir isn't asserting that he knows what the future will be, but O'Brien is, the latter has the burden of proof. Problem? They wouldn't know either way unless Bashir had found a cure.

I'd bet if the writers went the other way with this episode, most of the Jem'Hadar freed of the white wouldn't let go of their traditional warrior culture mentality. If Goran'Agar was somehow spared (something the writers of DS9 aren't known to do to guest stars), the rest would've went on and tried to bring others into their fold. Either the writers would bring them back later by forcing them to work with the Federation or have them killed off by the Dominion (like they did to the Maquis) because they "don't know what to do with them".

Still, it would've been awesome to have seen a Jem'Hadar regular in the show by this point. As long as they don't go completely stupid like the writers of Wing Commander III, they could've done some amazing stories with the character. Then maybe we could've avoided the utter garbage that was "Let He Who Is Without Sin" in season 5 in exchange for a Garan'Agar-centric episode.
William H
Wed, Sep 28, 2016, 9:20am (UTC -6)
The main plot seems like something of a walking back from the dark conclusion of "The Abandoned". Goran'agar as a character suggests that the Jem'Hadar aren't purely creatures of their programming. Its an interesting story, though in the end it discusses a lot but doesn't really go anywhere. And I do think Bashir is a bit too forgiving, given how far O'Brien ultimately goes.

I'm really not keen on the B plot. Worf acts like an idiot, Odo does too but the story doesn't really acknowledge it. Then its wrapped up with a rather weak excuse for Quark's get out of jail free card and some preaching of the shades of grey creed.
Rahul
Thu, Jul 13, 2017, 9:10pm (UTC -6)
DS9 S4 is off to a terrific start with this episode following on "The Visitor". As for "Hippocratic Oath" - it's great that we see 2 strongly opposing views from 2 buddies. Can see pros/cons for both O'Brien and Bashir -- and both take very extreme views of their stances which emphasize how different their views of the situation are.

O'Brien is out of line clearly/insurbordination, but he understands the military aspect of the situation whereas Bashir's role as a doctor puts them both in danger. To me, it's not clear what the better solution is for the longer term and getting a leg up on the Dominion. But that should become 2ndary after self-preservation.

I liked the B-plot with Worf/Odo. In a way it is similar to the conflict between O'Brien/Bashir with Odo really being in charge but Worf interfering in the end (kind of like O'Brien phasering Bashir's work). The B-plot is good as it shows Worf finding his feet in his role (hard to define exactly). Have to like how Odo is no-nonsense about his role and Worf's interference.

Goran'Agar's character comes through well and does a lot for giving the episode a deeper understanding of the Jem'Hadar. But I have to say I'm a bit confused with how he got over his addiction and why he shoots one of his subordinates in the end.

I'd give "Hippocratic Oath" a strong 3 stars -- nearly 3.5 stars. Maybe O'Brien/Bashir getting on good terms so quickly in the shuttle is a bit much -- would have been better to see them mumbling arguments at each other. But plenty of strong points to this episode.
Startrekwatcher
Sat, Aug 5, 2017, 11:08pm (UTC -6)
2.5 stars. I prefer episodes to be not so uneven

I've many times said I didn't much care for DS9's Fluffy B plots. Most of the time couldn't hold my attention and if they did then they held no rewatch value. Most of the time they all came across as ho hum padding that ultimately detracted from an episode. The worf subplot did nothing for me. I also felt a Worf was a much better character on TNG than on DS9. He mainly was defined by his relationship with Jadzia.

The A plot was much better. It was more involving and the reason I watch Star Trek however It wasn't stellar. It wasn't great And I didn't really want to see the Jem'Hadar humanized.
Startrekwatcher
Sat, Aug 5, 2017, 11:14pm (UTC -6)
I also think it is absolutely stupid for the Federation to keep violating Do union territory by entering the Gamma Quadrant. We have seen many times the Federation respect boundaries and not get involved in internal matters ie the Cardassian occupation of Bajor. So why they keep going into the Gamma Quadrant is ridiculous. Not to mention obrien and bashir are on a runabout which is no match for a Jem'Hadar ship
Filip
Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 5:32pm (UTC -6)
I was about to say how underrated this episode was, but after seeing the overwhelmingly positive comments I am glad to say I stand corrected. A truly good episode where we have two protagonists offering opposing views in a very human manner that makes it natural and unforced for the audience to understand both points of view. Of course, the fact that the two are already well established personas only gives weight to the whole conflict. The episode also offered something that in my opinion was missing from the whole Dominion War arc, and that was humanizing the enemy and I wish we could've seen more ventures like this one into the Jem'Hadar pysche.

The seemingly unrelated and, truth be told, weaker B plot does round up the main theme of the episode and that is trust. I don't think the focus should be on ketracel-white or how the Dominon controls its soldiers as that has been (or will be) discussed in other episodes, yet it should be on the pairing of our protagonists and the conflict it produces in both cases. Bashir asked O'Brien to trust him despite O'Brien's different perception of the situation in the same way Worf should've trusted Odo and have faith that he was up to the task.

As if that wasn't enough, the final exchange between O'Brien and Goran'Agar wins the show by itself:

"You are a soldier?"
"I have been."
"Then you explain."
Iceman
Sun, Aug 19, 2018, 4:53pm (UTC -6)
Yet another knockout here in the renaissance of DS9. The O'Brien and Bashir plot in "Hippocratic Oath" is first rate. Though one might empathize with one viewpoint over another, the episode doesn't really take sides, allowing the viewer to make their own decision. I tend to agree with Bashir-he had a very strong chance of helping the Jem'Hadar, and O'Brien certainly shouldn't have disobeyed direct orders from a superior office. Yet O'Brien has a point-the Jem'Hadar really haven't proven themselves to be trustworthy. Ultimately though, he might be allowing his own experiences in war to color his opinion, projecting his own guilt about what he had to do onto the Jem'Hadar. Fascinating stuff. The Odo and Worf material isn't up to par with the rest of the episode, but it's nice that DS9 gives attention to its Season 4 addition without letting said addition overwhelm the show.

3.5 stars.
Samuel Lawrence
Tue, Sep 11, 2018, 4:14am (UTC -6)
Love this one. Just a theory here which I think would be consistent with, if not proved by, the content of the episode - maybe all the Jem'Hadar actually need to do to break the addiction and produce ketracel white internally is to stop taking the drug externally. They might all have some internal system which produces the drug, which temporarily shuts down when they get it from an external source, or it may be that the Dominion supplies them with a higher level of it than their body needs, so they become dependent on that higher level. (Bashir says to Goran'Agar that his body is producing exactly the amount of white he needs to survive). Don't forget that while they are genetically engineered, they must have been bred from some other naturally evolved creature - maybe production and internal consumption of ketracel white is part of that creature's natural process that the Dominion found a way to produce externally, then they manipulated their use of it.

It's implied in other episodes that if denied access to the drug they tend to go insane and kill each other - it may be that the reason Goran'Agar didn't die is just because there were no other Jem'Hadar around to kill him. So the lethal factor in losing the drug is actually the horrible withdrawal symptoms causing the Jem'Hadar to go insane in the period before their body achieves its natural ketracel white balance.

Just a fan theory - but doesn't it seem like something the Dominion would do? Telling the Jem'Hadar that only the Dominion can supply them with this vital substance, when in fact their bodies can produce it themselves.
Samuel Lawrence
Tue, Sep 11, 2018, 4:17am (UTC -6)
This would also explain why Goran'Agar and Bashir can't find an answer to the problem in the environment - the planet had nothing to do with Goran'Agar's ability to break the addiction. It was inside him all along, to use the cheesiest possible phrasing.
Prisoner881
Mon, Oct 22, 2018, 11:04am (UTC -6)
Going back through all seven seasons, I relished revisiting this underrated gem of an episode. While the B plot keeps it from being a four-star outing, 3.5 stars is definitely warranted.

I won't rehash the entire A plot but, being a former Marine, I want to weigh in on the O'Brien insubordination aspect. The chain of command is a strict one but it has limits. Subordinates need not follow orders from a superior if they feel the order is morally wrong or, for lack of a better phrase, dangerous to the overall mission. What is the overall mission? To protect the Federation from the Dominion. Morally there's nothing wrong with Bashir's orders; quite the contrary, it is the humanitarian thing to do. What Bashir fails to adequately consider is the consequences of freeing the Jem'Hadar from their addiction. He's simply too caught up in doing what doctor's do to see the bigger picture.

For the sake of argument, let's transpose Klingons in the place of the Jem'Hadar. Arguably the two races are very alike: violent, warlike, duty-bound, the very essence of a stereotypical warrior. This appears to be a racial trait of Klingons, something most likely genetically hardwired into them. Suppose a peace-loving, pacifist, non-violent Klingon was born due to genetic mutation. Do you think for a moment other Klingons, given the choice of adopting the mutation, would do so? Of course not! And the Jem'Hadar are even more hard-line than the Klingons in this respect.

I must admit I was rooting for Bashir despite this, which speaks to the effectiveness of the episode. I felt empathy for the Jem'Hadar, being engineered for a single, disposable purpose by the Founders. But the bigger picture cannot be ignored. Their very engineering almost certainly precludes reform. Their entire existence is based not just on obedience but war. I doubt any reasonable number of them could even conceive of existing any other way. Absent the Founders, they would likely engage in homicidal raids just to have something to do. They have no culture, no civilization. They are unfortunate tools of the Founders. A tool cannot transcend its purpose no matter how hard Bashir wishes it to be so.

In the end, I think O'Brien did the right thing. While it's possible his actions passed up a chance at galactic peace, the risk of galactic Armageddon was simply too much. I wonder if Bashir's decision would've been very different had this episode taken place after something like "The Siege of AR-558". O'Brien has been through something like that; Bashir hasn't. Experiences like that tend to beat the idealism out of you (trust me, I know).
Prisoner881
Mon, Oct 22, 2018, 11:08am (UTC -6)
Oh one more thought: O'Brien makes a parting comment on how Bashir could bring him up on charges. While true, does anyone realistically believe Starfleet would punish O'Brien? Especially after the loss of the Odyssey and the tens of thousands of deaths caused by the Jem'Hadar? The more likely outcome would be *Bashir* being brought up on charges of conspiring with the enemy!
Peter G.
Mon, Oct 22, 2018, 11:13am (UTC -6)
@ Prisoner881,

Nice write-up. Luckily, this point -

"The more likely outcome would be *Bashir* being brought up on charges of conspiring with the enemy!"

isn't entirely forgotten later in the series.
Prisoner881
Mon, Oct 22, 2018, 3:01pm (UTC -6)
@ Peter G.

Thank you for the kind comments.

The Jem'Hadar are essentially sentient biological weapons, created by the Founders for the sole purpose of fighting and dying for the Founders. Their sentience exists only to make them more effective at that purpose and is in all other ways suppressed through genetic conditioning and controlled via Ketracel White. These latter attributes are analogous to the safety interlocks on a nuclear weapon. Remove the safeties and you still have a deadly weapon whose purpose has not changed, only now it is less easily controlled and more easily perverted.

Were the Jem'Hadar a race with millions of years of evolution, a culture, a history, politics, a true *civilization* instead of genetically engineered bipedal tanks then reforming them might be possible. Even the Borg can occasionally be reasoned with. The Jem'Hadar cannot. Their mission is war and conquest and they have no other purpose because they were *designed* that way, just as a nuclear weapon is *designed* to destroy a target. Bashir lost sight of this. Idealism does that and Bashir is (was?) the consummate idealist. O'Brien, the realist (perhaps even the cynic) rightly saw Bashir's actions as potentially devastating to all life in the galaxy. The small chance of success and its attendant rewards were vastly overshadowed by the large chance of unleashing a vicious, capable, uncontrollable force on all other life.
Chrome
Mon, Oct 22, 2018, 3:16pm (UTC -6)
@Prisoner881

What you seem to be missing, and what the episode alludes to is that the Jem Hadar might be willing to cooperate with the Federation if their shackles are cut. At the very least the Dominion would have a huge mess on its hand trying to control free Jem Hadar. Julian’s position did have merit, but the episode leaves us to decide how much. Remember O’Brien is not the clear here; he gets reprimanded for disobeying orders.
Prisoner881
Tue, Oct 23, 2018, 12:09pm (UTC -6)
@Chrome I'm not missing that at all. What you (and Bashir) seem to overlook is the "might be willing" part and how that relates to an actual probability of happening. Let's examine it, shall we?

What do we *know* for sure thus far? That the Jem'Hadar are ruthless warriors bred, conditioned, and completely controlled by the Founders. We have a few -- a *very* few -- examples of them taking honorable stances ("Rocks and Shoals") but even these are tinged with their apparent utter servitude. This is not to imply the bulk of them are dishonorable, merely to say we have very few examples of the Jem'Hadar being anything but living weapons of the Founders. Outside of Goran'Agar, we have precisely *zero* examples of any Jem'Hadar wanting to give up their "lifestyle." And there are a *lot* of Jem'Hadar.

Could they have some desire to be free, a desire that could manifest into overthrowing the Founders and becoming their own people living peacefully with their neighbors? Perhaps, but the Federation has no data whatsoever to back this up.

It comes down to brutal probabilities and risk assessment, something a good officer and Marine must constantly engage in when deciding what to do. Bashir, the idealist, either didn't do this or vastly overestimated the chances of success based on a single test case (Goran'Agar). O'Brien, the realist, objectively evaluated the risk/reward scenario and realized Bashir's plans, while laudable, had a low chance of succeeding and huge associated risk of unleashing the Jem'Hadar.

The episode brilliantly showcased the concept of "there is no perfect solution, only varying degrees of imprefect solutions." Star Trek, under Roddenberry, hewed close to the utopia vision which, I think, is almost childishly simplistic. There are rare occasions where you can make a difficult decision that has no downsides and wraps everything up in a pretty bow. This is not one of them. By forcing Bashir and O'Brien into this situation we see the moral complexity inherent in most facets of life instead of the idealistic paradise earlier shows presented.
Chrome
Tue, Oct 23, 2018, 12:27pm (UTC -6)
@Prisoner881

No, I get it. Bashir’s not 100% right either for the reasons you stated. That’s the conflict.

I think my point still stands that the Dominion would have its hands full trying to corral rogue Jem’Hadar and that reason alone is worth freeing them of the white dependence. It would be like giving people in a repressive regime a means to fight their oppressors. Surely you can appreciate that?
William B
Tue, Oct 23, 2018, 12:30pm (UTC -6)
I think one thing that's interesting here is that Bashir basically really is focused on his one patient -- Goran'agar -- and O'Brien is focused on the big picture. However, it's actually not unambiguously true that Bashir and O'Brien are actually even correct *on that basis*. Bashir helping Goran'agar might actually get him killed, as we see. And I think Chrome is correct that while it's by no means certain, it's at least worth considering that a rebellious Jem'Hadar might end up hurting the Dominion and helping its allies more than the controlled one we see.
Prisoner881
Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 7:46pm (UTC -6)
@Chrome how would the Dominion have its hands full when their entire army is gone? The only armed force the Founders in the Gamma Quadrant have is the Jem'Hadar. "Hippocratic Oath" takes place long before the Founders form any alliances in the Alpha Quadrant. A Jem'Hadar revolt would immediately reduce the founders to powerlessness. Far from having their hands full, they'd be the first to fall.

The Romans faced the same issues for the same reasons: they were outnumbered by their slaves. The Third Servile Revolt led by Spartacus terrified the Romans in ways no military force ever did for that reason. No wonder the Founders took such drastic steps to enforce Jem'Hadar obedience. If the Founders are terrified of a free Jem'Hadar, don't you think it's logical for the Federation to be at least as afraid? The alternative is to bet on the kindness, generosity, and mercy of the Jem'Hadar and that's lunacy given what we know about them.
Chrome
Thu, Oct 25, 2018, 8:02pm (UTC -6)
@Prisoner881

This is an increasingly hypothetical scenario but presumably some Jem Hadar like serving for the Founders and would remain loyal. In any event, if the Dominion is coming to the AQ as they have been threatening to since season 3, it would be better for the AQ if they were a divided force. And yes, we do see rogue Jem Hadar in “To The Death” and Jem’Hadar who won’t follow orders in “By Inferno’s Light”.
Prisoner881
Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 2:18pm (UTC -6)
@Chrome the most likely scenario for a Jem'Hadar revolt would not be an instantaneous quadrant-wide revolt but one that spreads over time. I agree, presumably such a revolt would pit loyalists versus rebels for at least a short period of time and perhaps even for an extended time. In that scenario it would definitely impede the Founder's strategy for dominating the Alpha Quadrant.

However, what comes next is of prime importance: who wins such a revolt? I will make the argument that no matter who wins, the Alpha Quadrant loses.

Suppose the Founders prevail? They would ruthlessly eliminate any vestiges of rebels -- as they did to the Maquis -- and we'd be right back to where we started: a unified Dominion with plans to dominate the galaxy. And you can bet they'd remedy any deficiencies in controlling the Jem'Hadar the second time around. There would be no second rebellion. Perhaps the Federation could use this interval to strengthen their defenses or even mount a counter-offensive, but I've always felt the Federation was no match militarily for the Dominion no matter how much preparation they made. The Jem'Hadar are simply too numerous, easily bred, requiring no training, and too effective for the Federation to ever counter, period.

Suppose the rebels win and destroy the Founders? Then we're left with another bad outcome. Based upon the behavior we see in "The Abandoned" and other glimpses we get into Jem'Hadar psychology, the Jem'Hadar *like* war, killing, and destruction. They have no sense of self-preservation either, being perfectly willing to die en masse if it serves the mission or even to make a point (as they did against the USS Odyssey). Having them freely roaming the Gamma and Alpha Quadrants is a terrifying prospect. Honestly I think they'd be more fearsome than the Borg.

The *only* case where Bashir's efforts are preferable is if he can rid the Jem'Hadar of their White addiction (which seems possible) *and* they develop and spread a psychological framework that is diametrically opposed to everything we know about them. It's the latter that trips the idea up. You'd have a better chance at convincing a virus not to kill its host.
Prisoner881
Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 2:31pm (UTC -6)
One last salient point: let us assume there is a magical way Bashir could instantly and completely convert all Jem'Hadar in the galaxy into those who think like Goran'Agar. That is, after all, what Bashir is trying to do, right?

Don't forget Goran'Agar's initial reaction to finding Bashir and O'Brien: he ordered their immediate execution. The only thing that stopped him was finding out Bashir was a doctor. In other words, Goran'Agar was perfectly willing to murder anyone he came across who was not immediately useful to his goals. This is not even remotely a live-and-let-live philosophy. It's just a slightly more reserved form of genocide made palatable by casting Goran'Agar as a sympathetic character. Suppose a colony ship carrying hundreds or thousands of civilians had crashed there instead of Bashir and O'Brien? What do you suppose Goran'Agar would've done with them? It shouldn't take long to arrive at an answer, and that answer would tell you all you need to know about whether O'Brien made the right choice or not.
Chrome
Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 2:40pm (UTC -6)
“Suppose the Founders prevail? They would ruthlessly eliminate any vestiges of rebels -- as they did to the Maquis -- and we'd be right back to where we started”

Right, and my argument has been that even in that scenario the Federation benefits from slowing down the Dominion’s incursions for a time.

I get that you really don’t like Bashir’s position here. But I think the writers want us to consider that neither O’Brien or Bashir are entirely correct. Like William B pointed out, Bashir’s too invested in helping his patient to see that he’s getting in over his head. And by the same token, O’Brien’s so convinced there’s no use curing the Jem’Hadar that he never considers the cure could be strategically important.

