Problems with B5

[oberon]

"Open up the gunports to show them we mean them no harm."

"They're opening their gunports! FIRE!"

[Patrick Degan]

Maybe what G'kar was refering to was FTL communications. In The Long Twillight Struggle, G'sten was able to communicate with the fleet almost immediately after they jumped in-system. This is assuming that the time elapsed in our reference was the same in theirs.

Presumably, ship-to-ship would require much less power than trying to punch a signal through hyperspace to the homeworld or nearest command base, so there is no inconsistency with the earlier episode in that case.

[Master of Ossus]

Yes, I remember that scene. G'kar explained that the blackout was due to the power-drain. The question is whether or not this is endemic to all ships in Babylon 5 or is a limitation on Narn technology, which I believe is slightly less advanced than that of the Earth Alliance.

The Narn appear to be less advanced than the EA in most respects, but in combat designs they are clearly very similar. The Narn stole much of their technology from the Centauri, and the Narn Dreadnaught was able to fight a Centauri Primus to a tie (both of them were destroyed, though the Centauri one came out slightly better, only destroying itself when it tried to jump out). Also, when G'Kar referred to the incident, he stated that "When a ship comes out of hyperspace...." (italics mine). To me, that indicates that it is a problem for the other races, too, though the exact meaning is debatable.

[Master of Ossus]

"Open up the gunports to show them we mean them no harm."

"They're opening their gunports! FIRE!"

That's not a problem, that was great. It was a wonderful way to get the humans and Minbari fighting over a cultural misunderstanding. The plot for B5 is above reproach.

[oberon]

It was contrived. A guy has a gun, and you have a gun. Do you point them at each other to show your peaceful intentions? What if he's from another planet? Do you Picard your way through, and honestly think "he may be trying to communicate. I should let him shoot me."? Then they try to paint the Eearth captain as a cowboy? Different cultures, my eye. You don't go through a process of inventing powerful ranged weapons and somehow come up with the idea that readying them for use against a contact is a good way to end up not using them.

OTT, I loved the movie

[Darth Wong]

"Open up the gunports to show them we mean them no harm."
"They're opening their gunports! FIRE!"

That's not a problem, that was great. It was a wonderful way to get the humans and Minbari fighting over a cultural misunderstanding. The plot for B5 is above reproach.

I hope you're being sarcastic. There's a limit to how much one can chalk up to "cultural differences", and pointing your weapons at someone in order to show peaceful intentions is way beyond that limit.

[Master of Ossus]

"Open up the gunports to show them we mean them no harm."
"They're opening their gunports! FIRE!"

That's not a problem, that was great. It was a wonderful way to get the humans and Minbari fighting over a cultural misunderstanding. The plot for B5 is above reproach.

I hope you're being sarcastic. There's a limit to how much one can chalk up to "cultural differences", and pointing your weapons at someone in order to show peaceful intentions is way beyond that limit.

I'm not being sarcastic at all, and I think your analogy is flawed. The Minbari were not pointing their weapons at the Prometheus, they were merely opening their gunports. Showing the Terrans their weapons. Their weapons were not tracking the Prometheus, nor were they powered up or anything like that. This is more analogous to how a Sergeant at arms salutes someone (by presenting that person with his rifle), to how Roman soldiers sometimes saluted Generals or the Emperor (by drawing and displaying their gladius), or how samurai greeted each other (by displaying their katanas, albiet only partway).

Further, I think that both of you are missing the obvious parallelism with Le Morte D'Arthur. Remember that the Earth-Minbari War is MEANT to be connected with that book, as was DIRECTLY stated in several episodes of B5. Now recall how the final battle between Mordred and Arthur began, and note Sheridan as a Lancelot figure. Now we can begin to appreciate the depth of the connection, and once again realize that JMS is better at writing than we are.

[Graeme Dice]

I hope you're being sarcastic. There's a limit to how much one can chalk up to "cultural differences", and pointing your weapons at someone in order to show peaceful intentions is way beyond that limit.

Why is it beyond that limit? There culture could view hiding your weapons as planning for a sneak attack, or keeping them covered as a sign of contempt for the enemy. There is absolutely no need for anything they do to relate to human cultures in any way.

[Master of Ossus]

I hope you're being sarcastic. There's a limit to how much one can chalk up to "cultural differences", and pointing your weapons at someone in order to show peaceful intentions is way beyond that limit.

Why is it beyond that limit? There culture could view hiding your weapons as planning for a sneak attack, or keeping them covered as a sign of contempt for the enemy. There is absolutely no need for anything they do to relate to human cultures in any way.

Incidentally, humans shake hands for more or less the same reason. It demonstrates that both parties are unarmed. Of course, one could just use it to get close to your enemy and then use a weapon concealed in the other hand to kill him, but that is beside the point.

[TheDarkling]

It was a dumb move on the part of the warrior caste but a perfectly reasonable thing to do and the reason for doing it were explained in the film.

Dukhat realised it was a stupid error saddly not in enough time to stop the battle.

The thing that bugged me the most was sending out a known (and almost convicted) gungho idiot on a scouting mission, not only that but he had things to prove so he went beyond his orders to rebuild his rep.

The admiral sending him on that mission was a blockhead but then again he also obeyed Clarks orders so...

They also didnt listen to Londo becaus ethey thought he was being greedy instead of just being his kind and honest self.

Basically the EA was arrogant but they soon got that beat out of them by the crazy bone heads.

[Master of Ossus]

I agree, Darkling (and congratulations on your recent promotion).

I think that the EA was completely inept in all aspects of that, but some of the other posters seemed to indicate that it was the fault of the Minbari, or that opening the gunports was unreasonable.

I think that it was a brilliantly artistic allusion and an excellent bit of back-story.

[Patrick Degan]

Remember, Dukhat himself thought opening the gunports was a stupid idea and was trying to get out the order to close the ports when Capt. Jankowski panicked and launched his attack. The tragedy was on the heads of both the Minbari captain and Jankowski.

This of course does not negate the symbolism of the scene: the soldier who drew his sword to strike the adder and thus precipitated the fatal battle (cast into very sharp relief in the episode "A Late Delivery From Avalon").

[Master of Ossus]

I think that, once again, Patrick has shown us all the true method of seeing things. You're right, as always, Patrick.

[SCVN 2812]

I'm glad I read this post, I never really saw the connection before. It gives the movie a great tie in to the series and one of my favorite episodes.

[Darth Wong]

Why is it beyond that limit? There culture could view hiding your weapons as planning for a sneak attack, or keeping them covered as a sign of contempt for the enemy. There is absolutely no need for anything they do to relate to human cultures in any way.

"Culture" is not a universal escape clause, you know. Unsheathing a sword, unholstering a gun, opening gunports, all of these actions make it easier to commit violence. Therefore, they logically increase the threat level, and any intelligent species will recognize that fact.

It is not just "culture"; it is both logic and instinct. Name one animal in the entire animal kingdom which does not bare its weapons (whether they be fangs, claws, or whatever) as a precursor to violence. As I said before, there are limits to what you can chalk up to cultural differences, unless Minbari culture is explicitly defined as a culture of rampant stupidity.

[seanrobertson]

I'm not being sarcastic at all, and I think your analogy is flawed. The Minbari were not pointing their weapons at the Prometheus, they were merely opening their gunports. Showing the Terrans their weapons.

That's still more threatening than leaving the gun ports *closed*, Ossus.

Their weapons were not tracking the Prometheus, nor were they powered up or anything like that. This is more analogous to how a Sergeant at arms salutes someone (by presenting that person with his rifle), to how Roman soldiers sometimes saluted Generals or the Emperor (by drawing and displaying their gladius), or how samurai greeted each other (by displaying their katanas, albiet only partway).

I vehemently disagree with you here. I think those analogies are
immensely flawed because the saluter and salutee are both very
familiar with that protocol; the soldiers saluting their superiors was,
indeed, *expected* among the Romans; and samurai are, again,
quite familiar with the custom of brandishing their swords.

You DON'T do that with a complete unknown, *especially* not as
your first real "language" in the very first encounter! This isn't
a Centurion knowing when to pay respects to his Emperor, who himself
demands such displays of deference. It's two fools on different
ships who know squat about the other, though I'd argue that the
CO of the Prometheus was thinking more clearly than the
Bonehead in that instance.

Further, I think that both of you are missing the obvious parallelism with Le Morte D'Arthur. Remember that the Earth-Minbari War is MEANT to be connected with that book, as was DIRECTLY stated in several episodes of B5. Now recall how the final battle between Mordred and Arthur began, and note Sheridan as a Lancelot figure. Now we can begin to appreciate the depth of the connection, and once again realize that JMS is better at writing than we are.

Wow...not to sound sarcastic, here, but if it's such good writing, why
did JMS have to come out and state the parallels directly? The similarities
should speak for themselves. I grant you, he's good, but I wouldn't
say "he's a better writer than anyone here is/ever will be" on B5 alone.
He's written some really stinky stuff, too, as recently as "Legend
of the Rangers" no less.

