-
The new B5TV.COM is here. We've replaced our 16 year old software with flashy new XenForo install. Registration is open again. Password resets will work again. More info here.
The merits of Byron
- Thread starter HeinleinFan
- Start date
Shaal Mayan
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
All good points something I never realised until now makes sense.Thanks for the enlightment.Stanley,it will also give me the excuse of rewatching b5 again .
All good points something I never realised until now makes sense.Thanks for the enlightment.Stanley,it will also give me the excuse of rewatching b5 again .
Jade Jaguar
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
Well, I think you're half right. I don't think Byron hated mundanes, and that was made abundantly clear in View From The Gallery. But, he DID realize that he had not been successful in moving his people away from Bester's "they're only mundanes" position, with the violence and hatred it brings with it, converting them to nonviolence, and that is part of why he failed. I liked Byron as a character, and can never understand why fans, and B5 staff, sided with Bester and the facist Psycorps over the fugitive teeps, who just wanted freedom. Being a long haired martyr is not a good reason for hating someone in my book.
Well, I think you're half right. I don't think Byron hated mundanes, and that was made abundantly clear in View From The Gallery. But, he DID realize that he had not been successful in moving his people away from Bester's "they're only mundanes" position, with the violence and hatred it brings with it, converting them to nonviolence, and that is part of why he failed. I liked Byron as a character, and can never understand why fans, and B5 staff, sided with Bester and the facist Psycorps over the fugitive teeps, who just wanted freedom. Being a long haired martyr is not a good reason for hating someone in my book.
GKarsEye
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
No one is "siding with" Bester.
They're both assholes. Why is it that in any conflict we have to choose a side? Being against something negative doesn't automatically make one the good guy.
Byron might not "hate" mundanes, but then neither does Bester. They both feel superior, that a telepath life is worth more than a human life because, as Bester said, they are more rare. They difference is that Byron is a pacifist. When his telepaths were hurting mundanes, he didn't as much feel for the loss of mundane life as he did the fact that his followers were being violent, violating his beliefs in his name, beliefs that came about through a negative personal experience.
Nowhere is his distaste for mundanes displayed more clearly than that little display for Bo in Gallery. His attitude of arrogance is in his eyes, his tone of voice, and the flippant attitude the saintly P12 pacifist rebel leader has towards some average working-class putzy mundane who fantasises about flying around blowing people up.
But most importantly, audiences are often annoyed by the "good guy." Look at Casablanca: the most morally pure, good, noble character is Laslo, the anti-Nazi rebel being hunted down by evil Nazis. And he's boring as all fuck. Like Byron, his annoyingness is perfect for the show. Rick, the selfish drunk, is much cooler and much more fun to watch, and when he does the right thing it means a lot more.
Why is it that so many people consider G'Kar and Londo to be the most interesting characters on B5? You don't see Sheridan, Delenn, or Sinclair often top that list. It ain't just the funny makeup or the overacting.
No one is "siding with" Bester.
They're both assholes. Why is it that in any conflict we have to choose a side? Being against something negative doesn't automatically make one the good guy.
Byron might not "hate" mundanes, but then neither does Bester. They both feel superior, that a telepath life is worth more than a human life because, as Bester said, they are more rare. They difference is that Byron is a pacifist. When his telepaths were hurting mundanes, he didn't as much feel for the loss of mundane life as he did the fact that his followers were being violent, violating his beliefs in his name, beliefs that came about through a negative personal experience.
Nowhere is his distaste for mundanes displayed more clearly than that little display for Bo in Gallery. His attitude of arrogance is in his eyes, his tone of voice, and the flippant attitude the saintly P12 pacifist rebel leader has towards some average working-class putzy mundane who fantasises about flying around blowing people up.
But most importantly, audiences are often annoyed by the "good guy." Look at Casablanca: the most morally pure, good, noble character is Laslo, the anti-Nazi rebel being hunted down by evil Nazis. And he's boring as all fuck. Like Byron, his annoyingness is perfect for the show. Rick, the selfish drunk, is much cooler and much more fun to watch, and when he does the right thing it means a lot more.