What I’m getting at is one can fall in either character’s camp, but in the end there really isn’t a clean win-win solution.
Prisoner881
Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 2:52pm (UTC -6)
Sorry! These ideas just keep coming to me!

The irony (and lesson) here is that by defeating the Dominion, the Jem'Hadar get their best chance at the freedom Bashir hoped for. A peaceful Dominion could assist Bashir in removing the White addiction whilst simultaneously using their genetic "obey the Founders" imperative to order them to change their ways. The latter may or may not be very successful given Odo's lack of success in "The Abandoned" but one might suspect the Founders have a better understanding of how their creations tick and can thus do a better job.

This raises yet another question though, one Bashir doesn't seem to have even remotely considered: how would a free, peaceful Jem'Hadar go on? They are, after all, a *created* race. They do not breed and seem biologically incapable of doing so. Without the cloning technology of the Founders, there would be no new Jem'Hadar and within a few centuries -- assuming they have a fixed life span and aren't biologically immortal -- there would be no more Jem'Hadar. This paints an interesting scenario of mass suicide by the Jem'Hadar if they ever overthrew and destroyed the Founders!
Prisoner881
Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 3:03pm (UTC -6)
@Chrome

"Right, and my argument has been that even in that scenario the Federation benefits from slowing down the Dominion’s incursions for a time."

I'm forced to quote a very cynical but lovable character from a different (yet eerily similar) sci-fi franchise: "No boom today. Boom tomorrow. There's always a boom tomorrow. What? Look, somebody's got to have some damn perspective around here!" Delay in genocidal conquest still ends up with genocidal conquest. The Federation doesn't have the belly, the spine, or the numbers to fight the kind of war needed to successfully defeat the Dominion. It's only the artificial constriction of the wormhole (and the aliens living in it) which prevented them from subjugating the entire Alpha Quadrant on a whim.

Am I a heretic for bringing a Babylon 5 quote into this? ;^)
Prisoner881
Fri, Oct 26, 2018, 3:05pm (UTC -6)
Just in case you didn't get the B5 reference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnR3Tyrg_10
Elliott
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 12:09pm (UTC -6)
Teaser : **.5, 5%

Worf has identified one of Quark's customers as a renown smuggler. Kira decides to confront him on this extracurricular activity; Worf is certain that the smuggler and Quark are up to something. Kira assumes that he's probably right but that Odo's choice to let a man with a criminal record—Quark, that is—run his business freely is questionable. And you know, while we as the audience may be inclined to give Quark the benefit of the doubt, thanks in no small part to Shimmerman's charm, Worf has a point. Quark's antics have actually endangered the lives of people on the station before. The original conceit of keeping Quark's open to stimulate the station's economy seems pretty moot at this point, too. Why *isn't* Quark in jail?

Meanwhile, because nothing ever has to make sense, Bashir and O'Brien are returning, alone, from a survey mission in the GQ. Right. Why WOULDN'T Starfleet send two officers by themselves into the territory of a hostile power bent on conquering the universe whose leaders can imitate any shape? I mean, that planet HAD to be surveyed! Whatever. O'Brien is complaining about Keiko, who sees Miles' attempts at coping with her long absences as a subconscious means of returning to his bachelor days. Why is it the writers seem to have such a dim view of the O'Briens' marriage? Anyway, this bullshit leads to:

O'BRIEN: See, you understand. Now, why can't she see that? Why can't she be more like
BASHIR: More like?
O'BRIEN: Well, a man. More like a man.
BASHIR: So you wish Keiko was a man?

Yes, good. 24Th-century Utopia, DS9-style. “Heh heh heh. Yer totally, gay bro!” Thankfully, this #nohomo nonsense is interrupted by the sensors beeping. They follow the beeps to a planet with technobabble in the atmosphere. The quantum whatever sends the runabout crashing to the surface, which is class-M and full of trees. The bros exit the crashed vessel and a greeted by a party of Jem'Hadar.

Act 1 : ***.5, 17%

The Jem'Hadar question the pair. The dialogue reveals that they are quite intimately familiar with Starfleet operations, from the runabout's slight modifications to the significance of the different coloured uniforms and rank insignias. The First determines that the pair may be useful in some way, violating what we assume to be established norms amongst the Jem'Hadar, namely executing them or using them in an exercise which ends with executing them. Got to love a two-party system.

Back on DS9, Worf has brought his concerns about Odo directly to Sisko. Odo, naturally, says that everything's under control and essentially dismisses himself, with Sisko's blessing. Sisko gently reminds Worf that he is not the chief of security and that he should probably mind his own business.

We cut back to the GQ where Bashir has deduced that the Jem'Hadar need a doctor, which is the only reason they've been kept alive.

O'BRIEN: If that's true, Julian, don't help them. Anything that weakens them increases our chances of getting out of here.

We were reminded during the First's interrogation that Miles has combat experience against the Cardassians, making his advice here seem tactically-sound. But, I find this reasoning horribly simplistic. We don't know a whole lot about the Jem'Hadar yet. We have seen that their instinct for violence is genetically-programmed in “The Abandoned,” but Bashir did not have the chance to experiment with this programming thanks to Sisko's dumbassery. He may not get the chance, however, has the First hauls him away from O'Brien.

Act 2 : ***.5, 17%

Bashir is brought to a laboratory and ordered to perform research. The First gives the enzyme the Founders addicted all Jem'Hadar to a name: Ketracel-white, and also reveals that it is the Vorta who control the supply. In fact, these Jem'Hadar have come to this planet specifically to escape the Dominion:

GORAN'AGAR: Surprised because a Jem'Hadar soldier might want something more than the life of a slave? You know nothing about the Jem'Hadar except that you fear us.

The First wants Bashir to cure them of their addiction (as he himself has been). It turns out this one Jem'Hadar had previously crashed on this planet, run out of the drug and lived on for over a month. It isn't stated outright, but this time in isolation, free of the addictive substance was no doubt instrumental in helping creating a predilection for rebellion in this slave. He believes that something about the planet itself cured him, but it has not helped the rest of his men. There are now only days before they run out of white.

Goran'agar introduces Bashir to a group of Jem'Hadar suffering withdrawal.

GORAN'AGAR: As a Federation Doctor, I know you are trained to feel sympathy and compassion for those in pain.

This is a marvellous line. We take for granted the idea that sympathy and compassion are innate qualities, part of being human. But perhaps, they are as programmed in us as is violence and obeisance are in the Jem'Hadar. In an oblique way, this gets at the heart of the Roddenberry conceit, that there is no such thing as fixed human nature; we can evolve and become better by force of will, by education and by changing the system in which we are “programmed.” Bashir agrees to try and save them, with O'Brien's help. Goran'agar warns him that after five days, they will all die, the soldiers from withdrawal, and the humans and the First from the wrath of the addicts.

On DS9, Dax briefs the remaining senior staff about continuing Klingon expansion throughout the quadrant. A nice touch is Kira's lament that her people always seem to be the target for aggressive nations trying to throw their dicks around. This intriguing rising tension is stalled by Worf giving Odo some background info he's dug up on Quark's criminal buddy, you know...to help. Odo is genuinely grateful for the additional intelligence, but cuts Worf off at his suggestion that Odo “will” arrest the men this evening.

O'Brien is helping Bashir by tech-teching, giving away the fact that he's just trying to stall for an escape when he calls Julian “sir” in front of the Jem'Hadar. And sure enough, Miles has rigged an explosive. Bashir takes the opportunity to continue the charade and give his buddy more shit:

BASHIR: Good work, Chief. Keep this up. You may make a fine officer some day.
O'BRIEN: Thank you Lieutenant. Coming from you that means a lot to me.
BASHIR: I know. Carry on.

It's impressive that this bit of humour works so well in such a tense and serious situation; the lines flow directly from the established characters and relationships of these two men. Bashir reports that his research hasn't yielded any results yet, prompting a terse “Three days, doctor,” from Goran'agar. But uh oh, another Jem'Hadar has found the chief's explosive, and sets it off, injuring a guard. The chief, in a brazen display of stupidity, tries to make a run for it, despite a gun being held to the back of Bashir's head and a super-soldier within arm's length of himself. Well, the angered Jem'Hadar grabs the chief by the neck, refusing to stop choking him to death despite Goran'agar's orders to stop.

Act 3 : ***, 17%

O'Brien is finally released and then hauled back to the holding cell. Meanwhile, the injured soldier requires joint surgery, which isn't an option at the moment. Given his “uselessness,” he expects to be killed so the rest of the men can have his supply of drugs, but Goran'agar refuses to follow protocol in this case. His refusal to obey the decrees of the Vorta and the Dominion, choosing instead...might we call it human compassion? for his men impresses Bashir, who returns to work on the cure.

Worf, in the mean time, has taken it upon himself to monitor Quark. He stakes out the bar and witnesses the illegal transaction take place. Furious, he stampedes into Odo's office.

ODO: I perform my duties as I see fit.
WORF: You do not seem to be performing them at all.
ODO: Frankly, Commander, I'm not interested in your opinion of my job performance.

We will come back to this.

Bashir continues his research, filling Goran'agar in on the backstory from “The Abandoned.” The dialogue also serves to patch up some of the diverging backstory about the Founders between seasons 2 and 3. The Jem'Hadar regard the Founders “almost as a myth,” because they have programmed the instinctive need to serve directly into their creations. Thus, the Changelings' and Dominion's enigmatic presence in S2 can be somewhat squared with the incredibly vast and expansive nature of their empire as portrayed in S3. Somewhat. Goran'agar believes that the closest analogue the Founders represent to them to the races he's encountered/conquered would be “gods.”

GORAN'AGAR: Our gods never talk to us and they don't wait for us after death. They only want us to fight for them and to die for them.

