Infection is a well-written episode by JMS, although diminished by the poor acting job of David McCallum. In contrast, Marshall Teague, who appears for the first time in B5, gives an outstanding performance as Nelson Drake. Teague will later be reincarnated as the Narn Ta'Lon. The opening scene with Garibaldi and the female reporter is hilarious, the only light-hearted scene in the episode. Thereafter the episode explores the deficiency of eugenics and the concept of racial superiority.
The episode ends in almost an anti-climactic scene with Sinclair granting an interview to the ISN reporter. In response to the reporter's question about whether space exploration is "worth it," Sinclair says, "there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on: whether it happens in a hundred years, or a thousand years, or a million years, eventually our sun will grow cold, and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us, it'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao- Tzu, Einstein, Maruputo, Buddy Holly, Aristophanes - all of this. All of this was for nothing, unless we go to the stars."
I had a hard time believing a person like Sinclair giving that answer. First, consider the premise, "Every scientist on the planet agrees our sun will grow cold." Every scientist on the planet doesn't agree now on this subject, so why should we assume they all will then? The outside estimate of scientists is 5 billion years until the expiration date. Scientists used to get edgy about expiration, but finally decided that the sun has cyclical activity and thus the odds are far better of winning the lottery than guessing whether and when the sun will expire. No one living now will see the event.
Second, I find Sinclair's justification for going to the stars ridiculous. Current arguments for going to the stars are basically utilitarian, that is, outer space exploration will somehow improve life on earth. And, indeed it has. As for scientists, they have an interest merely because they are naturally curious and want answers to scientific questions. There is also the appeal of exploration, "to go where no man has gone before."
Instead of the expected reasons Sinclair offers a philosophical answer that borders on nihilism. He offers a list of people whose deaths would be considered tragic and meaningless except for the redemption of space travel. No reason is given for the choice of names and it is more likely the list has special meaning to JMS than it would to a man like Sinclair. Most out of place in the list was Marilyn Monroe, an actress and voyeur favorite who died in 1962. Lao-Tzu lived in the 6th century and was the reputed founder of Taoism. Einstein, familiar to all, was a German scientist who proposed a special theory of relativity and won the Nobel prize; he died in 1952.
Maruputo is a totally fictional person, so one can't assess his/her significance in this context. Buddy Holly was a pop music artist who died in 1959, an event memorialized among rock and roll enthusiasts in the song "The Day the Music Died." Aristophanes was a 5th century Greek dramatist who wrote plays that promoted pacifism and ridiculed political figures. Of the names in the list only Lao-Tzu and Einstein (IMHO) have made anything resembling a major impact on civilization and world history. However, the truth is that there are millions of people who have lived and died since creation who to this day are unnamed and unremembered. Going to the stars will not make their lives any more meaningful.
In considering names a man like Sinclair would really put in his Who's Who list I find it difficult to believe that a military officer with a military heritage would not mention Sun Tzu (6th century), perhaps the most famous military strategist, or those who contributed to the development of aviation, such as the Wright Brothers, or space exploration, such as Yuri Gagarin (JMS is Russian, after all). I find it even more difficult that the Jesuit- trained Sinclair would omit Jesus Christ from his list who has had the most significant impact on civilization than anyone else in history. It's also odd that Sinclair mentions Aristophanes, but not his beloved Tennyson. Many other famous people could have been mentioned.
There are some particular characteristics of this list. Three of the six names come from the performing arts. Taoism is probably the basis of the alien belief systems in B5 so give a nod to Lao-Tzu. (The Vorlons and Shadows could represent Yin and Yang). Without Einstein's relativity there is no theoretical model upon which to build a B5 universe. Interestingly, Aristophanes, Einstein, Holly and Lao-Tzu were all pacifists and Monroe was once married to a noted pacifist, William Miller, so JMS may have been having a bit of fun having Sinclair, the war veteran and hero, to give these names.
Still, I'm stuck with the enigma of Sinclair's answer. In context maybe he had the deer in the headlights syndrome (camera, microphone) and said the first stupid thing that came into his head. Maybe he offered a politically correct response to avoid adverse reaction by EarthGov as happened the last time he talked to a reporter. Maybe Sinclair was just playing with the dumb blonde reporter who probably wouldn't have recognized such subtlety in his list and would be so ignorant about science that the issue of the sun's expiration would go over her head.
Perhaps the list was intended as an echo of Sinclair's opening narration, "to prevent another war by creating a place where humans and aliens could work out their differences peacefully." In that context the statement "All of this was for nothing" could refer to the building of Babylon 5 as the extension of all the efforts of pacifists down through the centuries. In any case, the answer can sound erudite and noble while being utterly pointless.
