Newbie has two questions (help yon browncoats!)
POSTED BY: tealcandtrip
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 1, 2006 14:23
VIEWED: 4670
PAGE 1 of 3
Okay, so I've been lurking for while, but two things from the series are really bothering me. Maybe some of you older, 'official' browncoats could settle the issue.
1: In 'The Message,' we find out about Tracey, a private who served with Zoe and Mal during the war. In the deleted scene from the pilot, Zoe says Mal had only Zoe left from his original platoon after the Battle of Serenity. Since Mal was in charge of Tracey before the war, wouldn't Tracey be in that platoon? So shouldn't Tracey already be dead by 'the Message'?
2: In 'Safe' did Simon's parents know, or the very least have an idea of, what was happening to River? They seem to be very uncomfortable with her coming to visit. They ignore Simon when he suggests something is wrong. They just don't seem to care about their daughter very much. Why not? Did they agree or were they worried about losing their own standing or what? After all, they seem to care about Simon enough, so why not River?
Any thoughts you have would be appreciated.
"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
Okay, so I've been lurking for while, but two things from the series are really bothering me. Maybe some of you older, 'official' browncoats could settle the issue.
Welcome. Don't know if I qualify as an official browncoat but I'll try to help with your questions.
1) Tracy was wounded at Du Khang, perhaps he was still in the hospital at the time of Serenity Valley.
2) Speculation is all I have here but I think the Tams had to have some inkling that things were not right with River. My personal feeling is that they were opposed to Simon going after River not because they thought she was safe but because they were afraid to loose both of their children. It never crossed their mind that Simon might actually suceed at breaking her out.
David
"A lot of people are asking me, you know, what exactly is Firefly? It's a tv show you morons!" - Joss Whedon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
1: In 'The Message,' we find out about Tracey, a private who served with Zoe and Mal during the war. In the deleted scene from the pilot, Zoe says Mal had only Zoe left from his original platoon after the Battle of Serenity. Since Mal was in charge of Tracey before the war, wouldn't Tracey be in that platoon? So shouldn't Tracey already be dead by 'the Message'?
Well, military life can be very transfery. So, although Tracey was under Mal at one point, it doesn't mean that he was under Mal at the Battle of Serenity Valley.
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
2: In 'Safe' did Simon's parents know, or the very least have an idea of, what was happening to River? They seem to be very uncomfortable with her coming to visit. They ignore Simon when he suggests something is wrong. They just don't seem to care about their daughter very much. Why not? Did they agree or were they worried about losing their own standing or what? After all, they seem to care about Simon enough, so why not River?
Brainwashing and self delusion can be very powerful things.
I don't think that in Safe Simon's parents ignored him when he said that there daughter was in trouble. They just didn't see it. They thought Simon was being paranoid.
The Academy probably said that it would be best to not have any contact with River for some time. At least until she got climatized. Wasn't that scene where Simon shows the letters to her parents only a couple months after River got to the Academy?
I would imagine, once they realized that River was indeed in trouble, that going up against the government was a very bad idea. I'm certain that they had heard stories of what had happened to people that did that. Thus, some self-delusion later, and they "ignore" the problem. Probably for purposes of self perservation.
That's my thinking anyway.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, I'll give it a shot. And welcome, by the way!
1)Remember in the deleted scene from the pilot, Zoe says that Mal commanded thirty-odd grunts at the start of the Battle of Serenity Valley. Zoe was one of the original thirty, and the only one to survive. Tracey served with/under Mal at Du-Khang, but must have been transferred or wounded before Serenity Valley.
2) In "Safe", I think it's rather obvious that Simon and River's parents cared almost as much about their social standing as they did about their children (Gabriel's threat about not bailing Simon out again, for example). I'm sure that they loved to brag about their little River attending a special, highly selective Alliance school. And as long as they could ignore their son's suspicions, everything was fine in their world.
That's my take on those two questions. Again, welcome! We're glad you're here.
MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."
http://www.fireflytalk.com - Big Damn Podcast
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well wait a minute... the battle of Du-Khang was seven years before the show and the Battle of Serenity was six years before... So he was injured for a year? And also... his actual message says "you guys carried me through the war", which to me suggests he was there till the end.
Also, Simon's parents seem to actively try to stave off their sons attempts to rescue River. They seem very uncomfortable with his attempts to convince them that River is not too well off. They don't even entertain the possibility. They all but forbid Simon to continue trying to help her. Is it because they're more worried about themselves than her, or because they don't believe anythings going on?
"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
Well wait a minute... the battle of Du-Khang was seven years before the show and the Battle of Serenity was six years before... So he was injured for a year? And also... his actual message says "you guys carried me through the war", which to me suggests he was there till the end.
Perhaps Tracy was laid up for the better part of a year. The wound he suffers at DK looks to me to be a back injury they can be tough. Also consider that Serenity Valley is listed as being 6 years before the events of Serenity the episode while DuK is 7 years before The Message, there is a certain amount of time elapsed between Serenity the episode and The Message. Just how much time is hard to say but less than 8 months which is how long Simon and River had been aboard Serenity the ship before the events in Serenity the movie.
Joss would it have killed you to use just a few more names? Or maybe a synonym or two? Placidity is a good word, as is pacificity. :)
Quote:
Also, Simon's parents seem to actively try to stave off their sons attempts to rescue River. They seem very uncomfortable with his attempts to convince them that River is not too well off. They don't even entertain the possibility. They all but forbid Simon to continue trying to help her. Is it because they're more worried about themselves than her, or because they don't believe anythings going on?
I think the wory is the more likely option. I entertain the notion that some of that wory is over the possibility of losing both children if Simon goes of to rescue River but others here have posted the more textually sound notion that they really were just woried about themselves. Their position in society.
David
"A lot of people are asking me, you know, what exactly is Firefly? It's a tv show you morons!" - Joss Whedon
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
Well wait a minute... the battle of Du-Khang was seven years before the show and the Battle of Serenity was six years before... So he was injured for a year? And also... his actual message says "you guys carried me through the war", which to me suggests he was there till the end.
I do believe that you are correct about the time frame. But, are you sure that that injury didn't keep him out of the war, period? His comment would only apply to his particular involvment in the war. That doesn't mean that he was in as long as Mal and/or Zoe.
Also, just because someone says that someone else carried them through the war, doesn't mean that they spent the entire war together. Perhaps just the bulk of it. Mal and/or Zoe could have just been the ones to "show him the ropes" so that he didn't die.
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
Also, Simon's parents seem to actively try to stave off their sons attempts to rescue River. They seem very uncomfortable with his attempts to convince them that River is not too well off. They don't even entertain the possibility. They all but forbid Simon to continue trying to help her. Is it because they're more worried about themselves than her, or because they don't believe anythings going on?
They probably know that if Simon starts
ing around with the government that something bad will happen to him. As conjectured above, there thinking could have just been that they didn't want to lose another child.Simon's father does seem concerned for Simon's well being, but he also cares a great deal for the larger picture of the family itself. After all, he said (paraphrase) "You're on a very slippery slope young man. If you end up here again, I won't get you out. Your on your own."
This probably is the father's tough love. Threatening the child so as to make them do what you think is best for them. I wouldn't think that Simon's father would just abandon him. I think that it's more along the lines of protecting him.
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It's part of the fact that they (the parents) so obviously care for Simon, that I'm confused by their relationship with River. They simply don't seem to care for her as much... Even at the beginning of Safe, the Dad acts much more fatherly toward little Simon than little River.
I don't know. Maybe Simon's love for her is so on his sleeve that it makes his parent's seem so cavalier. Or maybe it was a lack of genuine care from the parents that made Simon so protective of his sister.
"I also hear that there's something called Firefly, which is either a canceled science-fiction television show or a new religion, I'm not clear on that. Either way, prayers for the resurrection are involved." – Lore Sjoberg
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Some people in society who have children aren't all that much a part of their lives. Those in high positions are busy trying to keep their places and standing, and so they don't have the time to spend being with said children or bonding with them. Notice that the father, though proud of his young son telling Simon he was worth spending the money on him for a new (I cannot remember what it was, insert name of product here *) he didn't spend his free time with his children. But as we never saw many flashbacks of the Tams I may be stretching things.
They seemed to love their children to the point of giving them what they wanted, or what they were worth but I have a feeling the young Tams had a Nanny or Governess who actually did the raising while the parents were busy mingling with the high society cementing their position. In a way (odd as this may sound) their children was as much a way to increase their standing as anything else. And why I'm going with the theory of a Nanny or Governess stems from the girls in Shindig, those high society snobs come from an elite background that no doubt included some form of Governess. If they had slaves, you can be sure they had a Governess. In many ways Joss was reflecting the image of the Old South before the civil war. Just look up how those families societal infrastructure worked. I'm really amazed I didn't see that before.
Just imagine one of the old Southern genteel families in place of the Tams. Society at that point was very important, the American's imitating the English aristocracy. Position, placement in society, power, these are all important in politics. The Tams loved their children, I believe that, but sigmanunki got it right as well, though not so much brainwashing as in believing it's impossible that the powers that be would do this to one of their own well respected TAX paying citizens. Think Operative in terms of having blinding faith. Hell there are plenty of people in todays society who can't believe some governments would lie or hurt them.
A part of them believed, I have no doubt, but since it was a choise between the government that kept them in clover and allowed them the blissful life they had become accustomed (and risk being in some internment camp that they know they couldn't survive) or their children, who was probably raised by someone else (my own opinion) They decided to go the way of the Operative and believe in blind faith.
Just rewatch the scene where the father comes to bail Simon out. Watch and see how angry and upset dad gets. Listen to what he says. He wasn't even worried that Simon got arrested, didn't care he did it for River. He was more worried about his name being permanantly on record the moment he walked through the Stations door, and Simon throwing away his life as a doctor. Why? Because Simon's being one of the best trauma surgeons in the core raises the parents standing even more. The childrens actions reflects on the parents you see. It's a cold hard fact to swallow, but some families are like that. That's why snobs like the ones at the Shindig exist.
I'd like to think though that since those actions the truth settled into the parents psyche and they've realized how wrong they were to have turned their back on their offspring, but unfortunately it's too late. Mal's their old man now. Safe suggests this. Though now that the warrant for them is null Simon and River might stop in for a visit with the folks and see what's been up. Maybe not.
As for Tracy, well we know he was injured and had to recouperate. By the time he was better his squadron may have been given a new assignement. So Tracy was probably transferred to a different unit. And as for the quote "you carried me through the war", we know the war went on for quite a while. So he was no doubt reffering to before then. Or perhaps at some point after Du Khang he was hurt or transferred, we may never really know.
Wow, my post wouldn't end. It just went on and on... I usually never have such meaningful convo's like this.... I think I've grown...
If I'
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by tealcandtrip:
It's part of the fact that they (the parents) so obviously care for Simon, that I'm confused by their relationship with River. They simply don't seem to care for her as much... Even at the beginning of Safe, the Dad acts much more fatherly toward little Simon than little River.
I don't know. Maybe Simon's love for her is so on his sleeve that it makes his parent's seem so cavalier. Or maybe it was a lack of genuine care from the parents that made Simon so protective of his sister.
And it surprises you that a father will relate to or speak more to his son than his daughter? The older son that he can relate to? EDIT: The son that he actually had to speak to about important matters about in that scene?
You really seem to be stuck on this parents not caring about River and/or Simon thing. Are you going to consider anything else? Or are you stuck in your thought that this is true and there is nothing that anyone here can say that will change your mind?
----
"We're in a giant car heading into a brick wall at 100 miles/hr and everybody's arguing about where they want to sit."
-David Suzuki
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME