Babylon 5

[D'kian]

About time this series got a thread of its own.

The good:

1) It's an arc show, telling a story of a certain time period over five sesons of shows. This sets it apart from all otehr TV shows I can think of.

2) The main event of the show's plot is a massive war. This is preceeded by signs of the building war, then we see the war itself, then the messy aftermath. The last is a nice addition, as the story doesn't end in the climax.

3) The characters are interesting, they change through time and some main characters even die or leave the story in other ways. Again this is unusual for TV.

4) The story is interesting, well-crafted and follows its internal logic consistently. It provides drama, conflict between the main characters, heroes and villains.

5) SF specific, there are non-humanoid aliens. not many, but a few. This sets it apart from actors in costume as found in other SF series. The show also made use of extensive CGI effects. It also provided the most realistic space battles I can recall(not entirely realistic, but closer than anything else).

The bad:

1) The morality of the heroes is altruistic, both implicitly and explicitly.

2) There's a hell of a LOT of mysticism at every turn, religious and otherwise.

SPOILERS FOLLOW!!! POCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!!!!!!!!!! THEY WILL SPOIL THE SERIES IF YOU HAVNE'T WATCHED IT!!!!!!!!!

I MEAN IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The semi-reediming quality:

When confronted to make a choice between the Shadows and the Vorlons, the Alliance chooses neither and instead opts for freedom from both. Since this means intellectual domination by the Minbari, it also means altruism. But it's something.

Compared to a novel or series of novels, B5 acquits itself quite well regarding aspects of plot, theme and characterization, even when there were important cast changes in the second season, namely the replacement of Sinclair with John Sheridan. The reson J. Michael Straczinsky (JMS from here on) pulled it off was because Sinclair would eventually be gone from the series anyway, though much later on (at the time of War Without End to be precise). SO he was able to transfer some of Sinclair's story to Sheridan, while giving Sinclair a novel and a comic book to tie up loose ends.

Spekaing of novels, popular TV series and some movies, at least in SF, spawn novels. Some of them are good, some not, but usually they don't advance the story. The B5 novels do, at least some of them. Notably there are three trilogies that provide background and settle loose ends from the show:

1) The Psi-Corps trilogy. This tells about how telepaths first arise on Earth, how the Psi-Corps is fomred and what happens afterwards, notably to the Psi Cop Bester. it's ok, but the lesser of the three.

2) The Centauri Prime trilogy. As B5 ends we learn Londo ascends to the throne of the "Republic" under the influence of the Drakh. The trilogy shows what happens nect. In a way it was disappointing, because I think Londo gets away with too much and is pushed to the side. On the other hand Vir emerges as a hero. We also get to see technomages in action. But that brings me to:

3) The Technomage trilogy. This sheds a lot of light to a minor aspect of the B5 universe. The story is told from the points of view of Elric, Galen, Kosh Naranek and, surprisingly, what's left of Anna Sheridan. Galen is the protagonist, and of course his story intertwines with important events in the series. We learn the source of the technomages power, the extent, more or less, of these powers, plus how the technomages live and how they rule themselves. The mysticism reahces a maximum in this one, but it's still a worthwhile read. IN fact, it deserves a thread of its own.

There are other novels that fill in holes or advance the story a bit. "To Dream In The City Of Sorrows" tells us what happens with SInclair after he elaves Babylon 5. "The Shadow Within" has some backstory on the Sheridans and Morden (not enough to justify a novel, though). Of the TV movies released, only two are in any way relevant: B5 In The Beginning, which tells the story of the Earth-Minbari war, and A Call To Arms, which sets up the stage for the Crusade spinoff.

Even with the novels, there's a lot of B5 story left untold. JMS attempted to do a big part of it with a spinoff sereis called Crusade, but it was cancelled after half a season. Later he came up with the Lost Tales of Babylon 5, but apaprently this direct to DVD venture has fallen through. there's intermittent talk fo a theatrical movie, but I don't think it will ever come to pass.

I think JMS should invite more writers in, give them outlines and let them tell what remains to be told.

[Greyhawk]

I have pikal envy.

[bluecherry]

It is a pretty darn good show. I've seen most of it and heard spoilers galore about what I haven't seen yet from the people who own the series DVDs that I was watching it with.

4) The story . . . follows its internal logic consistently.

Mostly, but I still contend that

it fell into some time paradoxes anyway. Namely, the original captain, when he goes back in time to become the great "Minbari not from Minbar" takes upon a name based upon what he'd heard the name of that special religious figure was supposed to be and, worse still, where the hell did those crystal things come from that made him into a Minbari/human combo? Didn't he take and use the ones he got from Delenn who is supposed to have gotten them inherited from him? So where did those things come from originally then, eh?

I swear I got into the longest argument watching this show with some people one day over the episode where there's

that guy who thinks he is King Arthur. They insisted the guy should just be humored while I thought that was ridiculous and just giving up on him before even trying and that humoring him was not a long term plan for helping him but only securing things to go badly.

[D'kian]

Mostly, but I still contend that

it fell into some time paradoxes anyway.

I hope the spoiler tags work in quotes.

I concede the paradoxes. They're inevitable when doing time travel, unless you want to have pre-determination (sometimes not even then). So for a high-impact ep like War Without End, I'm willing to overlook them.

As to the items in question, JMS said something about it in his usenet group. Much of it's collected at the Lurker's Guide to B5. try this link: http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/us/guide/060.html

(BTW the Guide used to be hosted at a domain called hyperion.net. JMS named an Earth cruiser Hyperion in their honor. He didn't name anything midwinter, though).

[aristotlejones]

The good:

1) It's an arc show, telling a story of a certain time period over five sesons of shows. This sets it apart from all otehr TV shows I can think of.

Excluding most scifi shows produced outside of America, such as the UK, Australia, Japan, etc.

2) The main event of the show's plot is a massive war. This is preceeded by signs of the building war, then we see the war itself, then the messy aftermath. The last is a nice addition, as the story doesn't end in the climax.

There are wars going on throughout the series.

Earth/Dilgar, Earth/Minbari, Centauri/Narn, Mars/Earth, EA/B5 Rebels, Army of Light/Shadows n Vorlons, B5/Raiders, PsiCorps/Rogue Telepaths, Earth/Drakh...

I think the main event of the series was the fact that one must fight for one's values, and that the primary values are life and freedom.

3) The characters are interesting, they change through time and some main characters even die or leave the story in other ways. Again this is unusual for TV.

And again, not unusual for TV or other media made in the rest of the world. However, plot driven series are becoming the norm in the US thanks to the ground rebroken by JMS.

4) The story is interesting, well-crafted and follows its internal logic consistently. It provides drama, conflict between the main characters, heroes and villains.

And the stories/series portray a universe where actions have consequences, where courage and independent thought are rewarded, and where characters are three dimensional in that most of them do the right thing in spite of their past.

5) SF specific, there are non-humanoid aliens. not many, but a few. This sets it apart from actors in costume as found in other SF series. The show also made use of extensive CGI effects. It also provided the most realistic space battles I can recall(not entirely realistic, but closer than anything else).

Farscape matches B5's level of characterization and authentic portrayal of aliens, but I think this quibble should only apply to ST's use of interchangeable forehead appliances. B5 had many believable humanoid aliens of whom one could appreciate their alienness, but not be distracted by their costuming & makeup. In other words, they were believable as characters, not just because they had five or more appendages...

The bad:

1) The morality of the heroes is altruistic, both implicitly and explicitly.

2) There's a hell of a LOT of mysticism at every turn, religious and otherwise.

There is a surfeit of altruistic and mystical/religious people in American at the present time. Does that mean you recommend painting everyone who happens to inhabit a particular orbiting location in space with the same broad brush? JMS has stated that he includes mystical/religious people in his fiction because not to do so >would< be unrealistic.

As to your claim that the morality of the heroes is altruistic: are you saying that those who chose to serve their country/race as their protectors are altruistic? There are many times where the heroes question whether their roles are just, but no where does JMS imply that anyone is without a moral choice, or that they have a duty to others to sacrifice their lives or freedom.

The semi-reediming quality:

When confronted to make a choice between the Shadows and the Vorlons, the Alliance chooses neither and instead opts for freedom from both. Since this means intellectual domination by the Minbari, it also means altruism. But it's something.

Until the relationship between the Earthers and the Minbari was revealed, the Minbari did manipulate the Earthers, or neglected to tell them the full truth until they were ready to handle it, or needed to know. As a race far in advance of Earth, on a moral level, they had the obligation to their own race to not let baby play with the nukes until they could show they were responsible.