Bashir is impressed with Goran'agar's evolution and conveys this to O'Brien in his cell. Miles has little more than sarcasm and suspicion to offer in counterpoint, believing that Bashir is being manipulated into completing his task. Bashir is ready to pursue a cure for the white-addiction in earnest, but O'Brien is incensed at the idea.

O'BRIEN: You're just guessing. You don't know how the other Jem'Hadar will react when they're off the drug. They may go marauding through the galaxy on their own. At least now the Dominion keeps them on a short leash.

This sentiment reveals the extent of Miles' privilege. Sure, these sentient beings are being chemically-enslaved into a galactic terror, but if we put our necks out for these people, I might not get to go back to the station and tinker at things in my bedroom while my wife studies flowers! There is a great irony in all of this actually—Miles' position is supported by the Prime Directive, which is never brought up in their conversation, while Bashir's position would violate Starfleet's cardinal protocol. I'm actually very frustrated that this isn't addressed, because it allows the show to paint Bashir as the naïve Federation idealist and O'Brien as the pragmatist without really delving into those assumptions. If Bashir had to make the conscious choice to violate the Prime Directive (as Kirk and Picard often had to) for moral reasons, that gives Bashir's position some weight and makes O'Brien look rather craven (which is actually how I see the argument). By leaving this dimension out of their debate, we are left with the erroneous impression that Bashir is an idealistic fool and O'Brien a hardened realist, when there isn't evidence to support this. There is no reason to believe that the Jem'Hadar would just run amok if cured of their addiction. All the evidence suggests that Bashir is correct, that disrupting the Founders' control over their army could only be a good thing from a military perspective. O'Brien is too blinded by his prejudice against “the enemy” to understand this, and his line “no, it is not complex. It is simple,” is really sad and a blight against his character.

Finally, Bashir just orders O'Brien to help him complete their task. The Second Jem'Hadar monitors O'Brien following his orders and remarks that the two of them are similar in that they're both racist fucks who recoil at the thought of cooperating like this. Well, true to form, Miles uses his technical magic to rig himself a transport away from the runabout, violating orders.

Act 4 : ***, 17%

Bashir is running into walls on his front, failing to detect what planetary properties have made Goran'agar immune to his addiction. Finally, Bashir determines that his immunity is just a genetic anomaly he always possessed. The Second returns to report of O'Brien's deception and believes—just as O'Brien suspected of the Jem'Hadar—that the Federation boys never planned on helping them, that they have been manipulating them.

ARAK'TARAL to GORAN'AGAR: I knew you once. Trusted you. Obeyed you without question. But now you're like this human, weak, soft, inferior. If being free of white means becoming like you, I don't want to be cured.

While obviously, things aren't going the way the First or Bashir had hoped, this does in fact prove Bashir's point. The Jem'Hadar are not static monsters, they are sentient beings with free will whose psyches have been strangled by ((centuries?)) of propaganda and addiction. Bashir gives his word not to abandon the project and Goran'agar agrees to try and find O'Brien before his men so he won't be killed.

On DS9, Quark is completing his illegal transaction. Worf steps in with his phaser and nabs the crooks, ah but it turns out that the payment was actually Odo in disguise. Odo berates Worf for interfering, revealing he intended on using Quark's buddy to infiltrate some sort of smuggling underground. He arrests the middle man and gives Quark a slap on the wrist, leaving Worf feeling sheepish. Before getting into this further, let me ask this: how do you feel about Admiral Holdo? You know, the purple-haired Laura Dern from “The Last Jedi”? You might recall that she, very much like Odo, had plans that she kept from those outside the need-to-know circle, leading to the impression, very much like Worf had of Odo, that she was behaving recklessly, when in fact, she wasn't. So, was Odo in the right to play his cards close, suspecting he couldn't trust Worf to keep a secret, or did Odo's pride get in the way of him doing his job correctly? Because, frankly, I think Worf was right. Odo is not his commanding officer and Worf is not some green cadet. These two are supposed to be colleagues. Worf is supposed to look like a fool for not trusting Odo's methods even though Odo showed no trust in Worf himself.

Meanwhile, O'Brien is laying Ewok-style booby-traps for his pursuers and manages to make his way unscathed to the laboratory. O'Brien thinks he's there to rescue his friend, but Bashir insists that he isn't breaking his word.

Act 5 : **, 17%

So, O'Brien destroys Bashir's research, ending the argument for now. Of course, in that moment, Goran'agar returns and fast-walks them into the woods. With the white only hours away from running out, the First has determined to send the humans away, kill his own men and/or die alone. Bashir wants Goran'agar to return to the AQ with them.

BASHIR: You don't have to do this. Even if we can't save their lives, there's no need to sacrifice yourself.
GORAN'AGAR to O'BRIEN: You are a soldier?
O'BRIEN: I have been.
GORAN'AGAR: Then you explain.

Sigh...right, the honour of the military brotherhood and all that bullshit. While, I can certainly believe that Goran'agar would want to look after his men in this way—and I see a certain Klingon-y noble death angle to it—O'Brien's original argument that it was strategically-foolish to try and cure the addiction, falls apart with his smug nod of understanding about this pro-military crap. If for nothing other than strategic reasons, they should try and take Goran'agar back to the AQ with them and study him, or question him. Now that they can escape (glossing over the fact that the runabout fucking CRASHED), it doesn't even occur to Miles to consider the humanitarian implications? Fuck you, O'Brien.

On the station, Worf reports to Sisko who's...who the fuck knows? I fully agree with William B that Sisko's “DS9 is about shades of grey” smugness goes beyond winking to the audience to full-blown arrogance on the part of the writers. It's condescending and absurd. Sisko explains that everyone has their own set of rules that they follow diligently. Uh huh. So, fuck your morality, fuck your principles. Hell, don't even let these things get you down, man. Just take up hobbies like me. Do whatever you want however you want, and Starfleet will promote you. You get to reach smug conclusions based on contrivances that allow you to appear resignedly pragmatic and the audience will nod approvingly, feeling pleased with themselves for having the wisdom to recognise that having ideals and principles that you actually stick to is hopelessly naïve. Star Trek Deep Space Nine, everybody, where hope goes to die.

The Epilogue concludes with the return of the runabout to the station. O'Brien gets to have the last word, of course, because Bashir's too nice a guy to hold his feet over the fire for being such a colossal asshole. Oh, but don't worry, in a few days everything will be just spiffy again!

Episode as Functionary : **.5, 10%

I will credit the episode this much; O'Brien is a character who is difficult to dislike. He's homey, he's usually kind, he's got simple priorities and wholesome ambitions. He's reliable and loyal. So, making him the antagonist here—and yes, that's how I see him—was very brave. The polemics about Bashir's prognostications are quite beside the point; O'Brien showed extreme cowardice in this situation, totally unbefitting a Starfleet officer, commissioned or otherwise. Might Bashir's attempts have gotten them killed? Yes. But for someone who falls back on his war record so often, you'd think O'Brien would have an understanding of dying for a noble cause.

The episode is very proud of itself for presenting a complex issue—and it IS a complex issue. So then, giving the moral victory to the man who insists that things are simple, that there are good guys and bad guys and he's going to protect his own, is extremely disappointing. Additionally, while there's something kind of sweet in Bashir letting his friend off the hook because, you know, they love each other (oh but not in a gay way, lest we forget), the conclusion means that we have just abandoned the prospect of following up on this strategy to reform the Jem'Hadar, which seems like a decision Bashir should not be making on his own.

I find the B-plot equally arrogant and contrived. We just HAVE to beat the audience over the head with the point that this ain't your Daddy's Star Trek and things are grey out here blah blah blah. So, Odo's egoism and lack of trust aren't even commented on. No, it's just Worf (like Bashir) being one of those naïve TNG kinds of people causing the problem.

Structurally, while the hammy messages may gel, the tones of the two plots do not complement each other at all. I found it jarring to go from the deadly serious GQ plot to the light-hearted everyone-laugh-at-Worf plot in a way that we haven't seen since S2. I don't hold this against the episode too heavily, because of course, Worf wasn't supposed to be on this show, so trying to work him into the fabric of the series is bound to cause some hiccoughs. What buoys the episode up are the performances from the entire cast and guests, which are quite superb.

Final Score : ***
Peter G.
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 12:37pm (UTC -6)
@ Elliott,

I think you're underrating Odo's position in this one. Yes, Worf is now his colleague; and yes he's a high-ranking officer. But Worf isn't his CO, nor is he involved in any way in station security. It would be like Jadzia going over to security demanding to know how Odo is pursuing a case: none of her business! And that's just regarding whether Worf was overstepping, which he was. He had no business interfering, and I think the intent here wasn't to show him as being dumb, but to give us a taste of how different (a) his new duties are from his old and how shifting his mindset will be tough, and (b) how different law enforcement is in a mixed living community versus a military starship.

About Odo's attitude, we've also seen many times that Odo doesn't like working with others (other than Kira), doesn't like having to explain himself, doesn't like competing security people from Starfleet, and doesn't like it when his tactics are questioned. And more than all of those I don't think he likes it when his control over his territory is questioned: it's his order, and suggesting that something is lacking is a direct affront to his status as lawman. So there is definitely pride at work here, and we've seen it built on in previous episodes and I think it's fair to suppose the writers assume we know what he's like. His answers to Worf are gruff, but no more so than normal for him.

But yeah, Worf was clearly acting out of control in this situation and trying to do a job that wasn't his. When you're in the "military" it would be disastrous to run around trying to step on someone else's work. I put it in scare quotes because it's always hard to say exactly what Starfleet is, but I imagine the chain of command and division of responsibility may be similar to a military structure as we know it. So no, I don't think comparing Odo to Admiral Holdo is reasonable. In that case a person allowed *the entire rebellion* to believe they were about to face certain death rather than inform *the people who would be implementing her plan* what the plan was. Here Odo declines to tell Worf his plan, who has no business in knowing it and no personal stake in the result other than his dislike of criminals. Even in civil society why don't you try going into a police station and barking at the Captain about how he should do his job, and then proceed to try to arrest his suspects behind his back! You'd end up in the slammer for that.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 2:29pm (UTC -6)
"Yes, good. 24Th-century Utopia, DS9-style. “Heh heh heh. Yer totally, gay bro!”"

