Archer's Piracy in 'Damage'

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

How did a thread that started out asking if there was any follow-up to Archer's actions in "Damage" end up drowning in all these ginormous screeds about T'Pol and "Azati Prime"?

Hello? Archer? "Damage"? C'mon, people.

I think I have some additional questions/thoughts that can hopefully get us back on track, HopefulRomantic...

***

Given the fact that many Trek individuals are able to live longer life spans, I think that as Archer gets older (as many do), he begins to think about things he regrets in his past (Kirk, I think did this in the movies).

I'm not sure, but I think Archer is able to see the launch of the NCC-1701 under April's command; he was a pioneer, but he made mistakes.

No doubt, too...the species he came across in 'Damage' knew of him, or he--Archer--came across that same species if and when they applied to be part of the Federation of Planets.

This would make a good story!

Anywho, I'm pretty sure that incident wasn't brushed under the rug (or was it?) And even if it was, the conscience has a way of bringing things out in the open eventually....(T'Pol and I believe Reed, and possibly others, knew of the incident)....

 

[number6]

I don't really see the excitement in following up on every single little thing and tying up every loose end. That requires a lot of attention span from the casual viewer and is only appreciated by a handful of hardcore fans.

TOS rarely did that. They just beamed up and moved on.
Do I wish there had been some followup on Archer and Trip's falling out after Cogenitor? Sure, but really what would it be?? Would we need a whole episode to examine it???
Archer's demons form the expanse were explored in Home and where I thought it was good that they decided to give Archer a little bit of closure, that episode was boring as fuck, just like TNG's followup to the Best of Both Worlds. It's nice that the writers care enough about the characters to do something like that, but it doesn't make a good episode of Star Trek.

I don't like the idea that we have lost so much of our own imagination that we need every little thing explained and spoonfed to us. I preferred when Star Trek left things a little more open and ambiguous. It gave us something to talk about once the credits rolled.

 

[TheGodBen]

An episode where we saw Archer wrestling with his conscience a little more than in Home would have been nice, but I think that a direct follow up to Damage wouldn't have worked. I thought that Damage was one of the best episodes of the show, but if we were ever given an explanation as to what happened to the Illyrian ship then it would only dilute the moral question when watching Damage.

If Archer finds the ship and he helps them get home, then the ending of Damage is less powerful since we know that everything is going to work out for these guys. If Archer finds out that the ship was destroyed by his actions then the ending of Damage is still weakened. The powerful thing about that ending was the ambiguity of the action, it is the same reason that In the Pale Moonlight is my favourite Trek episode. Knowing the answer can ruin the question, it is best if you leave the audience to decide for themselves.

Personally, I like to think that the Illyrian ship was captured by Cardassians and they were forced to become slave labourers. The captain manages to escape and takes on the appearance of a Cardassian, taking the name Damar. Illyrians live long lives, and 200 years later he joins the military and gets posted to a Cardassian freighter with Gul Dukat. The rest is history.

 

[bluedana]

In fact the only follow-up to that storyline I'd like, (or maybe I should say as part of any follow-up), is confirmation that all or most the Iliryians did indeed die before their ship reached home space. That would add gravitas to Archer's actions. His "us or them" decision is the thing upon which great societes have been built, by humans at least. I also find the thought of the oh so self-righteous, human-led Federation being partially built on space piracy to be comforting in it's familiarity.

Great point. That would be almost Shakespearean in its tragedy. And it would have been awesome to see all the fallout of that, if it had been done well.
I always feel vaguely embarrassed by the slick and dismissive treatment Archer's character was given in "Home". Is he really so shallow that getting laid once or twice will put to rest all those demons? It would have been nice if The B&B had not shied away from a real opportunity for drama and character development.

I think I've been laboring under a big logical assumption all these years regarding the Illyrians. At the end of S3, I just figured that since the spheres had been destroyed and space had returned to normal, the Illyrians wouldn't actually have taken that much time to return home, wouldn't have been prey for pirates (who would have no reason to exist), and would have, if they needed to, been able to get assistance. In essence, they would not necessarily have died. It honestly never struck me that they'd be doomed no matter what.

