Of all the stupid reasons for hating Byron, that is the one that pisses me off the most. I have long hair, over my shoulders. I had long hair in High School, and college. I was beaten up by strangers, in both, not at "random," because I have long hair. So, I assume you have short hair. Should I hate you for that?
Hey, cool it. I've had short hair, I've had long hair, and I've been beaten up for having long hair.
That comment was, actually, tongue in cheek - of course I don't actually hate people for their haircuts. But some looks, for some people, just are NOT a good idea.
I don't think the dialog was bad at all, it suited Byron's character.
Yes, it did suit his character.
No more than Sheridan, G'Kar, many strong leaders, in time of adversity. To use the standard expression, he was a shepherd to his flock, but he was no Jim Jones, just the opposite.
G'Kar actively tried to fight the cult of personality forming around him. It was hardly self-created.
Sheridan's cult of personality was created by Sheridan coming back from the dead and saving the universe, which is, kind of impressive.
Byron's cult of personality came from .. Byron.
Now, that's just wacky. He did try to keep his group separate from the mundanes, and for very good reasons. If you don't realize that IF they had tried to "mix in," (a bunch of rogue teeps amongst the mundanes) that the rest of the people on the station would be far more alienated, you just don't appreciate the situation.
Well, yes, I do appreciate that situation. But this is completely not what I was talking about.
I was talking about the way he openly attacked people who are not firmly allied with his group .. that COULD have been valuable allies for his cause. Like, for example, Frankin. Or the Interstellar Alliance in general - Delenn could have been one hell of an ally for his cause if he had handled his cause as anything but "the universe owes us, boo hoo hoo", attacking people quite the opposite of responsible for his people's situation.
It would only be hypocrisy if he were still behaving as a psi cop. Besides, this is typical human behavior. The converted are often more rabidly opposed to what they converted from, than the average person.
Yes, it is typical human behavior. Since when is "typical human behavior" a good thing, though?
Byron was PERFECTLY justified in his anger, even when it was irrational, as it was in things like this. Him not being able to bottle it made him a rubbish leader of his interest group, though.
Byron didn't know about Franklin helping the rogue teeps in the past. He also didn't know about Franklin's part in using the teepsicles as weapons of war, which most would consider a war crime. Had Byron known that, his reaction would obviously be justified. He DID know Franklin was a mundane, and how the mundanes had treated, and used teeps, and that was enough.
You are right, he did not know about Franklin's actions - the good actions, or the bad ones.
He just assumed.
Where I come from, that is called "prejudice", and is not generally the mark of a great man.
The Nazi analogy works quite well here. I am sure there were some people in Nazi uniforms, or at least working gov jobs, under the Nazi regime, who had compassion for jews, but felt they had to go along with their gov, for various reasons. If a Nazi MD with such feelings helped an injured jew, they might well point out that the regime they were involved with was responsible. An emotional response, to be sure, but a human one.
I'm sorry, but this juts doesn't make ANY sense. I cannot think of any leaders of German Jews in exile that started blackmailing the governments that had taken them up as exiles, and making the acts others had committed on them, that their "hosts" were protecting them from, THEIR fault. This analogy would make sense if Jews had attempted to blackmail Oskar Schindler. Alas, they did not.
Well .. I *sort of* can, very sloppily. The establishment of Israel in 1948, which, for all my sympathy with the Jewish sufferings of the time, I consider a episode of history that was both immoral (punishing Arabs for the crimes of Germans - woo!) and bound to go awry.
I guess you can make some bandwagon nazis comparisons for Lochley and Zack - while no fans of Bester and the Psi Cops, they did play along. But hey, it's not like I'm saying that they were right when I'm saying that Byron was acting like a complete moron.
He was trying to be guided by love, especially for his people. But, with human emotions, he has lots of anger, which he is trying to suppress. So, are you mad at him for not being perfect, more christ-like?
I do not blame him for not bottling his anger.
I do blame him for unbottling it randomly, at people that do not deserve it. That does NOT make him a likable man, OR a good representative for his group.
Again, you are judging solely because you don't like their appearance.
I am judging them for having (extremely creepy) norms among a society that should be all about the abolition of norms.
I don't think he wanted to die at all. He was afraid of what would happen to his people. But, he was willing to die, if it would save the lives of others. This is of course, part of Byron as an allusion to Christ that JMS was using throughout.
I do not think, that Byron arrived on Babylon 5 expecting to die. He was, however, from the very beginning the kind of guy that walks into a room, and is the victim before anyone even says a word. See his first conversation with Sheridan in No Compromises. See his conversation when Garibaldi comes to him with a morally dirty, abusive, but yet honest offer to use telepaths as spies. Et cetera. Et cetera.
Yes, the allusions to Christ are quite strong.
I never much cared for that guy either.