Yep-regressive attitudes in Trek are totally a DS9 only problem-because it's not like someone on the set of "The Offspring" ran down the set to keep two male extras from holding hands. It's not like Gene Roddenberry wrote an episode that claimed women couldn't be Starfleet captains because they're too hysterical. It's not like TNG did a gay rights episode without actually having a gay couple in there. It's not like DS9 does two gay rights episodes that blow the garbage fire called "The Outcast" out of the water. It's not like...

" Structurally, while the hammy messages may gel, the tones of the two plots do not complement each other at all. I found it jarring to go from the deadly serious GQ plot to the light-hearted everyone-laugh-at-Worf plot in a way that we haven't seen since S2. I don't hold this against the episode too heavily, because of course, Worf wasn't supposed to be on this show, so trying to work him into the fabric of the series is bound to cause some hiccoughs. What buoys the episode up are the performances from the entire cast and guests, which are quite superb."

I don't think the Worf plot damages this episode so much. It's not substantial enough to be considered great, but it's not an "everyone laughs at Worf plot", nor does the tone clash that badly in my opinion.
Chrome
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 2:34pm (UTC -6)
I’m a fan of this one because I love how well the writers’ elaborate both on O’Brien’s and Bashir’s sides of an admittedly complicated humanitarian issue, and unlike Elliott I don’t think it’s ever made clear who was in the right here.

That said, I agree with Elliott that Bashir isn’t simply being naive here, and he’s certainly taking a controversial stance by bucking the Prime Directive for the sake of doing (at least based on all the info in this episode) the right thing. I also liked what William B above said about Bashir - who was totally willing to disregard O’Brien disobeying his orders, to risk only his own life to find a cure. That O’Brien felt so strongly about his convictions that he felt saving his friend from himself was an interesting move, and I think it goes back to their earlier conversation about how important their friendship was, especially to O’Brien who perhaps feels more fraternal about his career than Bashir.

Regarding the spiel O’Brien gives about military honor, it’s interesting at least that O’Brien actually connects with Goran'agar here. Goran'agar can’t abandon his men out of military honor in the same way O’Brien can’t abandon Bashir.

@Elliott

“the conclusion means that we have just abandoned the prospect of following up on this strategy to reform the Jem'Hadar, which seems like a decision Bashir should not be making on his own.”

Yeah, Bashir definitely lets the whole ordeal go too easily. It’s one thing to show that Bashir didn’t want to begrudge his friend for disobeying orders, but it seems like he still learned something vital about the Jem’Hadar that Starfleet security should have some say in.

As for the B plot, it’s mostly serviceable despite Sisko/Worf’s unnecessary meta-commentary. But I hasten to add it’s ridiculous that Odo would play puppet master with Worf and not expect Worf to make an arrest at some point. Also, Odo is interested in infiltrating a whole smuggling ring now that goes far outside DS9 and his own jurisdiction? How does that even work? I really don’t blame Worf for calling him out.

Finally one funny thing no one else mentioned is that the clock Sisko is working on is the same prop from Dramatis Personae, which makes one wonder if Sisko wasn’t too aloof in this whole episode. Nice callback, nonetheless.
Chrome
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 2:52pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

“It's not like DS9 does two gay rights episodes that blow the garbage fire called "The Outcast" out of the water.”

Are you referring to “Rejoined”? According to Brooks who directed the episode, it explicitly isn’t about homosexual rights. I’ll say more in the actual episode discussion, but the script never goes into gender let alone same-gender relationships.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:06pm (UTC -6)
"I find the B-plot equally arrogant and contrived. We just HAVE to beat the audience over the head with the point that this ain't your Daddy's Star Trek and things are grey out here blah blah blah. So, Odo's egoism and lack of trust aren't even commented on. No, it's just Worf (like Bashir) being one of those naïve TNG kinds of people causing the problem. "

Oh, nuance! The horror!

Snark aside, I do agree that it's a very blunt way of distinguishing itself from TNG-too blunt. But you have to consider the context in which these shows were made. TNG was a monster hit, pretty much beloved by everyone. DS9 kind of got lost in the shuffle, with TNG's final season, and then Voyager's first happening pretty much right after each other. DS9 was trying to be the rebellious younger sibling, the underdog. You're acting like poor TNG was getting metaphorically bullied or something. It wasn't-though DS9 comes off as disrespectful at times, it was just an attempt to differentiate itself-the DS9 writers weren't saying nuance is inherently better, just that DS9 was different. That's why I also think your claim that the episode is arrogant. It's a show far more comfortable and confident in itself. I find it quite refreshing, especially after 1 season of TNG-lite and 2 seasons of "we have interesting elements but we're unsure what to do with them".

And they didn't portray Bashir as naïve. The episode only works if neither side is completely right. What Bashir does do wrong is fail to consider what happens if the Jem'Hadar are let off their leash. I still think O'Brien had no business disobeying orders from a superior officer, but I can see his perspective. Which, of course, is the point.

Anyway, you did enjoy the episode, but I strongly (respectfully) disagree with the complaints you do have.
Elliott
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:07pm (UTC -6)
@Peter G

1. Wasn't it established that Odo's way of doing things, his proclivity to operate outside the boundaries of Starfleet regulations is what brought Eddington into the show? How is it that Odo is allowed to just go right back to the old way, especially when interstellar tensions are higher than ever?

2. I don't really buy the "Worf is settling into new duties" thing because we saw him adjust to new posts quite easily twice already, when Tasha died and in "The Most Toys" when he had to take over operations from Data. The plot here was more about getting used to "the DS9 way," which i find pretentious.

3. The only reasonw Odo would have *not* to tell Worf what was going on, when clearly Worf was interested in the investigation, would be a. that he doesn't trust him or b. that he wanted to spite him for interfering in his territory. I don't find that attitude endearing in the slightest.

@Iceman

I actually think that overall, DS9 has the best take of the Berman era Treks on non-heteronormative sexuality. "Rejoined" is a fabulous episode. My problem here is that the "you're a homo" thing here is milked for laughter, something never done in TNG. Eventually, Voyager would also repeat this sin ("Body and Soul"). That's my main beef here--but I hope you realise I don't hold this moment against the episode heavily, I just find it lazy comedy.

As far as the plots gelling, I would suggest paying attention to how the musical cues struggle every time we transition back and forth. The tone every time we break from the GQ is very tense, provoking a dissonant crescendo of some sort, then we cut to Worf peaking out from behind a bulkhead at Quark lounging in his bar or something. I stand by my criticism that the tones don't flow together. Again, this is a product of them adding a Worf B-plot into an episode that had already been pitched in order to justify his presence in the cast.

@Chrome

I think William B mentions the clock callback. The whole thing is kind of weird. I guess I prefer the aloof loner Sisko to the actively disregarding Starfleet Sisko, but I would think a more serviceable callback (despite my disdain for this arc) would be him studying the ancient prophecies.

As far as the central dilemma, I do think the episode contrives ways to make O'Brien's argument stronger and Bashir's weaker when at the heart of the matter, Bashir is in the right. The story does tie this contrivances into character motivations, but I would have liked Bashir to have something to say about O'Brien's fucked up ethics as well as his disregard for the chain of command, not to mention his nonexistent respect for Bashir's rank and authority.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:10pm (UTC -6)
"Are you referring to “Rejoined”? According to Brooks who directed the episode, it explicitly isn’t about homosexual rights. I’ll say more in the actual episode discussion, but the script never goes into gender let alone same-gender relationships. "

I'm referring to "Rejoined" and "Chimera". I'm aware that "Rejoined" wasn't specifically designed as a gay rights allegory, but it works just fine if you choose to interpret that way. According to Robert Hewitt Wolfe, it was definitely in their minds at the time.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:12pm (UTC -6)
"That's my main beef here--but I hope you realise I don't hold this moment against the episode heavily, I just find it lazy comedy. "

Of course. I was just (snarkily) pointing out that a perfect track record Trek does not have when it comes to social issues. In fact, it's not nearly as progressive as it thinks it is or wants to be at times.
Elliott
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:15pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

"DS9 was trying to be the rebellious younger sibling, the underdog. "

Yeah, that's my point. It's fucking annoying. I will praise DS9 when I think it does well--and exploring a stationary setting where conflicts develop over time is a wonderful and welcome departure from the standard fare. I appreciate much of what DS9 brought to the table, but much like a younger sibling acting out to get attention and prove himself, the incessant jabs against TNG are aggravating and unnecessary. It's like the writers developed all this pent up frustration (actually, I'm pretty sure Ira Behr has said as much) and took out their aggression in DS9.
Elliott
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:19pm (UTC -6)
I want to add that just because you present two ideas as equally valid--even when they are not--does not mean you have introduced nuance into a show. It just means you are both sides-ing an issue, West Wing-style. It's like Sisko's line from ItHotP: "My philosophy is that there is room for all philosophies on this station." Now, what the fuck does that actually mean? It doesn't mean anything, it's just a refusal to commit to an ethical perspective. That's not idealistic, that's not nihilistic, that's not realistic--it's just centrist pandering.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:27pm (UTC -6)
@Elliott

I can't argue with the fact that it's on the nose and unnecessary, but aggravating? C'mon, TNG can take it. It's possibly the most popular science fiction show of all time in the states (maybe the X-Files). It's the top dog of Trek-it's a frequently brilliant, massively popular classic tv show, and gets far more love and attention than DS9 will even come close to getting. A few jabs isn't going to change that. Even a massive DS9 fan such as myself can't deny TNG's accomplishments, or the fact that DS9 wouldn't exist without it and owes much of its success to it. I also agree that it's wrong to say TNG was simplistic or bright in comparison-the torture scenes in "Chain of Command" are as dark as anything DS9 ever did, maybe darker-but still-a few inappropriate barbs aren't going to change that.
Elliott
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 3:35pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

Mmmm...It's not that I think TNG "can't take it." It's that the show is a. trying too hard (which I find annoying) and b. can't ever seem to point out its differences without belittling the former. The whole "shades of grey" thing is the prime example. It isn't simply: DS9 has some characters, like Quark, who aren't necessarily heroes or villains. It's always; DS9 has characters who sometimes do horrible things, but are still portrayed as protagonists, therefore DS9 is more complex than TNG. DS9's quasi-serialisation, its unique premise and excellent extended cast are more than enough to differentiate itself from its predecessors. I also want to point out that being "darker" does not make the show better. "Revenge of the Sith" was incredibly dark and it was terrible. Enterprise S3 was way darker than anything on DS9 and inferior in almost every way.
Chrome
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 4:10pm (UTC -6)
@Elliott

“As far as the central dilemma, I do think the episode contrives ways to make O'Brien's argument stronger and Bashir's weaker when at the heart of the matter, Bashir is in the right. The story does tie this contrivances into character motivations, but I would have liked Bashir to have something to say about O'Brien's fucked up ethics as well as his disregard for the chain of command, not to mention his nonexistent respect for Bashir's rank and authority.”

