Paul and Madeline

[swatkat]

Since we were talking about harshness - are we, the Michael/Nikita fans, too harsh when it comes to Paul and Madeline? Even those of us who actually like and admire them (including myself)? We're always going on about their cruelty and how Michael or Nikita (Nikita for me *g*) would've done a better job as Operations - why is that so? Now that we know all about Oversight and Centre, wasn't what Paul and Madeline did for their own survival, just like the way Michael and Nikita fought to survive in Section? And what is the guarantee that Michael and Nikita wouldn't do the exact same things when they got the power? Your thoughts here. *g*

Nell, tell me why Nikita wouldn't fall in the same trap as Paul in order to survive.

Comments

Part II -

[nell65.livejournal.com]

This argument certainly works with Nikita, whose greatest problem with Section seemed to be the being kept out of the loop. Nikita prefers to trust people, and the fact that she can't trust her own people drives her nuts. So, for operatives like her, more information – at least to a certain point is definitely a better option.

I'm not sure it is as simple a matter as more or less information, rather it is a sense that when information is withheld, it ought to be to a shared purpose. It was the lack of clear purpose, and the sense that operatives could loose their lives not in pursuit of an understood goal, but simply because it was expedient to one of Paul's fits of fancy, that made it easy for Michael to stage a mutiny.

But on the flip side, there are also operatives like Michael with whom trust is not always an issue and who seem to be able to function under this existing pattern quite well.

Well - except when he didn't. Michael flipped them the metaphorical finger more than once even early on, and by S4 was in semi-open rebellion - so open that they could even capitalize on it tactically to bring down opponents. And I always believed that Michael did believe, sincerely, that Section had a positive function to serve in the world. He *agreed* with them on their end game, and he still wasn't loyal to them.

So their approach is not always counterproductive, especially when majority of the operatives in Section seem to be different from Nikita.

I've always wondered if that was true - were they all really that different from Nikita?

And dislike them… well, I'd think the operatives would dislike them under any circumstances, given the nature of their jobs and the nature of Section One.

I don't think that's mandated. If the operatives felt rescued from a dead end, offered a purpose, and valued by their leaders for their frequently mortal sacrifices....Section could be a really, really different place. It might even be more self-policing, oddly, because instead of operatives closing their eyes to disloyal colleagues, or actively covering up for them just to spite the perch, they might even discipline their own far more effectively than all the big-brother monitoring in the world. Which was ineffective anyway - Section leaked like a sieve.

Now that's a different situation altogether, because you're not judging them anymore, but simply dismissing them.

It was more like they slipped away - I couldn't find any crack to hold onto and they just drifted further and further from any posibility that I could understand their motivations, until one day the spot they had occupied in my fanfic imagination was empty - pfft, like that. Blown away by TPTB and their inconsistencies. ;)

Nell