Last week saw a bit of controversy in the Stargate world, surrounding a character description for the upcoming Stargate Universe episode “Sabotage.” (Read all about it here, including the producers’ response issued right here on GateWorld.)
We’ve seen outcries all over the Web, ranging from “That’s an insensitive way of talking about disabled persons,” to “They’re indulging the cliched male fantasy of lesbians having sex with men,” to “It’s a violation of Camille’s body to have Dr. Perry use it that way,” to “That’s rape, so the story is abhorrent and the episode shouldn’t be made.”
Setting aside the many misreadings and misrepresentations of what the casting call actually said, I’d like to offer my own response to these criticisms. But first, a word must be said about what character breakdowns and casting sides are, what they’re for, and why it’s not fair for viewers to draw conclusions or pass judgment based on them.
At the end of the day, I want to suggest to you, these criticisms entirely miss the point of why science fiction depicts controversial, often disturbing things.
Breakdowns Are Not ‘Real’
By that I mean that they are not a part of the story being told. Unlike a production photo or a clip from a trailer, a character’s description in casting documents may finally bear little similarity to the character as she is depicted on screen. Script pages are also usually from early drafts, and can be rewritten. Or tweaked on set by the actors and director. Or filmed, then cut. (Television is a long, creative process involving contributions from hundreds of people.) It’s an early look at what might be, followed by months of refining by everyone involved. Only the dialogue that is written, interpreted, acted, edited, and aired is worth judging.
To the degree that a character breakdown does correspond to the final product, it is only a snapshot — a single brush stroke in a large fresco.
There is only one way to judge any episode of television: Watch it. The Internet age has brought us a world of pre-production criticism, which is just ridiculous considering the sort of medium that television is. It presumes that one can accurately see an artist’s finished product before it has begun, that one can peer at Michelangelo’s marble slab and comment on the anatomy of David.
Casting Documents Aren’t Meant for You
They are behind-the-scenes production documents, often not even written or vetted by the script’s author, often exaggerated to serve their one, single purpose in life: to give casting agents who look at a zillion of these things a sense of the sort of actors that the show’s producers would like to see audition.
Reading casting documents — and in many cases, even the “sides” that consist of pages from a working draft of the script — is a poor substitute for seeing the final product. Passing judgment on the writer’s decisions at this stage is a little like debating a movie you’ve never seen. You’ve read a bad review, you’ve heard people talk about the trailer, you’ve seen a late-night interview with one of the actors. All these things might help you learn a little more about the movie, but it doesn’t mean you’ve seen it.
Till then, you just aren’t qualified to criticize.
Depiction Does Not Mean Endorsement
Have we forgotten the value of the science fiction genre and dramatic story-telling as a whole? Good television asks hard questions, and sci-fi in particular is good about studying the human condition and engaging tough issues. That means showing characters doing some damned distasteful things. Stargate is no exception. The shows have explored important issues such as torture (“Abyss,” “The Serpent’s Venom”), slavery and coercion (much of the Jaffa storyline throughout SG-1, though episodes like “Cor-Ai” and “Threshold” spring to mind), degenerative disease (“The Shrine”), and religion (all of SG-1 Seasons Nine and Ten), to name just a few.
As a series that is more intentionally dramatic than action/adventure, Stargate Universe will be doing this sort of human exploration even more. Among the many sci-fi plot devices that enable this is the long-range communications device, which allows someone from Earth to occupy the body of a Destiny crew member while that person in turn occupies the body of the person back on Earth. What sort of moral dilemmas might that bring up?
In “Sabotage,” the Destiny crew will grapple with a twisted mess of issues about identity and sexuality. What do you do when you are stranded galaxies away from your loved ones, against your will, with the very real prospect that you will never see them again — only to wake up in someone else’s body back on Earth, able to see them and talk to them and touch them again? Or, what if you’ve been without the use of your limbs all your life, and now inhabit a body that is strong and agile?
Is it ethically permissible to pose as that person? (You might watch “Avalon, Part 2” before you answer.) To kiss someone you love? To kiss someone that person loves? To have sex? Or, from the other side of the equation, if you fall in love with someone who is occupying the body of someone else, can you act on that? What if two lovers both find themselves in other people’s bodies? What if you don’t know that it is temporary? If your lover is transplanted to a robotic body? Is cloned?
