Monday, August 16, 2010

The Moral Ambiguity Divide

Science fiction television is divided into basically two halves: series that present basic battles between good and evil and tend to see the universe in terms of absolutes, and series which stress moral ambiguity. Here's how I'd divide the series:

Absolutist shows: Star Trek, TNG, Voyager, Enterprise, SG-1, Doctor Who (original), BSG (original), Buck Rogers, The Prisoner, Earth 2, V (original), Twilight Zone, Outer Limits

Ambiguity shows: Andromeda, Firefly, Farscape, Blake's 7, BSG (reboot), Torchwood, DS9, X Files

In the Middle: Babylon 5, Crusade, Doctor Who (reboot)

This is obviously not a full list of series. Which kind of series you like tends to depend a lot on your cultural and ideological background. As a rule, though I hold to some absolutist beliefs, I prefer the more ambiguous shows, because the writing is much better. Of my favorite series, only the original Doctor Who and The Prisoner are absolutist. Some of the other absolutist shows are fine, like The Twilight Zone and Outer Limits, but as a whole I just don't think these absolutist shows can match the nuanced characterizations of Farscape, Blake's 7 and Babylon 5. On the other hand, some shows have taken the ambiguity so far, such as Firefly and the BSG (reboot), that their characters are essentially cyphers and lack the depth of personality of a Kerr Avon or a G'kar. My other problem with the more ambiguous series, particularly with the new BSG (reboot), is that they sometimes sound too sympathetic to horrendous ideas, like the government eliminating certain civil rights during a time of war. I for one was more than a little pissed when Rosselin outlawed abortion for the good of the body politic in the new BSG, and I'm a pro-lifer! I thought Rosselin should stick to her guns and not give in to the "ends justify the means" rhetoric that has come to characterize the entire rebooted BSG franchise. I think JMS's position on Babylon 5, in which there are always choices, but always consequences to one's choices, is less likely to lead to this kind of relativistic anything-goes approach to civil rights and legal morality. But then again, I do like Blake's 7, which takes BSG's ambiguity and ramps it up ten degrees. I guess, though, that is because there is no sanctimonious pretense to moral strength on the part of Kerr Avon, which makes Blake's 7 more palatable than BSG, with BSG's constant desire to stay "relevant". Long term, I think Blake's 7 has been far more significant to the genre, because it refused to give some of the cheapened answers to moral questions that BSG delights in. Just my opinion though. Tell me what you think.

Category: Science fiction politico, science fiction politics

No comments:

Post a Comment