However, your accusing the Minbari of "intellectual domination" is nonsensical because the term is actually an oxymoron, or to use Rand's terminology, an anti-concept. This is the core of her epistemology as applied to social interactions, that the virtue of independence is the unwillingness to accept a statement of another as true or necessary unless you yourself have done the math. A mind cannot be dominated, only threatened with death. We always have a choice to think, to grasp all that is before us, or to evade or go along with others, however intimidating they may be. But that choice remains, and it is the only choice that matters to rational heroes. How you render this equivalent with altruism, I cannot say, as I cannot understand it.

Stay Focused,

<*> aj

The universe runs on the complex interweaving of three elements: energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest. G'Kar

Never apply a Star Trek solution to a Babylon 5 scale problem. Seen at Fermilab & NASA

[J. Michael Straczynski, the producer of Babylon 5, when a fan told him that he was God]: "Thank you, but I'm afraid I can't accept your compliment. You see, I'm an atheist, so if I'm also God, that would mean that I don't believe in myself, and at this point in my life, I don't need the added insecurity."

Edited October 19, 2009 by aristotlejones

[aristotlejones]

I concede the paradoxes. They're inevitable when doing time travel, unless you want to have pre-determination (sometimes not even then). So for a high-impact ep like War Without End, I'm willing to overlook them.

As to the items in question, JMS said something about it in his usenet group. Much of it's collected at the Lurker's Guide to B5. try this link: http://www.midwinter.com/lurk/countries/us/guide/060.html

JMS has a holographic mind. Well, we all do actually, but few of us operate on that level.

If there are paradoxes in his time travel threads, you might want to dig more deeply into his replies to answers on this topic before writing him off. There are better resources than the Lurkers Guide out now.

One is the Babylon podcast: which is into its 175th episode, and which has interviews of most of the cast members by now, and a two parter with JMS. http://www.babylonpodcast.com/

Also, there are a series of annotated script books published by Cafe Press, and recently a set of five books called Asked and Answered, the ultimate FAQ by JMS. http://www.cafepress.ca/B5books

Regards,

<*>aj

Edited October 19, 2009 by aristotlejones

[D'kian]

It's late and I can't take the time to post a full reply. I'll do it later. Meantime:

JMS has stated that he includes mystical/religious people in his fiction because not to do so >would< be unrealistic.

Granted. Yet none of the main characters are atheists, and all accept an altruistic morality implicitly or explicitly.

There's also a great deal of talk about a sentient Universe, sort of, which uses sentient beings to figure itself out. This seems to me to be JMS's belief.

As to your claim that the morality of the heroes is altruistic: are you saying that those who chose to serve their country/race as their protectors are altruistic? There are many times where the heroes question whether their roles are just, but no where does JMS imply that anyone is without a moral choice, or that they have a duty to others to sacrifice their lives or freedom.

Do you recall Delenn's mentor stating an important attribute of sentient beings is the capacity for self-sacrifice? How about "We live for The One. We die for The One"? Especially when fervently uttered by Marcus in a heated battle? The Vorlons believed some must be sacrificed so others could be saved, while the Shadows believed in wholesale sacrifice to "improve" the younger races. In the glimpses we get of the future, we see a human acting a lot like a Vorlon (Deconstruction of Falling Stars).

There's more. We'll get to it later.

[D'kian]

If there are paradoxes in his time travel threads, you might want to dig more deeply into his replies to answers on this topic before writing him off. There are better resources than the Lurkers Guide out now.

I'm not writing him off. Paradoxes in time travel are simply the cost of doing business, so to speak. The one way out is determinism, and that's simply worse. Just check out any time travel story, book or movie and, if the events lead back to the present, you will find paradoxes.

And thanks for the links. The Guide pretty much stopped once Crusade did.

[Robert J. Kolker]

Contrary to your assertion, Battle Star Galactica had a definitive story arc.

It was about a war for survival. It had a beginning, a middle and an end.

Bob Kolker

[Greebo]

Contrary to your assertion, Battle Star Galactica had a definitive story arc.

It was about a war for survival. It had a beginning, a middle and an end.

Bob Kolker

Not, as far as I am aware, from conception. The story arc for B5 was planned out through its conclusion prior to the first episode being filmed. BSG, on the other hand, didn't seem to start with a full story in mind as much as it followed the more classic path - try show, show succeeds, freak out and come up with all kinds of good ideas but don't think them through, then end up with lots of holes, conflicts and general chaos. Milk success as long as possible, then come up with a "wrap up story" that closes all the holes resorting to any means necessary including dues ex machina.

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

I thoroughly enjoyed Babylon 5 even though it was too focused on mysticism in the series, but with science fiction, the mysticism was really aliens who had certain technologies and powers that man didn't have. In that sense, I would say it wasn't mysticism but rather imagination. I do think the series was full of heroism, and not all of it was altruistic. The story lines kept me interested in the characters and I loved the way mankind was presented as being important in the grand scheme of things going on in the galaxy during that time period. Most of the plots were well done in the context of the overall story line, and I loved the way the heroes stood up for themselves under very overwhelming circumstances. The overall story line was epic in nature. It's been a while since I've seen it, and my DVD player is on the fritz and I haven't watched episodes via the Internet, but my overall assessment is that it was great science fiction.

There is a sense in which the major war ended when Sheridan representing mankind, rejected both the intrinsicism of the Vorlons and the subjectivism of the Shadows. What he wanted was the freedom to be in the universe without being manipulated by either side of the very long conflict between those master races.

It certainly wasn't philosophically perfect, but it was definitely worth watching.

[D'kian]

I thoroughly enjoyed Babylon 5 even though it was too focused on mysticism in the series, but with science fiction, the mysticism was really aliens who had certain technologies and powers that man didn't have. In that sense, I would say it wasn't mysticism but rather imagination.

I wouldn't dream of calling alien technologies mysticism.

Look. I'm not in a "If Ayn Rand didn't write it's all altruism, mysticims and whim-worship" kind of rant. There's a great deal of mysticism in the B5 Universe, all of it created by JMS himself.

To start with in the B5 universe there is life sfter death. We know this because 1) There's the scene where Lyta is scanning a Rabger near deat and experiences his mind after he dies and 2) "The Day of the Dead" Episode. It was a great ep, well-written, and it provided a lot of fodder for Lennier and Lochley, but it's all msyticism.

Second, we heard a lto from many sources, about what the universe wants, what the universe feels, what the universe thinks, etc. This is a kind of secular religion akin to the worship of Nature or the Earth by modern environemntalists, minus the man is evil aspect of enviromentalism (JMS does have the right sense of life, after all). And I suspect that may be more or less JMS's own belief

Now, as to altruism, largely it was implied, but it was explicit in all Minbari attitudes. Juts listen to Delenn in many episodes. take the episode where Susan is trying to keep a young, budding telepath out of the Psy-Corps. Delenn explains in minbar telepaths perform only public services, helping those in need of their talents, and live by the alms tossed their way by those grateful enough. Consider the whole philosophy behind the Rangers.

I do think the series was full of heroism, and not all of it was altruistic.

Certainly. Take Garibaldi. In the end all he cares about is to remain sober and to win the love of the woman he loves. Everything else is secondary to that. In the Centaury trilogy books the Drakh get to hold John Sheridan adn Delenn, not by threatening wholesale destruction, but by kidnapping their son. They risk everything to get him safely back.

I loved the show, I would have liked Crusade to continue (despite the stated plot, I don't think the entire run of that series would have been about finding a cure for the Drakh Plague), I would have like The Lost Tales to continue, I would like nothing better than for JMS to write an outline about all that's missing from B5 and let loose his choice of writers on it. But there were some flaws and I've pointed them out.

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

Yes, there was the typical human mysticism and a lot of reliance on religion for some of the episodes. And that made it less enjoyable in those episodes than I enjoy Star Trek. But overall, the more "mystical" elements were things that man hadn't figured out yet regarding the nature of the universe. For some reason or other, probably due to Kant, many science fiction shows just have a lot of strangeness in them, that is not alien produced; as a way of saying we don't know about everything in the universe. So, in a science fiction show, it is permissible to, say, detect the soul by some means after death -- because they have developed the ability to do that with telepathy or technology. I think it's bonkers in that I don't think there is a soul (in the sense of some element or contribution to man's physical nature) that is there but we cannot detect yet. But I wouldn't claim it is mysticism if someone made a show where this was detected using some science fiction element, because it is an aspect of projected science, not faith. Mysticism is more about believing in something without evidence and against reason, but if they can detect it, then there is evidence -- in that fictional universe. It does not give credence to modern faith, because it isn't real evidence, just a projection of what some sci-fi writer projects we might be able to detect in some future time. Think of it as hyperspace or faster than light star drives. It's just imagination, which isn't the same thing as mysticism. There were people who still believed in God without evidence in B5, and the Minbari had some strange beliefs themselves; so, yes, in that sense it was mysticism, and I think that took away from the science fiction of it.

However, I enjoyed it overall. Not saying it was philosophically perfect, just enjoyable as science fiction on a grand epic level view of man and his place in the universe.

[D'kian]

So, in a science fiction show, it is permissible to, say, detect the soul by some means after death -- because they have developed the ability to do that with telepathy or technology.

I don't think so. Not only is there no evidence for a soul, but there isn't even any rational reason to suspect there may be such a thing. So saying "in the future it may be discovered with technology," is ridiculous. For that matter we could say the same thing about God, magic, spontaneous generation, heaven, hell, etc etc.

There's a series of stories by H. Beam Piper collected in "The Complete Paratime." I love that book and have re-read it amny times. One of the better stories, a novella, deals with a timeline where science has uncovered evidence not only of a soul, but of reincarnation as well. I like the story beacuse it takes an unusual premise and searches for its consequences. But the premise itself is mysticism, regardless of how scientifically it is treated (and it is treated scientifically, with experiments, proofs, etc).

Think of it as hyperspace or faster than light star drives. It's just imagination, which isn't the same thing as mysticism.

I often run accross this kind of thinking. Here's my standard response:

1) Faster than light travel is possible according to what we know of physics. What's not possible is travel at the speed of light. Of course common sense tells us we cannot go from 299,999.99999999 kps (to use round numbers) to 300,001 kps without ever reaching 300,000 kps. But we also know of such things as changes in quantum states (albeit at a subatomic level only), so FTL is at least plausible.

2) There's good reason to suspect there are more than three spatial dimensions. In some of them distanes may be shorter than in others (think about going accross a balloon rather than around its circumference). So, again, it's remotely plausible.

So the difference is a tiny, subatomic if you will, reason to believe such things might be possible that allows for FTl and hyperspace to be used as plot devices in SF. Not so with the soul, life after death, God, reincarnation and other mystical ideas.

I could come up scientific-sounding effects, from cosmic rays to gravity waves to minute alterations to gene shapes, to explain, within an SF story, how astrology is valid, and how the positions of stars adn planets affect people in their lives. That would not make astrology any less mystical than it is.

[ZSorenson]

What there could never be are things that operate without reason. An unknowable truth. An omniscient God. An infinite life. A soul that operates in ways that cannot be understood.

However, technically there could be a superbeing that controls things. There could be a 'soul' that takes material form as 'phantom particles' that can be detected, but only barely.

Of course, there is no solid evidence for any of this. So we shouldn't believe it. But there could be things we're not aware of (though they usually derive from the impossible concepts of the first line when it comes to SF)

[D'kian]

This is as good a time as any to post my B5 jokes:

1) B5/DS9 Crossover scene 1:

Kira: What do you make of the prophets, Ambassador?

Kosh: Amateurs.

2) B5/DS9 Crossover scene 2:

Sisko: Welcome to Deep Space Nine.

Sheridan: Nine? Man, you people are freaking persistent!

3) One fine day on B5 Ambassador Kosh receives a communication from the Vorlon Homeworld. He decodes it and reads:

"Dear Son, I miss you very much. I know you ahve your own life and work, and I know fighting the ancient enemy and imposing Order on the younger races is vital, but you've neglected me enough. So, will you come here, or should I come visit you?"

Immediately Kosh sends an answer: "Yes."

A few minutes later he receives the folowing: "Yes, what?"

So he replies "Yes, mother."

4) Q: How many Centauri does it take to screw-in a light bulb?

A: none. they like it in the Shadows.

5) Q: Why did the Minbari cross the road?

A: Understanding is not necessary, only obedience.

6) Q: How many Earthers does ti take to sccrew-in a light bulb?

A: Two. One to do it and one to report it to the Night Watch.

7) Susan Ivanova's pearls of wisdom:

"If morning is the best part of the day for you, doesn't that mean your day only keeps getting progressingly more annoying?"

"Coffee justifies nearly everything."

"Make sure you are certain you know who sent you flowers."

"Make sure to catalogue the full extent of your stupidity before you do something stupid. Afterwards may be too late."

"Ivanova is always right."

8) B5/Pinky & The Brain crossover scene 1:

Brain: Are you pondering what I'm pondering?

Pinky: I think so, Brain. But, what if the Vorlon won't wear the nylons?

9) The origin of the Vorlon vs Shadow conflict:

Aeons ago Ulkesh Naranek tried placing a call to his brother(!) Kosh. However the subspace link bounced off an errant hyperspace current and his call reached the night side of Z'ha'dum(spelling optional).

Unfortunately this call woke up a Shadow who was in the middle of a ahort 500 year nap. Understandably she was upset when she answered the phone.

