lurkers-guide/guide/041

<!-- TITLE Divided Loyalties -->

<H2><A NAME="OV">Overview</A></H2>

<BLOCKQUOTE><CITE>
Lyta Alexander, the station's first telepath,
returns with a warning that one of Babylon 5's officers is
an operative for a top-secret government organization. A long-held
secret of another Babylon 5 officer is revealed.
</CITE>

<A HREF="http://us.imdb.com/M/person-exact?+Tallman,+Patricia">Patricia
Tallman</A> as Lyta Alexander.
</BLOCKQUOTE>

<PRE>
Sub-genre: Mystery/Intrigue
<a href="/lurk/p5/intro.html">P5 Rating</a>: <a href="/lurk/p5/041">8.50</a>

Production number: 220
Original air date: July 25, 1995 (UK)
                   October 11, 1995 (US)
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000087EYB/thelurkersguidet">DVD release date</a>: April 29, 2003

Written by J. Michael Straczynski
Directed by Jesus Trevino
</PRE>

<P>
<HR SIZE=3>

<H2><A NAME="BP">Backplot</A></H2>

<UL>

   <LI> Lyta Alexander is part of a secret movement against Psi Corps. She's
	evidently been a dissident since she probed Kosh
	(<A HREF="000.html">"The Gathering."</A>)
	When Lyta probed Kosh, she felt something she then hid from the years of
	subsequent interrogations from Psi-Corps.
	She has been feeling drawn to Vorlon space and has desperately tried to
	get there. She knows a lot more than she has ever told anyone, including
	what Kosh is under his suit.

   <li> Talia Winters was programmed with a 'sleeper' personality by the Psi
	Corps.  She is probably "Control" (cf.
	<A HREF="028.html">"A Spider in the Web."</A>)

   <li> Ivanova is a latent telepath. She is able to block some scans, knows
	instantly if someone scans her,
	can pick up on some feelings, but has never been able to scan anyone
	except her mother.
	She claims, though, that her psi rating is
	"not even a P1." 

   <li> "Universe Today" has a section called 'Eye on Minbari'
	which Delenn uses to find out things
	about her homeworld she might not neccessarily have been told yet,
	in addition to learning human perceptions of Minbari.

   <li> Lyta spent some time with Psi Cops as part of her training, but left
	because she didn't like it and became a commercial telepath instead.

</UL>        


<H2><A NAME="UQ">Unanswered Questions</A></H2>
<ul>

   <li> Exactly how much <em>does</em> Talia's new persona know?  And what will
	this do to B5 in the future? 

   <li> Is there really no chance of the old Talia recovering?  If not, what
	good is the recording Kosh made?

   <li> How safe is Lyta's escape?  Will Psi-corps get her in the end?  The fact
	that Kosh let her off the station suggests he's prepared to risk
	Psi-Corps getting their grubby hands on whatever it is she knows from
	the scan.

   <li> What did Lyta see when she asked Kosh to reveal himself?  Something
	with a halo of light, but what?

   <li> Dr. Kyle also saw Kosh. Has Psi-Corps learned anything from
	him that they didn't learn from Lyta?

   <li> How involved are Sinclair's rangers with the Mars resistance?

   <li> Was it Talia who attempted to kill Lyta?

   <li> How did (presumably) Talia get the lights in the security section to
	go out, being replaced with red backups? And how did she know that she
	had a chance to hit Lyta? She was being taken from one cell to another
	on orders passed from Garibaldi to Zack to two ordinary security
	people. Is Zack implicated in some way, perhaps by way of his
	involvement in Nightwatch?  It seems conincidental that in
	the few minutes available an attempt was made on Lyta's life.

   <li> What about Ironheart (cf.
	<A HREF="006.html">"Mind War?"</A>)
	If he saw "everything," would he not have known about the implanted
	personality, however deep it was?

   <li> What will Psi Corps do with Talia now that the Artificial Personality
	has taken control?

   <li> Was the 'Control' mentioned by Lyta the same one installed by Bureau 13?

   <li> Was Garibaldi <em>really</em> faking the transition to an artificial
	personality?  And does he know more that he's letting on? (see
	<A HREF="#AN">Analysis</A>)

   <li> How will Sheridan and Delenn handle the growing feelings in their
	friendship?

   <li> Why is Babylon 5 seen to be so important to several unknown
	individuals/groups, and who are those people?

</ul>

<H2><A NAME="AN">Analysis</A></H2>
<ul>
   <li> Whatever Ironheart did to Talia seems to have enhanced her powers
	enormously, and she seems to be growing more powerful. Psi Corps, at a
	minimum, now have the psychic assassin they were trying to create, and
	potentially much more.  Assuming, of course, that Ironheart's gift
	wasn't erased when Talia's original personality was destroyed.

<p>
   <li> Another possibility is that Talia <em>wasn't</em> destroyed, that
	Ironheart's gift allowed her to prevent Control from taking over,
	but she's playing along as a means of continuing her own investigation
	into what's going on with Psi-Corps (cf.
	<a href="028.html">"Spider in the Web."</a>)

<p>
   <li>@@@867174534 Talia's implanted personality was foreshadowed in
	<a href="021.html">"The Quality of Mercy."</a>
	After she was finished scanning Mueller, she was joined by Garibaldi
	in the Garden.  As they talked about her experience, she commented
	to him, "Things that live inside us, Mr. Garibaldi.  Terrible things.
	Terrible."

<p>
   <li> Delenn's choice of articles in <CITE>Universe Today</CITE> is a
	revealing one. This highlights the lack of information she is receiving
	now that she is no longer a member of the Grey Council.  However, she
	is learning to gather information from other sources and to "read
	between the lines" more carefully.  It appears that she is regaining
	confidence in her abilities.