These are interesting science fiction questions, which force us to re-examine where we think the boundaries of identity and love are drawn. Yet they are exactly what those who object to this body-swapping episode are taking issue with. It’s not right for Eleanor Perry to do what she does with Camille’s body — even moreso because the two women have different sexual orientations. It’s not right for Nicholas Rush to sleep with her while she is in someone else’s body (gay or straight).
All very right. That’s exactly the point! The episode presents dilemmas, shows characters making choices, and then — we can hope — facing the consequences of those choices. If every character on television acted wise and upright all the time, those stories would have no conflict … and no reason to watch.
The mere depiction of these things doesn’t make the episode bad, or offensive, or poorly written. The writers are attempting to pose difficult moral situations and ask hard questions, and show us more about these characters by how they respond — then, by how others respond to their choices. Perhaps Dr. Perry is selfish and ultimately abusive of the gift she has been given; perhaps Rush is one step removed from a rapist, and an incident like this could permanently color his already tense relationship with Camille. Don’t assume that these things are going to be glorified simply because they are depicted.
Don’t Pretend All Questions Have Easy Answers
Science fiction is at its best not when it is merely depicting distasteful things, but when it is asking hard questions. Questions that don’t have an obvious “right” answer on moral grounds. If your long-lost love knocked on your door wearing someone else’s face, how would you respond to them? If you have been immobile all your life and had the chance to take over someone’s body, would you do it? If it was temporary, what would you do with that body?
What if it was the mind of your spouse, and the person whose body she occupies has given consent? What would you do?
If you fell in love with someone but had no way of interacting with them except through another person’s body, how much is permissible? (Star Trek: The Next Generation‘s “The Host,” in which Riker played host to a Trill symbiant in love with Beverly Crusher)
If you had to choose between the survival of two different species, what would you do? (SG-1‘s “Scorched Earth”)
If you had the power to protect your world at the cost of a few civil liberties, or at the expense of an uncooperative enemy, would you force your will on them? (“Absolute Power”)
If you transform your enemy into a human like yourself and change his life forever, what are your responsibilities toward him? (Atlantis‘s “Michael”)
If the only way to correct your mistakes and save an innocent life is to let yourself be eaten by an alien monster? (“Miller’s Crossing”)
What would you do if you learned after the fact that a co-worker had raped you — but you have no memory or personal experience of it because your consciousness was in another galaxy at the time? … And it was entirely consensual with the person occupying your body, so from his point of view it wasn’t a rape at all? … And you’re a trillion miles from Earth with no ship-bound legal system to resort to?
Would you hate him?
Would you refuse to work with him?
Would you kill him?
My point is simple: Good science fiction puts its characters in frightful situations, with ethical dilemmas that make us think, “What would I do in that situation?” They make us talk with one another, learn something about one another, and learn something about ourselves. It’s why I love sci-fi.
Stargate Universe and shows like it put characters in difficult and at times ethically ambiguous circumstances. This shows us what those men and women are made of — and, in how we judge their actions, what we are made of, as well.
Editorials represent only the opinion of the author, and not necessarily that of GateWorld and its owner. In this case, however, the author happens to be the owner. Go figure.
OMG your actually trying to justify this!!!
Its rape end of!
Interesting post. But “one step removed from a rapist?” WTH? He IS a rapist, if that scene from the sides ever gets aired. And I have no desire to watch a rapist as one of the main characters on a Stargate show.
If we grant that the scene in question = rape, is the problem people have with the fact that it’s a main character involved, or that it’s being shown at all? Television and film have been depicting rape without glorifying it for years. The Battlestar Galactica episode “Pegasus” comes to mind, where it was very disturbing yet done to make some pretty heavy moral points. Now if, in “Sabotage,” it is done and the three characters simply move on as if nothing has happened — say, as in the Atlantis episode “Irresistible,” where a sort of long-term date rape drug… Read more »
My thoughts exactly, Darren. To modify an expression, you can’t judge a show by its breakdown. Thanks for posting it.
You People are morons! It is a tv show. No one is suggesting that rape is right or wrong for that matter. It is entertainment. Sure we may not like a situation they put some one in but the great thing about watching it on tv is if you dont like it turn it off or change the channel. I am looking forward to seeing that episode. It will surely cause drama on the ship and that makes for great tv. AND KEEP IN MIND IT IS ONLY TELEVISION NOT REAL LIFE! The writers on the show have always entertained… Read more »
@Darren, NO THE MAIN PROBLEM IS HE IS A RAPIST it doesnt matter who he is or what rank or what whether, sorry whats difficult to understand that concept the womans body has been violated, raped. Heres a question if the person was a man an had his body taken over by a gay man an used for sex, how would you as a man feel about ie do you think you would have been raped an would you be ok with it an as male viewer would you then be happy to sit an watch the show with the… Read more »
So it was important for the casting directors to know that the quadriplegic character is sex-starved? Or maybe they didn’t understand what quadriplegic meant, so they needed it spelled out that her body is ‘useless’? Sorry, but these sides are crude and rude and were put out by the same guys responsible for the show. It’s a peek behind the scenes at how their minds work, and it’s pretty ugly. I have no faith that these people will handle the subject matter in a tastefull manner.
OK i think a thing to remember is this is a darker Star gate series.Second as Damien said before me its TV not real life, no one is saying that rape is right or wrong.TV sometimes can climb beyond the normal cliff, have you ever watched HBO showtime. I’m looking forward to SGU and this episode because its something that hasn’t been done before in TV. You can complain all you like but in the end its up to you to keep watching or watch something else.SGU is supposed to have six people kill themselves by the sixth EPISODE its… Read more »
@ Durrkid34 yes your right, watch or dont watch it is a personal choice, so I think you can guess what I will be doing, Stargate is turly over in eyes dead an buried. I am so disgusted by this my anger as a woman an that will not be leaving me anytime soon, I even now have no desire to even see or buy a SGA or SG1 movie if it has anything to do with these people.
@shepsgirl4ever – Your comment asking if it was a gay man and how we’d feel? I think you’re missing the point. It’s a personal question for YOU to answer. But, most importantly, in the case of this ethical question, it’s whether “you” includes your consciousness AND your body, or just your consciousness.
@KayD – did you miss the part where Darren points out that breakdowns aren’t usually written by the people who write the episode?
We already know well that the SGU characters will not be the sort of archetypal heroes we’ve seen on SG-1 and Atlantis, and that Rush in particular is not going to be lovable or heroic. Yes, a main character on a Stargate show might end up being, in the final judgment, a bad guy.
I find that fascinating. And I hope that, as a bad guy, he gets what he deserves for his actions.
Even if the writers did say her body was useless, it is a description that fits whether it is in good taste or not. They were getting the point across plain and simple. As for the whole “rape” thing. Camille was not the conscience in control of the body, and the other person went on with life, living as she saw fit with her new physical capabilities. Camille, when she finds out, will not be too happy, and might see him as someone who took advantage over her. But in fact, he did nothing like that and should not be… Read more »
So, you think that by insulting us you’ll make us go away? This entire article is written in a horribly condecending tone, and I for one, don’t appreciate it. It doesn’t matter if the casting documents are for us, the very fact that such a offensive bag of stereotypes is being bandied around by TPTB is disgusting. _You’re_ _still_ _not_ _getting_ _it_. Yes, science fiction is a place to explore some topics that are too much for the mainstream media. Yes, in the past the genre has opened new avenues and taught us things about ourselves -> even dark things… Read more »
That the casting description and script pages were not final versions or written by the writers/show runners is not the issue, in my opinion. The folks in charge of the franchise have clearly created an environment where insensitive and thoughtless treatment of women, people with disabilities, people of color, and in fact just about anyone is acceptable as a starting point. Describing the physical condition of the character as quadriplegic is more than sufficient to convey the casting requirements – describing the character’s body as ‘useless’ is unnecessary, cruel and insensitive. I agree that science fiction can and should take… Read more »
If you do not see how horrendously offensive this entire concept is I despair of having a conversation about it. butler said “no one is suggesting rape is right or wrong”!!!!
What the everlovin F????
IT IS WRONG! How is this even a question?
I am pretty much done with this debate as I feel like I am hitting my head against a solid brick wall of ignorance.
Just as I am sure that I am done with SGU, if themes like this are in play.
I’ll preface this by saying I haven’t actually read the scene from the sides, so if there’s something vital I’m missing, please point it out. But I have read the initial article, and this editorial, and my understanding of the episode’s scenario is that a woman – a quadreplegic – is bodyswapped with one of SGU’s main characters, and while temporarily in posession of the main character’s functional body, she and another main character have sex. How is that rape? You are your mind, your body is where you live. If you and your family did a house swap with… Read more »
@Stoko – in what way are we separate from our bodies? If your body dies, you’re gone. If you’re asleep or in a coma and someone has sex with your body, you’ve been raped. The fictional ability to separate body from consciousness does not relieve anyone of the responsibility to obtain consent from the owner of the body before engaging in sex. Sex without consent = rape.
You guys are crazy.
It’s a TV Show.
Geez, dude. It’s not a matter of what questions are raised. There’s no way Wright had in mind making Rush a complete villain from episode 16 on. He’s the main lead! Clearly Bradley didn’t think it would be seen as rape nor that it was that big a deal either way. Maybe Wray would slap Rush’s face next time she saw him in her own body, and that would be the end of it. Yes, it’s not the depiction, but you have no idea if the script as BW and the freelancer wrote it had any real consequences. Past history… Read more »
Darren, I will confess to not getting all the way through your write-up – I stopped at the line “It’s not meant for you” re: Casting Call. Whilst I agree that they are no substitute for the finished article, that does not mean that they can say what they want. These, in particular, were insensitive and offensive in their wording – just because people were not meant to see them does not mean this kind of behavior should be condoned. Isn’t that like saying something misogynistic/racist/homophobic about a person and justifying it by saying “well, nobody heard me?” The reading… Read more »
Camille will have the right to be freaked/creeped that a coworker has had sex with her body, and that her body has been in sexual contact with a gender she doesn’t find attractive, but her body wasn’t helpless or forced or coerced, and it takes two to tango. I’m gonna go with violation of trust on this one. And heck, like I said I haven’t read the scene, but I doubt Rush says anything like “I could take or leave it as far as your personality goes love, but the chance to have sex with that ice queen lesbian’s body?… Read more »
oh my god THANK YOU! You recognize, and are willing to go on record, with this intelligent breakdown of why science fiction is so good. It questions the status quo, brings up the what if, and shoves the possible outcomes right in your face. I don’t want to be fed a watered down pablum of dreck because it is safe. I want to see individuals deal with moral ambiguity, ethical travesty, failings of character – basically, their humanity, right or wrong. At the end of the day, only one thing is certain regarding this latest pre-production leap to conclusions. The… Read more »
@Sweeneybird – in what way are we separate from our bodies? I think pretty much everyone who believes in an afterlife, religion aside, would have a bone to pick with you there. Ghosts, out of body experiences, Heaven, Hell, I’m not saying I believe in such things, but many do, and every single one of those things requires the mind to exist beyond the body. I’m not talking real world fact, I’m talking hypothetical concept, which is what much of sci-fi is. In SGU, they have body swapping. How are we seperate from our bodies you ask? By leaving them… Read more »
@jmf: Yes, finally. I agree with you: defending the wording of the casting call by saying “it’s not meant for you to see” is frankly, astonishing – it reminds me of people who have said racist or homophobic things in front of me and, when I have pulled them up about it, defend themselves by arguing, “well, obviously I wouldn’t say that in front of a black/asian/gay person.” As though, as a straight white woman I would have no reason to be offended! The fact of the matter is, this has been poorly handled from the get-go. Disabled people, no… Read more »
@jmf. Why don’t you give Darren the courtesy and read the entire thing. @THE CHARACTER BREAKDOWN. The writers are saying that THIS CHARACTER has not been able to express intimacy and that this CHARACTER can finally do that. They are not saying that every person with this disability is completely and utterly unable to ever share any level of intimacy in their life. Once more, for those of you who don’t understand. Just because the writer’s have created a character that hasn’t been able to express intimacy, does not mean that they are saying that no disabled person can’t. Just… Read more »
and btw, to everyone who is saying that the producers should apologise… why don’t you read the reply that wright and cooper posted on gateworld forum… it reads like this “Recently, a casting breakdown was released to agents for a upcoming character in our television show, Stargate Universe. The character, Doctor Eleanor Perry, is a brilliant scientist at the top of her field, who also happens to be a quadriplegic. As part of a science fiction conceit that is core to our series, Perry’s consciousness is temporarily exchanged with one our series main characters, Camile Wray, who is a lesbian.… Read more »
@bluejello I totally agree with you. I mean, yeah, they’re trying to make this show more episodic than the previous ones, but it just smacks of being “edgy” and “daring” and “dark” for the sake of it. This article itself already said the Rush/Wray relationship was a strained one, so yeah, while this incident might strain it more, I think it’ll just be one of those thnigs that ends up swept under the rug as “one of the thousands of things” that drove a wedge between the two of them. Well, I say totally agree, I do disagree with the… Read more »
@jasonreadett I did go and read the rest, I just wanted to make sure people understood that my response was based on the article up until that point. My point being that the casting call was seen and that was what started the downward spiral of fan/producer back-and-forth that has made the situation worse. I also agree with you, Jason, on the point that by having a character who is disabled who can’t have sex is not saying that all disabled people can’t have sex. The problem here for me, however, is that many characters in Sci-Fi have to be… Read more »
jesus christ, its a dang tv show. there is nothing here to say its truly forced apon and who knows if he even knows if the womens mind is taken over, or maybe dr. rush and eleanor perry fell in love before the whole mind control thing, who knows until we watch the show. oh and shall i say ITS A DANG TV SHOW. if u watch firefly (in the episode where there defending the companions) there is forced oral sex in the middle of a town, note: there is no mind control and no being lost in space ships,… Read more »
Dudes it’s a TV show it’s NOT REAL. If you don’t want to watch it don’t. it’s that simple.
I find it odd that ‘breakdowns are not real’ and ‘casting documents aren’t meant for you’, because GW has used both for years as a source of news. As for the ‘you just aren’t qualified to criticize,’ well… just delete all the threads discussing it then, the criticism, the ‘this is the best thing ever’ posts, etc. You know as well as the next person on the net that once the news is out on the web, you can’t get it back. It develops a life of its own. Your editorial is, hmm, interesting, but it’s opinion and if we… Read more »
Well, it’s got everyone thinking already.
I think job well done.
Ps, if the idea, repulsive as it is, hadn’t already occured to before now, congratulations, it means you have a full and productive life outside of television and internet – keep up the good work.
@Stoko Thanks for replying, and for being so reasonable – the point I was trying to make is that for a disabled person, even a paraplegic person, the description of the physical body as “physically useless” is really badly thought out, in fact it is inaccurate. Of COURSE their body has usefulness – for one thing, it is keeping them alive! That seems pretty useful to me – heart beating, neurons firing, are these not useful functions of the body? I mean, walking, running and standing does not = usefulness. For all of us, disabled or abled, our bodies ARE… Read more »
prion, don’t take the comments out of context. Casting documents are a valuable source of information on in-production stories, and have always been reported as such. Until an episode is shot, edited, and locked, those details are subject to change. Not only do I think we should discuss episodes — both before and after they air — GateWorld largely exists for that purpose. My complaint is about the lack of discussion, the summary judgment that “This episode is going to be awful [or awesome]” based on work-in-process production documents. “Let the studio do the damage control?” If we were doing… Read more »
MY GOD ToO MaNY WoRDs!
DARREN Do what you LIke,
Tell everyone else to shut off
the TElly if they don’t like
what They SEe! I donT LikE GaY anythiNG
SO If I sEE anY ThINg unBEcoming, i’LL
ChanGE the channel or shut OfF the Telly,
Sally fourth!!!!!
…
To “notwatchingsgu” who wrote: “I don’t trust the actors” Wow. That’s an incredibly stupid thing to say and it pretty much invalidates anything you said before and after. Actors get paid to do a job, just like you get paid to do a job. What’s trust got to do with anythng? Should I tell YOU that I don’t trust you to do your job?
Good Lord: It’s an unfinished unaired episode of a series that hasn’t even premiered yet. I haven’t seen the scene on here so I don’t know what was in it but from what I’ve read here and in the apology that was issued I didn’t see anywhere where it said that Rush KNEW the body swap had happened. How would it be considered rape if he is unaware of what happened? Give me the link where the scene is and I’ll go read it and update my opinion as my morals see fit but from what I’ve seen I can… Read more »
the silly thing is, is that these casting documents aren’t written to offend all races creeds and religions. They’re not even written with the intention to be insensitive. They are written and posted off to agents who then forward them onto their actors. The actors then read them to get inspiration to create a character to show for the audition. To give you an example. To say in the brief that the quadriplegic’s body is useless is not so much a blunt description as it is a clue for the actor. An actor reading that sentence would see the word… Read more »
If we’re to compare SGU to BSG and bad guys as main leads, then, uh, hello…Gaius Baltar and all the cylons…bad bunch, and we loved them!
Yeah what the F**k was that Coremae? @bluejello Don’t turn what that word meant into something else, they clearly implied that by useless her body had no motor control etc. It is meant to make agents know what to look for, it has to be short and too the point. Her body can’t do much that is what they were saying, not that it has no use at all. I am upset that people think that this place and the people who comment here would belittle people with disabilities. While there is always a certain percentage that will do that… Read more »
I cannot wait to see this episode.
This moral and philosophical predicament is fascinating to say the least.
I am excited to think of how the ramifications of this episode will influence the characters and future events.
Stargate truely motivates us to explore ourselves not only as a race, but as individual people and ask ourselves what it really means to be human.
I couldn’t be more proud!
Important point that I think many people are missing… Anyone who explicitly defines what happens in this episode as rape OR not rape, is just plain wrong. The event is undefinable within our current way of experiencing the world. We cannot categorically call it rape, or not rape, because it doesn’t fit into either definition. By changing the rules, and making it so the persons entire consciousness is separate from their body, our limited definitions fall over. The event was both consensual and non-consensual, depending on what you consider a person to be. In the real world there can be… Read more »
I just want everyone to know no matter how horrible rape is, it is still life. So why are you bitchin and complaining when other movies have it and you care less. I want everyone to grow up and watch the episode before you judge. I mean come on you haven’t seen it. It’s acting, to those who are replying cause you were raped- I’m sorry- but it’s Fiction not real and if you can’t handle it then don’t watch the episode. I’m so tired of everyone judging before even seeing it.
Wow, Darren, I never said for fans to shut up. I made a sarcastic remark based on your remark ‘the ‘you just aren’t qualified to criticize.” There has been a lot of discussion by fans pointing out precisely what they do or don’t like about this episode based on available information. Fans aren’t just saying “I’m not watching” or “I hate it.” Most give reasons why they dislike or like what they’ve read. However, GW is the only place where the thread got closed down for a day because of too much discussion and of course, the usual furor and… Read more »
I have zero desire to watch a show where a main character is a rapist. Zero. I could give a flying eff how TPTB make rape “edgy” (wtf?) or how they make rape a “fascinating moral and philosophical predicament” (wtf?) or how they explain away not punishing Rush for the rape. Rape is rape is rape. Already there are fans who are trying to apologize for it or play it down, just like they did with Lucius. As long as we’re comparing this show to Galactica, the rape on Galactica was done by villains who were immediately punished. Rush is… Read more »
Maybe we should backtrack a decade or so and see if there’s any other glimpses on “insensitivity” out there. You know, in casting calls and such that are written in tight, insensitive language to get the bare bones across to agents/actors. Or in the writing itself. . . Perhaps think of the burning bodies left from SG-1’s little body swap. Of course that has no merit next to ‘rape’. I suppose. What do you guys thing? That the writers just want to feed a fetish? They’re exploring the idea for a reason, because it’s sensitive, because it’ll get people to… Read more »
Wow. The episode hasn’t even been shot yet. You guys are making WAY too many assumptions. Yes. ASSUMPTIONS.
The episode needs to be shot :P
Wow folks are being attacked by the editor of GW because they have an opinion? Here I thought censoring on the GW forums was the lowest.