Is DS9 really Star Trek??

[Eminence]

DS9 is an alright show, but in many ways, it deviated from the Trek ideology so much that it could be considered an entirely different show; and thus by extension, not entirely Star Trek. Don't get me wrong, I love DS9, it used to be my favorite ST show (though right now, VOY holds that title), but it never really depicted the imaginary universe one associates with ST.

Any thoughts?

 

[Kegek]

Yes it is, for the same reasons that Voyager is Star Trek: It's part of the Star Trek media franchise. It has Klingons, Romulans, transporters, the Federation, Starfleet, and so on. That it undermined Roddenberry's utopianism is unarguable, but so is its status as a Star Trek product.

 

[bigdaddy]

It's more Star trek then Enterprise ever was.

Plus they needed a change, you can't just have SP9 be about a space station and just not doing anything. Before the war started the show was boring, when the war started it had a point.

Saying DS9 isn't Star Trek because it's different is like saying that the newer James Bond movies aren't James Bond movies because they aren't cheesey. Different is sometimes good, and DS9 is good, entertaining TV.

 

[number6]

No need to bash the other series.

DS9 is as much Star Trek as any other Trek series.
The same people who were bashing it as much as ENT now regard it as the best of the Trek spinoffs.

 

[archeryguy1701]

DS9 just showed the darker corners of the Trek Universe that never got to be shown in the other 4 series. Just cause Roddenberry never displayed them doesn't mean all was peachy.

 

[SlyCardie]

I think it's Star Trek, it's just evolved. More realistic character development and a war time setting for much of it.

 

[anti-matter]

If the big cigars at Paramount call it Star Trek... then that's that. Don't make it any harder than it is...

...there's nothing wrong with preferring VOY as your fav trek it was enjoyed by millions so your not alone. As far as an imaginary universe goes... what did you think of the architecture of Cardassia Prime?

 

[Navaros]

I don't buy into the "Star Trek is only for showing a perfect, positive future" philosophy that many Trek fans do. In fact it wasn't until I started reading Trek forums that I even realized such a philosophy existed. Because it certainly wasn't evident from me watching the TOS show for all the years of my life. TOS has conflict between the characters and aliens of the week, and internal conflict amongst it's crew. DS9 had the exact same thing, which makes them two peas in a pod.

I would argue that in addition to making the TOS and DS9 shows spiritually akin to each other, it also made them be the only entertaining Trek shows. By taking all the conflict out of TNG and VOY, in my view that made them extremely dull and boring & that boringness is unbecoming of what Trek should be. That boringness pervades the other Trek shows constantly, something TOS and DS9 rarely suffer from.

There was a Poll on the General Trek board of this site a year or two ago, which asked the question something like "Which other Trek shows best carries on the spirit of TOS?" and DS9 won that Poll by a landslide. For very good reasons in my view.

I'd say that if any other show is not Star Trek, then by TNG and VOY abandoning those things (conflict, adversity etc.), it is TNG and VOY that are not Star Trek. I haven't seen enough of ENT to comment knowledgably about if it abandoned those things too.

So yes, DS9 is definitely Star Trek. DS9 is basically just a much more fleshed-out, sophisticated, and deeper verison of TOS. :thumbsup:

 

[Sci]

People like to note that DS9 undermined Roddenberry's utopianism... but what they always forget is that it took the nails out before renailing utopianism to the wall.

It was undermining utopianism to examine it, question it, and then reaffirm it. So, yes, it is real Star Trek: It still holds fast to the belief that there can be a better future and that human nature is not fundamentally destructive and negative.

You want something that's truly anti-Star Trek? Try Battlestar Galactica. Or Aliens. Maybe The Last King of Scotland.

 

[Photon]

No it didn't follow the formula, something I'm very happy that happened.
TNG: just so happy-disease of the week, alien of the week, it all ends good w/out having the fire photon and phasers

TOS: good but weird (and dated)
Vyger: um uh couple of good episodes...
ENT: actually liked it but destroyed canon and had some less than scintilating episodes

DS9 not only good Trek but good TV.

 

[Wil has a posse]

Um, the name of the show is Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

It's as much Star Trek as Voyager and Enterprise, though I'm not sure if that works more for the prosecution or defense.

