- #1
Strato Incendus
- 182
- 23
In order to discuss several questions regarding my generation-ship story in parallel, without making a single thread go all over the place, this is one thread (of most likely several ones) that I'm opening in parallel. This one is less about technical questions per se, but rather about tactical choices the crew of a ship can make as a result of the technical parameters.
Secondly, I think we can widen this particular discussion to any type of colony ship in general - generation ships, sleeper ships, clone ships, seed ships etc. - as long as they still have a human crew, or a crew made of robots, or at least an AI steering it, any type of entity that can make choices for the ship while it is on its journey.
After all, that's what stories live from: Character's choices and their consequences.
The main problem I'm experiencing right now is: Most things you would expect a ship commander on Earth to have to do at some point don't work (at least not without loads of setup and explanation) for commanders of interstellar colony ships. Because in contrast to Star Trek ships that can hop around between systems, do cartography, diplomacy, trading etc., these ships are essentially still like arrows, pointed at a particular star system and then shot at the maximum feasible speed. If they didn't have to slow down at the end, one might as well treat them the same way like a probe with a solar sail that gets hit by a laser (as planned for the Breakthrough Starshot project).
Two major questions arise for me as a result:
1) What plot-relevant decisions is the commander of a colony ship supposed to make if
- they can't change course
- they can't slow down
- they can't have the ship pick up certain elements from space, or from planets and moons they pass on the way (since that would require slowing down, and potentially changing course, too)
- they can't go anywhere else to refuel the ship (like indeed by picking up stuff from space, planets, or moons), because colony ships are usually sent somewhere where the crew will be the first settlers (i.e., there are no pre-existing space stations you could get your fuel from)
- they don't engage in combat, diplomacy, or trade with any other species (and if they had to, again, that would require them to slow down first)
2) If no such tactical decisions can be made, why does the ship need a military command structure to begin with?
In one Voyager episode, Captain Janeway explicitly mentions that a ship is not a democracy. Rather, it's still a military hierarchy, and in Star Trek, this makes sense: A lot of the orders need to be implemented quickly, without questioning, and you need people in various positions on the ship based on their competence - not their popularity with the rest of the crew.
But colony ships don't act like Star Trek explorer ships. If the captain can't make any of the decisions I listed above, does the ship even need a "captain" in a military sense? Or would the ship rather have a traditional government, like any country on Earth? In the latter case, of course that government could be totalitarian, but it would no longer be required for the mission to work; it could also be a democratically elected body.
In my story, it's especially important, because the commander turns into the antagonist. And antagonists need to be even more active than protagonists, since they are usually the ones pushing the protagonists out of their comfort zone in the first place.
So I certainly don't want my ship's commander to be like Cersei Lannister in GoT Season 8, just standing by the window drinking wine all the time. Or like Admiral Thrawn in Star Wars "Rebels", where for the longest time he's an intimidating and "cool", but also rather passive villain, just watching all the events unfold, always claiming that everything was going according to plan, even things that looked like setbacks, and rarely ever interfering himself.So far, I'd say my antagonist is pretty active in the story, indeed. But this falls apart if
a) the decisions she gets to make are physically implausible to ever be regarded as actual options (like picking up hydrogen from space, or emergency-stopping the ship), and
b) if given this, the setting can no longer legally justify why the ship's commander needs to have this level of authoritarian power in the first place (=why the ship should have a strict hierarchy of competence, rather than of popularity, i.e., a democracy, if being the most competent person on board, and thereby becoming the captain, doesn't actually allow you to do all that much). In order for somebody to become able to abuse their power, the society around them first needs to give them (or at least allow them to reach) such levels of power in the first place.With my story essentially being that of a mutiny, of course I could still establish the status-quo of the ship as a dictator ship (gap intended) for the sake of it, and then have the mutineers overthrow the commander. However, this would run counter to the idea that the mission was founded in good faith, trying to export the best values humanity had achieved so far.
What my story needs before the rebellion is the gradual slide from a liberal into a totalitarian society, given external necessity - not a cartoon-villain overlord in a pre-established regime. Yes, you can still tell such a story about external necessities causing a reduction in freedom, even with a democratic society on board the ship. (There is sufficient inspiration for this in the real world, both recent and current...) But there will be a limit to that.
It's far easier for the commander to eventually even override basic human rights if the ship is at heart still a military hierarchy, than if the commander is elected by the ship citizens, and could be removed in a heartbeat by independent courts and/or a parliament that no longer trusts them.
A society with functioning division of powers doesn't really require a mutiny / rebellion, does it? ;) Because in such a society, there is already a "proper", peaceful way towards a powershift.