<p>
   <li> During the attempted murder of Lyta while she is being transfered
	between holding cells, we see the hand holding the assailants PPG.  It
	is wearing a black glove, very similar to those worn by Talia.  However,
	the lead time between Garibaldi ordering Lyta to be moved, and the
	attempted assassination appears to be very short.  So how did Talia
	know when to leave Ivanova's quarters in order to intercept Lyta?  And
	does Talia know how to kill the main lights in a section?  Three
	possibilities present themselves:

	<p>
	<ol>
	   <li> Coincidence.  Talia, under the control of the artificial
		personality (AP), goes to hunt down
		and kill Lyta while Ivanova is out getting some air.  The fact
		that Lyta was being transferred made the attempt much easier.
		Killing the main lights is knowledge that Talia has but we
		aren't shown.  However, in
		<a href="028.html">"A Spider in the Web,"</a>
		we <em>are</em> shown that Bureau 13 has cracked the station
		computer's security, which presumably would allow Talia to
		discover both Lyta's location and the time of the transfer.
	
	<p>
	   <li> There is an additional agent provocateur on Babylon 5.  Someone
		who does have the knowledge of Lyta's movements, and would know
		how to kill the main lights in a section.  This strongly
		suggests Garibaldi, but might be Zack or another member of the
		security staff.  A trigger message is sent to Talia, who then
		attempts to kill Lyta.
	
	<p>
	   <li> As above, there is an additional mole on Babylon 5, but it is
		this individual who knows about Lyta's movements, knows how to
		short circuit the main lights, and attempts to kill Lyta.  In
		this case, Talia is innocently caught up in the actions of
		another individual attempting to protect themselves.  There is
		additional evidence that might be seen to support this
		(see below).
	</ol>

<p>
   <li> How does Talia know that Lyta Alexander is aboard Babylon 5?  She may
	have guessed indirectly from a conversation with Ivanova and done some
	digging of her own, but Ivanova only asks if Talia knew Lyta - not
	telling her that she was aboard.  Alternatively, she learnt of this
	through her PsiCorps contacts.  Or Talia arranged (at the suggestion of
	the submerged AP) for her quarters to be out of use so that she could
	be closer to Ivanova.  Once close enough, she could scan Ivanova and
	learn about the cell group, also learning about Lyta at the same time.
	When Talia wakes up (finding Ivanova gone) she has no gloves on.
	Physical contact may be used to intensify mental contact, and Talia
	might have done this while Ivanova was sleeping.  Talia's new
	personality indicates that there <em>was</em> an ulterior motive for
	getting close to Ivanova.

<p>
   <li> Garibaldi's flashbacks refer to
	<A HREF="009.html">"Deathwalker,"</A>
	where Kosh uses a ViCaR (or VCR, an individual with an enhanced
	photographic memory) to conduct a strange negotiation, with Talia
	monitoring.  A data crystal was also passed to Kosh from the ViCaR, and
	Talia doesn't know what it contained.  Kosh's comments seem to indicate
	his awareness of Talia's AP and what will happen when it is activated.
	So, has Kosh recorded a copy of Talia's personality onto a data
	crystal? We have already seen that the Earth Alliance has the technology
	to wipe a personality and build a new one
	(<A HREF="021.html">"The Quality of Mercy"</A>.)
	Will this be a way for Sheridan to wipe out the AP and any knowledge
	that PsiCorps might pick up from Talia? It may not be so easy (see
	<a href="#JS">JMS Speaks</a>).

<p>
   <li> Garibaldi believed Lyta and her story.  Considering how strongly this
	goes against his previous behaviour, does he have an ulterior motive? 
	This may tie in with some of the speculation about Lyta's attempted
	murder.  See also the following two points.

<p>
   <li> When Taro Isogi is killed by the modified Free Mars leader
	(<A HREF="028.html">"A Spider in the Web,"</A>)
	Control identifies Talia Winters (who witnessed the murder) as
	someone who should also be eliminated.  Given that Lyta Alexander
	referred to the (then unknown) sleeper agent as 'Control', can we draw
	the conclusion that Talia was part of a Bureau 13 operation?  Or are
	there different sections of PsiCorps treading on each other's toes?
	It seems unlikely that Talia ordered her own execution, especially if
	Lyta is right about Control being programmed for self-preservation.

<p>
   <li> Garibaldi's "faked" personality transition was taken by all the
	others as being a joke in bad taste. But consider an alternative
	explanation:  Lyta stated that the AP would say or do anything to
	protect itself, and Garibaldi was behaving out of character.  He also
	immediately turned everyone's attention to Ivanova.  Talia was
	caught unprepared for the sending of the password, but Garibaldi knew
	that the password would be sent.  Garibaldi knew, or could easily
	have found out, when Lyta was slated to be moved, so could have pulled
	the trigger.  And he was ready to bring Talia into the conspiracy,
	perhaps in order to expose it indirectly.
	
	<p>
	However, it is unlikely that
	two different sleepers would respond to the same password, and the
	events in the "flashforward" scene in
	<A HREF="020.html">"Babylon Squared"</A>
	would suggest that Garibaldi's loyalty is not in question.

<p>
   <li> Ivanova was also awake at the time, and unaccounted-for, making her
	a suspect.

<p>
   <li> How high up the chain of Psi-Corps command does this implanting go?
	There is every indication the it's above Bester. Twice in the series
	Bester has suspected and even accused Talia of conspiring against the
	Corps. Why would he suspect or accuse her of this if he knew he had
	an ally inside her brain?

<p>
   <li> The Delenn/Sheridan relationship is growing stronger.  Neither Delenn or
	Sheridan are making a strong attempt to hide their growing trust and
	respect for each other.  After the events in
	<A HREF="040.html">"Confessions and
	Lamentations,"</A> Delenn has drawn emotional support from Sheridan.
	Her growing affection for him is something that she clearly shows in
	her face and actions while they are in the garden talking.  Sheridan
	also appears to be happy that he has someone who he can turn to who
	will help him when all around is madness, and is wondering just where
	all this is leading.

