On Daggits and Darfur, Obama and Adama

Truly, my first thought when I heard that the cast of Battlestar Galactica was debating at the real United Nations was that we’ve finally lost our sense of reality. And, on reflection, I admit I don’t think I’m wrong.

If you are not following all the latest news from the world of science fiction, then allow me to catch you up: fictional characters from the SciFi Channel’s long-running series of human refugees fleeing killer robots assembled (along with many of their fans, apparently) in the Economic and Social Council chambers; then, hosted by Whoopi Goldberg, they discussed issues of race, human rights and terrorism. They even had placards from their individual planets to identify themselves.

Right, I thought, the UN is now a playground for pop culture sf nerds and Hollywood B-listers.

While I’m not the first to begin UN-bashing, I certainly recognize that it has often fallen far short of its idealistic objectives. Mired by petty politics and corruption, incompetence in its administration, and mediocrity from its mid-20^th century assumptions of geopolitics, the UN is nevertheless one of the only platforms for discussing global conduct and occasionally achieving true consensus on everything from airline security to landmine bans, and from coordinating humanitarian relief to biodiversity treaties. It has found successes in halving the number of global conflicts in the 50 years of its institution in contrast to the fifty which preceded it. It has brought peace to Cyprus, El Salvador, Mozambique, Nambia, and Kashmir. One of its most powerful programs is in election monitoring where it assures the legitimacy of growing and established democracies. In its successes and in its failures, the UN is one of the most serious-minded political bodies in the world. So why turn it into a Romper Room for Galactica geeks?

Most of the media coverage, however, reminds me of my error. I admit I have not watched the new series at all (but I remember Dirk Benedict and the robot-dog Muffy). I confess that I have only the vaguest notion that the series addressed issues of torture, suicide bombing, and insurrection while our own country engaged in a prolonged Iraqi war. Established news agencies like NPR and BBC offer praise of the evening of debate, underlining the cultural importance of BSG.

And I should be able to admit when I’m wrong. Isn’t it true that anything which forwards debate on human rights and raises its profile be praised? Isn’t BSG one of those water-cooler series (at least at computer-programming companies) which raises the bar on discussion? It certainly must be better than having everyone talk about Paris Hilton skirt slips and celebrity couple hybrid names like Brangelina and Chrisiana. And I certainly don’t need Yahoo! pushing any more Red Carpet Atrocities at me.

As a literature teacher, too, I should recognize that fiction—at its best—compels discussion of the most complex human issues. Heart of Darkness challenges our notions of linking civilization with moral purpose, Waiting for the Barbarians compels us to wonder about the single-mindedness of empire and the impossibilities of altruism, and Richard III decries the power of language and the seductive power of evil. Art calls from humanity its most provocative philosophy and introspection, raising teleological questions as profound as religion: it’s no wonder that religion finds so much of its power in allegorical story.

And, as even I argued in my classroom Friday, The Dark Knight is arguably literary whereas Batman Returnscertainly is not. So who am I to pick on Battlestar Galactica and the idealism of its cast and crew?

But I will, and for two reasons. The first is that BSG‘s conception of complex issues must by definition be confined to a 52-minute commercial-driven sensationalism to sustain ratings. What television as a medium calls “compelling” is too often nothing more than WWE spin-offs like Ring of Honor or the newest grotesqueries from Law & Order: Criminal Intent. It’s the difference between authors called to idea and those called to profit, the difference between the poet inspired to vision and the pop-machinist programmed to a dance beat, between an Oscar Wilde or Ivan Turgenev and Los del Rio’s “Macarena.” Is this elitist? I’ll plead guilty, but I think it’s entirely fair to investigate the context in which art is propagated.

What compels the themes of BSG, then? And are we moving into dangerous territory when we disguise those themes as fair or full representations of the political machinations of Darfur or the financial complexities of Wahhabist schools in Pakistan? Has the UN become a soapbox for celebrities who will never have the attention from an Emmy speech?

And this leads me to my second objection: BSG has stepped out of its fiction and into some serious real life. Harmless enough while confined to the profit-making Saturday night primetime cable slots, turning fiction into faction openly tells its naïve fans that they do indeed understand all that needs to be said . . . or thought.

At the close of his speech at the UN, a teary-eyed Edward James Olmos as Admiral Adama cried, “There is only one race: the human race. SO SAY WE ALL!” And the crowd chanted it right back. They follow the mesmerizing fantasy into their own lives, as immersed just as much as they might have been in a Final Fantasycampaign.

I have written before about the problematic erasure of boundaries between fact and fiction, but perhaps it is all we can hope for. Perhaps the commoditization of human rights and war is inevitable. After all, do we remember the Iraqi playing cards sold by the Bush administration? When genocide awareness is sponsored by Zune, DirectTV and Cheetohs, and child slavery board games are marketed by SkyOne and QmX, should we complain? (And yes, these companies sponsored episodes of BSG.) What should we care if Disney wanted to build a theme park in Gettysburg? After all, then more people would really know about the Civil War. And what should we care if Holocaust camps in Germany sell tourists souvenirs?

Josiah Bartlet for President! Bono for Secretary-General! Kiefer Sutherland for CIA Director! Bring on the sponsored illusions, because a complex reality may just be too difficult to face.