As for it not seeming part of the universe otherwise depicted in Star Trek, well...thank god.

 

[HRHTheKING]

Yes it is Star Trek.

And it's the best of Star Trek.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

It's Trek and it's the best, IMHO!

 

[InklingStar]

As shipbound series, TOS and TNG showed us glimpses of the Star Trek universe. DS9 took that picture and gave it depth. Rather than just seeing them as aliens of the week, we got in-depth looks at the Ferengi, the Cardassians, even the Klingons. They were not guests, they were part of the fabric of the show.

Look at the characters. TOS was about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. TNG was about Picard and Data, with some storylines for the other five regulars. Voyager was the Janeway and Seven show, for the most part. Deep Space Nine had more recurring characters than regulars. We had humans, Bajorans, Cardassians, Ferengi, even a shapeshifter, all with their own stories and arcs.

Look at Sacrifice of Angels. In addition to the regulars, there are ten recurring characters. Each one of them has their own fleshed-out backstory. Several of them find the culmination or turning point in their arc here. Many recurring characters see more screen time than the regulars.

TOS showed us Klingons; DS9 shows us what it is like being Klingon. TNG showed us the Federation, the "good guys" of the galaxy; DS9 showed us the Federation under siege, what it would do to remain good. Voyager showed us a crew that became a family; DS9 has a myriad of people, good and bad, who learn to trust each other.

DS9 dealt with politics, religion, and conflict. This does not mean it is not Star Trek. The original Star Trek was "Wagon Train to the Stars." DS9 is what happens after the homestead is established, and what it takes to build a life out on the frontier.

 

[Squiggy]

Kegek Kringle said:
Yes it is, for the same reasons that Voyager is Star Trek: It's part of the Star Trek media franchise. It has Klingons, Romulans, transporters, the Federation, Starfleet, and so on. That it undermined Roddenberry's utopianism is unarguable, but so is its status as a Star Trek product.

I've uncovered some startling evidence to corroborate your claim:

It seems that, indeed...it is Star Trek.

And, IMHO, some of Roddenberry's ideas weren't all that great. Really, how watchable would another show where everyone got along all the time without any conflict be?

 

[Sisu]

Oh my, it does appear to be Star Trek....and all along I thought this was Babylon 4 (with Sisko as a Minbari not born of Minbari....why else do you think he was bald?)

 

[HRHTheKING]

The question that really should be considered is whether "a Trek ideology" actually exists at all.

 

[Moocey]

Eminence said:
DS9 is an alright show, but in many ways, it deviated from the Trek ideology so much that it could be considered an entirely different show; and thus by extension, not entirely Star Trek. Don't get me wrong, I love DS9, it used to be my favorite ST show (though right now, VOY holds that title), but it never really depicted the imaginary universe one associates with ST.

Any thoughts?

I consider that a compliment to the show. I don't like DS9 because of anything to do with an imaginary universe. I like it because it's good television.

 

[-Brett-]

Eminence said:
DS9 is an alright show, but in many ways, it deviated from the Trek ideology so much that it could be considered an entirely different show; and thus by extension, not entirely Star Trek. Don't get me wrong, I love DS9, it used to be my favorite ST show (though right now, VOY holds that title), but it never really depicted the imaginary universe one associates with ST.

Any thoughts?

I'm curious. What is Star Trek to you?

Does Star Trek have to be set on a pearly white shiney space ship? Does that space ship have to be named Enterprise? Does it have to have an artificial life form or emotionless alien on board? Do all of the characters have to fall in to one of four or five neat little archetypes?

If the answer to any of those is yes, then no DS9 isn't Star Trek.

I always thought Star Trek was a little more versatile than that.

 

[Nebusj]

Festivus Toad! said:
And, IMHO, some of Roddenberry's ideas weren't all that great. Really, how watchable would another show where everyone got along all the time without any conflict be?

At the risk of starting some kind of trouble ... what's the ratio of the Next Generation's seventh season average rating to its first season average rating, and what's the similar number for Deep Space Nine?

Granted not all of Rodenberry's ideas were great. But he did have a knack for putting together Star Trek that people found mighty watchable.