Well, O’Brien has a legitimate point that no one knows just how the Jem’ Hadar on the whole will act when released from the white. It’s also not clear Goran'agar wasn’t manipulating Bashir to some extent. Certainly showing Bashir the sick Jem’Hadar which he knows Bashir is trained to feel compassion for could be seen as manipulative. I do agree that Bashir’s point about the chain of command is dismissed too easily, and it feels like a more balanced take on the two points of view would land O’Brien in hot water with Starfleet regardless of his intentions.

@Iceman

“I'm referring to "Rejoined" and "Chimera". I'm aware that "Rejoined" wasn't specifically designed as a gay rights allegory, but it works just fine if you choose to interpret that way. According to Robert Hewitt Wolfe, it was definitely in their minds at the time.”

Looking at the background notes for “Rejoined” it seems like they were more interested in making the episode post-homosexual rights and more interested in telling a story about taboo love as it relates to castes and social hierarchies. Don’t get me wrong, I actually think this is to the episode’s credit. Yet “The Outcast”, regardless of how badly written it is, was more interested in specifically depicting the hardships of homosexual relationships.

I don’t really see how “Chimera” advocates or explores homosexuality. It’s a bit of a stretch (no pun intended) to say that Laas and Odo represent that on some level. There’s certainly a lot of *racial* tension in the episode and I think that the story succeeds on that level.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 5:33pm (UTC -6)
@Elliott

I agree that it was unnecessary-just that I understand why they were somewhat frustrated.

" I also want to point out that being "darker" does not make the show better. "Revenge of the Sith" was incredibly dark and it was terrible."

From my point of view, Voyager is evil! (Possibly the worst combination of line and line delivery, like, ever). On a serious note, no arguments here. The prequels are awful, in pretty much every way beside the sound design and music. Clone wars (2003 and 2008) all the way. (I can't wait for the final season of Clone Wars).

Yes, darker doesn't necessarily mean better-maybe sophisticated would have been a better word choice. TNG isn't less sophisticated than DS9, but it is more clear cut. I think DS9's unique qualities made it truly stand out. TNG could never make a "Duet" or "Necessary Evil", just like DS9 couldn't make singular episodes as well as TNG. They're both great-I just prefer DS9.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 7:04pm (UTC -6)
"I don’t really see how “Chimera” advocates or explores homosexuality. It’s a bit of a stretch (no pun intended) to say that Laas and Odo represent that on some level. There’s certainly a lot of *racial* tension in the episode and I think that the story succeeds on that level."

"This is no time for a changeling pride demonstration on the Promenade"-Quark

I think it's pretty clear. Laas basically demands that Odo stop changing who he is so that those around him will accept him.
Chrome
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 7:47pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

You’ll need to explain why a “Black Pride” or “Asian Pride” demonstration wouldn’t be a better analog for the situation. Odo and Laas both have taken the roles of heterosexual males with female lovers. Thus, it’s not their sexual identity that differentiates them others. It’s their racial traits - physical genetic differences and a shared culture, in other words, their race - that distinguishes them.
Elliott
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 8:25pm (UTC -6)
I agree with Iceman that “Chimera” works well as a non-heterosexual analogue. Odo links with a “male” Changeling, an act which has been strongly associated with shapeshifter sex. When he finally “linlks” with Kira, it’s like Odo metaphorically coming out of the closet.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 8:37pm (UTC -6)
"Odo and Laas both have taken the roles of heterosexual males with female lovers. Thus, it’s not their sexual identity that differentiates them others. "

A metaphor doesn't have to be one-to-one. Odo has been keeping an important part of himself hidden in order to make his friends more comfortable, and Laas takes him to task for it. It fits quite well imo.
Chrome
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 8:40pm (UTC -6)
@Elliott

But following that logic, hasn’t Odo linked with a “female” Changling dozens of times before Laas? I don’t know, if we take the Founders at their word, linking sounds like a transcendent experience beyond sex where two beings share their very existence, not just their bodies. Confining linking to human gender terms seems to be missing the point, in my opinion.
Chrome
Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 9:03pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

“Odo has been keeping an important part of himself hidden in order to make his friends more comfortable, and Laas takes him to task for it.”

And Garak did the same thing to Odo in season 3. If your metaphor is based on something as vague as “keeping a secret”, then the metaphor starts to lose meaningful coherence.
Iceman
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 9:44am (UTC -6)
"And Garak did the same thing to Odo in season 3. If your metaphor is based on something as vague as “keeping a secret”, then the metaphor starts to lose meaningful coherence."

The two situations were entirely different. Keeping secrets isn't the same as hiding something to keep others comfortable.
Chrome
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 12:20pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

In both cases Odo was holding back something personal so he could fit in better with solids.

Anyway, if you feel compelled to read homoerotic tension into scenes of Star Trek that’s certainly your prerogative, but you seem to be doing at the cost of ignoring the more obvious racism allegory “Chimera” the writers’ intended.
Iceman
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 1:29pm (UTC -6)
" Anyway, if you feel compelled to read homoerotic tension into scenes of Star Trek that’s certainly your prerogative, but you seem to be doing at the cost of ignoring the more obvious racism allegory “Chimera” the writers’ intended. "

If you want to ignore the very obvious parallels to the gay rights movement in "Chimera" and the differences between that and Season 3, that's your prerogative. And thanks for the unearned snark.
Chrome
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 1:51pm (UTC -6)
@Iceman

I’m not being “snarky”, it just sounds like you haven’t read any of the background information for the story and script of “Chimera” (a script that very much was based on Odo taking the side of Laas in a racial conflict between humanoids on shapeshifters) and expect me to buy into a very forced metaphor.

I also suspect you’re an alt of another commenter on this board, so perhaps I’ll just leave you be in your anonymous goading.
William B
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 2:16pm (UTC -6)
I don't want to get into the conflict that seems to be brewing, but I think in terms of the content, I agree with Elliott and Iceman are right that Chimera can be (does not necessarily have to be) read as being about being gay. The Link has been strongly associated with sex and the way in which Odo reacts with embarrassment at Laas' offering to link with him on the Promenade seems much more like someone being embarrassed about a bit too much overt intimacy rather than someone being embarrassed at a reminder of some cultural/racial symbol. That doesn't preclude the race interpretation at all. Chimera can be about Odo's belonging to different marginalized groups, and Laas has a kind of (X-Men line) Magneto-style distaste for the "majority" without Magneto's desire to fight for broader liberation (or "liberation" depending on how it works).

I definitely read Chimera as being about race back in the day, but I read it as being more about sexuality last time I watched it a couple years ago.
William B
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 2:24pm (UTC -6)
@Elliott, I think that one element you are maybe understating in this ep is how much Miles' love for Julian (which, yes, the episode goes out of its way to #nohomo about) influences his decision. I think if it were Dax or something who was on Julian's course, Miles would have respected their choice because he has more respect for them as an officer, but also because he doesn't feel the same protective love for them. On some level, Miles doesn't want Julian to get hurt by his own idealism, and is somewhat unable to see Julian as a wholly independent being because of it. I think that's part of what's tragic about the situation, is that Miles loves Julian for reasons very close to reasons for which he doesn't respect him.

DS9 very often does these stories where the real key turns out to be less philosophical and more personal, which sometimes bothers me and other times doesn't. This is one when it largely doesn't bother me, but YMMV.
Chrome
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 3:20pm (UTC -6)
@William B

Yeah, sorry, I may have come off more callous than intended and gotten off track. I see “Chimera”’s primary story being one about racism (solids versus changlings) but there’s certainly enough bigotry and xenophobia in the show that you could apply a sexual orientation analogy. The key difference between “Chimera” and “The Outcast” is that the latter has a very clear primary message about sexual orientation and in the former that message is up to interpretation and possibly lost on the viewer (as it was on your younger self, for example).
William B
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 3:25pm (UTC -6)
@Chrome, yeah, that's fair -- the creators are much more forthright about The Outcast, whereas Chimera possibly wasn't intended as being about sexuality (and if it was, they were cagey about it).
Peter G.g
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 3:47pm (UTC -6)
The funny thing about this argument is that based on content alone I'm tempted to even say that The Outcast doesn't have to do with sexual orientation at all. If anything it feels like more of a gender identity issue, and even then it's muddied by us not know the actual medical facts about that race, and additionally by Soren actually being happy about loving Big Brother again. Whereas by contrast in Chimera I see some pretty blatant homoerotic sexual notes in the episode, especially in the "Changeling Pride" line, the general tenor of Quark's message about that, and about the fact (which we can't ignore) that both Changelings are played by dudes. That's meta content but it's there all the same. I also think that this aspect is underlined by the fact of Odo 'coming out' at the end in the bedroom with Kira, which shows pretty conclusively that sexually speaking he was holding back with her to appear more like a solid. That's not a straight vs gay issue per se, but it's definitely about sexual mores and identity.
William B
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 4:11pm (UTC -6)
Definitely, based on the content, The Outcast is more about gender identity than sexuality (who Soren is is more important than who she wants to sleep with, though the two get intertwined). I was more saying that Chrome's point that authorial intent, based on what the writers said in interviews, was more clearly about homosexuality in The Outcast than with Chimera, even if the episodes end up playing differently in terms of their actual content. The Outcast arguably works better as a trans allegory than as a gay allegory, anyway.
Sean Hagins
Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 9:57pm (UTC -6)
I agree with Chrome. I do not think the reference is supposed to be about homosexuals.
Prisoner881
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 11:32am (UTC -6)
@Chrome - "I do agree that Bashir’s point about the chain of command is dismissed too easily"

Allow me to give you a military perspective based on my service experience.

