Skip to main content

The Conflict of Competency


Characters have a need to feel competency. Once all of the other basic needs have been met - enough to eat and drink, a sense of security, and acceptance from peers - it is natural for human beings to seek out opportunities to feel good about themselves. To feel important and clever. In literature, this type of conflict is difficult to describe because it tapers away to questions of love and acceptance on the low end and issues of ethics and morality on the upper end. Also, I think many people have a mixed reaction to obviously talented people having those abilities tested. On one hand, professional sports wouldn't exist if we didn't, on some level, enjoy watching talented performers push themselves in competition. But on the other hand, we tend to mock or revile those people who seem too proud of their own accomplishments or too flashy in victory. "Don't spike the football."

This is a tough balancing act for Star Trek: The Next Generation. Put simply, every single character comes off as incredibly arrogant at some point in the first season. Whether it's Picard's deliberately unironic reading of Hamlet's "Piece of Work" monologue, Riker's high-handed treatment in "Angel One" of the Matriarch Beata, or Wesley's smug little smirk, these are characters existing in a state of high self-regard. Of course, this is one of the most common complaints about the beginnings of the series, how the characters are bland and complacent to a fault. To the show's credit, that changes and there are some entertaining challenges to the crew's arrogance later on.


A central motif in the Star Trek universe is an attraction to competency. Although flawed, the members of the crew, from the earliest episodes, clearly represent the best of the best. Picard is the premier Star Fleet captain and Riker is an ambitious and impressive first officer. Data, LaForge, and Worf are all unique individuals with, presumably, glowing resumes. Perhaps that's why the crew comes off as remarkably intolerant in some of the earliest episodes: repulsed by the Ferengi, patronizing to the Ligonians, and dismissive of Angel matriarchal oligarchy. The two basic types of threats in these earlier stories are either godlike in potency or significantly more primitive. There's not much for the crew to test their mettle against.

For the first season then, most of the conflicts revolve around the one character still attempting to define his abilities, Wesley Crusher. This is a tricky statement because Wesley also fulfills a more odious function in the first season: a convenient deux ex machina. Is an enormous gob of glowing star barf heading towards the Enterprise? Wesley fixes it. Is the ship marooned in a swirling, gossamer fantasy mist at the end of the universe? Wesley fixes it. The list of examples where Wesley saves the day at the last minute is depressingly long. But that's not really an example of an ego conflict. A better moment happens in the episode "Coming of Age." Here Wesley is attempting the Star Fleet admission test, competing against three other applicants, all demonstrating impressive amounts of knowledge and talent. One section of the test, challenges the applicants to solve a series of engineering problems. One of Wesley's competitors, Mordock, loses composure and Wesley, perhaps empathizing with the other's struggles, talks him through to a solution. The situation is sort of obvious, but I like it nevertheless as an example of ego played against a need for acceptance. From an earlier encounter between Wesley and Jack, we see Wesley feels uncomfortable with his talent, embarrassed by outcompeting his friend. So again he is confronted with the tension of surging ahead for himself or pausing to help someone else. He helps his new friend, allowing Mordock to win, and losing a few crucial points.



I think this is the same basic conflict that appears in the psych test later in the episode. Here, Wesley is confronted with an apparent explosion at the test site. He rushes in, attempting to bring two trapped personnel to safety. He is forced to physically drag one free from an impending explosion, and is unable to convince the other to leap through a jet of noxious gases to safety. Ultimately Wesley chooses to save the injured man, leaving the other to his fate. Informed that the whole situation was the psych test, Wesley shows remarkable self-control. Instead of grabbing the nearest phaser and blasting his way out of the Skinner box, Wesley realizes his central problem is a fear he could not choose one life over another or withstand the pressures of responsibility. He fails to win his way into Star Fleet, but the test has given him some measure of confidence in his own abilities.

I honestly feel this is one type of conflict under-used in speculative fiction. Skill and talent is typically taken for granted in stories. An uber-competent hero cuts a wide swath through swarms of cannon fodder until he meets his only one true challenge in a story, the principal villain. The rivals match swords, guns, wits or giant mechs in a pitched battle until one of them wins, roll credits. I'd like more examples of conflicts where a competent character has a central talent truly tested in a convincing and interesting way. Perhaps, that conflict has to look like what I've described above, the need to compete versus a need to help others. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

With the title World War Z

Early on in the mostly disappointing zombie epidemic thriller World War Z, UN Investigator Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) hides out in a Newark apartment, trying to convince a family living there to flee with him from the hordes of sprinting, chomping maniacs infesting the city. The phrase he uses, drawing from years of experience in the world's troubled war-zones is "movement is life." Ultimately he's unsuccessful, the family barricades their door behind him and they join the ever-swelling ranks of the undead. As far as a guiding philosophy goes for a pop-action thriller like World War Z, 'movement is life,' isn't bad. And for the first half of the movie or so, it follows its own advice. Similar to other recent zombie movies (Dawn of the Dead, Shaun of the Dead) the warning signs of what the rest of the movie will bring are subtle and buried until all hell is ready to break through. The television mentions 'martial law,' Philadelphia traffic snarl
I’m going to take a slightly abbreviated approach to this year’s best-of lists and mostly focus on movies. It’s not that I didn’t read or listen to music but for whatever reason I feel uninspired to talk about either topic. C’est la vie! So in no particular order are five movies I greatly enjoyed watching this year. Firstly, Avengers: Endgame. Well, I guess there is some order to this list because literally the first thing I thought of in terms of movies I’ve seen is this movie. It is inevitable! This is the one MCU flick it’s hard for me to remember as simply a super-hero film. Although I found its predecessor a bit more more compulsively watchable, I really enjoyed this film. First of all it’s tone, which veered from despair, heist hijinx, parental reconciliation, to epic mega-brawl was never boring. Even the gorgeous mess which is that final fight has its own interior logic and sports some of the best looking cinematography this side of Black Panther. With Endgame MCU found a

Stephen King's 2017

Despite the release of a single novel and a few short stories, 2017 has to rank up there as one of the more Stephen King ascendant years. No less than four movies based on his works appeared, including one of the most successful horror films of all time, the first part of IT. 'The Mist' (Stephen King) by Dementall.deviantart.com Of course, with King, for every high, there are plenty of lows and 2017 also provided a number of examples of how to do his works wrong. But let's start with the good stuff. The movie adaptation of IT, directed by Andres Muschietti and starring a number of talented young actors (including Finn Wolfhard of "Stranger Things" fame) really captured, for me, a lot of what I liked about the original novel. Being scary certainly helped, but with King, the horror slice is never really the whole cake. What makes King King, at least for me, is the combination of earthy, believable characters with lurid, "Tales from the Crypt&quo