No. I refuse your rationalization. Itâs pretty solid, as rationalizations go, itâs good fictional logic. But no.
Grief, itâs all grief. Itâs the same grief, in factâwe just are better, in fictional settings, at rationalizing extraordinary losses as requiring extraordinary solutions ⌠particularly within the same episode. And little losses, over time, when they canât fit in one episode, when theyâre attrition, we accept as written off because the solution doesnât come with the close of the plot.
But thatâs not how neurotypical humans actually handle grief, on the whole.
Or rather: it is, because we donât have time machines. We only have memories. We only have moving forward, or becoming unable to move forward. We only have degrees of pain becoming bearable over time, of ourselves becoming the people that pain has shaped.
What if you were responsible for all of it? What if, in every moment of the joy you had left, you couldnât bear the fact that people you cared about werenât there anymore, not because they had died over the years, but because they died on your watch? Because you decided to take a chance, or not to take a chance, and either way it still didnât keep them safe? Because even the length of that âover the yearsâ was your fault?
What if you could no longer bear the thought of âacceptable lossesâ?
And what if, in the depths of not being able to deal with that, you had a solution available to you?
Weâve seen this kind of grief in CPT Archer, after the Xindi mission. Hell, weâve seen it as a mainstay of the Movie!Kirk character from ST2 forward. And ADM Janeway is hardly in the worst timeline, but the answer in âEndgameâ is Chakotay, because of what is then happening to Tuvok. The answer is: she is not facing that loss rationally, any more than any of us actually do in life. It eats at her. She is grieving, and it wonât stop.
And, like Movie!Kirk, she is just crazy enough and just powerful enough to steal a starship and do it anyways. It doesnât matter that the plot of that loss was already resolved. It doesnât matter that itâs illegal. It doesnât matter that she could go on with her career, as everyone else has gone on with theirsâas she has in fact done for years at that point.
But ADM Janeway is not the episode; sheâs the problem to be solved in it. And because itâs set up that way, we go back to the point in time she is obsessed with, to the winner-take-all gamble she wisely chose not to make at the time, which set up her career as an expert in fighting the Borg.
The episode works because of her griefâand because CPT Janeway doesnât let herself be replaced by that grieving future version. The episode works because Janeway does not âthrow away her scruples,â because âthe Janeway we knowâ and the Janeway that made and regretted those future choices finally work together in a way that morally overcomes the obstacle. And thatâs Trek.
Ultimately we donât value ADM Janewayâs choice because âEndgameâ is set up to frame it as a problem to be solved, and the question is not whether she was right, but how we get from that officially bad decision to a good outcome. We were told Janeway was wrong, just like we were told that Annorax was wrong, and in the same way, and we had a conflict between Janeways just like we had a conflict between Chakotay and Tom Paris as to how the resulting situation could be salvaged.
But as always, we also have a problem with the fact that Janeway is a woman, and her actions and emotions are judged on a different standardâeven by the writers and producers. Harry is heroic in his overcoming. But somehow we lose sight of the heroism of both Janeways in the end of the plot because weâre hung up on condemning the beginning of the plot