Also, my memory of the Arthurian legend is a little fuzzy, but I don't recall Arthur and Mordred becoming enemies over anything *remotely* similar to a cultural clash, nor of the war stopping because the dominant force
halted the advance at the last moment, etc.

Sean
Analyst http://www.babtech-onthe.net/

[Master of Ossus]

I'm not being sarcastic at all, and I think your analogy is flawed. The Minbari were not pointing their weapons at the Prometheus, they were merely opening their gunports. Showing the Terrans their weapons.

That's still more threatening than leaving the gun ports *closed*, Ossus.

I agree completely, but to the Minbari it would not have seemed unnecessarily hostile.

Their weapons were not tracking the Prometheus, nor were they powered up or anything like that. This is more analogous to how a Sergeant at arms salutes someone (by presenting that person with his rifle), to how Roman soldiers sometimes saluted Generals or the Emperor (by drawing and displaying their gladius), or how samurai greeted each other (by displaying their katanas, albiet only partway).

I vehemently disagree with you here. I think those analogies are
immensely flawed because the saluter and salutee are both very
familiar with that protocol; the soldiers saluting their superiors was,
indeed, *expected* among the Romans; and samurai are, again,
quite familiar with the custom of brandishing their swords.

First contact between America and Japan consisted of an American fleet sailing into Tokyo Bay, and that did not lead to a war. Even though the Japanese obviously did not know that the Americans were going to hold their fire, they did not attack the Americans first. Similar happenings occured when conquistadors were first moving through Mexico, on their way to eliminate the Aztec, and similar things happened in the Andes with conquistadors and the Inca.

I agree that it was a mistake to open the gunports, but I also think it was a mistake to open fire. I think that the incident would be described as being an accident had either side launched a formal investigation, or it would have beem marked as negligence on the part of both CO's involved. It should be classified by viewers as a tragedy.

You DON'T do that with a complete unknown, *especially* not as
your first real "language" in the very first encounter! This isn't
a Centurion knowing when to pay respects to his Emperor, who himself
demands such displays of deference. It's two fools on different
ships who know squat about the other, though I'd argue that the
CO of the Prometheus was thinking more clearly than the
Bonehead in that instance.

Sure you do. Do you think that Kennedy and Kruschev were fully aware of what was going on during the Cuban Missile Crisis? Do you think that Kruschev knew that the Americans were firing starshells when an American cruiser first fired on a Soviet tanker? How about the repeated Soviet fly overs of Chinese territory during their conflicts during the Cold War? Just because someone does something that is usually perceived as being hostile does not mean that they are going to open fire. Both sides do not have to be fully aware of each other when their mildly aggressive actions begin to be seen as being non-hostile. Did the Finns declare war on America for flying spyplanes over their territory without prior knowledge?

Wow...not to sound sarcastic, here, but if it's such good writing, why
did JMS have to come out and state the parallels directly? The similarities
should speak for themselves. I grant you, he's good, but I wouldn't
say "he's a better writer than anyone here is/ever will be" on B5 alone.
He's written some really stinky stuff, too, as recently as "Legend
of the Rangers" no less.

Also, my memory of the Arthurian legend is a little fuzzy, but I don't recall Arthur and Mordred becoming enemies over anything *remotely* similar to a cultural clash, nor of the war stopping because the dominant force
halted the advance at the last moment, etc.

Sean
Analyst http://www.babtech-onthe.net/

He didn't. I would have figured it out just from the title "Late Arrival from Avalon," if the episode had unfolded in more or less the same manner except with no other references to the Arthurian legends whatsoever. Or I would have figured it out from watching In the Beginning, having never seen that episode. An intelligent and dedicated person should be able to figure out such references. This is the definition of an analogy. For example, in SW Anakin's capture by the Geonosians is clearly analogous to Jesus' seizure by the Romans. This does not have to be directly stated. In The Lord of the Rings, it does not have to be directly stated that Sauron=Satan, or that the men of Rohan are extended metaphors for the Vikings/Nordic peoples. In B5, it does not have to be stated that G'Kar is a modernized Cassandra figure. We understand all of these references given the context of the writing. However, as writers it is often very difficult to maintain all of your secrets, particularly when people seem to be struggling while making connections with figurative meanings with your work. Just look at Franz Kafka as he faded into oblivion during his later years. This does not appear to completely explain what happened with JMS in that episode. I think it more likely that he wanted to craft an episode that would draw out people into thinking more deeply about his work, and at the same time add an additional layer of complexity to his references. In short, he did not have to make the metaphors so obvious, but because he did so they became undeniable. Believe it or not, many people still refuse to believe me when I tell them that the Star Wars saga is symbolic, sometimes even rejecting my explanations after I have shown them some of the parallels. I think that JMS was afraid something similar might befall his own series.

