"The Coming of Shadows" discussion

[ruuger]

This is the discussion post for the episode 2X09, "The Coming of Shadows". Spoilers for the whole of the series, including the spin-offs and tie-ins, are allowed here so newbies beware.

Summary:
The Centauri emperor visits Babylon 5.

Extra reading:
The article for "The Coming of Shadows" at Lurker's Guide.

Comments

[vjs2259.livejournal.com]

I would imagine the Centauri are a sort of constitutional monarchy; hereditary emperor if there is a clear line of succession, elected (or selected emperor if there isn't a logical successor (or a regent if the appointed emperor is underage or unable to serve at that moment). Sort of like England post the Stuarts. Centaurum members might be elected, or they might inherit their seats. Vir is a Senator when Londo is Emperor; sounds more like elections. I never got the impression Vir's family was that well-situated.

You know, I really love Vir as a character, but excusing his silence in the face of mass murder due to personal loyalty is a little tough for me. Silence because of feeling helpless and overwhelmed and uncertain seems more Vir. And who knows if at this point he really thinks of the Narn as fully human? Most Centauri don't seem to. Refa tries to make the point that this outpost is a military one, but I don't think that's proven by any means.
Vir comes to understand that we all have choices, even when we don't think we do, and he works his way back from his personal abyss. None of these characters is pure and innocent, and that is why I love B5.

My apologies to those who worship Valen! (But Sinclair is still nuts. And a good thing too. Sometimes you have to be crazy in order to get done what needs done.)

[amatara.livejournal.com]

With regards to Vir's motivation to keep silent: hmm, hard one.

Just to be clear: I'm not saying that I'm excusing him, I do think his decision was wrong... It's just that for some reason, probably because of his inherent goodness combined with the fact he did stand up to Londo, if to no one else, I never asked myself that question - how guilty is he, and why didn't he do anything? - before.

Feeling overwhelmed must surely have had something to do with it, I agree. However, at that point Vir is no longer the silent, helpless aide he was before, and in a lot of ways (think of his encounter with the Techno-Mages) he's braver than many give him credit for. So I don't think that fear to speak out was his most important reason - not fear for himself, in any case.

I still think his relationship with Londo was his main reason for staying silent. Partly out of an "I'm the aide, you're the ambassador, so I'm supposed to do as I'm told" reflex (yep, the "just following orders" - which I am not excusing here, I'm just saying it could be a reason). But also because Londo is the single person Vir is close to at the time, and to betray that person - well, I think that, for Vir, would be a very hard line to cross. Also, isn't it usually true that people find it much easier to care about one person getting hurt than about a major disaster occurring miles away - hence it's easier to ignore said major disaster? Like many people care about famines, without doing much about it; however, when someone they know dies of cancer, that's a different story. So, for Vir, I think the immediate concern of Londo might well have prevailed over the much more serious, but also more distant concern of war... It's not an excuse, but it is very human. (and Centauri, too, I assume *g*)

[vjs2259.livejournal.com]

Okay, I'll give you the caring for friends/your own people trumps the far away foreigner, but what is the danger to Londo? What is Vir's concern? That Londo will lose the respect of Lord Refa? That Londo won't eventually become Emperor? At this point we don't know how far these people will go (poor Prime Minister Malachi!) and I don't really think Vir was concerned about Londo's safety. His reputation and his career maybe, but then we're back to not very good reasons.
Did Vir completely grasp what was going on? Londo doesn't 'get' what happens to Malachi, at least not immediately, so Vir probably didn't either. Maybe it's a function of his goodness, his innocence, that he doesn't take it seriously enough.
And there is still the issue of whether it would have helped. Who does he tell? What does he say? Perhaps he's trapped in silence.
Later Vir seems more concerned with Londo's soul (if that isn't too grandiose a statement). He wants Londo to make good decisions and regret his prior bad decisions for purposes of his own redemption. Vir eventually cuts himself loose from Londo, but without ever throwing him over completely--he always cares, does Vir.

[amatara.livejournal.com]

With that I can agree completely: I don't think Vir is concerned about danger to Londo, or even damage to his reputation, at this point. In fact, I don't even know if he has a good and rational reason for doing (or not doing) what he did. Maybe at this point, despite knowing in his heart(s) that Refa is not up to anything good, he still trusts Londo enough to give him the benefit of the doubt. And maybe he was just afraid of letting Londo down, however good the reason. And maybe he didn't see the full scope of things yet. In any case, he'd probably be regarded by a blood traitor by his own people if he talked. And whether it would have helped - no one knows, I guess. He could have told a relatively neutral party like Sheridan or the Minbari, and maybe something good would have come out of that... or, it could just have started the bloodshed faster, with the Narn out for revenge.