I think there are ramifications from Damage inherent in S4. Like, I don't think Archer is ever the same joyful explorer who existed up until the opening moments of The Expanse. It's manifested in his nightmare, but it persists for the rest of the series. While I would gladly jettison SF 1 and 2 for a three part Home, I do think that the mountain nookie with Erika was more about an emotional acknowledgement that Archer could come "back."

How does this relate to Damage? Remember the dialogue with Phlox? Where Archer asks if Phlox had ever crossed the ethical line, and Phlox says yes. Archer then crosses the line by engaging in piracy. But because Phlox is the most ethics-bound person Archer knows, despite having done whatever he did, Archer knows that it's possible for him to come back to the right side of the line. Cut to Home, where, fresh off an accusation by Soval that he murdered the Impulse Vulcans in cold blood, he basically tells Erika, You don't understand what I did out there. And Erika conveys to him that, yes, she does, and yes, she still loves/accepts him anyway. She confirms that he's not lost on that dark side of the line.

If anything, I would have liked to see more of that with respect to the other very traumatized members of the crew.

 

[cylkoth]

I don't really see the excitement in following up on every single little thing and tying up every loose end. That requires a lot of attention span from the casual viewer and is only appreciated by a handful of hardcore fans.

Well what Archer did, wasn't exactly a little thing. Which was the impetus for the OP's discussion. It was a big thing for the character, and the lack of followup, not necessarily a full blown episode, but not allowing Archer get away without consequence feels wrong.
Let's put it this way, how would you feel if an alien vessel attacked an Earth ship, stole their warp core, stranding the crew 50 years away from home, in a hostile sector of the quadrant, with their excuse being they're on a near impossible mission to stop a superior alien race from destroying their home world, one you've never heard of before?

 

[Bak_and_Blue]

In fact the only follow-up to that storyline I'd like, (or maybe I should say as part of any follow-up), is confirmation that all or most the Iliryians did indeed die before their ship reached home space. That would add gravitas to Archer's actions. His "us or them" decision is the thing upon which great societes have been built, by humans at least. I also find the thought of the oh so self-righteous, human-led Federation being partially built on space piracy to be comforting in it's familiarity.

Great point. That would be almost Shakespearean in its tragedy. And it would have been awesome to see all the fallout of that, if it had been done well.
I always feel vaguely embarrassed by the slick and dismissive treatment Archer's character was given in "Home". Is he really so shallow that getting laid once or twice will put to rest all those demons? It would have been nice if The B&B had not shied away from a real opportunity for drama and character development.

I think I've been laboring under a big logical assumption all these years regarding the Illyrians. At the end of S3, I just figured that since the spheres had been destroyed and space had returned to normal, the Illyrians wouldn't actually have taken that much time to return home, wouldn't have been prey for pirates (who would have no reason to exist), and would have, if they needed to, been able to get assistance. In essence, they would not necessarily have died. It honestly never struck me that they'd be doomed no matter what.

I think there are ramifications from Damage inherent in S4. Like, I don't think Archer is ever the same joyful explorer who existed up until the opening moments of The Expanse. It's manifested in his nightmare, but it persists for the rest of the series. While I would gladly jettison SF 1 and 2 for a three part Home, I do think that the mountain nookie with Erika was more about an emotional acknowledgement that Archer could come "back."

How does this relate to Damage? Remember the dialogue with Phlox? Where Archer asks if Phlox had ever crossed the ethical line, and Phlox says yes. Archer then crosses the line by engaging in piracy. But because Phlox is the most ethics-bound person Archer knows, despite having done whatever he did, Archer knows that it's possible for him to come back to the right side of the line. Cut to Home, where, fresh off an accusation by Soval that he murdered the Impulse Vulcans in cold blood, he basically tells Erika, You don't understand what I did out there. And Erika conveys to him that, yes, she does, and yes, she still loves/accepts him anyway. She confirms that he's not lost on that dark side of the line.

If anything, I would have liked to see more of that with respect to the other very traumatized members of the crew.