On his part, Ulkesh was upset to find a sleepy Shadow rather than Kosh.

Ulkesh said "Who are you?" at the same time the Shadow said "What do you want?"

It all went downhill from there.

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

This is as good a time as any to post my B5 jokes:

You know you've been watching too much TV when all of those jokes makes sense

Regarding my views of mysticism versus imagination or fantasy, I agree there is no evidence for a soul in the Christian sense and the existence of God and that their views on that are mystical (having no evidence). But I think it becomes artistic fantasy when an artist shows what is on his mind regarding these views and presents a world in which there is evidence for these things (if he actually shows it). As an example, in the Star Gate series, the Ancients ascended, becoming pure energy without the need of a body. While this is similar to the Christian view of the soul freed from the body, the artist in those cases shows it happening -- you know, with special effects. It is a secularized version of the Christian mysticism, and the artist is showing us this. So, I think it is fantasy rather than mysticism. It's like showing man going to the moon in a hot air balloon, which we know to be impossible; or like showing fairies or goblins (since it is Halloween). I do think the better science fiction doesn't do this, insofar as the better science fiction sticks with what the artist projects is possible without violating reason.

[D'kian]

You know you've been watching too much TV when all of those jokes makes sense

So you didn't think they're funny?

Oh, well:

10) Q: how many Centauri does it take to screw-in a light bulb? (this is a different joke)

A: Two. One to do it and one to mix the drinks.

11) Sign at the Vorlon Tourist Office: "We have never been here."

11b) Another sign seen at the Vorlon Tourist Office: "If you go to Z'ha'dum you will die."

Regarding my views of mysticism versus imagination or fantasy, I agree there is no evidence for a soul in the Christian sense and the existence of God and that their views on that are mystical (having no evidence). But I think it becomes artistic fantasy when an artist shows what is on his mind regarding these views and presents a world in which there is evidence for these things (if he actually shows it).

Have you read any of the novels? None were written by JMS, but some are from outlines done by him, and others were aproved by him as officially part of the B5 cannon. Specifically the three "official" trilogies about Psi-Corps, the Centauri and the Technomages, and a stand alone volume called "To Dream In The City Of Sorrows," which deals with how Sinclair got involved with the Rangers and how he proceeded from there (it also contains Marcus' "origin story").

The last one has lots of Minbari metaphysics and mysticism. The Technomage books, though superb, suffer from too much of a fixation in "transcending ones' self" and musings about god.

As an example, in the Star Gate series, the Ancients ascended, becoming pure energy without the need of a body. While this is similar to the Christian view of the soul freed from the body, the artist in those cases shows it happening -- you know, with special effects. It is a secularized version of the Christian mysticism, and the artist is showing us this. So, I think it is fantasy rather than mysticism.

So were where you on the Stargate thread?

I would agree, had the Ancients used some sort of ascension machine or gadget. As it is they simply find "enlightment" and their minds do the rest. That's not just ridiculous, it also strains the suspension of disbelief and introduces mysticism into the series. Not to mention the Ancients' "Prime Directive," which was a plot device to keep the main cast from becoming obsolete

[Thomas M. Miovas Jr.]

I think the main importance of good science fiction is that it shows man the hero on a universal level, but I do think utter fantasy (or mysticism as you call it) does detract from the importance of it. I do think the jokes were funny, but not roll on the floor funny, and I was more making a comment about myself understanding the jokes than trying to say you watched too much TV.

Science fiction and the detective stories on TV are some of the last vestiges of romanticism, showing man the hero. The more realistic it is the better. As an example, I don't like "Sanctuary" or "Warehouse 13" because they are too much in the fantasy realm. I liked "Babylon 5" because for the most part it was science fiction and not so much fantasy -- i.e. man being out in the universe and encountering things he might not understand, but having a fundamental understanding of existence and doing what he could in that context. But it has been too long since I've seen the series to be specific, and no I haven't read the novels.

Rationally, existence exists and only existence exists, and man's knowledge gained on earth is applicable to the entire universe, and the better science fiction shows that. To the extent that the shows violate that knowledge premise, they are flawed (but can still be enjoyed). I definitely enjoy good science fiction, and I'm not sure why I didn't get involved in the StarGate discussions; though I did enjoy those shows.

Anyhow, I'm kind of babbling in this post, but I definitely recommend "The Romantic Manifesto" to better understand romanticism and why science fiction is an aspect of romanticism -- of man making heroic decisions in a context.