![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Meta: Elizabeth Weir in season 2
Jan. 30th, 2006 11:36 pmA conversation I had earlier this week got me thinking about the darker themes SGA has been exploring in season 2 and changes in character behavior, particularly Elizabeth Weir. This then got me thinking about her characterization in general.
Some less charitable fan opinions I've come across regarding Weir include 1) that she is badly written as a leader by writers whose only known examples of women in leadership positions were their kindergarten teachers, 2) that she is presented as merely competent at her job, putting her in poor contrast to her male counterparts, who are all excellent at their jobs, 3) corollary to both 1 and 2, that she simply hasn't shown enough talent as a leader or a diplomat to justify her having achieved the position of head of the Atlantis expedition.
I'm somewhat inclined to agree with 1 -- many of her lines, I think, could be better written. I'd be willing to argue with 2, but that's a subject for another post. As to 3, I don't care to debate whether Elizabeth is a good diplomat or leader. I will, however, argue that her skill as a diplomat or leader, on the whole, has very little bearing on her having achieved her position as head of the Atlantis expedition.
She doesn't need to be the best diplomat in two galaxies because she knows how to find advantages in the situation surrounding a debate, rather than the debate itself. She doesn't need to be the principal authority figure for every single person under her leadership because she knows how to delegate power. Where others would deal directly, she slides in through the back door. Elizabeth is not head of Atlantis for her outstanding performance as a diplomat and leader, but rather for her brilliance as a politician.
And she is a brilliant politician.
( spoiler cut )
Some less charitable fan opinions I've come across regarding Weir include 1) that she is badly written as a leader by writers whose only known examples of women in leadership positions were their kindergarten teachers, 2) that she is presented as merely competent at her job, putting her in poor contrast to her male counterparts, who are all excellent at their jobs, 3) corollary to both 1 and 2, that she simply hasn't shown enough talent as a leader or a diplomat to justify her having achieved the position of head of the Atlantis expedition.
I'm somewhat inclined to agree with 1 -- many of her lines, I think, could be better written. I'd be willing to argue with 2, but that's a subject for another post. As to 3, I don't care to debate whether Elizabeth is a good diplomat or leader. I will, however, argue that her skill as a diplomat or leader, on the whole, has very little bearing on her having achieved her position as head of the Atlantis expedition.
She doesn't need to be the best diplomat in two galaxies because she knows how to find advantages in the situation surrounding a debate, rather than the debate itself. She doesn't need to be the principal authority figure for every single person under her leadership because she knows how to delegate power. Where others would deal directly, she slides in through the back door. Elizabeth is not head of Atlantis for her outstanding performance as a diplomat and leader, but rather for her brilliance as a politician.
And she is a brilliant politician.
( spoiler cut )
