airlockalpha.com

Genre Nexus - We Get Entertainment Airlock Alpha |  Inside Blip |  Rabid Doll

Sign-In [?]

Twitter Facebook Mailing List RSS Feed

TV Watchtower: Is Religion Killing Good Sci-Fi Shows?

How 'Lost,' 'Battlestar Galactica,' 'Caprica' lost sight of their sci-fi roots

As an avid science-fiction fan, shows like Battlestar Galactica, Caprica and Lost rank amongst my favorite shows. But somehow these shows -- in an effort to be edgy and contemporary -- got lost along the way trying to find ways to counter-balance their extreme science-fiction mythology.

Religion and politics are the hot buttons in any society and using them as storytelling devices is risky. When used cautiously, both can be excellent tools to provoke debate and galvanizing story points. But when used with abandon and heedless of the consequences, they can completely derail or eclipse even the best of sci-fi shows.

Lost was thought to be one of the most pre-eminent science-fiction shows of the modern era and was heralded as the best example of successfully melding sci-fi with commercial dramatic television. Yet in the space of 15 minutes, Lost managed to alienate the very audience that faithfully tuned in for six years. Instead of delivering the expected epic showdown between good and evil and a climatic ending for the fans, it opted to wrap up its journey with an image of its cast sitting on church pews reverently awaiting the light to welcome them.

I vividly recall sitting with my dad watching those last few minutes of Lost and wondering, What the hell? Both of us are deeply religious and yet we were still shocked and horrified. In all the years devotedly following every baited-breath of Lost, it never occurred to us that it was a show more interested in religion than science-fiction.

The fractured timelines, wormholes and smoke monster were all elements of sci-fi. There were no religious undertones to the story about a group of survivors from a plane crash on a mysterious island that could literally be moved throughout time and space. So where did that ending come from?

To this day, I am still appalled that the series chickened out of telling the story that fans had come to expect. The show could have melded the two fractured timelines; it could have picked any timeline. Instead, it chose to jump the entire show into the limbo-land where souls await their friends before moving on.

Just writing that sentence feels like the anti-thesis of Lost. That was not the show I watched for six years and spent countless hours debating the pros and cons of whether the castaways would ever escape the doomed island.

Nearly as aggravating was the end of Battlestar Galactica, which also chose to over-emphasize religion in its final hour. Having watched the absolutely riveting epic showdown between the survivors and the evil Cylons in Part 1 of the finale, the final hour felt anti-climatic and a bit bewildering. The final hour was spent showing us the divergent paths that each of the surviving Colonists chose upon reaching New Earth. The most startling being the disappearance of Starbuck - - who may or may not have been angel -- and the final scene with Head Baltar and Head Six, several thousand years in the future - who may or may not have been angels, as well.

This ending was similarly jarring. For when did a military space opera depicting the near genocide of the human race at the hands of rebellious machines decide it was a story about angels.

Both Lost and Battlestar Galactica had dabbled and debated various points of religious theology, but ultimately one did not feel as if they were watching a show solely about religion. Sure, John Locke and Jack Shephard had engaged in many debates of faith versus science over the six years on Lost; and one of the core differences between the Cylons and the Colonists in Battlestar Galactica had been the polar opposite views on monotheism versus polytheism.

In both series the tug-of-war of political and religious ideology serve well to propel the storylines and heighten the ferocity in which each side fought for their belief that they were absolutely right. It was the motivation, not the answer.

More recently, Caprica, the Battlestar Galactica prequel, also expanded its foray into the theological realm. Whereas, Caprica was to be the story of the genesis of the Cylons and their rise to power and subsequent resistance to subjugation to mankind, in a startling twist, the series came back from its extended hiatus nearly consumed with a religious war. The hero of the story, Zoe, was virtually missing from the story with nearly 75 percent of the screen time in the past two episodes spent on the religious zealotry of Sister Clarice and Soldiers of the One internal battle for religious control.

Angels, purgatory, limbo and monotheistic/polytheistic religious wars - - each has its place in science-fiction, but they are merely an element. They should not be the core of a science-fiction story. Relying too heavily on these elements in the place of true science-fiction only serves to alienate the very audience that such shows seek to engage.

