Too Much Death in Star Trek?

[ZapBrannigan]

If TOS has a flaw (and it doesn't), it would be that there is too much death in it.

"The Cage" has off screen deaths in the three crewmen that Pike lost on the "real" Rigel VII, and the crew of the S.S. Columbia.

"WNMHGB" racks up a body count of twelve, counting the nine that Spock mentions, and they are never thought of again on screen. That brings up another issue: death in Star Trek is put behind us very quickly.

A few people even die in "A Piece of the Action," one of our two comedies.

Hundreds die in:
"The Doomsday Machine"
"The Immunity Syndrome"
"The Ultimate Computer"
"The Tholian Web"

Hundreds of Klingons die in "Day of the Dove."

In "The Changeling," four billion people die before the main titles "to show that the situation is serious." Jeez!

"The Mark of Gideon" seems like one of the many episodes where nobody buys the farm, but it ends with kindly Mr. Hodin planning to unleash Vegan choreomeningitis and kill billions. And it's all smiles at the end.

I love the show, but I think they over-used death as a dramatic tool. I wonder if a lot of these episodes could have had the same emotional impact with nobody getting killed at all. And then they could have paid more attention to the realistic aftermath of death when a story required it, because being less commonplace on the show, it would be a bigger deal.

 

[Warped9]

Reali life in the universe is dangerous...and that includes our own little planet throughout history.

I think it's one of those things that gave TOS a sense of realism.

 

[kirkfan]

If TOS has a flaw (and it doesn't), it would be that there is too much death in it.

"The Cage" has off screen deaths in the three crewmen that Pike lost on the "real" Rigel VII, and the crew of the S.S. Columbia.

"WNMHGB" racks up a body count of twelve, counting the nine that Spock mentions, and they are never thought of again on screen. That brings up another issue: death in Star Trek is put behind us very quickly.

A few people even die in "A Piece of the Action," one of our two comedies.

Hundreds die in:
"The Doomsday Machine"
"The Immunity Syndrome"
"The Ultimate Computer"
"The Tholian Web"

Hundreds of Klingons die in "Day of the Dove."

In "The Changeling," four billion people die before the main titles "to show that the situation is serious." Jeez!

"The Mark of Gideon" seems like one of the many episodes where nobody buys the farm, but it ends with kindly Mr. Hodin planning to unleash Vegan choreomeningitis and kill billions. And it's all smiles at the end.

I love the show, but I think they over-used death as a dramatic tool. I wonder if a lot of these episodes could have had the same emotional impact with nobody getting killed at all. And then they could have paid more attention to the realistic aftermath of death when a story required it, because being less commonplace on the show, it would be a bigger deal.

"The Mark of Gideon" is a strange episode. A whole planet with that many people on it wouldn't last long. Where would they even find the food to feed everyone? Replicators? I just don't buy the premise.

 

[Green Shirt]

Everybody dies.

 

[Metryq]

Well, there's only so much time in a TV drama that must establish a situation, run through its various permutations, and then resolve it all in an hour.

SPOCK: I've noticed that about your people, Doctor. You find it easier to understand the death of one than the death of a million. You speak about the objective hardness of the Vulcan heart, yet how little room there seems to be in yours.
—"The Immunity Syndrome"

Westerns, a TV staple, routinely had people die on-screen and very "neatly" (fall over quietly like flipping off a light switch). STAR TREK never made on-screen deaths pretty, yet showed proper concern for those off-screen deaths. Kirk was always troubled by the loss of crewmen, but also knew that he had no time to mourn them without risking the rest.

Also consider the magnitudes in STAR TREK—we're talking about interstellar travel and entire planetary populations, though we meet only a few individuals in any episode. I think STAR TREK tried to make global considerations feel personal.

 

[JWPlatt]

Everybody dies.

Remember that, unlike real life, in fiction writers have a choice. Far too often writers with a lack of imagination use death as drama when it is really just an easy way out, or to piss on a franchise to "leave their mark" on it like a dog to satify their ego, or simply to lazily manipulate the reader or viewer. Sometimes it's because the actor has become too expensive or too annoying. The real Universe is much more objective about it and does not kill people because of those things even when we wish it would.

 

[tafkats]

Not necessarily too much, but sometimes it was treated far too casually. I'm thinking, for example, about the "everyone stands around the bridge laughing heartily" ending to "The Galileo Seven," right after two crewmen were killed.

 

[kirkfan]

Everybody dies.

Remember that, unlike real life, in fiction writers have a choice. Far too often writers with a lack of imagination use death as drama when it is really just an easy way out, or to piss on a franchise to "leave their mark" on it like a dog to satify their ego, or simply to lazily manipulate the reader or viewer. Sometimes it's because the actor has become too expensive or too annoying. The real Universe is much more objective about it and does not kill people because of those things even when we wish it would.

If people died like in real life then it would be far worse because once in a while it would be a main character that gets it and not always a red shirt.

 

[Warped9]

Everybody dies.

Remember that, unlike real life, in fiction writers have a choice. Far too often writers with a lack of imagination use death as drama when it is really just an easy way out, or to piss on a franchise to "leave their mark" on it like a dog to satify their ego, or simply to lazily manipulate the reader or viewer. Sometimes it's because the actor has become too expensive or too annoying. The real Universe is much more objective about it and does not kill people because of those things even when we wish it would.

If people died like in real life then it would be far worse because once in a while it would be a main character that gets it and not always a red shirt.

There have been and continue to be more than enough assholes who caused the needless deaths of thousands and millions. Millions upon millions have been treated as disposable in the interests of someone furthering their own whims.

And nature can wipe out hundreds to thousands and more in practically an instant just because they had the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[allstar77]

While there is a lot of death in Trek, it's dealt with in episodes like Balance of Terror, Operation -- Annihilate!, and The Doomsday Machine in not so casual ways. I think there's a balance, a fair one. They couldn't mourn every single red shirt every single week, but the could acknowledge it from time to time.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

While there is a lot of death in Trek, it's dealt with in episodes like Balance of Terror, Operation -- Annihilate!, and The Doomsday Machine in not so casual ways. I think there's a balance, a fair one. They couldn't mourn every single red shirt every single week, but the could acknowledge it from time to time.

When I wrote the original post, I was going to give honorable mention to "Balance of Terror." That's one where they got it just right. Death was not over-used without dramatic justification in the story, and the final scene acknowledged the crewman who died. In the sense of this thread topic, it might be the best episode of the series.

 

[Nightowl1701]

"If you can't take a little bloody nose, maybe you ought to go back home and crawl under your bed. It's not safe out here. It's wondrous, with treasures to satiate desires both subtle and gross. But it's not for the timid."

 

[Nerys Myk]

Everybody dies.

Remember that, unlike real life, in fiction writers have a choice. Far too often writers with a lack of imagination use death as drama when it is really just an easy way out, or to piss on a franchise to "leave their mark" on it like a dog to satify their ego, or simply to lazily manipulate the reader or viewer. Sometimes it's because the actor has become too expensive or too annoying. The real Universe is much more objective about it and does not kill people because of those things even when we wish it would.

Sounds like you're talking about something very different than the OP.

 

[Nebusj]

Westerns, a TV staple, routinely had people die on-screen and very "neatly" (fall over quietly like flipping off a light switch). STAR TREK never made on-screen deaths pretty, yet showed proper concern for those off-screen deaths.

Indeed, I don't think Star Trek's body count is substantially different to what you might encounter on an (adult) Western of the time. Heck, the radio version of Gunsmoke could be so death-laden that half the guest cast dying was the conclusion of the happy episodes.

 

[Melakon]

The on-screen deaths and violence in TOS, especially in its first year, was pretty mild compared to the westerns, cop shows, spy shows, and WW2 shows airing as its contemporaries in the 1960s. There was already noise from anti-violence groups at the time, and one result was a change in Gunsmoke's main title sequence.

 

[kirkfan]

Remember that, unlike real life, in fiction writers have a choice. Far too often writers with a lack of imagination use death as drama when it is really just an easy way out, or to piss on a franchise to "leave their mark" on it like a dog to satify their ego, or simply to lazily manipulate the reader or viewer. Sometimes it's because the actor has become too expensive or too annoying. The real Universe is much more objective about it and does not kill people because of those things even when we wish it would.

If people died like in real life then it would be far worse because once in a while it would be a main character that gets it and not always a red shirt.

There have been and continue to be more than enough assholes who caused the needless deaths of thousands and millions. Millions upon millions have been treated as disposable in the interests of someone furthering their own whims.

And nature can wipe out hundreds to thousands and more in practically an instant just because they had the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I can't argue with that.

 

[JWPlatt]

Everybody dies.

Remember that, unlike real life, in fiction writers have a choice. Far too often writers with a lack of imagination use death as drama when it is really just an easy way out, or to piss on a franchise to "leave their mark" on it like a dog to satify their ego, or simply to lazily manipulate the reader or viewer. Sometimes it's because the actor has become too expensive or too annoying. The real Universe is much more objective about it and does not kill people because of those things even when we wish it would.

Sounds like you're talking about something very different than the OP.

Not at all. Fictional death is easy to write with just a stroke of the pen or a press of the keyboard. Who cares? It's not real. So pile on the numbers of deaths for greater drama, right?

Consider these quotes:

I've noticed that about your people, Doctor. You find it easier to understand the death of one than the death of a million. You speak about the objective hardness of the Vulcan heart, yet how little room there seems to be in yours.

So just rack up the body count for shock and awe to increase the drama because one just isn't enough.

The death of Tucker was another object of controversy. Salem described the development as "a major character is pointlessly killed off in service of a pointless plot device," a complaint echoed by IGN. Actor Connor Trinneer, who played Trip, said during a convention appearance that the character had "gotten out of much worse scrapes than that," and the death seemed forced. The writers, Trinneer contended, wanted to kill off a character to "get the fans talking," and so Trip was killed off simply to manipulate viewers.

Fictional death is easy to write, so writers all too often use it for impact and manipulation rather than doing something organic with the character that requires more effort - building drama without death. So the excesses of death in a fictional show may reflect the writer's lack of imagination and result in an increased body count and often the typical ratings ploy in promotional ads that offer up the sacrifice of "A major character will die!!!!!." Yes, I'm sorry, but this does suggest that even Star Trek writers get lazy sometimes.

Just so you know, I do not count Spock's death in "The Wrath of Khan" as one of these cheap deaths. It was organic, part of the story and character, and was meaningful. Contrast that to Kirk's second death in "Generations." That was about pissing on the franchise where the conversation starts with "Let's kill Kirk!" instead of at least allowing the character and plot to lead them there.

Before anyone brings it up, as I recall it, the story goes that they attracted Nimoy back to the role of Spock in "The Wrath of Khan" by telling him "We'll kill Spock" in addition to offering the role of Golda's husband in "A Woman Called Golda." But as the writing of "The Wrath of Khan" went on, they pushed Spock's death further towards the end because that's where the story lead them.

 

[Lance]

If TOS has a flaw (and it doesn't), it would be that there is too much death in it.

Nah. As others have said, the universe is a dangerous place. Heck, NASA scientists today acknowledge that one of the biggest hurdles to overcome vis-a-vis sending humans out into space is that the realm of space is *incredibly* dangerous to human-kind... look at, for example, how in Star Trek our characters are basically beholden to artificial life-support systems, because none of that exists out there... and the reality is that if/when humans ever manage to get off what's left of our barren little rock by the time we've annihilated each other, the enviroments we live in are going to be very dangerous.

Personally, I like the deaths. I think it shows us that this isn't a cosy little career and these guys are not just exploring the brush in their own backyard.

Reali life in the universe is dangerous...and that includes our own little planet throughout history.

I think it's one of those things that gave TOS a sense of realism.

Nailed it.

 

[kirkfan]

Death is an inevitable element of any series of a serious nature.

 

[Draculasaurus]

I'm fine with the deaths in TOS. It's a little awkward when they're joking around a few minutes later, but I see that as the compressed, compartmentalized time of a '60s television narrative and not callousness of the characters.