<p>
   <li> The relationship between Talia and Ivanova is one that will attract
	much debate.
	
	<p>
	At the start of the episode, it seems clear that they are just friends.
	Talia would not hesitate to impose on Ivanova's sleeping quarters if
	there were anything stronger.

	<p>
	During the episode, as Ivanova becomes more and more worried about
	revealing her (limited) telepathic ability, she relies on Talia during
	the expression of her feelings and doubts.  There is an apparent
	emotional tension between them that might be interpreted as a "should I
	make the first move," or as Talia's giving support but hesitating to
	probe further, and Ivanova's "should I trust her, even though she's a
	telepath?"

	<p>
	When Talia wakes up in Ivanova's bed, finding her missing, it is
	tempting to jump to the "obvious" conclusion.  However we know that
	Ivanova's quarters only has one cot (indicated in
	<A HREF="027.html">"The Long Dark"</A>
	by Dr.  Franklin.) Of course, Ivanova probably has a sofa/couch that
	might have been used.

	<p>
	When Ivanova has her final conversation with the dominated Talia, she
	indicates that it gave Talia the words that would get her close to all
	Ivanova knew.  Just how much Talia knows about Ivanova is unclear, and
	we have no indication of just how close in addition to the emotional
	bond.

	<p>
	Had Ivanova and Talia had a physical relationship then Ivanova might
	have revealed her latent telepathy ("Do you know what its like when
	telepaths make love?" in
	<A HREF="006.html">"Mind War."</A>)
	Since the alternate Talia didn't goad Ivanova about this, then either
	Ivanova maintained a block, or they didn't have a physical
	relationship.

<p>
   <li> Ivanova's relationship with her mother is opened up further by her
	revelation of being a latent telepath, although this is not explored
	directly.  Since Ivanova could initiate contact with her mother, she
	could obtain a clear mental as well as physical picture of her mothers
	deterioration under the PsiCorps telepathic suppression drugs.  The
	drugs would of course prevent any attempt at contact initiated by her
	mother, and also of any blocking.

	<p>
	We now have a clearer understanding of how Ivanova developed her strong
	feelings against PsiCorps, and what she must have overcome in order to
	establish her friendship with Talia.  This change in Talia (and the AP
	claiming to have directed the growth of their friendship) may have far
	reaching effects in her ability to trust again.<p>

<p>
   <li> Sheridan has now seen a part of his Kosh-induced dream
	(<A HREF="033.html">"All Alone in the
	Night"</A>) come true.  In the dream he saw Ivanova with a black raven
	on her shoulder, and heard her say: "Do you know who I am?"  At
	what point will other parts of the dream come true? (If they
	haven't already.)<p>

<p>
   <li> Why did Sheridan let Talia go so easily?  He could have held her on
	charges of shooting two security guards, if nothing else.  Perhaps he
	felt that doing so would draw too much attention to his covert
	activities.

<p>
   <li> Since a Ranger was involved in smuggling the data crystal to Lyta,
	Garibaldi may have been warned of her arrival.

<p>
   <li> Delenn appeared to be turning down closer relations with the Lumati (cf.
	<a href="034.html">"Acts of Sacrifice"</a>)
	when Lyta called.  Why?  (Maybe their method of closing treaties is
	a bit closer than she'd prefer the relations to get.)

<p>
   <li> JMS says (see
	<a href="#JS:takashima">jms speaks</a>)
	that originally, Takashima
	(<a href="000.html">"The Gathering"</a>)
	was going to be the plant, and that that
	part of the storyline was transferred over to Talia with the cast
	changes between pilot and series.  The other events in "The Gathering,"
	combined with some revelations from the comic series (cf. comic 8,
	<a href="/lurk/comic/008.html">"Silent Enemies"</a>)
	suggest some disturbing connections.

	<p>
	Psi Corps was working with Minbari dissidents to kill a Vorlon.  The
	comic has also established a connection between Psi Corps and the
	Shadows, although this has not yet been seen on screen.  If the comic
	is to be believed, there is a link through Psi Corps between the
	Shadows and elements of the Minbari warrior caste.  The effects
	of that link on the coming war may be quite unfortunate for one side
	or the other.

</ul>

<H2><A NAME="NO">Notes</A></H2>

<UL>

   <li> Zack is still wearing his "Nightwatch" armband
	(<A HREF="038.html">"In the Shadow of Z'ha'dum"</A>)
	and Garibaldi is a little bemused by it. Clearly he doesn't quite
	approve of the idea.

   <li> The Pak'ma'ra have separate toilet facilities.  Oddly, the warning
	sign next to the door is written, among other languages, in Vorlon!
	Or at least, in a script identical to that displayed by Kosh's ship in
	<a href="035.html">"Hunter, Prey."</a>

   <li> At least one of the fugitives in the sewers on Mars was clearly a 
	ranger. The other may not necessarily have been. Lyta arrived
	in a shot-up ship and knows that two men died for the information.
	Obviously she has links with the rangers. 

   <li> Delenn lies yet again, and is caught immediately.

   <li> When Delenn is dictating her response to the Lumati, the computer
	screen shows the text appearing (whether this is Lumati writing or
	Minbari isn't clear.)  One odd thing about it is that it alternately
	flows in both directions, up and down, across the width of the
	screen from left to right.

   <li>@@@862900923 Production gaffe: In the first live-action shot after
	the title sequence, as Sheridan enters the restroom, one of the
	production crew's hands (likely the director's) can be seen briefly at
	the bottom of the screen.

</UL>

<H2><A NAME="JS">jms speaks</A></H2>

<UL>

   <LI> <A NAME="JS:about">"Divided Loyalties"</a> will
	produce a stunning revelation about one of our major characters.

