Thread: Guy in Gown
View Single Post
Old April 12 2010, 10:28 PM   #34
Location: On a boat
View Withers's Twitter Profile Send a message via AIM to Withers Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Withers
Re: Guy in Gown

Again, the one-line response, verrrry refreshing. But okay, I can go with that.

Let's start here; The existence of Stupid Thing B in no way diminishes or detracts from the stupidity of Stupid Thing A. Families on board Enterprise D was a stupid idea for largely the same reasons the Skant was a stupid idea only worse in every way I can imagine off the top of my head because rather than putting officers unnecessarily in harms way, having families aboard put civilians unnecessarily in harms way. And before you tell me to "blame the creators and not you" they agree-

Regarding the presence of families on starships, Ronald D. Moore commented "Perhaps [still] on some Galaxy-class ships, but I think this was an experiment that failed." (AOL chat, 1997) "I think that the "family friendly" starship notion was an interesting idea, but one that didn't pan out. There was always something awkward about Picard ordering the ship into battle situations with kiddies running through the corridors. And no matter how much lip service we paid to the "our families are part of our strength" concept, it never seemed very smart or very logical to bring the spouse and kids along when you're facing down the Borg, or guarding the Neutral Zone, or plunging the ship into uncharted spatial anomalies." (AOL chat, 1997)

So, just because they were playing fast and loose with lives in other aspects of the show, doesn't negate they were playing fast and loose in regard to Officer efficiency and safety when it came to the Skant. Having civilians aboard was a stupid decision but this show had room for at least two because the Skant Uniform was a stupid decision too.

Withers is offline   Reply With Quote