Why is it that so many people consider G'Kar and Londo to be the most interesting characters on B5? You don't see Sheridan, Delenn, or Sinclair often top that list. It ain't just the funny makeup or the overacting.
Jan
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
But at that point she didn't know what he believed, did she? In that same conversation, though, doesn't Byron tell her that he believes that telepaths are superior?
Jan
Which reminds me: Byron orders Lyta "Sit." When she complies, he says "No!" and gives her a speech about how we shouldn't allways do as we're told. If she really believed in what he told her, she would defy him and sit anyway, wouldn't she?
But at that point she didn't know what he believed, did she? In that same conversation, though, doesn't Byron tell her that he believes that telepaths are superior?
Jan
A_M_Swallow
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
If Byron hated mundanes he would not have left Psi Corps nor killed a telepath to save the mundanes in Medlab. He probably thinks of mundanes as pets or wild animals.
If Byron hated mundanes he would not have left Psi Corps nor killed a telepath to save the mundanes in Medlab. He probably thinks of mundanes as pets or wild animals.
Flounder
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
Ah, it all makes sense now. Superior People for the ethical Treatment of Mundanes (SPeTM).
Maybe Superior People for ethical Relations with Mundanes, but that would take us into NC-17. Again. (Not that there's anything wrong with that. --PC police)
Ah, it all makes sense now. Superior People for the ethical Treatment of Mundanes (SPeTM).
Maybe Superior People for ethical Relations with Mundanes, but that would take us into NC-17. Again. (Not that there's anything wrong with that. --PC police)
Jade Jaguar
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
It may have been reluctant, but Lochley and Sheridan clearly sided with Bester, by allowing his bloodhound units on B5, and not granting asylum, or finding another place for the teeps to live in peace, instead of running from the brutal, murderous, facsist organazation that was Psycorps, and letting them fall into those hands. Cooperation with Bester IS siding with him.
Our interpretations of that scene couldn't be more different. I realize that Byron is arrogant, in the sense that he is unwavering in pursuit of his goal, to find safety for his people, to the near-exclusion of all else. But, he certainly isn't flippant. He is the opposite of flippant. He is extremely serious at all times. I think that is the main thing about him that drives people up a wall. He is uncomfortable around mundanes, but can hardly be blamed for that, since so many are rather uncomfortable with teeps. But his distaste is for superficiallity, and things that have no real importance, like the buzz of thoughts he picks up from mundanes constantly. He asks Bo 'Is it important to you? Really important?' When Bo says yes, it is, his wish is granted. Byron identified with the Star Fury pilots defending the station. He had been there, and done that. He knew the danger they faced. He wanted to know that Bo was sincere in his concern for them. Then, he granted Bo's wish. You don't do that for someone you find contemptably beneath you. I don't think Byron was a classist, or an anti-mundane racist. He just felt that it wasn't possible for both to live together because of their big difference.
It may have been reluctant, but Lochley and Sheridan clearly sided with Bester, by allowing his bloodhound units on B5, and not granting asylum, or finding another place for the teeps to live in peace, instead of running from the brutal, murderous, facsist organazation that was Psycorps, and letting them fall into those hands. Cooperation with Bester IS siding with him.
Our interpretations of that scene couldn't be more different. I realize that Byron is arrogant, in the sense that he is unwavering in pursuit of his goal, to find safety for his people, to the near-exclusion of all else. But, he certainly isn't flippant. He is the opposite of flippant. He is extremely serious at all times. I think that is the main thing about him that drives people up a wall. He is uncomfortable around mundanes, but can hardly be blamed for that, since so many are rather uncomfortable with teeps. But his distaste is for superficiallity, and things that have no real importance, like the buzz of thoughts he picks up from mundanes constantly. He asks Bo 'Is it important to you? Really important?' When Bo says yes, it is, his wish is granted. Byron identified with the Star Fury pilots defending the station. He had been there, and done that. He knew the danger they faced. He wanted to know that Bo was sincere in his concern for them. Then, he granted Bo's wish. You don't do that for someone you find contemptably beneath you. I don't think Byron was a classist, or an anti-mundane racist. He just felt that it wasn't possible for both to live together because of their big difference.
GaribaldisHair
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
No it isn't.
Lochley was forced to allow Bester's bloodhound units on board B5 because she is part of Earthforce, whose regulations grant PsiCorps full jurisdiction over 'rogue' telepaths. Lochley spent most of Strange Relations looking for an excuse to throw them off the station.
It had already been made clear from previous eps that Lochley's attitude was that her duty to Earthforce and its regulations came first, over and above everything else. She co-operated with Bester because that sense of duty required her to do so, not because she was on his side. Different thing entirely.
And Sheridan clearly didn't want Bester to be allowed on board in the first place, but Lochley was able to throw back his agreement that running the station was her job and not his and she had to do what she thought was the right thing.
Although he did then charge her with making sure that he could keep his promise to Byron that the teeps would be safe on B5.
No it isn't.
Lochley was forced to allow Bester's bloodhound units on board B5 because she is part of Earthforce, whose regulations grant PsiCorps full jurisdiction over 'rogue' telepaths. Lochley spent most of Strange Relations looking for an excuse to throw them off the station.
It had already been made clear from previous eps that Lochley's attitude was that her duty to Earthforce and its regulations came first, over and above everything else. She co-operated with Bester because that sense of duty required her to do so, not because she was on his side. Different thing entirely.
And Sheridan clearly didn't want Bester to be allowed on board in the first place, but Lochley was able to throw back his agreement that running the station was her job and not his and she had to do what she thought was the right thing.
Although he did then charge her with making sure that he could keep his promise to Byron that the teeps would be safe on B5.
Jade Jaguar
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
Clearly, to me at least, when you cooperatively work with someone to accomplish something, you have taken their side, are acting on behalf of their side, and anything else is just semantics, or rationalizations. I did say reluctantly, however. They didn't like it, but they did not oppose Bester, they helped him, ergo, they sided with him.
Clearly, to me at least, when you cooperatively work with someone to accomplish something, you have taken their side, are acting on behalf of their side, and anything else is just semantics, or rationalizations. I did say reluctantly, however. They didn't like it, but they did not oppose Bester, they helped him, ergo, they sided with him.
A_M_Swallow
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
The first time they helped Bester round up the telepaths but prevented him from taking them back to Earth and confined them to the station. Lochley however gave Bester her word that she would give them to him when the quarantine period was up; this was in direct breach of her orders.
On Bester's second visit he was given full cooperation until Byron surrendered.
The first time they helped Bester round up the telepaths but prevented him from taking them back to Earth and confined them to the station. Lochley however gave Bester her word that she would give them to him when the quarantine period was up; this was in direct breach of her orders.
On Bester's second visit he was given full cooperation until Byron surrendered.
PillowRock
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
I would liken Sheridan's position in this case to Arthur's toward the end of "Camelot". Mordred pushes for Guenevere's execution as a traitor. Does the fact that Arthur follows that course mean that he has "sided with Mordred" over Guenevere? Of course not, that is about the most loathsome concept that Arthur could imagine. Unfortunately for Arthur, it all comes down to one line of Mordred's: "What will you do? Will you kill the Queen? Or kill The Law?". Arthur has to condemn Guenivere or else he would destroy everything that he had built in Camelot.
Sheridan has a similar problem with regard to Byron and Bester. He would never "side with Bester". The very concept is anathema to him. He also sympathizes with Byron's cause (however angered he may have been by some of his later tactics). Unfortunately, this is also the first actual test of the treaty that created the Interstellar Alliance, and whether its leadership will keep their promises to the individual member worlds. If Sheridan breaks the treaty by denying the EA's juristiction over those humans, then IA will almost immediately cease to exist in any real manner.
And all of that is completely predictable even before Sheridan actually granted them asylum on the station at the start of S5 .... which is precisely why I think that (had S5 not been such a longshot during all of S4) the plan was originally probably to introduce Byron's colony to the station during S4, before the end of the Earth Civil War and the writing of the actual IA treaty.
I disagree.