Hmmm, I like this. It makes me think a little better of the episode.

 

[number6]

I don't really see the excitement in following up on every single little thing and tying up every loose end. That requires a lot of attention span from the casual viewer and is only appreciated by a handful of hardcore fans.

Well what Archer did, wasn't exactly a little thing. Which was the impetus for the OP's discussion. It was a big thing for the character, and the lack of followup, not necessarily a full blown episode, but not allowing Archer get away without consequence feels wrong.
Let's put it this way, how would you feel if an alien vessel attacked an Earth ship, stole their warp core, stranding the crew 50 years away from home, in a hostile sector of the quadrant, with their excuse being they're on a near impossible mission to stop a superior alien race from destroying their home world, one you've never heard of before?

It's not about how I would feel. They devoted an entire episode to Archer's emotional baggage in season four. That was plenty. This isn't supposed to be a soap opera. If they had another 3 years, maybe they might have done some kind of followup, but they only got one more season and seriously I don't think a followup of Damage would have made that great of a television episode.

 

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

I don't really see the excitement in following up on every single little thing and tying up every loose end. That requires a lot of attention span from the casual viewer and is only appreciated by a handful of hardcore fans.

Well what Archer did, wasn't exactly a little thing. Which was the impetus for the OP's discussion. It was a big thing for the character, and the lack of followup, not necessarily a full blown episode, but not allowing Archer get away without consequence feels wrong.
Let's put it this way, how would you feel if an alien vessel attacked an Earth ship, stole their warp core, stranding the crew 50 years away from home, in a hostile sector of the quadrant, with their excuse being they're on a near impossible mission to stop a superior alien race from destroying their home world, one you've never heard of before?

It's not about how I would feel. They devoted an entire episode to Archer's emotional baggage in season four. That was plenty. This isn't supposed to be a soap opera. If they had another 3 years, maybe they might have done some kind of followup, but they only got one more season and seriously I don't think a followup of Damage would have made that great of a television episode.

Ah, it's not a soap opera, but we're looking for flawed and realistic characters to root for. (Not too mention good storytelling).

A follow-up would either make or break Archer in terms of the audience, and possibly make him a realistic Captain, like Sisko.

To just bring up 'something' that pivotal (especially in the sense of what Trek is supposed to be about) where we have a man who is representing an organization that's supposed to be above that sort of thing--piracy--that warrants a payoff.

 

[number6]

Make or break Archer for the audience??? You make it sound like not following up on Damage somehow hurts the show or Archer's character. It does neither. There are plenty of episodes that show Archer as flawed or human, and as I said, if the show had a few more years on the air, maybe they could have afforded to follow up on every little thing. DS9 did it well because it was set on a space station. You couldn't just warp away and be done with that. None of the ship shows had that luxury and when they did follow up on some previous story, most of the time it was dull as shit.

They covered a lot of it during the Xindi arc over the course of the season and then the aftermath in Home. That was enough for the time being.

 

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

Make or break Archer for the audience??? You make it sound like not following up on Damage somehow hurts the show or Archer's character. It does neither. There are plenty of episodes that show Archer as flawed or human, and as I said, if the show had a few more years on the air, maybe they could have afforded to follow up on every little thing.

I personally think it hurts the character. Again, because I believe it was such a 'wow' moment.

I do agree, maybe, if the show was on the air a couple more seasons, there possibly could have been a follow-up, but as many of the posters brought out...a follow-up could have occurred in the 'following' episode.

DS9 did it well because it was set on a space station. You couldn't just warp away and be done with that. None of the ship shows had that luxury and when they did follow up on some previous story, most of the time it was dull as shit.

Not really. The Borg showed up in later episodes after being introduced as a threat (and some hold 'Best of Both Worlds' in high regard); I personally like 'Descent' because of Lore.

'Space Seed' followed-up in TWOK, which was one (if not the best) Trek film, and gave us a flawed Kirk...even more so than the classic series. The film even played with the idea of life and death...and growing older, and letting life pass by.

I'm sure there are other examples...

They covered a lot of it during the Xindi arc over the course of the season and then the aftermath in Home. That was enough for the time being.

In your opinion, of course.

I didn't see the development that was started in that particular episode...(i.e. 'Damage').

 

[number6]

Make or break Archer for the audience??? You make it sound like not following up on Damage somehow hurts the show or Archer's character. It does neither. There are plenty of episodes that show Archer as flawed or human, and as I said, if the show had a few more years on the air, maybe they could have afforded to follow up on every little thing.

I personally think it hurts the character. Again, because I believe it was such a 'wow' moment.

There were loads of 'wow' moments throughout the season (Anyone remember "Airlock Archer?") and a lot of reflection throughout the whole Xindi arc. At the end of the season viewer and writer alike decided to put that puupy to bed.

I do agree, maybe, if the show was on the air a couple more seasons, there possibly could have been a follow-up, but as many of the posters brought out...a follow-up could have occurred in the 'following' episode.

Well, No. We had posters insisting that the follow up should have. Archer weighed the cost and regrets of his actions fairly frequently through the whole Xindi arc and there was an entire episode devoted to it.

DS9 did it well because it was set on a space station. You couldn't just warp away and be done with that. None of the ship shows had that luxury and when they did follow up on some previous story, most of the time it was dull as shit.

Not really. The Borg showed up in later episodes after being introduced as a threat (and some hold 'Best of Both Worlds' in high regard); I personally like 'Descent' because of Lore.

And after they introduced Hugh, every subsequent Borg outting noticed diminishing returns, until FC. By the time VOY came around people were pretty sick of the Borg. Besides, the Borg were created to be a recurring villian.. That is very different than the situation surrounding the events in Damage. That crew wasn't intended to be recurring villains in the series.

'Space Seed' followed-up in TWOK, which was one (if not the best) Trek film, and gave us a flawed Kirk...even more so than the classic series. The film even played with the idea of life and death...and growing older, and letting life pass by.

How much time had passed between Space Seed and TWOK?? By your logic, they should have followed up on Space Seed during the run of TOS. I don't think it hurt Kirk's character.. in fact the characters had so very little development until the films.

I'm sure there are other examples...

They covered a lot of it during the Xindi arc over the course of the season and then the aftermath in Home. That was enough for the time being.

In your opinion, of course.

I didn't see the development that was started in that particular episode...(i.e. 'Damage').

Then you weren't paying attention. There was plenty.

 

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

Make or break Archer for the audience??? You make it sound like not following up on Damage somehow hurts the show or Archer's character. It does neither. There are plenty of episodes that show Archer as flawed or human, and as I said, if the show had a few more years on the air, maybe they could have afforded to follow up on every little thing.

I personally think it hurts the character. Again, because I believe it was such a 'wow' moment.

There were loads of 'wow' moments throughout the season (Anyone remember "Airlock Archer?") and a lot of reflection throughout the whole Xindi arc. At the end of the season viewer and writer alike decided to put that puupy to bed.

Well, you can say the Xindi arc had it's beginning, middle, and end...so there was no follow-up needed.

Well, No. We had posters insisting that the follow up should have. Archer weighed the cost and regrets of his actions fairly frequently through the whole Xindi arc and there was an entire episode devoted to it.

I'm confused, so he did mentioned his actions in 'Damage'? Can you point me to that episode?

And after they introduced Hugh, every subsequent Borg outting noticed diminishing returns, until FC. By the time VOY came around people were pretty sick of the Borg. Besides, the Borg were created to be a recurring villian.. That is very different than the situation surrounding the events in Damage. That crew wasn't intended to be recurring villains in the series.

I do agree the Borg lost their 'mystery.'

In regards to the alien crew, as aforementioned....that 'little' situation is something that is pivotal due to what us Trek watchers have seen in terms of the Federation...

How much time had passed between Space Seed and TWOK?? By your logic, they should have followed up on Space Seed during the run of TOS. I don't think it hurt Kirk's character.. in fact the characters had so very little development until the films.

Well, they probably should have followed up on 'Space Seed' on TOS! (However, given the time frame a follow-up would have probably been in the Phase II series, as it is hinted some time has to pass before Kirk 'checks back' to see what happened with Khan and his people).

TOS did have little development; the fans actually gave more depth between the time of the films and the series.

***

My logic is just following up on interesting situations and characters; especially situations and characters that might have long-lasting effects on our regular characters...

TWOK actually built on Kirk's character...(For example: Where he always seemed to be 'lucky' in the classic series, and dodge death...in TWOK, he didn't have all the answers).

Other examples:

'Brothers' was a follow-up to 'Best of Both Worlds' as Picard tries to wind down after his assimilation.

'Galaxy's Child' was an interesting follow-up to one of my favorite episodes, 'Booby Trap'...where we learn that Geordi's dream girl is not all he thought she was.

The Trek writers have been doing a wonderful job of following up certain situations and characters, making the Trek universe well-rounded and allowing us to better relate to the regular cast...as well as some of the guest cast.

Then you weren't paying attention. There was plenty.

Well, be my guest and point me to where that episode was followed up on. To where those particular aliens were referenced, and where we learn what their fate was, and how Captain Archer had to not only deal with it internally, but in terms of his career and future decisions.

 

[number6]

While he never did reference them directly, the entire episode Home focused on Archer dealing with his behaviour throughout the whole affair and how he did things he wasn't proud of. He pretty much freaked out. I consider it a pretty comprehensive follow up to the whole thing, albeit a weak episode, very much the equivalent of TNG's Brothers.

I didn't care for the Leah Brahms followup episode. It was pretty much a by-the-numbers predictable episode. As I said before, DS9 really did well with the follow-up. The other shows, not so much..

For TOS, we really only had Harry Mudd, but they managed to tell two completely different and distinct stories. I can't really say that the TNG followups with Ensign Ro or the Traveller (Remember Me) were all that compelling.

I know it's nice to see things followed up and tied together, but I prefer things with a little more ambiguity, I guess. There is no need to eat up an episode with "Gee I was really an asshole when I stole that warp core from that guy's ship, maybe someday they'll have a psychologist on these starships for me to talk to (wink,wink)."

 

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

While he never did reference them directly, the entire episode Home focused on Archer dealing with his behaviour throughout the whole affair and how he did things he wasn't proud of. He pretty much freaked out. I consider it a pretty comprehensive follow up to the whole thing, albeit a weak episode, very much the equivalent of TNG's Brothers.

Hmm....

I know it's nice to see things followed up and tied together, but I prefer things with a little more ambiguity, I guess. There is no need to eat up an episode with "Gee I was really an asshole when I stole that warp core from that guy's ship, maybe someday they'll have a psychologist on these starships for me to talk to (wink,wink)."

Well, that's where good writing comes in.

'Family' focused on the Picard family and how Picard dealt with the aftereffects of his assimilation. However, it was also a story about Worf, who was dealing with his own family

I think I referenced 'Family' as 'Brothers' early on. My mistake!

An episode could not only deal with Archer and his conscience, but we can learn something about Travis, Hoshi, Reed, or Phlox...that ties into that same idea in a coinciding story.

Now, ambiguity is good. The classic Twilight Zone did it all the time. However, when ambiguity is used as a 'cop out'--as a lot of short films and independent films do this--to an already lazily written piece, it doesn't do much good to the story as a whole.

Basically, the audience is being asked to do the writer's job.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

How does this relate to Damage? Remember the dialogue with Phlox? Where Archer asks if Phlox had ever crossed the ethical line, and Phlox says yes. Archer then crosses the line by engaging in piracy. But because Phlox is the most ethics-bound person Archer knows, despite having done whatever he did, Archer knows that it's possible for him to come back to the right side of the line. Cut to Home, where, fresh off an accusation by Soval that he murdered the Impulse Vulcans in cold blood, he basically tells Erika, You don't understand what I did out there. And Erika conveys to him that, yes, she does, and yes, she still loves/accepts him anyway. She confirms that he's not lost on that dark side of the line.

Exactly.

