FarscapeWeekly Farscape Is Farscape Good Sci Fi opinion part 3

Home ¤ Is Farscape Good Sci-Fi? part 3

Is Farscape Good Sci-Fi? part 3
Tom Francis ¤ March 2002

Start with Part 1, or go back to Part 2.

An Apology: The final part of this short treatise on Farscape is late because of lack of time on my part to complete it. I recently became very busy with real life activities and something had to give. It is not Joan's fault - it is completely mine.

Here we are - Part III already. Is Farscape good sci-fi? Will there be a tomorrow? Will I be lynched by legions of Farscape fans if I ever show my face at a convention?

Let's find out.

In Part I, we took a look at the actors, the visual elements and the simple overall plot line. In Part II, we examined the music, the writing, directing/producing and the character interaction with both each other and with the stories.

So, can we reach a fair conclusion based on what we have seen so far? Not really. And I ask you to suffer an old fool for a minute while we wander into some philosophy.

[begin philosophy]
"There is nothing new under the sun" - "There are only eight notes", "There are only seven basic plots" (or three or thirteen depending on who is counting and how), - in short, everything that we watch on TV or read in a novel are just variations on a theme. However, as the argument goes, the variations are virtually limitless and thus we can feel safe in the assumption that we will be endlessly entertained.
[end philosophy]

Maybe.

Let's take Zhaan for instance. How many fans made a connection between Zhaan and Kwai Chang Caine? The characters were very similar in temperament, philosophy and concept. The difference was mostly in story setting and gender. One could even argue that the scope of the characters within the story lines were very similar. What made Zhaan unique was her characterization by Ms. Hey and the fact that she was very exotic looking. Ok, add the fact that she was a plant.

How about John Crichton - conceptually a Buck Rogers with overtones of Han Solo? That is so correct it is almost scary. D'Argo - G'Kar? Chiana - Buffy? Wormholes - Transwarp conduits? Aeryn - Delenn? If you look long and hard enough, you can find similarities between a variety of characters from different genres and those in Farscape, and vice-versa. So the logical conclusion is that Farscape is not unique. We've seen most of this before in different venues, different times, different channels - same stuff, different day.

Or, to quote Yogi Berra, "It's déjà vu all over again".

Wandering into this "same old, same old" territory is dangerous, but I think that the case made about the actors/characters can be made for the story lines. Is it really true that Farscape is "same story, different slant"?

No. It is same story, same slant. Perhaps same story combined with a different story to create a new story, but it is basically a repeat of themes and combinations of themes, that I've seen before. Without revealing details, the end of Season Three is almost identical to other stories that Kemper and O'Bannon have done in other venues - I've been around long enough to remember. And truthfully, with one exception, they're predictable.

Complications within concepts within complications within concepts - Ok, that sounds a little silly, but hang in there for a moment.

When I read reviews done by other 'Scapers, professional write-ups and the thoughts kicked around on the various discussion boards available on the Internet, one thing becomes very apparent - not much attention is paid to the story. It is almost as if the story is the background against which the CGI and characters' "development" is laid. "Character development" is all there is to the story. I blame over-educated English majors for this.

Science fiction, at least to me, is about as simple a genre as one can get and it has been invaded by those who want soap operas. In other words, let's make the story complex with all sorts of conceptual nonsense and "character" development.

I remember several episodes in which some very intelligent and knowledgeable denizens of alt.tv.farscape, John Iwaniszek and Tante Joan (I use her posted name for privacy reasons - John doesn't care), pointed out that the backgrounds used in the story's were (1) Islamic influenced and (2) rip-offs of some Russian artist that I never heard of and (3) some New York artist that I never heard of. There have been other observations about Farscape in the vein of mythologies that are pretty interesting - mostly contributed by such luminaries as John I, Jim L and others. [1]

So are we at the point where we can fairly say, "Yes, Scapers - there isn't an episode of Farscape that hasn't been done in other times and in other places"?

Yes.

And we can progress to the central question - Is Farscape Good Sci Fi?

And the answer is this:

No.

Scraping the Scapers off the ceiling - really, Farscape isn't good sci fi. Good sci fi is something completely different. Farscape isn't sci fi at all, really. What it is, is good-to-great soap/space opera with the trappings of being science fiction, but science fiction it isn't.

Ok, now that the ceilings have been cleaned, let's examine what I said.

To be totally honest, science fiction is basically childish in nature. You take some very simple concepts, throw in a little faux science (or even real science), wrap a little story around it and tell it quickly and efficiently - The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is a good example of a written sci fi story. Outer Limits is a good example of what a sci fi TV series can be - nifty stories, wrapped up quickly, sprinkled with a little science.

Farscape is something completely different. The writers/producers actually give some credit to the viewers with complex plots within a basic storyline that, while sometimes a little over-the-top, is fairly solid. If you change the characters of Farscape into human form, make Moya into a three masted sloop named Tiki III, you have Adventures in Paradise.

Or to put it another way, the characters of Adventures in Paradise have been transformed into space-faring adventurers on a ship named Moya.

Certainly, Farscape, with the trappings of Science Fiction, is good TV. It just isn't good science fiction. We've been there, done that in other series -- we are just looking at something presented a little differently.

I contend, and will continue to espouse this view, that the attraction of Farscape is the eye candy, the occasional foray into comedy, and, when the writers/producers keep their ideas from getting out of hand, the occasional great story. Why we make the appointment to watch Farscape is more for the neat, whammo, blammo, "Moe, Larry - the cheese" bits than the angst-ridden nonsense that this show seems to produce at least every five minutes.

So, there you have it - plain, simple, and to the point.

Farscape isn't good sci fi -- but it is good TV.

¤ ¤ ¤

[1] If you get the time, read "Hero's with a Thousand Faces" by Joseph Campbell (no - not JOHN Campbell, Joseph) for some insight into "heroes" and how they fit into story telling through the ages. return to text

¤ ¤ ¤