Also, just because the plot is above reproach does not mean that the symbolism or the references are. Lord of the Rings is a great series of books, whose plots are incredibly strong. I would never for a second think that that trilogy had half the symbolism of Lord of the Flies or Catcher in the Rye. I think they are wonderful, but to compare the two is ridiculous. The movie Serendipity is a fairly well written piece, symbollically. Nearly every aspect of the movie has a deeper meaning, but it was wrapped up in a romantic comedy that was neither comedic nor romantic, thus it fails. It is possible to have a literal level without a strong symbollic level, or a figurative level without a literal level. Just because the plot of B5 is above reproach does not mean that all aspects of the writing are (for instance, particularly early in the series JMS struggled with dialogue, at times).

[Ender]

It is not just "culture"; it is both logic and instinct. Name one animal in the entire animal kingdom which does not bare its weapons (whether they be fangs, claws, or whatever) as a precursor to violence.

How does human smiling (the bearing of teeth as a sign of greeting or pleasure) mesh with this?

I don't disagree with you, I just don't see how that fits in.

[Patrick Ogaard]

It is not just "culture"; it is both logic and instinct. Name one animal in the entire animal kingdom which does not bare its weapons (whether they be fangs, claws, or whatever) as a precursor to violence.

How does human smiling (the bearing of teeth as a sign of greeting or pleasure) mesh with this?

I don't disagree with you, I just don't see how that fits in.

It actually fits in perfectly if you remember that human teeth are largely ineffective weapons of last resort: if a human is close enough to resort to biting, he or she has to be practically draped over the target.

Also, humans have incredibly underdeveloped canines even when compared to any species of great ape. The underdeveloped canines of hominids seem to go back to the australopithecines, so that the relatively inoffensive nature of hominid teeth appears to be older than the human species itself. Therefore, the display of teeth has become a hardwired part of the universal human repertoire of facial expressions. Humans rely heavily on knowing what the faces of other humans are telling them.

That also explains why human eyes have huge sclera, and why SF humanoid makeup that replaces the sclera (the "whites of the eyes") with huge dark irises like those of most other mammals makes those SF humanoids look creepy (the Stepford Wives effect). Knowing where a conversational partner's eyes are focused is more important than confusing potential predators/competitors about where one's attention is (which is what huge irises are good for). Great apes make up for their lack of visible sclera by substituting large head movements for subtle eye movements.

When humans display their natural weapons, they pose to emphasize their physiques, their fierce scowls and the length and power of their arms. Most especially their arms. A long, weighty stick makes those arms even longer and more dangerous.

As for the Minbari and humans and how both sides screwed things up:
The Minbari were obviously of two minds, with no one bothering to ask the worker caste's opinion. The religious caste, represented by Dukaht, appreciated at least in part that their own cultural standards might not apply universally. The warrior caste, on the other hand, appeared entirely oblivious to the potential for trouble. That is most reasonably explained by the custom of weapons display being so ingrained in Minbari warrior culture that they literally could not see the problem. It just proves that the Minbari, the warriors in particular, were an incredibly xenophobic, insular, naive people that did not get out much.

On the topic of Commodore Perry and his taskforce entering a Japanese port without resistance: resistance was futile. First off, the huge, smoke-belching monstrosity crewed by hairy, enormous-nosed aliens reeking of meat consumption scared the xenophobic, insular, naive Japanese to no end, since the Japanese didn't get out much at the time. An attempt was made to have small boats go out and lasso the fiery beast, but the Japanese hemp tractor beams were ineffective against the power of steam engines. Once the Japanese got over their initial shock, they quickly assimilated what they could of the alien technologies and set about turning themselves from a completely isolated society with an essentially medieval technology base into a technologically advanced regional superpower over the course of little more than one lifetime.

[oberon]

Ancient rituals don't apply now. Notice the use of the word ritual, not protocol. "Ritual" implies a ceremonial gesture made by people who know the code. That doesn't apply here. The only thing that applies here is gun safety. You can't go through the invention process without devising safeguards. We shake hands because the aspect of showing your arms is obscure and now it's merely polite. Notice that we don't perform a similar ritual with guns. Even if we did, we wouldn't do it in a strange land, unless we were stupid.

Same goes for smiling versus gnashing teeth. We don't gnash at each other, and we are not animals (nevermind the biological argument, red herring--I know we are technically). Note that gnashing and clenching IS a sign of aggression, anger, or the very least tacit disapproval.

