Killin' officers / Murderin' officers

[gement]

So I've been imbibing a tiny smidge of media I didn't write lately, thanks to maribou, who turned me on to Sharpe's Rifles. I've both read the book and watched the BBC now, and enjoyed them both. The video adaptation felt rushed and clunky right after the book, but Sean Bean covers many sins.

For those who aren't familiar, it's Napoleonic infantry slogging, brutally described, which should send me screaming in the other direction. But it's also delicious character development, and honor porn, which I'm going to go make an LJ interest RIGHT NOW. (If you don't know what honor porn is, I'm not sure I can describe it, but if you like Bujold, you know honor porn. By the way, if you like honor porn, my work contains scads of it.) The main character is a lieutenant raised from the ranks, which is to say spat on by "real" officers and distrusted by enlisted men as no better than themselves.

But I had a point here, which was types of officers. In the BBC adaptation, there's a lovely little speech near the end, and it goes roughly like this (I'm borrowing someone else's transcription and have not verified its accuracy):

Harper: "Ye'll make a fine killin' officer, sir."

Sharpe: "A what?"

H: "Ye don't know about killin' officers?"

S: "No."

H: "Oh, now that's too bad, sir. I thought you'd 'ave known, coming up yerself from the ranks as ye did... There are only two kinds of officers, killin' officers and murderin' officers. Killin' officers are poor old buggers that git you killed by accident. Murderin' officers are mad, bad old buggers that git you killed on purpose, for a reason, for a country or a religion, maybe even for a flag. They're mean, murdering old buggers."

It is my opinion that Miles Vorkosigan is a killin' officer. Captain Jack Harkness of Torchwood, at least in the first four episodes which I have now seen, is a murderin' officer if there ever was one. And I started thinking about it, because you don't need stripes to be in a position of authority where things of value are at stake and hard choices have to be made, particularly if you're a fictional character.

[Poll #1171534]

Edit: A summary of the first 48 hours of results (18 respondents) is available in the next entry.

If you think you can define honor porn or the difference between killin' and murderin' officers articulately, please attempt to do so in the comments. That would make me happy.

Comments

[vixyish.livejournal.com]

Thanks! It was the nearest relevant icon I had (I don't have a Torchwood icon).

It's from a moment in the episode "School Reunion" that just knocked my *socks* off.

Who Love and an apology to GFish

[gement.livejournal.com]

Oh, I KNOW. *shiver* I had to induct meowse to Doctor Who, so I sat him down, told them a little about the Doctor's personality and lifestyle and why I've been obsessed with him since I was three, and a little about Gallifrey (and that it's all obliterated now), and then sat him down and showed him Girl in the Fireplace and School Reunion back to back.

WHAM. Hooked. *cackle*

By the way, to gfish (nudge him to look at this): It's been haunting me that I said I thought I'd be a better companion than you at the Ides of March party. You looked positively wounded, and it was clearly interpreted as cruel. Joking, but cruel. As we've both wanted to follow the Doctor around for about the same length of time, I wanted to clarify.

I think you would be a stunningly competent and amazing and brave companion. My largest thought at the moment that I said that was that I'd be willing to follow a murderin' officer because I'm a relativist sucker who can be blinded by personalities, and I think you probably wouldn't be willing to put up with his crap. You're too good for him.

Re: Who Love and an apology to GFish

[vixyish.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure he identifies more with the Doctor than any Companion anyway. :)

Re: Who Love and an apology to GFish

[gfish.livejournal.com]

...not really. Aspire to be like, as a symbol of ultimate goodness in the universe, sure, as the very best thing one could possible aim to be. But identify? That's kind of like saying you identify with Jesus, to my ears. (I'm sadly dead serious by that comparison.)

I much more identify with the companions, who have so much to learn.

Re: Who Love and an apology to GFish

[vixyish.livejournal.com]

That is pretty much the exact opposite of what you said to me during the conversation that inspired "Companion".

...so, at least don't go spreading that around, neh? I have an image to uphold. :)

Re: Who Love and an apology to GFish

[gfish.livejournal.com]

Inconsistency is a Doctorish trait I have to admit to. :)

Re: Who Love and an apology to GFish

[gfish.livejournal.com]

Aw. Truth be told, I had forgotten that moment, so it obviously didn't sting too much. I get all emo when I'm drunk, over relatively silly things. But the entire conversation was amazing, that stuck with me.

I think my fundamental devotion to the Geek Social Fallacies would see me through. I'm pretty good at putting up with people too smart and self-sure for their own good, particularly if I can end up doing cool things because of it. :)

Obviously, we should both be companions. Between the two of us, I think we can pretty well cover all the ways a companion can get in trouble and drive the plot.

Teamwork

[gement.livejournal.com]

I'll take care of getting locked into places while you work on inadvisably tinkering with things, okay?