Discovery: Choose Your Pain

[Darth Wedgius]

I haven't watched the show, and I just now got around to the review. Is the word "eugenics" being used exceptionally sloppily or is that just an effect of Chuck's summary? Eugenics is a movement that usually advocates for forced sterility or even mass murder as a means of breeding out undesirable traits. It's connected to genetic modification in Star Trek because of the Eugenics War, where engineered humans tried to control the world in order to advance a eugenics agenda. After that genetic enhancements became outlawed in an effort to prevent a dystopian type of able-ism.

Injecting yourself with a chemical isn't "eugenics," though it might be genetic modification. And it may not even be that-athletes in particular have found ways to chemically enhance their abilities without altering their genes.

Star Trek itself confused the term, and Trek fans have proudly continued the confusion in its honor. I think Khan in "Space Seed" was supposed to be a product of controlled breeding -- the term "eugenics" properly used -- but back in the 60s, genetic engineering wasn't much of a thing. It was first done in '72, I think. Then DS9 confused eugenics and genetic engineering when discussing the doctor's genetic engineering, and so did Enterprise later on.

[AllanO]

Star Trek itself confused the term, and Trek fans have proudly continued the confusion in its honor. I think Khan in "Space Seed" was supposed to be a product of controlled breeding -- the term "eugenics" properly used -- but back in the 60s, genetic engineering wasn't much of a thing. It was first done in '72, I think. Then DS9 confused eugenics and genetic engineering when discussing the doctor's genetic engineering, and so did Enterprise later on.

Note in Enterprise they tell the story such that: Kahn and his ilk were apparently a product of a program where selected parents (accomplished scientists and athletes) produced embryos, those embryos where then altered by some kind of technology that replaced or added some DNA to augment them.

[J!!]

It's possible that the legal definition of eugenics is different from the scientific one.

[AllanO]

It's possible that the legal definition of eugenics is different from the scientific one.

The thing is that eugenics just became an anachronistic term after WWII. If eugenics had not become discredited we might have called a genetic counseling (counseling on the chances of potential disorders your offspring might have and what you can do) eugenic counseling, but we are not go to do that given the bad vibes around the term eugenics.

Checking dictionary.com it gives two definitions for the adjective eugenic:
"1. of or bringing about improvement in the type of offspring produced.
2. having good inherited characteristics."

So a technology that rewrites germline DNA in a way that improves the characteristics of potential offspring would be a eugenic technology and anyone with such improved germline genetics would be a eugenic being. It is a perfectly cromulent use of English but at odds with the way the language changed...

Now legal terms often are anachronistic and Star Trek's Eugenics wars took place in what one must imagine were an alternate history 1990s (I don't remember a world wide war with the genetic supermen back then , but I was in high school maybe I was not paying attention).

[Deledrius]

I literally had to stop the Fucking episode in the middle and laugh my fucking ass off when the fucking computer said that the most notable fucking characteristics in Jonathan Fucking Archer are "Intelligence", "Compassion" and fucking "Tactical Brilliance".

This Fucking show, I tell yah.

It's a stupid problem caused by their own choice of setting it as a prequel to everything but Enterprise, and wanting to press the Nostalgia Button anyway.

[J!!]

All jokes aside, it would've been a dick move for them to snub the captain from the most recent show, regardless of whether Disco were a sequel or prequel,

[Deledrius]

I can't disagree with that, but I think it still contributes to a small universe feeling, and leans on the fourth wall too.

There's a mention of Archer and his adventures later in the season (and a reference to something else from the show as well) that fits much more organically and doesn't have the same problem, so it is possible to do it in a way that works.

[Shuboy07]

I'm going to say Jonathan Archer was totally added to the list out of IRONY. The writers had to know how much Archer is disliked by the fanbase.

Also, I must say I lost it when Chuck responded to the first F-bomb in Star Trek with another Star Trek clip. Yes, it's a staple of these reviews (heck Chuck uses a clip from The Tick earlier in the review) but it's very rare to see Star Trek being used as the response (the last one I can recall was Odo's "Murdering your own clone is still murder" being used to respond to Riker killing his clone)!

[MixedDrops]

I'm going to say Jonathan Archer was totally added to the list out of IRONY. The writers had to know how much Archer is disliked by the fanbase.

I know plenty of people who like Enterprise (and by extension Archer, or at least are ambivalent). That aside, it would make no sense for them to crap on Enterprise even if the writers themselves didn't care much for it. Then people would just say that the writers don't like Star Trek instead of saying they shouldn't reference a series they subjectively don't like.

I can understand making fun of references to Enterprise like that one, but if someone's actually actively annoyed by references like that I usually feel safe tagging them as the type of person going out of their way to look for things to be annoyed at.

[Shuboy07]

I'm going to say Jonathan Archer was totally added to the list out of IRONY. The writers had to know how much Archer is disliked by the fanbase.

I know plenty of people who like Enterprise (and by extension Archer, or at least are ambivalent). That aside, it would make no sense for them to crap on Enterprise even if the writers themselves didn't care much for it. Then people would just say that the writers don't like Star Trek instead of saying they shouldn't reference a series they subjectively don't like.

I can understand making fun of references to Enterprise like that one, but if someone's actually actively annoyed by references like that I usually feel safe tagging them as the type of person going out of their way to look for things to be annoyed at.

I'm probably more on the ambivalent side. I like Scott Bakula and feel he would have played the character well if the writers had a clearer vision for Archer.

Now I have to mention that Discovery's writers might not have wanted to reveal their feelings on Enterprise so they went with a reference that the fans could either take seriously or as a joke. That is something I liked about that moment.