I think he hits the ball right out of the park with this one. I think there are a lot of people who follow Star Trek who need to hear this. The phenomenon he talks about makes me ashamed to be a Trek fan sometimes, far more than any stereotyping or nerd-bashing. I love it. He says it all right here. Read it and internalize it. https://www.facebook.com/david.gerrold/posts/10205146788641680?fref=nf
Is Bjo Tremble still alive? DC Fontana? You see, I think it would be beyond belief to be able to sit in a room with Gerrold, Fontana and Tremble and just listen to them talk and reminisce. The man gets it and I'm sorry he left TNG so early in its run. I think this is my favorite theme from his rant:
Agree 100% with Gerrold's statements. Quite refreshing. Although I'm not quite sure who actually thinks Trek represents conservative values. I've always personally felt it to be left-of-center on the whole. Perhaps DS9 fits more into that mold, but I find many of its influences as more libertarian than particularly conservative, which is why it's my favorite series over all of them. And unfortunately, I think some anti-Abrams zealots will take the "we're Star Trek fans too" as proof that NuTrek should have never been made, as many of them believe that several of the top people were never fans of the original. Don't know if this actually true or not or if I'm getting mixed up with Nu-Battlestar Galactica, which had its own tidal wave of fanboy civil wars during its run.
In ST09, I quite liked the fact that Kirk made it a matter of public record that he tried to save Nero in order to show the Romulan Empire that he tried, and that there was no bad blood between them. Sure it was lip service, but it was still an acknowledgement. I wish either ST09 had expanded on that a bit more in the epilogue, or that there was some sort of follow up in STXII with unprecedented negotiations, that both powers suffered because of Nero. And in doing so, it would stay truer to the sentiment that exploration could yield friends rather than enemies (besides, what a twist on TOS then, that one of the Federation's more formidable enemies in the prime universe would be the opposite in the alternate universe, all because one captain did the right thing). To me, that would be pretty true to Trek.
I'm no fan of Star Trek fans either, but I'm unimpressed by this post. Basically he's advocating blind, uncritical, unconditional loyalty to a brand name. We tried that. The results were Enterprise and Nemesis. Critical and commercial failures that nearly killed the property forever. No thanks.
The general idea is don't be a jerk and I agree with that. Good message overall. I'm not sure about this part: To many it was a job that they did to feed themselves or get a leg up in acting... Patrick Stewart or Robert Beltran come to mind.
Patrick Stewart tackled the work with gusto, Beltran not so much. The people who disturb me were the one's who kept hanging around trying to get one more Trek check. Takei, Frakes, Sirtis, Burton...
I don't see the problem with Beltran, he complained when the writing started to suck which is all an actor can really do. And I don't see anything wrong with sticking around for the money and doing their jobs... all I meant was that not everyone who works on the show is themselves a fan of star trek.
Problem is his definition of asshole appears to be anyone who has an opinion that's any less than unabashedly positive about so much as a single episode and who dares to express that opinion in any form.
When did David Gerrold forget how to write? The tone and phrasing are immature. It's the kind of essay writing I'd expect from Hayley Dunphy on Modern Family, which is especially jarring given that Wikipedia puts him at 71 now. It's not just that he's old enough to know better. He USED to know better. Maybe he's over-compensating nowadays by trying to sound like a sassy young thing.
Well, it *is* a Facebook post. For some reason, people approach writing on/reading Facebook as a different medium than, say, a personal blog, BBS, or newspaper editorial.
You're reading things into the post that aren't there. Nowhere does he call for an unabashedly positive reaction.
Thank you for sharing the post. If there is one aspect that frustrates me with Star Trek discussions is how quickly it turns in to a hate fest towards the people who made the show/film/work/whatever. It is one thing to disagree-it is another to take that disagreement and use it as a weapon. I may not 100% agree with Gerrold but I understand his frustration.
You know, when I first read this post, I read into it too much. I thought he was essentially saying that fans have no right to be critical of the product. But that's not all what's he's stating. He's ranting against the nasty 'jihadi' attacks that can happen on fan forums. Well thought-out post actually.
When I look for great writing, I head straight over to Facebook and if I don't find it, I check the age of the writer so I can assess how jarred I should be A celebration of Infinite diversity in infinite combinations would be more convincing if we actually saw it. Trek has been dining out on it's reputation for progressive values for decades without justification. Everyone is straight. Everyone still strives for marriage and kids like it's the damn 50's By comparison to other sci-fi, Trek can often look painfully conservative and saying so should be encouraged
That's not what he was saying. He was saying that there's no reason to be jackasses to each other or to spew hatred and ill-wishes at the production teams.