If one is watching The Terminator, one does not expect to find that angels are in our midst manipulating the fate of mankind. And if one is watching Doctor Who, one does not expect The Doctor will one day wake up to find out that all his former companions are waiting for him to welcome him into Heaven. (Note: Angels have their place, for surely nothing has been more terrifying in recent history than Doctor Whos weeping angels.) However, there are certain things we hold to be self-evident in science-fiction: it is science-fiction, not theological fiction.

Therefore, modern-day television writers need to remember what kind of show they are writing and who they are writing for. If they are more interested in writing about theology, then they should write those shows and not distort good science-fiction shows beyond recognition. For what purpose does it serve to pull a bait-and-switch on the very audience that provided them with tenure?

Will the sci-fi community ever trust Carlton Cuse, Damon Lindelof, Ronald D. Moore and David Eick to write a sci-fi show again? Has our faith in them been betrayed upon finding out that they were not actually writing sci-fi shows, but instead delivering pontification on their religious views?

It is time to get science-fiction back on track. Where is the science? In todays sci-fi, we want to be challenged by the possibilities of what lies ahead if such things as time travel, alternate universes, alien life and the rise of artificial intelligence come to fruition. Give us more of that.

That is, after all, what science-fiction is truly about. We want to see Cylons and smoke monsters. Do not kill the science in science-fiction.

About the Author

Tiffany Vogt is a contributing writer for Airlock Alpha, writing the column 'The TV Watchtower' and lives in Los Angeles. She loves science-fiction and is addicted to sci-fi films and television shows and attends as many conventions as her busy work schedule will allow.
Email author

You might also like:

Genre Nexus Community

Visit our forums

Nothing here yet...
tell what you think.

I would have to disagree (respectfully) with your article. I felt that both Lost and Battlestar Galactica in particular made it pretty clear that religion was a major focus. There were so many times in Galactica's 4 year run that Baltar is refered to as a servant of God by Head 6 that to discover the possible angelic nature of the head characters/characters in general was not a shock, and they practically spelled it out in the case of Kara Thrace (Starbuck). "Servant of God" is probably the most accurate definition of "Angel" I have ever seen. In regards to lost, the central conflict of the show was clearly the struggle between Jacob (the metaphorical God figure) and the smoke monster (the metaphorical Satan figure) for the hearts and minds of the castaways. It is debatable if the Island was purgatory, of if purgatory was represented only in the "flash sideways" sequences in Season 6, but the religious connection was obvious as early as season 2, with Locke's strong faith, but also his pride, which lead to his undoing. I agree that if it were to occur in Terminator or Doctor Who it would not fit, but it was not set up that way, Lost and Galactica clearly were.

Religion and science fiction have always gone hand in hand in deep ways.

2 examples:

Stargate. First it was about Goa'ulds, who pose as gods. It was heavily based on Egyptian mythology. Then it upped the ante even more going straigth to evil ascended beings, who (also posed as gods and) got power from belief and spread their holy book through prophets etc. You cannot imagine Stargate without religion waved right into its veins.

The most compelling example would be Star Wars though. Its central idea is the force. And it was in fact a grave mistake from Lucas to try to step science up with the cost of religion. When he introduced the midichlorians, he demythified his greatest asset - and got the mighty wrath of fans for that.

I have to agree with the other commenters here ... I think that if they didn't end BSG with religion, it would not follow anything they established through the entire show's run.

There is something you are missing here about BSG. BSG talked about religion, it talked about those who believe in many gods (colonists), those who believe in one god(cylons), also allowed for those who don't believe in god period.

The show through much of its run allowed for interpretation that god did things, but also allowed for other explanations. It for a long time by design didn't want to say whether or not god existed.

The problem with the ending was it was too overtlly religious. It allows for no other interpretation than god did it. Also with the head characters taking center stage at the end, it is obvious that the cylon's one true god was the one true god in this universe. This is not a question the show should have tried to answer, any more then we can answer definitively does god exist in our universe.

This is a show that prided itself in realism. In its last hour went so far off the rails far as realism that it felt like it let itself down. In the show's bible it was stated they wanted to avoid cliches of the scifi genre, what is more cliche then god did it?

I see your point regarding BSG, somewhat. When it is over there is still plenty of room for interpretation. Who were the "head" characters? One of them mentions God in the end, and Baltar says, "he doesn't like to be called that." Was it God, or some being we assume is God? In addition, the Kara Thrace deal is also open to interpretation. Was she an angel? Was she one of the "beings of light" from original BSG finally making an appearance (the same could be said for the head characters). In the end, it is this openness to interpretation which allows some of us to view it as religious, while some of us do not. The ambiguity is what made the Galactica finale one of the greatest series finales in recent memory. I don't think the "God" question was answered at all, I think it was answered only if you found an answer within it. It is like a great work of literature, for ever 100 people who read it, there are 100 interpretation of it.

Historically speaking, science-fiction at the movies at one time did tend towards a religious ending, but it was religious like the War of the Worlds or When Worlds Collide.

At the end of WotW the martians were killed by microbes that "God in his infinite wisdom had placed on Earth". So even though it was a scientific idea it was wrapped in a little religion.

WWC was a little more religious. You have a rocket ship taking the last of humanity to a new planet ala Noah's Ark. And when they arrive and are safe they have the first dawn on a new world and then a statement about God in scrolled lettering shows on the screen.

Now granted not every science fiction movie ended with religion and in many religion wasn't mentioned at all. But historically religion was used in a different way.

In the cases mentioned in this article you are seeing a resurgence of what I like to call the V-exit. Back in the mists of time there was a great mini-series called V! A couple of great movies steeped in hard-science science-fiction until the end when they ran out of story ideas. So a hybrid child was imbued with MAGICAL PROPERTIES and only had to wave her hands to solve the problem at the end of the show. That's right...abracadabra. It seems to me that the writers involved with the shows in question decided to stop thinking and take the V-exit. Ignore everything that has come before and rely on MAGIC. It's the easy way out and they took it. Plain and simple.

I watched most of BSG, until they ended up on that planet and it became more of a soap-opera. I watched the first two seasons of LOST and then Lost interest. Friends continued to try to bring me back into the fold, but after I heard about the ending I was so glad I didn't. I would have felt betrayed, as it seems many were. It's not the inclusion of religion that hurts good science fiction, it's relying on it to write yourself out of a corner!

First, in general, allow me to say I think it's sad that there must be this preceived "conflict" between science fiction and religion. I do not believe the two are incompatiable. Since religion can be considered an aspect of the human experience for some people, I see no reason why it should be considered wrong for a science fiction story to address religion. Why is it allowed for science fiction to talk about every single aspect of the human experience except for religion?

Now, onto Battlestar Galatica specifically. Battlestar Galatica talked about religion from day one. So, I do not understand why people have such a difficult time accepting the fact that religion was involved in the finale. Furthermore, my own personal interpretation is that the "twist" was that although the cylons were the ones hunting down humanity, (and of course the audience were humans), it was apparently the monotheistic cylon "God" who was "influencing" the events. Then again, I think the ending was vague/ open enough to allow for individuals to have their own personal interpretations. (I would not be surprised if my interpretation was in a very low minority). However, that does not mean it was wrong for the writers to involve religion in their story. I honestly think the problem is that some science fiction fans are too closed minded/ have such a hatred for religion that they get upset when the subject is discussed in a science fiction story. If this is true, I think it's sad because as I stated above religion is part of the human experience for some people. With that in mind, science fiction should/ must address the topic of religion. Why ignore religion when more than half of humanity would describe themselves as religious/ spiritual?

I'm not the most religious person in the world, and the last thing I want is people to start preaching all over the place.

But I have not been uncomfortable with the use of religion in sci-fi. In fact, I like it. Especially when it works well with the story.

I agree with the article wholeheartedly. The shows may have had religious motivations behind some of the characters, but this is *science* fiction and religion should not be the prime focus.

In my article "Is Religion Killing Goog Sci-Fi Shows," I was not saying all religion in sci-fi is a bad thing -- just the over-emphasis of it. Especially at critical junctures, such as wrapping up a major sci-fi series. A sci-fi television series must never come across as if the religious storyline in the END -- the answer to the overall arcing story.

"Lost" and "BSG" would have been better off ending on a sci-fi note and not a religious note. I was perhaps not clear enough in my article in clarifying that the religious debates throughout both "Lost' and "BSG" were helpful in propelling the story. But they should have avoided ending on that topic. It undermined their success as ground-breaking, thought-provoking sci-fi shows.

Regardless, I'm glad to see the debate. :)
- Tiffany

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.