If TPTB had known they had three more seasons, they likely would have spent more time on the psychological aftermath of the Xindi war. They might have done an entirely different scenario than the one we saw in "Home," who knows. But they likely saw the writing on the wall, and they had to downsize. I'm glad they did address the issue, rather than act as if Archer was alllllll better as soon as Daniels plopped him back on the ship.

As for the Illyrians...yeah, I wish there had been some mention of what happened to them. Even a throwaway line would have been better than not knowing. But as others have said, the lingering "not knowing" may have been the point...that sometimes we never get closure.

 

[JiNX-01]

I always feel vaguely embarrassed by the slick and dismissive treatment Archer's character was given in "Home". Is he really so shallow that getting laid once or twice will put to rest all those demons?

I see people always bringing up "getting a quickie cures Archer's guilt" issue.

I think that's an odd way to view this. He hasn't been emotionally connected with anyone in over a year. He's born literally the weight of the world on his shoulders and bore sole responsibility for everything he -- or members of the crew -- did. He hasn't allowed himself to feel anything. Erika isn't just some tramp he picked up in a bar. He was involved with her long before that climb up the mountain, so who better to help him reconnect with his own humanity with the most basic expression of human closeness?
Sheesh.

While I would gladly jettison SF 1 and 2 for a three part Home, I do think that the mountain nookie with Erika was more about an emotional acknowledgement that Archer could come "back."

Ditto.

 

[commodore64]

I agree with Jinx who commented about the lack of follow-up on many threads from season 3, including Archer's piracy. I see that as a *HUGE* failing in season 4, and one of the reasons I think Coto wasn't all he's cracked up to be on this board. I was really disappointed that he made such a 180 degree shift in personality without much follow-up. And I don't think him having sex is a good way to wrap up that arc.

Really a shame.

On the sex, a la Bak-n-Blue and Jinx's comments -- I really didn't buy that Erika dragged him back from the abyss. I mean, the dude did -- as Jinx mentioned -- have the weight of the world on his shoulders. He cloned his friend, took the responsibility for killing that clone, put a prisoner in the airlock and stranded innocent people in order to get back home and save his planet. Worse, the guilt is eating him up; he knows he did revolting things only to be heralded as a savior. Erika may be reminding him he's human after all, but -- so what? The guy still has a deep conscience. These things weigh on him. I doubt an ex-girlfriend would be able to in a matter of perhaps two days be able to change his opinions of himself. Archer is stubborn for one and if he's wringing his hands over the fate of the Earth for an entire season, he isn't likely to let himself off the hook for his misdeeds even if an old friend says he did the right thing. We're talking about Archer here. The self-loathing will live on.

From a storytelling point of view, I thought bringing Erika in was pointless. I think a more effective and riveting way to unveil his self-loathing and help untangle it would be for him to have a heart-to-heart with one of his crew, like T'Pol, Trip or Phlox. I can see one of the three of them able to help him begin to forgive himself. I also think by having one of them talk with Archer, we can see follow up episodes where they continue to untangle it.

If TPTB had known they had three more seasons, they likely would have spent more time on the psychological aftermath of the Xindi war.

I don't think so. Coto seemed happy sweeping those things under the rug, believing that people would rather see fanwank than good storytelling. Why do I say this? Look at how he, as the head writer, treated T'Pol's drug addiction. He didn't. They barely touched on Pa'naar and suddenly dragged it up from two seasons ago for a bizarre ending (T'Pau was able to fix it).

 

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

From a storytelling point of view, I thought bringing Erika in was pointless. I think a more effective and riveting way to unveil his self-loathing and help untangle it would be for him to have a heart-to-heart with one of his crew, like T'Pol, Trip or Phlox. I can see one of the three of them able to help him begin to forgive himself. I also think by having one of them talk with Archer, we can see follow up episodes where they continue to untangle it.

I don't mind the Hernandez character. I actually wish we'd seen more of her and the Columbia.

Not too mention, it blasted the TOS notion from 'Turnabout Intruder' that there were no female commanders. Which in that time--Kirk's era--would have been far-fetched anyhow to NOT have female commanders.

On the other hand, I do agree Archer could have confided in one of his own crew as well; it could have worked both ways.