I would liken Sheridan's position in this case to Arthur's toward the end of "Camelot". Mordred pushes for Guenevere's execution as a traitor. Does the fact that Arthur follows that course mean that he has "sided with Mordred" over Guenevere? Of course not, that is about the most loathsome concept that Arthur could imagine. Unfortunately for Arthur, it all comes down to one line of Mordred's: "What will you do? Will you kill the Queen? Or kill The Law?". Arthur has to condemn Guenivere or else he would destroy everything that he had built in Camelot.
Sheridan has a similar problem with regard to Byron and Bester. He would never "side with Bester". The very concept is anathema to him. He also sympathizes with Byron's cause (however angered he may have been by some of his later tactics). Unfortunately, this is also the first actual test of the treaty that created the Interstellar Alliance, and whether its leadership will keep their promises to the individual member worlds. If Sheridan breaks the treaty by denying the EA's juristiction over those humans, then IA will almost immediately cease to exist in any real manner.
And all of that is completely predictable even before Sheridan actually granted them asylum on the station at the start of S5 .... which is precisely why I think that (had S5 not been such a longshot during all of S4) the plan was originally probably to introduce Byron's colony to the station during S4, before the end of the Earth Civil War and the writing of the actual IA treaty.
GKarsEye
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
I thought you were referring to fans, not characters.
Lochley made the right decision. Her responsibility is the safety of Babylon 5. Sheridan made the wrong decision by agreeing with it, but also by letting them stay and trying to use them. This why it's said it's called his greatest failure in Deconstruction of Falling Stars.
I thought you were referring to fans, not characters.
Lochley made the right decision. Her responsibility is the safety of Babylon 5. Sheridan made the wrong decision by agreeing with it, but also by letting them stay and trying to use them. This why it's said it's called his greatest failure in Deconstruction of Falling Stars.
2aMageing
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
I'd pretty much agree. Sheridan didn't grant them refuge specifically because it was the "right" thing to do. He himself says that he sees a telepath war coming and he wants to have "some of his own". His mistake was not in grantingthem asylem, but I would say it was in doing it with the wrong motivatio, which end up affecting how he handles them forever after that choice.
But then when Byron starts getting heavy handed, regardless of Sheridans intents, he should have put them all on a transport and expelled them......(into the sun maybe)
Frankly I find Lochley ALMOST more annoying than Byron. If she hadn't had that honesty bit with Garibaldi about Alcoholism, the she would have the title of most annoying newcomer of Season 5. Either a person believes in the code rules they are following or they don't. Her bending ove backwards to follow the letter of the law of Earthforce, and then running all over to follow her conscience in spite of it.........she is totally THE Waffle Meister.
It's hard to trust someone who doesn't do what they sincerely believe to be right.
And as someone previously mentioned, I think much of the hollowness and weakness of Season 5 is directly a result of the uncertyainty about being able to finish the series and JMS having had to play his best character and story cards previously. Pity.
I'd pretty much agree. Sheridan didn't grant them refuge specifically because it was the "right" thing to do. He himself says that he sees a telepath war coming and he wants to have "some of his own". His mistake was not in grantingthem asylem, but I would say it was in doing it with the wrong motivatio, which end up affecting how he handles them forever after that choice.
But then when Byron starts getting heavy handed, regardless of Sheridans intents, he should have put them all on a transport and expelled them......(into the sun maybe)
Frankly I find Lochley ALMOST more annoying than Byron. If she hadn't had that honesty bit with Garibaldi about Alcoholism, the she would have the title of most annoying newcomer of Season 5. Either a person believes in the code rules they are following or they don't. Her bending ove backwards to follow the letter of the law of Earthforce, and then running all over to follow her conscience in spite of it.........she is totally THE Waffle Meister.
It's hard to trust someone who doesn't do what they sincerely believe to be right.
And as someone previously mentioned, I think much of the hollowness and weakness of Season 5 is directly a result of the uncertyainty about being able to finish the series and JMS having had to play his best character and story cards previously. Pity.
GKarsEye
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
Well, I'm saying his mistake was granting them the asylum, regardless of reason. He was starting this fragile alliance and then brought on a group that was guarenteed to cause trouble (even if it's not their fault) and get involved in the internal matters of one of the member worlds on the same little space station. Recipe for disaster.