The episode ends in almost an anti-climactic scene with Sinclair granting an interview to the ISN reporter. In response to the reporter's question about whether space exploration is "worth it," Sinclair says, "there's one thing every scientist on the planet agrees on: whether it happens in a hundred years, or a thousand years, or a million years, eventually our sun will grow cold, and go out. When that happens, it won't just take us, it'll take Marilyn Monroe, and Lao- Tzu, Einstein, Maruputo, Buddy Holly, Aristophanes - all of this. All of this was for nothing, unless we go to the stars."
I had a hard time believing a person like Sinclair giving that answer. First, consider the premise, "Every scientist on the planet agrees our sun will grow cold." Every scientist on the planet doesn't agree now on this subject, so why should we assume they all will then? The outside estimate of scientists is 5 billion years until the expiration date. Scientists used to get edgy about expiration, but finally decided that the sun has cyclical activity and thus the odds are far better of winning the lottery than guessing whether and when the sun will expire. No one living now will see the event.
Second, I find Sinclair's justification for going to the stars ridiculous. Current arguments for going to the stars are basically utilitarian, that is, outer space exploration will somehow improve life on earth. And, indeed it has. As for scientists, they have an interest merely because they are naturally curious and want answers to scientific questions. There is also the appeal of exploration, "to go where no man has gone before."
Instead of the expected reasons Sinclair offers a philosophical answer that borders on nihilism. He offers a list of people whose deaths would be considered tragic and meaningless except for the redemption of space travel. No reason is given for the choice of names and it is more likely the list has special meaning to JMS than it would to a man like Sinclair. Most out of place in the list was Marilyn Monroe, an actress and voyeur favorite who died in 1962. Lao-Tzu lived in the 6th century and was the reputed founder of Taoism. Einstein, familiar to all, was a German scientist who proposed a special theory of relativity and won the Nobel prize; he died in 1952.
Maruputo is a totally fictional person, so one can't assess his/her significance in this context. Buddy Holly was a pop music artist who died in 1959, an event memorialized among rock and roll enthusiasts in the song "The Day the Music Died." Aristophanes was a 5th century Greek dramatist who wrote plays that promoted pacifism and ridiculed political figures. Of the names in the list only Lao-Tzu and Einstein (IMHO) have made anything resembling a major impact on civilization and world history. However, the truth is that there are millions of people who have lived and died since creation who to this day are unnamed and unremembered. Going to the stars will not make their lives any more meaningful.
In considering names a man like Sinclair would really put in his Who's Who list I find it difficult to believe that a military officer with a military heritage would not mention Sun Tzu (6th century), perhaps the most famous military strategist, or those who contributed to the development of aviation, such as the Wright Brothers, or space exploration, such as Yuri Gagarin (JMS is Russian, after all). I find it even more difficult that the Jesuit- trained Sinclair would omit Jesus Christ from his list who has had the most significant impact on civilization than anyone else in history. It's also odd that Sinclair mentions Aristophanes, but not his beloved Tennyson. Many other famous people could have been mentioned.
There are some particular characteristics of this list. Three of the six names come from the performing arts. Taoism is probably the basis of the alien belief systems in B5 so give a nod to Lao-Tzu. (The Vorlons and Shadows could represent Yin and Yang). Without Einstein's relativity there is no theoretical model upon which to build a B5 universe. Interestingly, Aristophanes, Einstein, Holly and Lao-Tzu were all pacifists and Monroe was once married to a noted pacifist, William Miller, so JMS may have been having a bit of fun having Sinclair, the war veteran and hero, to give these names.
Still, I'm stuck with the enigma of Sinclair's answer. In context maybe he had the deer in the headlights syndrome (camera, microphone) and said the first stupid thing that came into his head. Maybe he offered a politically correct response to avoid adverse reaction by EarthGov as happened the last time he talked to a reporter. Maybe Sinclair was just playing with the dumb blonde reporter who probably wouldn't have recognized such subtlety in his list and would be so ignorant about science that the issue of the sun's expiration would go over her head.
Perhaps the list was intended as an echo of Sinclair's opening narration, "to prevent another war by creating a place where humans and aliens could work out their differences peacefully." In that context the statement "All of this was for nothing" could refer to the building of Babylon 5 as the extension of all the efforts of pacifists down through the centuries. In any case, the answer can sound erudite and noble while being utterly pointless.