Another great review. Glad to see y6'all are warming up to season 5. I never thought it was bad. It's just that after years of build-up with incredible pay-offs, it was a bit of a let-down to go with a more 'traditional' episodic style. I particularly liked the argument that Lochley wasn't being simplistic so much as she was fighting fire with fire to demonstrate how simplistic Garabaldi was being. I never thought of it that way, and the fact that she says that she actually likes Garabaldi demonstrates that she was tearing a strip out of him for reasons that weren't necessarily personal. Now I see that scene as her being a really great leader--because there are members of the crew who were 'on the other side,' and if she were to have Garabaldi's attitude, not only would they not have a place on the station, but it would undermine her leadership. In a broader sense, it demonstrates the sort of advocacy for opposing views (and there is a difference between advocacy for the people and advancement of their beliefs) necessary for Earth to move forward on a cultural/societal level. Look at the disasterous consequences of Reconstruction after the American Civil War, the effects of which we are still dealing with to this day, or the punitive treatment of Germany after the first world war which lead to WWII. JMS really knew how to sneak in really important, thoughtful issues and follow through on themes. There is no 'happily ever after' in the JMS 'verse!
Re: kevin thinking Lochley's reasoning for not joining up with Sheridan was simplistic, at 16:14, and saying it boils down to "i couldn't disobey orders". Thats not what i took from her speech at all. She's saying she believes she should obey orders until one comes along that violates her conscience, and then she should resign. This strongly implies that she never actually GOT an illegal order, which tracks, because if she HAD committed war crimes she would probably be on trial now. I dont see Sheridan wanting her to command B5 either if that were the case. Edit: and once again, i comment and then Scott makes my point for me 🤣
If we look back to battle of Proxima III, the six Clarke destroyers are equally divided between those that join Sheridan, those that fight back, and those that stand down immediately. I'd imagine Lochley to be in that third group.
@@simongiles9749 I wonder if Clark's forces were (at least informally) structured so that only core loyalists were given the most egregious orders, and the more 'Earth loyal' group would even be excluded from key information. It's not confirmed anywhere but at least with Nightwatch there was an element of working out groups within it
Quedtion: Sec Turval... haven't we seen him before in another role? Sec Durhan - Meroon mentioned he was taught the pike by him, and Marcus chimed in 'so did I!' in their fight in s3.
I think the script supports Lochley's position as being complex and non-reductive. I might not agree with her, but thats just my personal, emotional bias.
This episode shows why I do not like captain Lockley. In civil war you have to take a stand. It is about your life, the life of your friends and family. It is all fine and good to have a noninterference opinion or policy when the fighting is outside your borders, there is a whole slew of moral and legal issues in getting involved. It is not however an option when your own state is tearing itself apart. Staying out of it is like Lockley did is not something to be proud of. She was posted out of the way on the edge of human space and I do not think it is a coincidence that someone with her history was posted and kept away. She claims to know Sheridan, so she should have known he would not act like that without a good reason. If nothing else she should have reached out to see if there was any truth to the "Minbari syndrom" Clark´s propaganda was spinning about him.
![Summer Walker - Heart Of A Woman [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/SFddctbZzw8/mqdefault.jpg)
Another great review. Glad to see y6'all are warming up to season 5. I never thought it was bad. It's just that after years of build-up with incredible pay-offs, it was a bit of a let-down to go with a more 'traditional' episodic style.
I particularly liked the argument that Lochley wasn't being simplistic so much as she was fighting fire with fire to demonstrate how simplistic Garabaldi was being. I never thought of it that way, and the fact that she says that she actually likes Garabaldi demonstrates that she was tearing a strip out of him for reasons that weren't necessarily personal.
Now I see that scene as her being a really great leader--because there are members of the crew who were 'on the other side,' and if she were to have Garabaldi's attitude, not only would they not have a place on the station, but it would undermine her leadership. In a broader sense, it demonstrates the sort of advocacy for opposing views (and there is a difference between advocacy for the people and advancement of their beliefs) necessary for Earth to move forward on a cultural/societal level. Look at the disasterous consequences of Reconstruction after the American Civil War, the effects of which we are still dealing with to this day, or the punitive treatment of Germany after the first world war which lead to WWII.
JMS really knew how to sneak in really important, thoughtful issues and follow through on themes. There is no 'happily ever after' in the JMS 'verse!
Re: kevin thinking Lochley's reasoning for not joining up with Sheridan was simplistic, at 16:14, and saying it boils down to "i couldn't disobey orders".
Thats not what i took from her speech at all. She's saying she believes she should obey orders until one comes along that violates her conscience, and then she should resign. This strongly implies that she never actually GOT an illegal order, which tracks, because if she HAD committed war crimes she would probably be on trial now. I dont see Sheridan wanting her to command B5 either if that were the case.
Edit: and once again, i comment and then Scott makes my point for me 🤣
We agree that Kevin is wrong. :) ~Scott
If we look back to battle of Proxima III, the six Clarke destroyers are equally divided between those that join Sheridan, those that fight back, and those that stand down immediately. I'd imagine Lochley to be in that third group.
@@simongiles9749 I wonder if Clark's forces were (at least informally) structured so that only core loyalists were given the most egregious orders, and the more 'Earth loyal' group would even be excluded from key information. It's not confirmed anywhere but at least with Nightwatch there was an element of working out groups within it
Quedtion: Sec Turval... haven't we seen him before in another role?
Sec Durhan - Meroon mentioned he was taught the pike by him, and Marcus chimed in 'so did I!' in their fight in s3.
I like how you can write the word 'boobies' on a calculator. Just saying.
I think the script supports Lochley's position as being complex and non-reductive. I might not agree with her, but thats just my personal, emotional bias.
You will never see a Pak'ma'ra ranger...
Because they are invisible.
This episode shows why I do not like captain Lockley. In civil war you have to take a stand. It is about your life, the life of your friends and family. It is all fine and good to have a noninterference opinion or policy when the fighting is outside your borders, there is a whole slew of moral and legal issues in getting involved. It is not however an option when your own state is tearing itself apart. Staying out of it is like Lockley did is not something to be proud of. She was posted out of the way on the edge of human space and I do not think it is a coincidence that someone with her history was posted and kept away. She claims to know Sheridan, so she should have known he would not act like that without a good reason. If nothing else she should have reached out to see if there was any truth to the "Minbari syndrom" Clark´s propaganda was spinning about him.
Rumpology? WTF?
WTF, Rumpology?