I think Lochley is the most underrated character of B5, and every decision made sense. For such a late, last-minute addition, she was fantastic and would have made a wonderful recurring character on Crusade.
Well, I'm saying his mistake was granting them the asylum, regardless of reason. He was starting this fragile alliance and then brought on a group that was guarenteed to cause trouble (even if it's not their fault) and get involved in the internal matters of one of the member worlds on the same little space station. Recipe for disaster.
I think Lochley is the most underrated character of B5, and every decision made sense. For such a late, last-minute addition, she was fantastic and would have made a wonderful recurring character on Crusade.
2aMageing
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
I liked her qute a bit more on Crusade, but I would say that was because she was not among the core cast. For some reason I think she just was very hollow and not really well suited for her primary spot in B5. I am not sure if it was how she was written or the way she was played, but I just barely warmed up to her by the end of the season.
Her role as a semi love interest in Crusade helped her fit a fair bit better, I think. She just was not multidimensional enough for my tastes during B5.
I liked her qute a bit more on Crusade, but I would say that was because she was not among the core cast. For some reason I think she just was very hollow and not really well suited for her primary spot in B5. I am not sure if it was how she was written or the way she was played, but I just barely warmed up to her by the end of the season.
Her role as a semi love interest in Crusade helped her fit a fair bit better, I think. She just was not multidimensional enough for my tastes during B5.
GKarsEye
Regular
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
I felt the same way about Delenn by the beginning of season 2.
You have to put it in perspective. She come on in the last year of the show. Most of that time has to be spent starting new stories and finishing up plot points from 4 years before that. Also, you have to bring character arcs to their big conclusions. And then, in the middle of all this, you have brand new character who, because she is the captain of the freakin' station, has to be a major character. The writers' hands were tied.
Giving her an addiction past, having her square off with and then help Garibaldi, and featuring her on Day of the Dead were very clever ways of brining her into the fold. The only thing that hampered her development was that River of Souls sucked (but it certainly wasn't her fault).
Also, she's really hot.
I felt the same way about Delenn by the beginning of season 2.
You have to put it in perspective. She come on in the last year of the show. Most of that time has to be spent starting new stories and finishing up plot points from 4 years before that. Also, you have to bring character arcs to their big conclusions. And then, in the middle of all this, you have brand new character who, because she is the captain of the freakin' station, has to be a major character. The writers' hands were tied.
Giving her an addiction past, having her square off with and then help Garibaldi, and featuring her on Day of the Dead were very clever ways of brining her into the fold. The only thing that hampered her development was that River of Souls sucked (but it certainly wasn't her fault).
Also, she's really hot.
Re: Cutting Byron from season 5
Even with the appearances Lochley made in River of Souls and Crusade, I don't think her screen time adds up to anything like as much as Ivonava's through Season 1 (ie. Ivonava's in every Season 1 episode, I don't think Lochley's in much more than half of the Season 5 episodes). Frankly, if I had to judge Ivanova on Season 1 alone, I'd probably say she was humourless, wooden, obssessed with regulations, overburdened with emotional baggage..
Lochley needed more screen time, more humour, more scenes where she wasn't being Ivanova, more scenes where she wasn't in uniform for crying out loud (she has perhaps two?) This is something that could have been addressed through the writing. That episode with Zoe is about the only time that I even begin to warm to her as an independent character, and it wasn't written by JMS.
Even with the appearances Lochley made in River of Souls and Crusade, I don't think her screen time adds up to anything like as much as Ivonava's through Season 1 (ie. Ivonava's in every Season 1 episode, I don't think Lochley's in much more than half of the Season 5 episodes). Frankly, if I had to judge Ivanova on Season 1 alone, I'd probably say she was humourless, wooden, obssessed with regulations, overburdened with emotional baggage..
Lochley needed more screen time, more humour, more scenes where she wasn't being Ivanova, more scenes where she wasn't in uniform for crying out loud (she has perhaps two?) This is something that could have been addressed through the writing. That episode with Zoe is about the only time that I even begin to warm to her as an independent character, and it wasn't written by JMS.