Added note: We have Archer, who really doesn't have a blueprint on space exploration. (Newflash: Untapped Travis Mayweather potential)! Maybe Mayweather and Archer can have a back and forth where they Ensign learns from the Captain, and the Captain gets an idea of what the Ensign came across during his own space travels....and what he had to deal with.

Moreover, he--Archer--is the first captain to really start mapping out space and looking for neighbors, basically. With the alien 'piracy' incident he can start to question is that what they were originally about? Is this what Starfleet is all about?

Hernandez, being a captain herself, might be able to relate to that...

I don't think so. Coto seemed happy sweeping those things under the rug, believing that people would rather see fanwank than good storytelling. Why do I say this? Look at how he, as the head writer, treated T'Pol's drug addiction. He didn't. They barely touched on Pa'naar and suddenly dragged it up from two seasons ago for a bizarre ending (T'Pau was able to fix it).

T'Pol's drug addiction and Archer's personal troubles would have been a good parallel arc, I think....as both characters would have had issues to take care of where the fate of the Earth 'hangs on the balance' (as the cliche goes).

Good storytelling/potential stories would have shown these characters possibly on the breaking point, where they might not be able to perform their job well...unless they get help.

 

[jefferiestubes8]

Re: Archer's Piracy in 'Damage' & Gen. order 1

Archer then crosses the line by engaging in piracy.

I just watched this ep for the first time this week and wow! I knew this was way far out and away from the Prime Directive which I didn't know did not yet exist at the time (before The United Federation of Planets was formed).
After the Federation is formed and the creation of Starfleet General Order 1,

Starfleet General Order 1 the Prime Directive is the most important law in Starfleet, a law of noninterference. Violation of the Directive is generally considered a felony offense that often carries severe punishment unless sufficient justification can be made for the violation.

There are two general exceptions to the Prime Directive:
The first is in cases where an extreme threat to the Federation exists.

(Due to issues of security, only Starfleet officers ranked Captain and above are privy to knowledge of this directive.)

I really wish they put something in Memory Alpha about Archer's piracy decision in Damage.
but instead quotes Archer:

"I have reconsidered. I spent the whole night reconsidering. And what I've decided goes against all my principles. Some day my people are going to come up with some sort of a doctrine, something that tells us what we can and can't do out here; should and shouldn't do. But until somebody tells me that they've drafted that...directive...I'm going to have to remind myself everyday that we didn't come out here to play God."

- Archer, sensing the need for the Prime Directive (ENT: "Dear Doctor") season 1 Dear Doctor #113

per memory alpha
I think this quote is particularly interesting in regards to Damage and the line crossed by Archer even though I haven't the Dear Doctor episode.

Is this where the whole

Article 14, Section 31, of the original U.E. Starfleet Charter made allowances for certain rules to be bent during times of extraordinary threat. This clause was the seed for the rogue organization known as Section 31.

comes in covering this type of thing as a extreme threat to the Federation (really Earth)?

I think there are ramifications from Damage inherent in S4. Like, I don't think Archer is ever the same joyful explorer who existed up until the opening moments of The Expanse.

Cool. I haven't seen season 4 or 1 & 2 (other than 'Broken Bow').

This episode though had 1:41 of recap before the title sequence. That is a lot of time taken away from the episode storytelling. Starting to annoy me.

Oh a quick side question as Memory Alpha didn't have any info on the Illyrian starship.
We saw the ships interior briefly when the MACOs and Archer transported to the ship. What was the ships interior closely designed from? What other alien race or ships? (not the exterior but interior) since they had a Warp drive.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

From a storytelling point of view, I thought bringing Erika in was pointless. I think a more effective and riveting way to unveil his self-loathing and help untangle it would be for him to have a heart-to-heart with one of his crew, like T'Pol, Trip or Phlox. I can see one of the three of them able to help him begin to forgive himself. I also think by having one of them talk with Archer, we can see follow up episodes where they continue to untangle it.

I don't mind the Hernandez character. I actually wish we'd seen more of her and the Columbia.

I like Captain Hernandez myself, especially in the Star Trek: Destiny novels....