<p>
   <li> Pat is nothing less than terrific.  If there was any sense of hesitation
	in her appearance in "Divided Loyalties," it can be attributed to the
	fact that she had just given birth to her son something like 4-6 weeks
	prior, if that much, and this was pretty much her first day back in
	the saddle.

<p>
   <LI> <em>Does the comic series contain spoilers for the series?</em><br>
	There's only one case of this conflict, so if you want to avoid any
	spoilers, here's my recommendation: when the last issue of this current
	story arc comes out, resolving the Mars/Sinclair/Garibaldi thread, pick
	up that last issue and stick it in a bag until after the first new ep
	airs in October.  THEN read it.  You'll know it when you find it.

<p>
   <li> The impact of Talia's situation should be the same whether you saw
	the comic or not.  (And, remember, the idea was that the comic would
	come out AFTER the remaining year 2 episodes, as a nice little 
	frisson, not as required data.)

<p>
   <li> Re: things you don't expect to happen...that's kind of one 
	aspect I was after here.  By way of comparison....
	
	<p>
	There's one great thing about The Shining, despite some other 
	flaws in the film: they set up Scatman Cruthers (sp?) as the one guy 
	who understands what's going on...he gets the Shining, he's a
	potentially heroic character, and when all hell breaks loose, he's the
	one to get into the snow plow, cross terrible weather, we're all sure
	he's going to get there and fight the menace... he overcomes weather and
	nonsense to get there... he blows through the front door, ready for
	action...  and gets an axe in the middle of his chest and dies.
	
	<p>
	I *loved* that, and always kinda wanted to something of that nature, 
	where you set someone up to be that kind of character, the future, 
	whatever, then you yank it back and let the audience say, Oh, hell, 
	NOW what?

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 "If Talia is 'the future' then why is she off the show?"

	<p>
	Because stuff happens.  Because rocketry was the hope of the
	German Luftwaffe to win the war.  Didn't work out that way.  Just
	because a character says it, doesn't mean that it's guaranteed to
	happen at all times. A parent can look at a child and say, "He's our
	hope for the future," and the next day the kid gets turfed by a
	semi-truck.  Stuff happens.  Nothing is guaranteed in the B5 universe;
	any character -- ANY character -- is vulnerable.  That, for me, is part
	of what's exciting.

<p>
   <li> RE: Talia...look, you've kinda got to look at this the way I do.
	Stuff happens.  Yes, Talia was hoped for to be a key to the solution
	of the problem.  (Not the key, but a key.)  But if you do that, every
	single  time, you become predictable.  It means you, the audience,
	can relax.   "Well, we know now that Talia will always get through
	this because she's the one they're hoping for." Suspense: gone.
	Story: suddenly predictable.  There's no rule that every person who
	is hoped to help solve the problem in real life is gonna make it to
	the end or BE that solution.  So if you delete that person, now it's
	"Oh, hell, NOW what're they gonna do?" which is more intrinsically
	interesting to me than the other option.

	<p>
	Generally speaking, about once a year, toward the end of the year, I
	kinda look around at the characters with a loaded gun in my hand, and
	say, "Hmmm...if I take out *that* person, what happens?  Is there
	anyone here I can afford to lose?  Would it be more dramatically
	interesting to have this person alive, or dead?  What is the absolute
	bare minimum of characters I need to get to the end of the story and
	achieve what I have to achieve?"

	<p>
	It helps to really remember that this is a *novel*, and uses the
	structure of a novel.  That means you have to have some real suprises
	as you go.  Anyone is fair game.  To the question "Why did you get
	rid of Sinclair?  Why'd you get rid of [<em>spoiler removed</em>]?
	Why'd you get rid of
	Talia?   Why'd you get rid of....oh, er, that hasn't happened
	yet...." there is only one answer: 'cause I felt like it, and 'cause
	I thought it'd make the story a lot more interesting.

	<p>
	The stories I like best are the ones that ratchet up the tension and
	the uncertainty inch by inch until you're screaming.  This could
	apply to any of Stephen King's novels (and recall that a lot of my
	background is in horror writing).  Mother Abigail in THE STAND was
	supposed to be their hope for the future.  So in short order she's
	vulture-food, JUST when she's most needed.  *Because that's
	interesting*.  It makes you say, "Oh, hell, NOW what?" (Stephen
	actually does that a lot in his books, and it's a technique I've
	learned as well.)  Boromir in LoTR was a capable, skilled fighter,
	deemed absolutely essential to the Company of the Ring...oops, there
	he is by the tree, full of Orc arrows.

	<p>
	Stuff happens.

	<p>
	Same here.

<p>
   <li> One other thought on Talia...one of the motifes we've played 
	with from the start was always showing Talia in mirrors...in Race, 
	in Z'ha'dum and others...always showing the reflection, her opposite, 
	just to set stuff up on an emotional/symbological level.

<p>
   <li>@@@833442154 The Talia situation likely could've been finessed more
	smoothly than it was, no mistake.  Sometimes there are going to be
	ragged spots.  It's going to happen.

	<p>
	Here's the best comparison to what my position is with this
	show: Harlan Ellison has, on occasion, done this routine where he'll go
	into a bookstore and write a story in full view of everyone.  As each
	page is finished, it's taped to the wall unti it's done.  This is
	considered a pretty nifty trick, sustained over maybe 15-20 pages.

	<p>
	That's pretty much what I'm doing here.  It's an ongoing story. 
	I can't go back, I can only go forward.  As each page (episode) is
	finished, it's put up on the wall, and I have to go on to the next one.
	So far I've written 2,400 pages on that wall.  Again, I can't go back
	and change anything, and if there's a bump caused by a real world
	incident, it simply has to be accommodated as best I can while still
	going where I have to go.

	<p>
	From time to time, there's going to be a misstroke on the
	keyboard, or there's going to be a typo that I'll miss.  That's
	inevitable when you're out performing in front of a massive crowd on
	the high wire without a net.  As long as the totality of it all hangs
	together, as long as the story is told, the trick finally done...then
	that's what fundamentally matters.

	<p>
	That this happens on occasion should be obvious; that it happens
	as rarely as it does is the point of wonderment, I think.  Remember,
	it's all trial and error, because no one's ever done this before.  And
	right about now I understand why.  But we're making it work.

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 <em>Andrea Thompson has said in interviews that she felt
	Talia got short shrift.</em><br>
	There are a number of actors who feel that if they're
	in a story then they should be at the *center* of the story.  Andrea
	seemed to feel that if she was in an episode, the episode should be
	about her character, and was consistently lobbying for this, despite
	the fact that it would cut into the arc, and time for the other
	characters on-screen.  Babylon 5 is an ensemble show; time on screen
	is determined by the story, not by whim or personal insistence.

	<p>
	Yes, we used her 8 or 9 times in a given season; but by contract, we
	paid her for a full 13 episodes, whether she appeared in them or not.
	We were never under any obligation to give her *any* guarantee; we did
	so to make her feel comfortable taking on the job.  For the first year
	he was on the show Jeff Conaway didn't have a guarantee of episodes;
	he was used as he was needed, and that grew with time.  Andrea wanted
	time away from the show to do other projects; we accommodated where we
	could, as we do with all our cast members, but if a request comes in
	at the last moment, or conflicts with our schedule, we can't comply.
	We feel that if we're paying someone a great sum of money to be
	available to us, for episodes they may not even appear in, this is not
	unreasonable.

	<p>
	Finally, it was never Warner Bros. who hired her or pushed her on me.
	WB didn't care one way or another.  I was the one who hired her, with
	Doug Netter.  If I hadn't felt she was right for the role, I wouldn't
	have hired her.  But I was also under no constraint to make the show
	into the Andrea Thompson Show.  Andreas and Peter have often appeared
	as many times in a season as Andrea, and didn't even *have* a
	guarantee for the first two seasons.  (Now they do.)

	<p>
	We did what we could to accommodate her without destroying the story
	arc.  I regret that she has taken out her frustrations in this way.
	Either one is a team player, part of an ensemble, or one is not.  We
	are very proud of the fact that the cast members as they stand now are
	all ensemble, team players.

<p>
   <li> In the B5 universe, as a general rule of thumb, people don't just 
	come back after something like this.  "Talia" has been destroyed 
	permanently; that's what it said in the episode, and that's the way 
	it'll stay.

<p>
   <li> What was the password?  I'm hideously tempted to say, "Z'ha'dum."

<p>
   <li> One thing you have to remember is that while Talia is in the opening
	credits, to Psi Corps she's just one more of many programmed
	individuals in various places.  The character in "Spider" was a highly
	valued infiltration unit, with very expensive "parts."  Of the two,
	Talia would've been far more expendable.

	<p>
	And I don't recall that Control actually issued any death order; it was
	the Psi Corps/B13 in any event.

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 <em>Was Garibaldi at Lyta's ship because the Rangers told
	him she was coming?</em><br>
	No, Garibaldi was there because the ship's ID# didn't check out, as he
	stated, and it could've been in the process of smuggling or who knows
	what.

<p>
   <li> Absolutely *nothing* from prior seasons/episodes has been discarded.
	So if that's your concern...don't worry about it.

	<p>
	In very tense situations, some people feel compelled to somehow break
	the tension.  Hence, that sequence.  [Garibaldi's "gotcha"]

<p>
   <li> The problem in trying to keep something mysterious and
	vague is that sometimes you can outsmart yourself, and get
	confusing.  The *theory* is that there was the Bureau as Control
	overall back on Earth; and a minor Control figure on B5.  And
	Controls are always referred to as "he"regardless of the facts
	to avoid giving any means of identification to anoutsider based
	on gender.

	<p>
	So it would be

<pre>                            BUREAU CONTROL
            ----------------------|---------------------
            |                     |                    |
      Earthdome Control      B5 Control         Minipax Control</pre>

	<p>
	(That's a breakdown using artificial and not necessarily
	correct elements, just for illustration.)

	<p>
	It is, however, a confusing bit of terminology, so it's been
	amended subsequently.

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 <em>Up until the coup, was the EA government pretty
	good?</em><br>
	The EA was fairly easy going, but remember that people are used to a
	heavy governmental hand during the Earth/Minbari War.  It's in a way
	similar to the situation we had post WW2; the only way we could make it
	past that war and survive was through strict discipline, following
	orders, going along with rationing, conserving, everything.  And it was
	that positive attitude that those who came later would exploit in the
	McCarthy/Red Scare 1950s, and hit us sideways in the 60s.

<p>
   <li> <em>If Talia was Control in "Spider in the Web," why would she order
	herself eliminated?</em><br>
	My sense was that the Control part, which sometimes moved
	at night,  reported that the mission could be jeapordized. 
	Then B13 gave the order to  eliminate.  Nowhere does it say
	that Control said the second half of the  sentence.

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 <em>Control was referred to as "he."</em><br>
	You always refer to agents in the single "he" form to
	avoid giving away  identities.

	<p>
	That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

<p>
   <li> <em>Was the hand that fired the PPG a left or a right hand?</em><br>
	I don't remember offhand; I'll have to check the tape.  (I have a
	vague memory that it was a right hand originally, flopped to shoot in
	the other direction.)

<p>
   <li> Not that it just looked better per se, but the gunshots came from 
	right to left; the gun hand as originally shot fired from left to right.
	It looked very funky when edited together, like it was going in a
	different direction than the one it was fired in.  Flopping the shot
	corrected that.

<p>
   <li> Yeah, I wouldn't waste much time on the gun-hand, frankly.

<p>
   <li> <em>About <a href="021.html">"The Quality of Mercy"</a></em><br>
	Yes, part of the reason for the episode was to 
	set up the notion of an implanted personality as acheivable tech.

<p>
   <li> <em>Couldn't Ironheart have removed Control?  Was Talia the original
	personality?</em><br>
	Control was the construct.  The alternate personality was dormant at
	the time Ironheart was there.

<p>
   <li> Remember that Ironheart was not seeing Talia under the best of
	conditions...he was fighting hard NOT to use his abilities, for any
	reason, because it created mindquakes...he was pulling everything IN.
	And later he was shot, also not a good position.

<p>
   <li> <em>Does Psi Corps have Talia's gift now?  Isn't that a problem?</em>
	<br>
	Logically, yes, that would eventually pose a problem.

<p>
   <li> <em>Was the new personality formed by modifying Talia's, or was it
	created from scratch?</em><br>
	I'd rather let this aspect slide for the moment.

<p>
   <li> Remember, the *conscious* Talia did none of those things; she would
	never dream of scanning without permission.  (And in Ivanova's case,
	remember that she said she knows *instantly* if she's being scanned.
	Note her strong reaction in "Eyes" when it happens.)

<p>
   <li> Talia v 1.0 would not have violated Ivanova's privacy during any kind
	of intimacy, as that would violate her profoundly; you can hold back,
	and Talia would have, and Ivanova would've sensed if she had tried it.
	The theory on telepaths making love is that they both willingly drop
	the blocks they normally keep in place.

<p>
   <li> The real Talia was becoming more and more disenchanted with PC, and
	this was in time going to pull her into resistance activities, which
	Talia v2.0 would only be *thrilled* about.  The self-protection
	mechanism only kicks in when the personality's existence is threatened.

<p>
   <li> <em>Why did they kick Talia off the station?</em><br>
	Because the longer she was there, the more she'd discover (was about to
	enter into Sheridan's cell group in fact), and the more damage she'd
	be able to do.

<p>
   <li> Oh, to be sure, they'd have preferred to have Talia accidentally fall
	out an airlock rather than turn her over to the Corps...but that's cold
	blooded murder, and if they go that route, then there's no difference
	between them and their opposite number.

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 . . . Re:  Talia...it's okay to be pissed about
	that; it was intended to have that reaction.   Things *should*
	get us annoyed when Psi Corps pulls a stunt like that.  And we
	haven't heard the last of what happened to Talia, btw.  That's
	the B5 universe for  you....

<p>
   <li> <em>Did Lyta sense Ivanova's talent?</em><br>
	A non-telepath can learn certain tricks to make it harder to break
	through, albeit briefly, so the reaction was sufficiently ambiguous and
	the event sufficiently brief that it wouldn't raise too many concerns.
	Which is why Sheridan dived in when he did; if she'd continue to block
	much longer, just instinctively, it would've revealed her latent
	potential.  It was his distracting Ivanova that in a sense helped Lyta
	break through.

<p>
   <li> <em>Could Ivanova sense when someone else was being scanned?</em><br>
	No, that she wouldn't really be capable of doing at her present level.

<p>
   <li> Of *course* the telepath issue will have to be dealt with; this is a
	logical progression of the story, no?

<p>
   <li> <em>Was a kiss between Ivanova and Talia edited out?</em><br>
	Nope, no such scene was cut.  It's just a slightly awkward 
	match in the edited shots.

<p>
   <li> No, nothing was cut; we had a matching problem at one point in the edit,
	where Andrea reached with her left hand in one angle, and didn't reach
	out with the other, and we had to come around for the shot on Ivanova,
	so it looked a tick off.  But nothing was cut.

<p>
   <li>@@@846705133 Film is shot on the stage, then transferred to video,
	which is then digitized onto the Avid computer editing system, which
	holds every take of every scene.  A scene is shot many times from
	various angles: wide master shot, three-shots (3 people), two-shots,
	singles, raking twos, close ups, medium shots, extreme closeups and
	sometimes downshots (as well as CGI and composite shots).

	<p>
	John Copeland and I then go in and work on the version of the episode
	edited by the director to do the producer's cut.  We sit down with the
	editor, and go scene by scene.  The usual construction is as follows:
	you get a wide master shot so we know the geography, where we are, and
	where everyone is in relation to that.  Gradually you go closer, into
	threes or twos, then singles or closeups for dramatic emphasis, coming
	out into the master from time to time when someone has to move, or to
	break the sense of claustrophobia.

	<p>
	When you get in close, you have over-the-shoulder shots, meaning
	you're shothe same thing in reverse, so you see both sides of the
	conversation.  You do these one at a time, for lighting purposes; you
	light one side of the room for the scenes looking left-right, then
	move the camera and the lighting around for the scenes when you're on
	the right side looking left (or, phrased differently, you light for
	Susan looking at Talia, then Talia looking at Susan).  The actors then
	do the scene again, with the camera on the other side.

	<p>
	The actor has to be very careful to always repeat each movement
	exactly; if he picks up a teacup on th word "quibble," he has to make
	absolutely sure he picks up the cup on exactly that same word, every
	time, in every take, in the same way, in the correct hand.  If the
	actor slips (and this sometimes happens), when you go to show tther
	side of the scene, you suddenly find you have a matching problem; in
	the shot over Talia's shoulder to Susan, the actor raised a hand; in
	the shot over Susan's shoulder to Talia, the actor (generic term that
	includes women) *didn't* raise a hand.  So when you edit the two, you
	have a matching problem.  You can sometimes avoid this by just staying
	on one side of the shot, but then you can't get the other character's
	on-face reaction to what's being said.  And in that scene in
	particular, we *needed* to see both sides.

<p>
   <li> We will see Lyta again.

	<p>
	RE: alternate lifestyles...I said when stuff happened, we wouldn't make
	a big deal out of it, it'd just be there...and I said we'd address it in
	our own way, in our own time.  We've done a bit here, we'll do a bit
	more down the road.  I won't give you or anyone a timetable; I'll do
	stuff as the integrity of the story permits, not sooner, not later.  I
	will not allow this to become a political football.  If you do nothing,
	folks yell at you for ignoring it; if you do a little, they yell for
	not doing more; if you do more, they yell for not doing it sooner.
	Screw it.  I do what the story calls for, as the story calls for it.  

<p>
   <li>@@@846737775 Susan and Talia had been dancing around one another
	for months; that night, though, would've been the first time they got
	physically intimate.

<p>
   <li> See, here's where I start to have a problem.  For starters, I don't do
	any thing to be politically correct, or politically incorrect, I do
	what I do in any story because that's what the story points me
	toward.  Anybody who says "It's not necessary" isn't entitled to that
	judgement, frankly; you don't know what's necessary to the story.  And
	by framing it in the  "is this NECESSARY?" way is designed to make you
	defend your position when such defense isn't the point; is it
	NECESSARY to have humor? to have a romance? to have correct science?
	No, *nothing* is NECESSARY.  It's what the writer feels is right for
	that scene, that story, that character.

	<p>
	"Oh, well, I saw it, but was all that violence NECESSARY?"  This is,
	frankly, a BS observation usually offered by someone with an agenda,
	who wishes to invalidate the notion of an artistic view and impose
	some kind of quota, or objective criterion to what is and isn't
	necessary for a movie or film.  As far as I'm concerned, the first
	person to throw this into a discussion has, frankly, just lost the
	argument.

	<p>
	Point the second: one of the most consistent comments I get, in email
	and regular mail, is the spirituality conveyed in the show, that we
	have shown, and will continue to show, tolerance toward religion, even
	created sympathetic religious characters.  "Thank you for your
	tolerance," they say...until we show somebody or some action THEY
	don't like...and at that point suddenly it's a lot of tsk-tsking and
	chest thumping and disapproval; so okay, how about I just stop all
	positive religious aspects of the show?

	<p>
	It seems to me, that if I do *all that* with religion, and with thje
	(the) simple act of showing maybe ONE PERSON in all the long history
	of TV science fiction across 40 years has a different view of life,
	that the show is somehow degraded, or downgraded, or dropped in
	opinion...this simply reinforces the notion, held by many, that a lot
	of folks in the religious right wish to make sure no other perspective
	or lifestyle is ever shown on television, at any time, unless in a
	negative fashion.

	<p>
	The thing of it is, while on the one hand I'm getting praise from
	religious folks for addressing spirituality in my series (speaking
	here as an atheist), I've gotten flack from others who think it has no
	place in a SCIENCE fiction series, and why the hell am I putting
	something in that goes right against my own beliefs?  "Because," I
	tell them, "this show is not about reflecting my beliefs, or yours, or
	somebody else's, it's about telling this story, about these people,
	with as much honesty and integrity as I can summon up.  That means
	conceding the fact that religious people are going to be around 260
	years from now."  Well, fact is, all kinds of people are going to be
	around 260 years from now.  And what did the anti-religion folks say
	specifically about including spirituality in my series?  "It's not
	*necessary*," they said.

	<p>
	Translation: they didn't like it.  Well, tough.  It was right for this
	story, and this show.  And it seems to me rather hypocritical for some
	folks, who applaud the show for tolerance, for my standing up to
	those who want to exclude religion from TV, to then turn around and
	say the show is diminished because it showed that same tolerance...to
	another group or perspective.  I guess tolerance is only okay as long
	as it's pointed one way.

	<p>
	You say that as a christian, you think any sex except that between a
	husband and a wife to be wrong.  Well, as I recall, the bible also
	speaks against murder.  We've depicted deaths by the hundreds of
	thousands.  (And we're talking here about the *depicting* of the act,
	simply showing it, not the value judgements made after the fact.)  Why
	does the one (which is so barely hinted at as to be almost invisible)
	cause the show to be diminished where the other does not?

	<p>
	My job is not to reinforce your personal political, social or
	religious beliefs.  My job is not to reinforce MY personal political,
	social or religious beliefs.  Then it isn't art or storytelling
	anymore, it's simply propaganda.  My job is to tell this story, about
	these people, AS people, as mixed and varied as they are today.  And
	there is no outside objective criteria as to what is, or isn't
	*necessary* in a story; that is the sole province of the author.  You
	may or may not like it.  You may or may not choose to watch it.  Just
	as people who don't like to see religion and god discussed on TV may
	dislike it or choose not to watch it.

	<p>
	But you'll excuse me if I see complaints about this one little thing
	from the religious side, after all I've done to present religious
	characters and the religious life in a positive fashion, to be
	hypocritical and frankly somewhat ungrateful.  It's as though all this
	means nothing because of one thing, one outside-imposed litmus test
	that disregards anything and everything else that has been done.

	<p>
	So straight up...if I should stop tolerating or showing viewpoints
	that are not my own (spoken as someone who is absolutely straight),
	then should I now stop showing religion as well?  Because that's what
	this comes down to.  Is that what you want?  Because religion is
	included at my discretion as well as anything else on this show.  You
	want me to be less tolerant?  Just say the word.

<p>
   <li> Ken: yes, showing does not mean endorsing, showing just means saying
	"this is here," not to make an issue of it.  If I'm going to start
	endorsing ANYbody's POV around here, it's going to be mine, and I think
	we all know how dreadful THAT would be.