But, um... I'm getting a bit confused now as to what your position on all of this is, really. You think that not speaking up makes Vir guilty, right, but you believe he did it because he wasn't aware of the danger? (Sorry for asking stupid questions - it's getting late, and my brain is having a hard time keeping up. *sheepish grin*)

He always cares, does Vir.
Amen to that. And it comforts me to no end that, despite the sad fates reserved for nearly every other major character, Vir gets through all of it just fine. Sometimes the kind-hearted persons really do get a happy end. :) (More often, however... oh, Lennier. Oh, Susan. Oh, Marcus. Oh, Lyta.)

[vjs2259.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry it got confusing; I was working it out as I went along. Plus I have a terrible tendency to play Devil's Advocate and argue both sides just for fun.

I was thinking of Edmund Burke's quotation as I re-watched the episode; 'All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.' I don't mean to put the burden of events on Vir. He does argue with Londo, trying to change his mind. But that bit at the end, when he tells Londo he'll confront him in the future about how this was a wrong decision...I started to think, 'And what exactly are you doing but going along with it, Vir?' Also I kept wishing someone would do something...which I guess shows the power of the show, that I get caught up in the story every time.

Or then again, maybe I'm just in a cranky mood. ;)

[amatara.livejournal.com]

Playing devil's advocate: no, not such a terrible tendency at all - I indulge in it myself sometimes. I just realized, there at the end, that I was probably trying to convince you of something without knowing what said "something" was anymore. That's when it got confusing. *g*

I didn't know that quotation, but yes, very true. And there's a fine line between when silence is just a bad but understandable choice, and when it's plain morally wrong not to speak out.

[widsidh.livejournal.com]

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing

That is precisely what Vir is doing, and (partly) why he is here as a character.
Here is the general decent everyman, he does see what is going on, at least enough to guess that it is no good will come out of it, but he doesn't do anything to prevent it. Maybe out of loyalty for Londo, maybe out of fear or because hefels he should do as he is told, or maybe just telling himself that everything will work out in the end.
For all our good intentions, most of us do not really know how we would react in these situation, and history tells that most people, normal, intelligent dcent people, are overcome by one or the other of these motiveation (or somthing similar). because at the end of the day it is *easier* to do nothing and not think of the consequences. No this is not an excvuse. It is merely an explanation.
Vir shows us that no later attempts at atonement can quite make up for the initial lack of action.

There is a line in the Catholic mass (and similar ones in most other Christian orders of service), where the worshippers ask to be forgiven "for what we have done and what we have failed to do". I have always found the second half the more important.

[vjs2259.livejournal.com]

There is a line in the Catholic mass (and similar ones in most other Christian orders of service), where the worshippers ask to be forgiven "for what we have done and what we have failed to do".

Exactly. On a personal note, I have little doubt that I would have done what Vir did in that situation, or even less; and probably I would not have gone as far as he did later to make amends. He is an amiable everyman, and an entry character for a lot of people. Perhaps that's why he got the (relatively) happy ending.

[maspalio.livejournal.com]

You know, I really love Vir as a character, but excusing his silence in the face of mass murder due to personal loyalty is a little tough for me.

This is quite fascinating because I never thought about Vir's guilt until now. It never even occurred to me that he was guilty, but you're right, he *is*. Maybe I was too focused on Londo's obvious faults to see this before.

Anyway, I don't have anything to say that hasn't been said before, but I wanted to thank you for initiating this debate.

(Also, I understand perfectly well what you meant but it's been bugging me... Narns are not fully human. They are fully Narn. Maybe "fully sentient" would be more appropriate? I'm not sure...)

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

I like a very early line in James White's Sector General series, in which a Terran character is told, to avoid confusion, never to refer to himself as "human" when talking to aliens, as in a universe where everyone has magic hi-tech translation "human" is always translated to the word that means "us" in each culture's language. Which some people may interpret as a position that is "colourblind" in the bad denying-difference-to-avoid-noticing-discrimination way, but I quite like.

[vjs2259.livejournal.com]

You're welcome, I guess! I've been trying to use the re-watch to catch new angles; sometimes it works.

Aargh, as to 'human'. It's hard to catch those humanisms in speech/writing! I have the same problem with 'man' and 'woman'. Male and female don't always work as substitutes when aliens are talking together, and making up gender nouns can be clunky.

'Sentient' doesn't quite work either. Narns are obviously sentient. (As an aside; I had to look that word up. Answers.com says it means experiencing sensation or feeling. Kind of a broader definition than I thought. I was going with a Descartes-like awareness of their own existence.) We get some hints that the Centauri consider them barbaric. And even some humans (in Season One; that goes away quickly.) Backward? Below them? Unworthy? Animals? *goes off to think*