That Bashir outranks O'Brien is undeniable but there's more to command than just pulling rank (indeed, pulling rank is one of the least-effective leadership traits). One thing a lot of civilians never understand is how the most senior enlisted ranks with decades of service are subordinate to a freshly-minted 2nd Lieutenant with no experience whatsoever. While true in a technical sense, in practice a low-ranking, non-command-track officer would be an idiot to ignore the advice of a senior non-commissioned rank such as the Chief. O'Brien is exactly that and with combat experience as well. You can make the argument Bashir "listens" to O'Brien and disregards his advice but I don't see it that way. Bashir, IMO, dismisses O'Brien's concerns without even considering them based on Bashir's humanitarian impetus. Bashir is, IMO, a poor officer because of this although he can be forgiven much since he's a science-track (blue) officer and not a command-track (red) officer. Making tough strategic decisions is not his forte, whereas O'Brien, even though he is subordinate in rank structure, has superior experience.

I say all this as a former Marine who takes the chain of command very, very seriously. But one must consider that rank doesn't automatically imply rightness or competence in every situation. A wise officer/noncom relationship depends on the officer respecting existing experience in his/her subordinates. Respect for such experience *should* be automatic, whereas respect for leadership by the subordinate is *earned*. It's a complicated dance and much more nuanced than "Bashir outranks O'Brien, therefore O'Brien's actions are cowardly." On the contrary, bucking leadership takes guts; on the offhand chance the subordinate is proven wrong, the penalties are quite severe. In wartime it can even be a capital offense.
Prisoner882
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 11:54am (UTC -6)
@Prisoner881

While that may all may be true from your experience, the episode makes it clear that Bashir *chose* not to bring Miles up on charges, even after Miles suggested it.
Prisoner881
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 12:13pm (UTC -6)
I don't know why this didn't occur to me earlier but there's another excellent example of a very similar situation in BSG, namely the "Fragged" episode. If you're not familiar with the episode I urge you to see Jammer's review of it: https://www.jammersreviews.com/bsg/s2/fragged.php

To recap, you have a combat-inexperienced officer suddenly placed in command of a combat op during war. His command includes enlisted members with superior experience. His inexperience and inability to listen to those under him leads to the deaths of several members of his command and, if it had been allowed to continue, would've resulted in the deaths of everyone.

In such a case the correct course of action would be for the commander to be removed from command. Peacefully if possible, violently if necessary. It's only by trick of fate the final blow was struck by a civilian. Had Baltar not pulled the trigger, Tyrol would have and I doubt any court of inquiry would've faulted him for it.

Obviously the above represents a much more extreme *tactical* situation than Bashir and O'Brien were in. However, the *strategic* implications of Bashir's chosen course had the potential to be far more catastrophic. Crashdown's command would've destroyed the squad but it wouldn't have altered the course of the human/Cylon war. Bashir's could've endangered the entire galaxy and in fact had a very real chance of doing so based on everything we know about the Jem'Hadar. We have *never* seen a Jem'Hadar with a "peaceful co-existence" mindset or anything remotely resembling one. Bashir's plan hinges on such a thing existing, and the lack of it almost guarantees unleashing a bloodthirsty, amoral, conquering-obsessed race of super-soldiers on the galaxy.

Perhaps the Jem'Hadar have the capability to transcend their nature and it's always been suppressed by the Founders. Perhaps. It's a supposition based on no factual evidence and borrowing heavily from Bashir's feeling all people are inherently good somewhere in their core being. It's idealism, and idealism in a war tends to get you and a lot of other people killed. It's ugly but it's been proven true far more often than not.
Peter G.
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 12:14pm (UTC -6)
I'm pretty much unwilling to agree with the validity of any reading of a DS9 episode where O'Brien is described as cowardly. That's just never shown. Sometimes he's shortsighted, or even obstinate, but never ever cowardly.
Prisoner881
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 12:20pm (UTC -6)
@Prisoner882 - "While that may all may be true from your experience, the episode makes it clear that Bashir *chose* not to bring Miles up on charges, even after Miles suggested it."

True, but it begs the question why. Friendship with O'Brien? That's the obvious -- and most likely correct -- answer given the thematic arc of the show. However, a more cynical appraisal shows the most likely outcome of any such charges would be exoneration of O'Brien and perhaps even charges against Bashir for "aiding or conspiring with the enemy during a time of war."

There's a word for that: treason. I don't know offhand what the Federation penalty is for treason but nowadays, during wartime, being convicted of such is a capital crime.

Remember, we're talking about a Federation that passively endorsed Tain's plan involving covert genocide of the Founder's homeworld. If they're willing to go along with genocide they clearly see the Dominion as a mortal threat worth throwing away their lofty principles. Do you think for a moment they'd give Bashir's "humanitarian" argument much credence in a time where Jem'Hadar are slaughtering Starfleet officers by the thousands?
Prisoner881
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 12:26pm (UTC -6)
On a side note, I think DS9 is the best example of Trek puncturing Roddenberry's Utopian 24th-century fantasy. TOS and, to a large extent, TNG gave us a Federation than rarely had to make hard choices. However, whenever the Federation is pushed into a corner, their precious moralizing gets thrown away in favor of brute survival.

I don't see a problem with this so much as I see the fault in Roddenberry's vision in the first place. A species that isn't willing to do all it can to defend itself cannot survive.
Chrome
Mon, Nov 12, 2018, 1:53pm (UTC -6)
“TNG gave us a Federation than rarely had to make hard choices.”

I don’t think that’s an accurate assessment. TNG has hard choices, but the difficult choice is typically one of taking the moral high ground. Since “Silicon Avatar” keeps coming up as a hotbed of controversy , I’ll use that as an example. There, the Enterprise has the obvious and easy choice to kill the crystalline entity, satisfy its vengeance and never have to worry about the CE attacking its colonies. Instead, Picard wanted to try the more challenging path, reach out to its enemy and try to find a path to coexistence. It’s not entirely certain Picard’s choice was correct, mind you, but it is certain being moral would be the harder choice.

I think we see an echo of “Silicon Avatar” here where, on the face of it, the Jem’Hadar is the enemy and anything less than killing the Jem’Hadar and escaping is the right thing to do. But then we get into more difficult questions like whether enemy combatants like the sick Jem’Hadar here deserve medical treatment, and if so how far should that treatment go. There really isn’t a clean answer, and again there’s arguments that both O’Brien and Bashir were doing their respective duties the best they could.
Jason R.
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 5:36am (UTC -6)
The problem with TNG is that outside perhaps one episode (I Borg, to be specific) Picard's choices were never all that hard, at least as I always saw it. Doing the right thing, by 24th century Picardian standards, is relatively easy when you're the captain of a Galaxy Class starship at the vanguard of an interstellar federation that is simultaneously virtuous and all-powerful.

Most of Picard's moral dilemmas entailed choosing the sacrifice of strangers (Pen Pals, Symbiosis, the one with Worf's Brother...) or alternatively, the sacrifice of crewpeople where in the end it isn't even necessary and the price need not be paid (eg Justice, When the Bough Breaks).

In the Pale Moonlight, and to a lesser extent, Paradise Lost, are rebukes of that fraudulent TNG era Roddenberry morality where humans are supposedly *better* yet where that concept is never tested. Saints in paradise is right.

The irony with Silicon Avatar is that I don't even think it should have been much of a dilemma. The Enterprise could have blasted the entity to pieces with its phasers any time it pleased. They were either going to convince it to behave or destroy it. Picard's position was not all that radical.

I Borg should be the much more controversial episode. That should have been Picard's ITPM moment. But since he never had to pay the piper and take responsibility for his decision (the Borg were transformed by Voyager into villain of the week cartoons) he once again got away with being the Saint but dodging the lion's jaws.
Chrome
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 11:01am (UTC -6)
“The problem with TNG is that outside perhaps one episode (I Borg, to be specific) Picard's choices were never all that hard, at least as I always saw it. Doing the right thing, by 24th century Picardian standards, is relatively easy when you're the captain of a Galaxy Class starship at the vanguard of an interstellar federation that is simultaneously virtuous and all-powerful.“

I beg to differ and I won’t limit the choices to Picard. “Where Slinence Has Lease” (sacrifing your life and your crew to show that people don’t like to be played with), “The Emissary” (Talking down a ship hellbent on war that you can easily destroy), “The Enemy” (Letting your officer refuse a blood transfusion that may lead to war), “The Defector” (Putting faith in a defector whose backstory is riddled with lies). “Yesterday’s Enterprise” (Sacrifcing your ship and losing another ship based on a hunch that your timeline isn’t right), “The Wounded” (Helping a former enemy track your ship and attack a colleague despite evidence that colleague is right), “Chain of Command” (Not yielding to torture no matter how far you lose your mind and are offered outs).

