View Single Post
Old March 27 2013, 09:20 PM   #34
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Has star trek changed

yousirname wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
I don't see how you can expect to not hear the phrase "Gene's vision" in a Trek BBS. Should we just erect JJ-specific Trek hangouts so people like you can avoid Trek purists?
A) We have just such a hangout, it's this forum and you seem quite fond of hanging out here.

B) My view is that Star Trek isn't a religion with Gene Roddenberry as Moses. Neither we as fans nor Abrams nor anyone else as creators are beholden to "Gene's vision" in any way. As far as I'm concerned, the question of whether or not this or that is in line with "Gene's vision" is akin to wondering if Colonel Sanders 'would have approved' of the Zinger Tower or the Boneless Banquet. No-one cares if he would or not.

Likewise, Roddenberry's been dead for over twenty years. More Star Trek has been made without his involvement than with it. His 'vision' is sweet and all, but it's restrictive of the kind of stories you can tell and the kind of characters you can tell them about. There's just no real reason to keep mindlessly deferring to it, in my view.
You mean you are not of the body?

BillJ wrote: View Post
mos6507 wrote: View Post
yousirname wrote: View Post
I could happily go the rest of my life without ever hearing the phrase "Gene's vision" again.
I don't see how you can expect to not hear the phrase "Gene's vision" in a Trek BBS. Should we just erect JJ-specific Trek hangouts so people like you can avoid Trek purists?
No.

But let's be honest, Gene adjusted his "vision" according to whatever best stuffed his pockets with cash and his couch with starlets.
So basically, to live Gene's vision is to be a hedonist. Better than religion, I'd say.

Roddenberry wanted to create a TV show in the 1960s that would sell. Period. I will say that to his credit, he did want it to be at least a moderately intelligent and moderately progressive show. But it wasn't the only intelligent or progressive show on TV in the 1960s. Further, most of its staying power over time hasn't come from one "vision," but from its versatile format. Unlike "Gunsmoke" which was always a western stuck in a time and place, Trek could be many things.

But Gene's "vision" and crap like that came later. It's revisionist history. It's all part of the "cult" of Trek and the self-importance it used to market itself. We've all read that stuff at some time during our fandom. Some dismiss it. Some are absorbed.
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote