Deep space nine: Defiant

[CrypticMirror]

One problem with modern trek is that when they're coming up with a new series idea instead of saying how can we write a compelling story they ask how many SJW check boxes can we check off.

Riiiiight. If you think that fighting for social justice was something only the post-TOS Trek did then I have bad news for you. Racism, warring, slavery, even sexism (in its own special ham handed way), TOS took on them all. Without SJWs, there is no Star Trek modern or classic.

[Robovski]

You can be liberal without being progressive. You can write good fiction that has a message or you can write a message and try to make it entertaining or influential through some means (propaganda comes to mind). Or you can half-ass it and throw in some current political points and accuse anyone who doesn't like it of racism or being regressive.

Star Trek had Gene's vision of a better future that had a lot of free-ish loving going on and people without much internal conflict or needs because they had grown past that as a people (with exceptions). I'm sure that rankled some at the time. But there was always the idea of either a concept or story to be told first, not the message.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Robovski, sometimes the concept starts with a message.

[Durandal_1707]

Yeah, if political and/or social messages bother you, then Star Trek as a franchise might not be for you.

[Karha of Honor]

Yeah, if political and/or social messages bother you, then Star Trek as a franchise might not be for you.

Depends. I see Disco as most easily to be enjoyed by right wingers.

[Asvarduil]

Yeah, if political and/or social messages bother you, then Star Trek as a franchise might not be for you.

Depends. I see Disco as most easily to be enjoyed by right wingers.

The only way to make DISCO more lovable to the right, is if they include Hillary Clinton and/or her pantsuits. ...Ok, that was a low blow, but one I don't apologize for making.

Seriously though, the right's entire platform is based on a victim/siege mentality. Given how 'identity warriors' who are fighting for racial, cultural, or other forms of 'purity' are the antagonists, the unfortunate result is probably that the 'identity warriors' arc only reaffirms the world views that DISCO is trying to refute in the first place.

While I think that the 'identity warriors' arc needed to be told, unfortunately my impression is that it was rather ham-fistedly done (as seems to be the rule for post-TNG Trek; we can only shout our message, as we know no other way to deliver it.) I think that characters like Lorca, Voq, the Klingon spy-girl, and the Emperess really needed more characterization for the arc to be more effective. I think the Emperess and Voq were the most well-done, because they got at least some of that, and were forced to encounter either their ideas, or the opposite of their ideas.

The Emperess in particular was interesting, and not just for the scene with the black leather corset, though that did help. Through Michael, her daughter that she genuinely felt great affection for, even though the Michael she met was her Michael's 'prime' counterpart, was exposed to her ideas, and mostly rejected them...to a point. Yet, she has enough respect for the Discovery crew's achievements, even Prime Tilly, that when they bested her, instead of going off on some kind of rant...she takes the defeat as one well-earned, and walks off with dignity (and an utter dereliction of karma.)

I think social justice is fundamental to Trek, but I also think there's an aspect that you can rightly point out isn't being included: an actual look at the other system being discussed. It's easy for us to be shown the Terran Empire's fascist caricature of Starfleet, complete with Saturday morning cartoon bits of villainy (a death pit in the Emperor's chamber? REALLY!?) While there was brief discussion of things that drive fascists in DISCO, we got precious little on-screen characterization that humanized those concepts such that the conclusion that DISCO is advancing was well-proven by the drama of the episodes.

In short, DISCO tried to discuss something of genuine meaning and value, and in my opinion at least partially failed due to how they chose to deliver their discussion. Subtlety clearly isn't the forte of Star Trek writers.

[Karha of Honor]

Yeah, if political and/or social messages bother you, then Star Trek as a franchise might not be for you.

Depends. I see Disco as most easily to be enjoyed by right wingers.

The only way to make DISCO more lovable to the right, is if they include Hillary Clinton and/or her pantsuits. ...Ok, that was a low blow, but one I don't apologize for making.

Seriously though, the right's entire platform is based on a victim/siege mentality. Given how 'identity warriors' who are fighting for racial, cultural, or other forms of 'purity' are the antagonists, the unfortunate result is probably that the 'identity warriors' arc only reaffirms the world views that DISCO is trying to refute in the first place.

While I think that the 'identity warriors' arc needed to be told, unfortunately my impression is that it was rather ham-fistedly done (as seems to be the rule for post-TNG Trek; we can only shout our message, as we know no other way to deliver it.) I think that characters like Lorca, Voq, the Klingon spy-girl, and the Emperess really needed more characterization for the arc to be more effective. I think the Emperess and Voq were the most well-done, because they got at least some of that, and were forced to encounter either their ideas, or the opposite of their ideas.

The Emperess in particular was interesting, and not just for the scene with the black leather corset, though that did help. Through Michael, her daughter that she genuinely felt great affection for, even though the Michael she met was her Michael's 'prime' counterpart, was exposed to her ideas, and mostly rejected them...to a point. Yet, she has enough respect for the Discovery crew's achievements, even Prime Tilly, that when they bested her, instead of going off on some kind of rant...she takes the defeat as one well-earned, and walks off with dignity (and an utter dereliction of karma.)

I think social justice is fundamental to Trek, but I also think there's an aspect that you can rightly point out isn't being included: an actual look at the other system being discussed. It's easy for us to be shown the Terran Empire's fascist caricature of Starfleet, complete with Saturday morning cartoon bits of villainy (a death pit in the Emperor's chamber? REALLY!?) While there was brief discussion of things that drive fascists in DISCO, we got precious little on-screen characterization that humanized those concepts such that the conclusion that DISCO is advancing was well-proven by the drama of the episodes.

In short, DISCO tried to discuss something of genuine meaning and value, and in my opinion at least partially failed due to how they chose to deliver their discussion. Subtlety clearly isn't the forte of Star Trek writers.

If you are trying to create socialism or social democracy don't you have the smae siege mentality?
There is no other explanation why the woke left would deny their media dominance.

The Klingons have some resemblance for some of the left pet victim demographics. Burnham straight up calls out a superior for treating the Klingons like that.

TNG season one has some of the most ham fisted preaching ever commited on Trek tv.

[Asvarduil]

I'm going to reply to the first comment, but I will not quote it, as that can easily lead us down a path of discussion that would be virtually unrecognizable from certain forms of trolling.

I think that the perspective in that comment has a problem, in that news outlets selling siege mentalities - whatever flavor that is - want us to believe they are the sole bastion of truth, such that we continue tuning in, and more importantly viewing ads. They're not above convincing us that the other side is 'winning' the propaganda war, and sometimes resort to just that.

As to a siege mentality being required to create socialism...all that proves is that you do not know what socialism is.

Personally, I choose to enjoy certain bits of mass media - including Trek - but with the awareness that someone with a lot of money owns it, and that those who have the gold make the rules.

In conclusion, I believe liberal vs. conservative media are actually evenly matched, and are relying at least a little on reality distortion to make the information situation seem otherwise, in pursuit of enriching themselves. To say I oppose the current state of affairs is putting it lightly.

Something else that I think needs to be said: this is the exact sort of thing Chuck talks about when he discusses 'powers that be striving to keep us divided.' I urge you to see past the charade for all sorts of reasons, not least of which being one's own emotional health.

As to your other points. On the first one quoted, remember at the first episode that the Klingons aren't a pet villain - unfortunately for them, they're an overpowering villain. The Klingons had been in seclusion for 100 years (probably thanks to Archer finding novel ways to f@#$ up Qo'nos.) When they were awoken, they owned the Federation at the Battle of the Binary Stars, and thanks to Discovery getting displaced into the MU after the destruction of the Sarcophagus, had conquered about 1/5 of the Federation's territory. The Federation was straight-up panicking when they were going to explode Qo'nos. This wasn't a case of a 'pet villain' at all - the re-emergence of the Klingon threat when you look at the events depicted is about as severe as the later incursion of the Borg, in a way.

As to S1 TNG? I think S1 TNG had so many problems that the ham-fisted preaching is kind of lost in that. Of course, I think Roddenberry was busy pushing his agendas...which was a contributing factor in all of that. Suffice to say, S1 & S2 TNG is a hot mess, that I choose to pretend didn't happen.

[griffeytrek]

One problem with modern trek is that when they're coming up with a new series idea instead of saying how can we write a compelling story they ask how many SJW check boxes can we check off.

It's not even that. In the brainstorming sessions they come up with a bunch of stuff that sounds "interesting" on paper and very "Star Trek" but turns out to be largely unworkable in actual series production. Chakotay's herritage is a great example. Let's put someone culturally different in there for contrast. Great. But nobody early on asked "exactly what are we going to do with this?" Which in the end meant that pretty much every Chakotay centric episode was he claims "mystic mumbo jumbo" to sneak off ship and away from Janeway for a few days to get really really stoned. (And just writing that out, it actually makes more sense and is a more interesting story than everything they actually did with him. even when they did just that.)

Similar problem characters were Kes. Yeah the whole Mayfly thing sounds great when brainstorming in the writers room. But once you hit production? When every weekly question regarding the character involving what to do with them ends in A. Die or B. Ignore them for another week you have created a problem character. And the problem is built in.

Dax is a similar although less obvious problem in production. Not so much Jadzia. But the Dax symbiote. Notice how we only ever got 1 or 2 stories a season that featured or involved it? Otherwise Jadzia and Ezri were just mostly humans with funny spots. The problem with the Dax Alien was it had no visual language. Nothing to queue the viewer onto what was going on. So every time they used the symbiote in a story they essentially had to go through a bunch of exposition explaining it. Not a fatal flaw, but a cumbersome one. Contrast that with Spock, Worf, Odo and Quark who could readily communicate their alien nature visually and without needing any time wasting explanation. The sad thing with Dax is the same concept was actually handled much much better over in Stargate with the Tok'ra. They included visual and audible queues to indicate when the symbiote was speaking or acting vs the host.

[RobbyB1982]

One problem with modern trek is that when they're coming up with a new series idea instead of saying how can we write a compelling story they ask how many SJW check boxes can we check off.

Yeah, like when TOS included an Asian, a Russian, and a black woman as main characters for no reason. And the original pilot even had a woman as second in command! What a bunch of SJW checklist nonsense.