At that point, my mutiny story would turn into a story about a political campaign, trying to get the opposition elected to implement certain legal changes (while the one in power oppresses said opposition, uses legal tricks and "emergency situations" to extend their own term etc.). And such a story might as well be told on Earth; the specific setting of a generation ship would no longer be required.
Secondly, I think we can widen this particular discussion to any type of colony ship in general - generation ships, sleeper ships, clone ships, seed ships etc. - as long as they still have a human crew, or a crew made of robots, or at least an AI steering it, any type of entity that can make choices for the ship while it is on its journey.
After all, that's what stories live from: Character's choices and their consequences.
The main problem I'm experiencing right now is: Most things you would expect a ship commander on Earth to have to do at some point don't work (at least not without loads of setup and explanation) for commanders of interstellar colony ships. Because in contrast to Star Trek ships that can hop around between systems, do cartography, diplomacy, trading etc., these ships are essentially still like arrows, pointed at a particular star system and then shot at the maximum feasible speed. If they didn't have to slow down at the end, one might as well treat them the same way like a probe with a solar sail that gets hit by a laser (as planned for the Breakthrough Starshot project).
Two major questions arise for me as a result:
1) What plot-relevant decisions is the commander of a colony ship supposed to make if
- they can't change course
- they can't slow down
- they can't have the ship pick up certain elements from space, or from planets and moons they pass on the way (since that would require slowing down, and potentially changing course, too)
- they can't go anywhere else to refuel the ship (like indeed by picking up stuff from space, planets, or moons), because colony ships are usually sent somewhere where the crew will be the first settlers (i.e., there are no pre-existing space stations you could get your fuel from)
- they don't engage in combat, diplomacy, or trade with any other species (and if they had to, again, that would require them to slow down first)
2) If no such tactical decisions can be made, why does the ship need a military command structure to begin with?
In one Voyager episode, Captain Janeway explicitly mentions that a ship is not a democracy. Rather, it's still a military hierarchy, and in Star Trek, this makes sense: A lot of the orders need to be implemented quickly, without questioning, and you need people in various positions on the ship based on their competence - not their popularity with the rest of the crew.
But colony ships don't act like Star Trek explorer ships. If the captain can't make any of the decisions I listed above, does the ship even need a "captain" in a military sense? Or would the ship rather have a traditional government, like any country on Earth? In the latter case, of course that government could be totalitarian, but it would no longer be required for the mission to work; it could also be a democratically elected body.
In my story, it's especially important, because the commander turns into the antagonist. And antagonists need to be even more active than protagonists, since they are usually the ones pushing the protagonists out of their comfort zone in the first place.
So I certainly don't want my ship's commander to be like Cersei Lannister in GoT Season 8, just standing by the window drinking wine all the time. Or like Admiral Thrawn in Star Wars "Rebels", where for the longest time he's an intimidating and "cool", but also rather passive villain, just watching all the events unfold, always claiming that everything was going according to plan, even things that looked like setbacks, and rarely ever interfering himself.So far, I'd say my antagonist is pretty active in the story, indeed. But this falls apart if
a) the decisions she gets to make are physically implausible to ever be regarded as actual options (like picking up hydrogen from space, or emergency-stopping the ship), and
b) if given this, the setting can no longer legally justify why the ship's commander needs to have this level of authoritarian power in the first place (=why the ship should have a strict hierarchy of competence, rather than of popularity, i.e., a democracy, if being the most competent person on board, and thereby becoming the captain, doesn't actually allow you to do all that much). In order for somebody to become able to abuse their power, the society around them first needs to give them (or at least allow them to reach) such levels of power in the first place.With my story essentially being that of a mutiny, of course I could still establish the status-quo of the ship as a dictator ship (gap intended) for the sake of it, and then have the mutineers overthrow the commander. However, this would run counter to the idea that the mission was founded in good faith, trying to export the best values humanity had achieved so far.
What my story needs before the rebellion is the gradual slide from a liberal into a totalitarian society, given external necessity - not a cartoon-villain overlord in a pre-established regime. Yes, you can still tell such a story about external necessities causing a reduction in freedom, even with a democratic society on board the ship. (There is sufficient inspiration for this in the real world, both recent and current...) But there will be a limit to that.
It's far easier for the commander to eventually even override basic human rights if the ship is at heart still a military hierarchy, than if the commander is elected by the ship citizens, and could be removed in a heartbeat by independent courts and/or a parliament that no longer trusts them.
A society with functioning division of powers doesn't really require a mutiny / rebellion, does it? ;) Because in such a society, there is already a "proper", peaceful way towards a powershift.
At that point, my mutiny story would turn into a story about a political campaign, trying to get the opposition elected to implement certain legal changes (while the one in power oppresses said opposition, uses legal tricks and "emergency situations" to extend their own term etc.). And such a story might as well be told on Earth; the specific setting of a generation ship would no longer be required.