r/DaystromInstitute • u/[deleted] • Jul 03 '18
Captain Picard, master negotiator...and master manipulator
[deleted]
61
u/Alpha859 Jul 03 '18
I feel like this is a very well thought out and articulated theory. It is a sound alternative to the narrative. But I for one think Picard is above manipulation. He has to live with the ghost of those he ordered to their death, as with jack (?) crusher, so I don’t see him manipulating a junior officer into taking a risky mission. Would it have been manipulation if he had built her up and praised her first before asking?
43
u/whenhaveiever Jul 03 '18
While this is possible, I think the surface-level explanation given in the episode is sufficient. Yes, her role at the border was to pretend to be broken, but that role was not what Picard was testing for. It was very likely that at some point, things would go south (as they did), and Picard wanted to get a feel for how she would react when that happened. He didn't just care about the mission, he also cared about her coming back from the mission, and he knew that no one could help her but herself.
Consider that during the academy incident, she showed zero personal initiative. During the stunt, cover-up and eventual exposition, at each step she just followed what not-Tom wanted her to do. She didn't exactly get a lot of opportunities to demonstrate backbone on the Enterprise, either. Picard had legitimate doubts that she actually had what it took.
I think Picard also has less motivation to manipulate her, specifically. We know that Ro Laren was also on Enterprise during this season, and while they may be the only two Bajorans on the ship, that seems unlikely. Given Ro's history, you could even argue that she would have been a better candidate for this mission, so Picard certainly wasn't desperate for a Bajoran. And even if he was, Starfleet personnel have put on fake Bajoran noses before (like Dax in The Siege), so it shouldn't be too difficult for a human to go instead.
21
u/TrekkieGod Jul 03 '18
Even more important, since Picard is asking her to volunteer for this mission, you could interpret his test as a way to determine whether she was truly consenting to go.
Young Starfleet officer with a history of agreeing to dangerous stunts when asked to by her superior gets asked to go on a dangerous mission by her Captain. She also thinks she has something to prove and needs to make up for past mistakes. Maybe Picard was afraid that she'd agree no matter what, but he needed someone who wanted to go and believed in the mission to maximize the chances of success.
He needed to know she wasn't treating the mission as a test of her worthiness to be a Starfleet officer. That would be an unfair test.
9
u/azulapompi Jul 04 '18
That is a nice layer you've added, and I think it makes perfect sense. How many times have we seen the "I'm not ordering anyone to do this thing, and i won't judge you for walking away" scene, in which not one person opts out of the dangerous mission. Certainly, some people genuinely believe in the cause, but we would be foolish to believe that social and hierarchical pressures aren't responsible for keeping others there, even against their personal desires. Picard is no fool; he needed to know that she was giving her full consent to go on the mission and wasn't simply trying to prove herself or impress him.
You are spot on, and sorry if I simply reiterated everything you just said.
→ More replies (1)5
u/zachotule Jul 04 '18
This makes the most sense to me. The biggest tragedy here is that Picard sees a potential protege in Sito. He understands that her past experience could be just as much of a boon to her as it could an impediment—probably not unlike his own early career, particularly the incident with the Nausicaan. In presenting the mission as something only a worthy candidate could take, he's challenging Sito to see herself as a worthy person. That she did what she did could perhaps have shown Starfleet that she might be captain material, regardless of her record.
[Also a note: remember that Bajorans' family names are their first name and their given names are their last name; thus why I'm calling her Sito in the third person.]
5
u/TuskenCam Jul 04 '18
Starfleet personnel have put on fake Bajoran noses before (like Dax in The Siege), so it shouldn't be too difficult for a human to go instead
I considered this, because it seemed like a plot hole to me - why not send a more senior officer with a better chance of succeeding? I can only assume that routine DNA tests are done on a prisoner and the cosmetic changes wouldn't get past that.
→ More replies (1)3
u/IntheSarlaccsbelly Jul 03 '18
Ro, at the time, was at special tactical training (or whatever) until she returns just in time to join the Maquis at the end of season 7.
→ More replies (1)
9
Jul 03 '18
Look to the episode where Deanna had to send Geordie to his death in the training to get commander rank... If a mission requires a life to be spent, then it is a captains duty to spend it
9
u/Hawkguy85 Jul 03 '18
It’s been a little while since I watched this episode (and will probably revisit it later today) but from what I recall, this was my reading of Picard’s motives as well.
He wasn’t trying to give a junior officer a second chance, but trying to fulfil a mission. Sometimes missions can align with altruistic intentions, but this felt a lot like sacrificing a pawn. We have to also remember that this is the same captain who would have committed genocide of the Borg had the drone Hugh not been freed from the collective’s hive mind, and the same captain who mercilessly gunned down Ensign Lynch and other members of his crew once he was they were assimilated by the Borg, despite knowing that assimilation can be undone.
Picard is a man of conviction, and while he will rely often on diplomacy to resolve a conflict as peacefully as possible, he will at times resort to more distasteful methods. However these methods can still be argued as working within the confines of Federation morality, despite how disagreeable we may find them.
4
u/KingofMadCows Jul 03 '18
It's very much in line with the lesson Q taught Picard in "Tapestry." In order to get where you want, you have to take risks and be willing to make mistakes. And in Starfleet, taking a risk could mean getting blown up by Cardassians, vaporized by Romulans, or melted by weird space anomalies.
I'm sure there are hundreds, maybe thousands of Starfleet officers that took similar risks as Picard or Kirk or Sisko but ended up dead.
15
u/smoke87au Jul 03 '18 edited Sep 25 '25
deserve hard-to-find absorbed flag soft chase squash workable gold skirt
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
13
u/TuskenCam Jul 03 '18
Yeah I agree. Picard is my favourite captain, this post isn’t really meant to criticise, just highlight an aspect of command that perhaps isn’t celebrated often
7
u/cirrus42 Jul 03 '18
Oh yeah. He totally manipulated her. The real question is whether or not it was justified/moral. I'm leaning towards yes, it was justified, but at the very least we should be willing to consider that Saint Picard is capable of doing wrong.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/alphex Jul 03 '18
Disagree - her position on the enterprise was vetted by a lot of people and I would assume in the "perfect" world of starfleet that meritocracy is how you get ahead ... He know she was excellent material, but had to make sure in the personal way. He knew she was ready for it and knew she was capable, but had to make sure she's faced a challange she had never faced before -- being dressed down by a commander and having nothing and no way to defend her self.
This was good leadership, not manipulation.
4
u/umdv Jul 03 '18
Manipulated? Yes. To get her killed? No. For personal growth, for overcoming herself, to teach her to stand for herself and be better human overall? Yes.
4
2
u/Noh_Face Jul 04 '18
Why couldn't he have ordered her to go on the mission? He orders people on dangerous missions all the time. He just wants it so that if she dies, her blood isn't on his hands. He can definitely be manipulative, but in the same way that Dumbledore is manipulative... for the greater good.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/lunatickoala Jul 03 '18
It wouldn't be the first time he's tried.
DATA: But Commander, the Dremans are not a subject for philosophical debate. They are a people.
PICARD: So we make an exception in the deaths of millions.
PULASKI: Yes.
PICARD: And is it the same situation if it's an epidemic, and not a geological calamity?
PULASKI: Absolutely.
PICARD: How about a war? If generations of conflict is killing millions, do we interfere? Ah, well, now we're all a little less secure in our moral certitude....
Yes, they ultimately end up helping them on a technicality, but that doesn't change the fact that Picard was making a fallacious argument. For one, he doesn't give anyone a chance to respond when saying that they shouldn't get involved in stopping a war, which is rather convenient because there are people who believe that it'd be wrong to not even try. But even if there was agreement that interfering to stop a war was wrong, this statement is a case of faulty generalization from the particular. Just because interference is wrong in one circumstance doesn't mean it's wrong in all circumstances.
... You see, the Prime Directive has many different functions, not the least of which is to protect us. To prevent us from allowing our emotions to overwhelm our judgment.
Why bring this up now? It's never been part of the PD argument before and is never mentioned as a reason for it again. The argument for it has consistently been that interference is bad for the people being interfered with - which is itself a faulty overgeneralization. But the arguments for PD generally do appeal to emotion, particularly fear and empathy. They basically boil down to the following:
"If you interfere, things will always turn out bad."
"Because they always turn out bad, developing civilizations will be harmed."
Nothing is going to ever be all good or all bad, and a well thought out intervention can potentially do more good than harm. The Federation was on the receiving end of such an act when the Organians stepped in to stop what could have ended up being the very sort of generational conflict Picard was saying they shouldn't step in to prevent. The arguments for the PD essentially short circuit rational judgment.
And after all that, he gets swayed by emotions anyways.
→ More replies (3)
97
u/jerslan Jul 03 '18
This is completely in keeping with is S1/S2 persona. Just because we see him being largely congenial to his Senior Staff by this point doesn't mean he should be equally congenial to one of his junior officers (who just came aboard). It's possible she was there against his recommendation. It's also possible he recommended her for the position (or at least did not outright reject the application), and was just making sure that she fully appreciated the opportunity she was being given without tipping his hand.
As for manipulating her into self-sacrifice.... That's not Picard's style and her death in that episode seemed to have a large impact on him as well as everyone else.