	<p>
	As for "including controversy rather than skirting it," this is
	more or less the point.  The goal here is to not have our characters
	or our show make *value judgments* about what our characters do,
	because then you're hitting the audience over the head with the
	MESSAGE.  "Believers" is a good example of that; some came away using
	parts of that to argue pro and anti interference in medical
	situations; ditto for "Confessions" which hit squarely on BOTH sides
	of the issue (no, you can't blame morality for disease...but then, we
	had our characters openly requiring blood testing, which annoys many
	on the other side of the issue)....my sense is that our audience is
	smart enough to take the elements we present them with, and discuss
	them, and come to their own conclusions and draw their own meanings
	from them.  It's the part of objecting to even *presenting* the
	situation that seems to me a marginal position at best.

<p>
   <li>@@@840398921 They weren't shown in separate beds.  We saw Talia
	reaching over to the empty space in the bed where Ivanova had been, and
	finding her gone.

<p>
   <li> I didn't show a kiss because, in my experience, it's easier on all
	around if one steps into the shallow end of the pool first, and walks
	into the deep end rather than diving in and splashing everybody in the
	process.

<p>
   <li>@@@840399020 <em>Wouldn't Talia have discovered Ivanova's secret if
	they were intimate?</em><br>
	Well, a telepath can also hold it back and avoid dipping any
	further into someone's mind, if not permitted or asked not to do so.

<p>
   <li> As for Ivanova...remember that the core of good drama is conflict.  So
	here we have a situation where a possible romantic involvement is
	shaping up for her in year three.  It shouldn't be made too easy.  So
	you create a situation that really hurts her deeply; she made a
	difficult step, got over her distance, opened herself up, became
	vulnerable...and got hurt very badly as a result.  The same thing that
	happened in first season, when her old flame was discovered to be a
	big guy with Home Guard.

	<p>
	You now have someone who's freshly hurt, who is going to be unwilling
	or slow to open up again, who's now experienced every kind of
	relationship and NONE of them have worked...in short, she's one
	exposed nerve ending, perfect for someone now to come in who may be
	right, but for whom she has little time, and is disposed not to get
	involved.

	<p>
	Sounds a lot like my own dating history...keep them razor blades and
	salt sprays a'comin.....

<p>
   <li> No, the Ivanova revelation in "Loyalties" has nothing to do with
	replacing Talia; that is a moot point in many ways, since Lyta is back,
	and since other things happen which take that issue off the table in
	any event.

<p>
   <li> Didn't say Talia WAS a psi-cop, Talia said she *interned with* the
	PsiCops.  Bear in mind that you're going to need support staff, lower
	level liaisons, and a bunch of other positions as well as the actual
	cops.  <em>JMS has names confused; Lyta interned with the PsiCops.</em>

<p>
   <li> <em>Did Bester try to befriend Talia because she was Control? (cf.
	<a href="030.html">"A Race Through Dark Places"</a>)</em><br>
	You're assuming Bester knows everything.  Also, Bester's interest
	may have been more...carnal than PsiCorp oriented.

<p>
   <li> <em>If Laurel Takashima had stayed with the crew and shot Garibaldi
	in "Chrysalis," would she have been Control?</em><br>
	Yes, Laurel would've been Control.

<p>
   <li> Mike: your assessment is pretty much correct.  Laurel was to be the
	traitor initially; as I noted long, long time ago, and you quoted, she
	was not, in fact, acting entirely under her own volition.  There would
	indeed have been an implanted personality there, acting without even
	her knowing about it.  And it would've been this implanted personality
	that would've shot Garibaldi.

	<p>
	When I took Laurel off the board, elements of this were transferred
	to other characters.  This is the kind of thing I mean when I say that
	even with changes here and there, the story continues to go where I
	want it to go.  We don't necessarily remember *which* general put the
	briefcase with a bomb next to Hitler's chair in the bunker, only that
	it got done.  Some chairs are moveable, some are not, as anyone who's
	ever written a novel from an outline can tell you...you start moving
	the chairs around, but you always keep going where you're going.

<p>
   <li> Yeah, originally it was the Kosh-scan that would've gotten Lyta in
	trouble; the TK aspect was originally going to come in from another
	angle, but I was able to collapse the two in Talia, and then bring Lyta
	in from a different direction, as you'll see in one of the first batch
	of new year 3 eps.

<p>
   <li> If Laurel *had* stayed with the show, by the middle of
	year two the fact that she  was Control would've been revealed
	via the password incident. At that point, one  particular
	possibility was that her second in command under her -- a
	rather dour  Russian lieutenant named Ivanova -- would've been
	promoted to take her place,  while Laurel was moved off the
	chessboard. (This was planned because we  knew going in that
	Tamlyn Tomita had a growing film career, and we probably 
	could've only kept her for a couple of years in the best of
	circumstances.  So why  not turn that to your advantage?)

	<p>
	The position now being occupied by Corwin, Ivanova's
	second, is the position  that Ivanova would've held (though
	more prominently) if Laurel had stayed on.   (And no, Corwin
	doesn't now have that arc lurking in the background.)

	<p>
	See, it's easy to stick to an outline and never diverge
	if you're writing  characters in a novel; in a TV show, with
	live actors, you have to be flexible, plan  ahead, come up
	with contingency plans, and have threads that weave and 
	interlock in ways to leave you maximum flexibility while still
	proceeding toward  your destination.

<p>
   <li> Takashima would have been the one to be Control.  A Psi
	Corps plant.  (Her background on Mars would've been the perfect time
	for it to have happened.)  When Laurel went away, I took that one
	thread and passed it along to Talia, setting it up as early as the very
	first episode, when Talia and Ivanova first meet, and later reluctantly
	have a drink.

	<p>
	At one point, Ivanova says to Talia, referencing Ivanova's
	mother, "You're as much of a victim as she was."  To which Talia
	replies, "I don't feel like a victim."  And, of course, that's exactly
	what she was, though she didn't know it yet.  Ivanova's analysis was
	100% correct.

</UL>