Redial the Gate: some meta on Nick Ballard

[fignewton]

grav_ity has just posted a delightful recap of Crystal Skull over at redial_the_gate. There's sure to be some great discussion there, but I wanted to encourage some thoughts on another subject: Nick Ballard.

Most fanfic writers tend to demonize Nick. He's a cold-hearted, selfish creep who puts his own crazed obsessions over the life of his grieving grandson, abandoning him to a series of foster homes where he will be cruelly abused and traumatized, because no one realizes he's more comfortable speaking Arabic than English, and anyway, the one family that was really nice to him couldn't adopt him because Nick refused to sign the papers, and...

Erm. Yeah.

As we discussed back when we did canon vs. fanon on pre-series Daniel, all we really know about Daniel and Nick, pre-series, are these facts:

1. Nick took Daniel to a waffle house after the funeral.

2. Nick did not take custody of Daniel.

3. Daniel visited Nick regularly before they had a final argument and falling-out over Daniel's theories.

The rest of it? All fanon.

Now, Daniel calls him, and I quote, "The great explorer, the not-so-great grandfather Nicholas Ballard." But despite his reference to their disagreements - "Oh, please, he kicked me out. We had a huge fight." - Daniel is quite surprised when Janet tells the team that the doctors told her that "any friends of Dr Jackson's are welcome." So how much of Daniel's perceptions of Nick are based on assumptions, and how much is reality? Everyone talks about Daniel's "abandonment issues," but do we have any canon proof that he actually has any?

If you consciously set aside the fanon condemnations of Nick, what are we really supposed to make of him? randomfreshink suggested once that Nick might have felt he was making the best possible choice for Daniel - he was older, he didn't have the right temperament or patience to deal with a small child, and he couldn't offer Daniel the proper stability he needed. How plausible do you find that theory? Nick is unquestionably conniving and manipulative - he virtually blackmails Jack into bringing him to the SGC, and he takes advantage of Daniel's inability to speak for himself to finagle his way onto the planet. But to be fair, it looks like Daniel inherited that particular trait in spades. "Oh, yes, I can find the address on the other side of the Stargate and get the team back. Sure I can." Sound familiar, anyone?

Was it cruel of Nick not to take Daniel? Do you think they had any ties other than blood? How much did Daniel know Nick before his parents died? He cared enough about him to keep in touch after he'd grown older - from the dialogue in the ep, it seems that they only parted ways a few months before Daniel first stepped through the Stargate. Was their relationship only a professional one, archaeologist to archaeologist?

My question isn't how likeable we find Nick - I can't say I like him very much myself. My questions is, does Nick deserve the pillorying he gets from fanfic, and is there another, canon-based way to perceive the character?

A few other questions on the lighter side: Daniel, why are you the last one to go back through the Gate when it nearly shut down on you last time? And then, isn't it amazing how the team knows to conveniently leave space for him in the middle as they walk down the causeway?

Was anyone else utterly charmed at how Nick introduced himself, pointing to his chest and pronouncing his name? That must be genetic, too - it's exactly how Daniel introduced himself to Sha'uri in the movie, and we see him do it time and again in the show.

Also, this is the only episode in the entire series (and SGA, if you want to include his guest-appearance there) where Daniel is not only unfazed by the prospect of radiation, but actually argues in favor of longer exposure! Of course, this is before Meridian, but we've seen Daniel nervous about radiation as early as Singularity....

Comments

[aurora-novarum.livejournal.com]

And anyway, it allows for whump, so that excuse everything, right? Right? ;)

Well...there is that. Heh. ;-) I'm a strange pullup by their own bootstraps (with team support) kinda whump lover though. Emo angst...it all depends.

[sg-fignewton.livejournal.com]

I would agree with you wholeheartedly, except I have written emotional whump. Er. Twice, at least.

Hopefully, it gets a check mark in the "all depends" column. :)

[aurora-novarum.livejournal.com]

Oh "depends" means the type of emo-angst, my particular mood, the alignment of the stars, and of course the quality of the fic. :-)

It's all a matter of taste. Heck I've written emo-whump...*thinks*...most of my whumping style fics are actually more "emo" whump than regular whump. LOL!

[sg-betty.livejournal.com]

To me, the 'depends' (because I have that,too) is 'does this have a point?' Does it really take the plot somewhere, or is it the emotional equivalent of having the villain kill the family pet because it's a quick and easy way to demonstrate something about the character, or get to emotional interaction. Then there is a matter of degree. Some awfulness can't be undone or balanced by non-awfulness. It's just 'there', forever. I kind of think that kind of thing should be left to canon - it's too big for it to come from outside. And some things are simply too ugly and unbearable for words...

[sg-betty.livejournal.com]

I'm with you on that. Damsel-like emotional or physical helplessness makes me cranky, especially when there is plenty of room between superhero, and helpless pawn of fate, to tread.
I have to admit that I have a story idea that goes pretty close to the edge, though. I'm not going to try to write it until I can do it without wallowing. ; ) I want to stay well away from the character torture area, but the situation is a bad one, so I think I need to be a better writer before I go there...