Beyond that, there are tactics. A naval engagement is largely decided by the better crew getting off the first shot. Opening the gunports is, surprise! an outstanding way to do that.

Furthermore, there is no reason to assume that every culture is like ST ones, where there is a weapons-powering-up "ritual". The Minbari don't have to perform this ritual even if humans in B5 do. Maybe they open the gunports, then power up, so as to avoid an accidental discharge with a closed door, killing the gun crew. That is only one possibility. Another is, if you are on a ship and used to sensing a power-up before an engagement, but all of a sudden the new contact's gunports open with no warning, then your sensors may have malfunctioned, and you definitely would have to consider that. If the Minbari have a different, unknown power source, you may have to consider that. If they use chemical weapons, there is no "power-up" needed, and as someone trained in commanding a warship, you'd have to consider that. Load the barrel, open the gunports, and send an electrical pulse to a detonator. It is probably better to have a fairly inert payload of solid fuel that requires a good priming to go off, launching a nuke, then to spend expensive energy doing some silly power-up (in an energy-expensive, barely-containable process if you have warp technology), if it's not needed. That doesn't imply inferior tech, it implies an energy management decision made by people who stick to something that works. You'd have to consider that the Minbari are just plain sneaky.

Jankowski's past is irrelevant. He may have been exiled to space, and that was probably a good idea. But when the new ship's gunports opened, he made the best decision. It's the only thing he could have done.

Regardless of cultural differences, the boneheads went beyond the limits of any wise protocol, and Dukhat considered that. Anyone versed in gun safety will not use culture as an excuse.

[SpacedTeddyBear]

Jankowski's past is irrelevant. He may have been exiled to space, and that was probably a good idea. But when the new ship's gunports opened, he made the best decision. It's the only thing he could have done.

No, he made the 2nd stupidest decision. The first was made by the warrior caste by opening the gunports during first contact situations. Back to the point: I would rather risk my ship and my crew than to risk starting a war with an unknown alien race who even the Centauri are afraid of.

[Master of Ossus]

I think that his decision was even stupider than the Minbari's. It is insane to open fire in a first contact scenario, especially since EA ships could detect energy spikes in Minbari ships. He should have waited, and he also should have realized that if the Minbari were there to fight, he would be dead anyway, so it really did not matter if he fired or not.

[Darth Wong]

I think that his decision was even stupider than the Minbari's. It is insane to open fire in a first contact scenario, especially since EA ships could detect energy spikes in Minbari ships.

Actually, they were being hit with high-energy ECM (or so it seemed) which blinded their sensors.

An unknown vessel approaches, opens its gunports, and blinds all of your sensors. Wouldn't you feel threatened?

He should have waited, and he also should have realized that if the Minbari were there to fight, he would be dead anyway, so it really did not matter if he fired or not.

Hindsight is 20/20. Put yourself in his shoes, considering his lack of hard data.

If you have to grope for a stupidity, it is in the use of military vessels for first contact missions in the first place. When you want to parley, you send out an unarmed man to talk. It's risky, but it's one man's risk and not an entire nation's risk. Unfortunately, first contact protocols in B5 seem to have been derived from the stupidity of Star Trek, where they do the same thing.

[Sea Skimmer]

I think that his decision was even stupider than the Minbari's. It is insane to open fire in a first contact scenario, especially since EA ships could detect energy spikes in Minbari ships.

Actually, they were being hit with high-energy ECM (or so it seemed) which blinded their sensors.

An unknown vessel approaches, opens its gunports, and blinds all of your sensors. Wouldn't you feel threatened?

If that happened to a modern naval warship, it would go the general quarters and put missiles on the rails at the minimal, if not open fire. Using a hostile use ECM is considered justification for opening fire under standing USN ROE.



Preparing weapons for use is going to be highly threatening and provocative in any case. Heck, standing USN rules of engagement state that if an approaching aircraft turns five times to gain an positional advantage over the intercepting aircraft, it may be assumed that an attack is underway and the interceptor can be authorized to fire first. Permission to fire is still at the discretion of the battle group commander normally, but mind you this is in peacetime against any warplane from any power. A fire control lock is also grounds for firing under standing ROE.

[Graeme Dice]

Incidentally, humans shake hands for more or less the same reason. It demonstrates that both parties are unarmed. Of course, one could just use it to get close to your enemy and then use a weapon concealed in the other hand to kill him, but that is beside the point.

That's why being left-handed was considered to be sinister. You could shake hands and use your weapon effectively at the same time.