There’s more, and I’ll even argue that episodes like “Measure of Man” involve seemingly easy decisions but fighting to justify that decision is still a weighty task (not to mention Riker needing to side with the plaintiff and attack his friend in order to help him).

“In the Pale Moonlight, and to a lesser extent, Paradise Lost, are rebukes of that fraudulent TNG era Roddenberry morality where humans are supposedly *better* yet where that concept is never tested. Saints in paradise is right.”

Funny you should mention “Paradise Lost”, because that episode contradicts the idea that it’s easy to be a saint in paradise. Leyton was in thick of it at Starfleet HQ on Earth and he still let his ambitions outweigh his dedication to Federation principles. It’s actually one of the big episodes where Sisko stands up for “Roddenberry morailty”.

“The irony with Silicon Avatar is that I don't even think it should have been much of a dilemma. The Enterprise could have blasted the entity to pieces with its phasers any time it pleased. They were either going to convince it to behave or destroy it. Picard's position was not all that radical.”

I tend to agree with you, but if you direct yourself to that comment section there are many who think Picard was wrong to even try to communicate with the CE after it killed so many.
Jason R.
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 12:34pm (UTC -6)
Chrome, I should explain what I meant by "easy" in this context. I don't mean to suggest that Picard's actions were easy in the sense that they required no personal courage or sacrifice in any sense. Obviously surving torture, choosing to destroy the ship rather than submit to inhumane experiments etc. are all difficult things requiring tremendous integrity and conviction.

But I'm talking about a *moral* sacrifice here. I am saying that Picard's choices are easy in the sense that they don't require him to sacrifice his principles the way Sisko does in ITPM. Picard choosing to endure torture rather than surrender, or blowing up the ship rather than submit to experiments, affirm his own personal sense of morality. He may lose his crew or his life, but for a man like that (and Starfleet officers) those are acceptable stakes and indeed, it is what they signed up for.

If Picard had chosen to let Nagolim kill half the ship to save the rest, or if he had chosen to use Hue as a weapon against the borg, that would have been a true sacrifice for a man like Picard.

Why didn't he? Because the show never really permitted us to test that resolve with stakes that could truly move the needle. Would Picard have let Hue go if he knew the Federation would be assimilated as a result, if the wolves were really at the door and a cube was on its way to Earth?

Picard was a man who captained the flahship of the Federation, set policy, had a huge role in its strategic operations and policy, yet somehow got away with never sullying his own conscience, never having to compromise his personal integrity for a greater good. I just don't buy that.

Unfortunately, TNG always cheated, refusing to really put a man like Picard's feet to the fire the way Sisko was. In ITPM there is no doubt in my mind that Sisko made the right choice. I agree with Sisko that one officer's self respect was a small price to pay. Picard, in my view, got off lightly in TNG.
Chrome
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 1:08pm (UTC -6)
@Jason R.

“But I'm talking about a *moral* sacrifice here. I am saying that Picard's choices are easy in the sense that they don't require him to sacrifice his principles the way Sisko does in ITPM.”

I think you understand that TNG and DS9 were trying to do very different things. TNG shows the flagship of Enterprise embracing Fedration ethics and morals even when it puts them in a difficult position. It sets the standard for what we should expect from the best of humanity in the 24th century.

DS9 is trying to build on TNG by showing that not everyone can or is willing to follow Federation principles to the same level as the Enterprise. Sometimes people disagree with Federation principles, or find them too hard to follow and start embracing other values.

I don’t buy that one way of depicting the ST Universe is “better”. Indeed DS9 couldn’t be nearly as good at showing tough moral decisions if TNG hadn’t first established those morals to begin with. Both shows are good at depicting the Trek universe in different lights. Some days you want to watch Superman, and other days you want to watch Batman.
Peter G.
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 1:59pm (UTC -6)
I think Jason R's point isn't that TNG is worse or that Sisko is a better man than Picard for having been really tested. This seems to me more a case of asking how Roddenberry morals should actually be applied in practice. TNG is a very "drawing board" sort of show, where the theories are painted nicely and some of them for the first time. But it doesn't tell you what to do in crazy situations. That's where DS9 explores how to plumb out which choice will have what moral consequence.

So I fully agree that Picard "always got off easy" insofar as it was almost never unclear which choice was actually the correct moral one. Almost always we saw a situation where there was a moral decision, and a *convenient* decision, and Picard always went with the moral one even if that created complications. But I can't recall an example other than with Hugh, and maybe in The Wounded, where it was difficult to determine what the moral action actually was. And that's a cheat in practice, which is why I suggest that TNG is about spelling out the theory. The TNG situations are 99% of the time written so as to create a problem and it's about the crew finding a solution; and there is almost always *one evident solution* but the trick is to find it. A good example of this is in Redemption, where apparently there was little they could do to stop the Romulans interfering, until they figured out that they could blockage the Romulan/Klingon border, thus interfering without meddling in Klingon affairs.

But what happens when any choice at all will require not only bad results but also some sacrifice of conscience? We could bring up the trolley problem as the prototype but basically any scenario where two sides of an issue must be weighed in terms of how much harm each decision would cause (or perhaps which violates morality more, assuming these are different). *That* isn't something that happens in TNG for the most part, and that's why criticizing Sisko for being "grey" is weird to me. I've always thought of him as being an utterly upstanding man who has to make hard decisions that don't always make him come out smelling like roses. I think he's supposed to be more of an "everyman" than Picard not in terms of being less moral, but in terms of being faced with scenarios that aren't scripted to have obvious moral solutions. He's down in the muck and has to mud wrestle to get out.
Chrome
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 2:45pm (UTC -6)
Look guys, I get that some people like Star Trek shows where people are driven to desperation and start ignoring ethics and getting their hands dirty to solve problems, but at the same time it’s good to have shows like TNG that explore what a utopian future might look like if we took a higher path.
Peter G.
Tue, Nov 13, 2018, 4:00pm (UTC -6)
@ Chrome,

I'm not down on TNG in the slightest and for the most part I rewatch it more than DS9. And I've also been taken aback a little by the "TNG vs DS9" debates that come up as if their morals are in conflict, because I've *always* felt that these are brother and sister shows that are very closely aligned in terms of message. DS9 is, to me, the deeper exploration of TNG themes, and certainly not a repudiation of them. So when I say "Picard got off easy" I don't mean that he's a fake or something: he was and is a role model for me. But what I mean is that comparing Sisko to him is on the wrong track, because Picard is the spirit of ethic while I see Sisko as being the nuts and bolts.
Iceman
Wed, Nov 14, 2018, 6:07pm (UTC -6)
@Chrome-

Just wanted to come back and defuse things a bit. First of all, I am certainly not an alt of another commenter. Second of all, fair's fair. Art (which includes tv in my opinion) can be interpreted in multiple different ways. That doesn't change the fact that you are correct that it was originally intended as a racial metaphor, regardless of how it may fit into other allegories. That being said, I still think my and Elliott's takes on the episode work really well, regardless of whether it was intentional. Regardless, I'm not sure why I was so eager to aggressively argue about it. Just seems a bit silly and pointless now.

Tldr; You were right, I was wrong, and very childish to get aggressive over a tv show. My apologies.
Chrome
Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 10:27am (UTC -6)
@Iceman

No worries. In all honesty, it’s kind of funny how little Star Trek explicitly used homosexual elements in this time, so I can see why “Chimera” deserves praise for staying off the radar and still reaching the message on another level.
Springy
Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 8:53pm (UTC -6)
I came, I watched, I read the commentary. Some thoughts:

--"Call me Julian." Remember a reluctant O'Brien learning to call Bashir "Julian," with encouragement from Bashir? Well, Julian, look what has happened here. You wanted to be just " Julian" to O'Brien? Congrats, mission accomplished.

--Julian is a good doctor, but terrible officer.

--This episode is all about control - who controls what, what controls who, who controls who.

--Bashir mentioned the Jem Hadar baby. This makes me realize we've not seen a Jem Hadar female. Do they procreate, or do all Jem Hadar babies come straight from the Founder's Factory?

--I don't think the Prime Directive applies here. There's no culture whose development is being artificially threatened or rerouted. The Jem Hadar are enemies. They've destroyed SF vessels. The PD isn't mentioned because it doesn't apply.

--I don't understand what Worf's job entails.

--Ep nicely adds some depth to the Jem Hadar.

A good, solid ep.
Trent
Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:17am (UTC -6)
I'm surprised so many are bashing Bashir in this episode. I thought he was correct, not only morally, but in terms of wider Federation tactics, and was surprised that he didn't push his arguments further: he should not only agree to help, but try to negotiate the bringing of more Stafleet medical teams over to the planet, or to bring the Jem Hadar to a location where the Federation can help them with high tech equipment. If the Jem Hadar are unwilling and paranoid about being conned, grant them some hostages.

If you're able to prove to the Jem Hadar that they can survive without ketracel white, or develop a white substitute, you've effectively created a rebellion army willing to help you fight the Dominion in the name of emancipation. Starfleet should be running massive political re-education and propaganda campaigns ("Citizens of the Jem Hadar, you are being kept as slaves! Reject your Gods! Say no to Ketracel White!") for precisely this purpose. Divide and conquer. Make it your chief goal to emancipate conquered worlds.

Or if you don't want to meddle, park a couple genesis devices at either end of the wormhole, and threaten to blow it if any Dominion ships approach.

Anyway, I thought this episode's A and B plots dovetailed nicely. In one, Worf struggles to trust Odo, and adapt to his methods, in the other, Bashir and O'Brien struggle to adapt to one another's methods, whilst the Jem Hadar and the Federation struggle over issues of trust as well. Like most DS9 episodes, its all directed flatly, there's not enough momentum and energy in the plot, and aesthetically everything looks drab, but the ideas are good, and some of the dialogue scenes very powerful.

Submit a comment





◄ Season Index

▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2019 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. See site policies.