I didn't assume she was straight because she didn't kiss a woman, I assumed she's straight because there was no non-straight people on Star Trek.
Do you think "Discovery" will take more chances than "DS9." did?
- Thread starter Jayson1
- Start date
I didn't assume she was straight because she didn't kiss a woman, I assumed she's straight because there was no non-straight people on Star Trek.
Since TWOK is constantly used as a benchmark for Trek films, this is nothing new.
I think it did, especially with more religious questions. I think it was a willing to explore far more serialized storytelling, to a certain degree, and willing to challenge the idea of Federation's paradise.
TOS challenged conformity to computer "Gods" on multiple occasions.
It did. But it put me to sleep...
It was never a paradise in TOS to begin with.
But, DS9 embraced the idea of gods and destiny.
To each their own.
I enjoyed it and so did my wife, who usually hates Sci-Fi.
Not a paradise, but Spock's comments in "Way to Eden" always struck as a very interesting challenge of the Federation's status quo. I think that DS9 explored that far more especially in light of what TNG presented.
I'm sorry, but even as a DS9 fan I don't see how it "took chances." Maybe in comparison to the rest of the Star Trek franchise where things like serialized storytelling and fighting a war are considered "ballsy" but in comparison with the rest of television, even mid-to-late nineties television it wasn't taking any serious risks. An argument might be made that it showed positive aspects to terrorism, which if it were made today would not be tolerated, but this wasn't much of an issue in the 90s.
DS9's stance on religion isn't much different from the rest of the Trek franchise, or indeed sci-fi in general. The "gods" the Bajorans worship are firmly established to be aliens living in a different realm, and their "miracles" can usually be explained via the established and accepted pseudoscience of the franchise's universe. Meanwhile, episodes which focus on the Bajoran church usually center on the corruption of their leadership, particular their "Pope" figure, Kai Winn. While you do get some issues of Church vs. State which were actually somewhat interesting and IMO underrated, but let's not pretend there was anything groundbreaking or risky going on here. And indeed, it was more or less in line with previous attitudes expressed about religion, particularly organized religion already addressed in TNG Who Watches the Watchers.
Last edited:
I think one thing to consider is what was the target audience of DS9? I think DS9 was like TNG and most sci-fi back in the 90's were going after families,nerds and kids. In that regard I think it does count by simply being more or equally sophisticated as something like "Xena" or "Stargate." Other than "X=Files" "Space and Beyond" and "Babylon 5" I can't think of any other genre show that can even be argued that they took more chances back then than DS9.
I think a show's target audience and how the show tries to cater to them can say just as much about it's edge or sophistication as how it might compare to something like "NYPD Blue" which was going after a different audience. You can even look at it compared to something like "TOS" which I think they were going after hippies,kids and nerds.
That brings up the question of what do we think the target audience will be for "Discovery?" Is it going to aim at families or is it going to try and win over the modern geek culture that has basically become the new mainstream. Is it going to be simple but fun adventure stuff that has even more broad appeal like the Abrams movies?
Jason
I should also note that "Buffy" along with those other shows that can be argued was more advanced than "DS9." It simply slipped my mind, until now, after the post was made.
Jason
Last edited:
I think DS9 was willing to go places with it, and in a more positive direction, than TNG did, with Sisko attempting to stradle a very duel relationship as a Starfleet officer and as the Emissary.
Do I think it "ground breaking" in sci fi? No, not really. But, I think it was more risky in the Star Trek sense, to move away from the safer episodic storytelling and embrace some richer character moments. The organized "church" is shown to be problematic, but the everyman faith of Bajorans, like Nerys, are demonstrated as far more positive in terms of spirituality.
I didn't assume she was straight because she didn't kiss a woman, I assumed she's straight because there was no non-straight people on Star Trek.
I have to admit, you got me there.
I love DS9 but I don't think it took that many chances.
Strong continuity - That wasn't taking a chance, it was a) the result of the show takingplace in the same area of space for its entire run and b) what was getting more popular in tv anyway. With how much Voyager is criticized for its lack of continuity it doesn't look like DS9
New style of sets - TNG did that too despite still being a federation ship, compare the hotel lobby look of the Enterprise D to the TOS movies.
A different style is usually used to differentiate productions, to give them their own identity especially if they are produced concurrently. But despite that DS9 still used a very recognizable TNG style for the runabouts and the Defiant because despite the need to differentiate itself the show also wanted to feel familiar.
Non starfleet characters - Wesley and Guinan on TNG, Neelix, Kes and Seven on VOY, T'Pol and Phlox in ENT. They all had them, DS9 deserves zero credit or recognition on that front.
Using established characters - For regular characters DS9 was the first to have the opportunity to do that, it simply wasn't an option for TNG and for Voyager it might have felt a bit too "small universe" and I don't think there were characters they could have used with Michelle Forbes clearly not being interested.
TNG and Voyager did it for guest appearances though.
The starfleet look staying the same - That was because they shared costumes, props and sets with the other shows.
This probably sounds like I'm shitting on DS9 but I'm not, it was a very good show but they still played it realitvely safe, there was a bit more ambiguity to the federation's actions but that was largely done via section 31 which the "proper" starfleet heroes were very much opposed to.
If DS9 had actually taken chances O'Brien and Bashir would have been lovers cheating on Keiko. Two of the main characters in a gay relationship and portraying their actions negatively would have been a big deal because it would have pissed of both sides, conservatives because "omg, gays on tv" and liberals because of "omg, awful representation by having them cheat".
Having Terry Farrel kiss Susanna Thompson is not taking a chance because lesbians are more easily accepted and the entire thing was not even framed as them being gay or bi, it was the slugs in their bellies remembering being in a straight releationship.
Discovery will obviously change a lot by necessity:
Strong continuity - That wasn't taking a chance, it was a) the result of the show takingplace in the same area of space for its entire run and b) what was getting more popular in tv anyway. With how much Voyager is criticized for its lack of continuity it doesn't look like DS9
New style of sets - TNG did that too despite still being a federation ship, compare the hotel lobby look of the Enterprise D to the TOS movies.
A different style is usually used to differentiate productions, to give them their own identity especially if they are produced concurrently. But despite that DS9 still used a very recognizable TNG style for the runabouts and the Defiant because despite the need to differentiate itself the show also wanted to feel familiar.
Non starfleet characters - Wesley and Guinan on TNG, Neelix, Kes and Seven on VOY, T'Pol and Phlox in ENT. They all had them, DS9 deserves zero credit or recognition on that front.
Using established characters - For regular characters DS9 was the first to have the opportunity to do that, it simply wasn't an option for TNG and for Voyager it might have felt a bit too "small universe" and I don't think there were characters they could have used with Michelle Forbes clearly not being interested.
TNG and Voyager did it for guest appearances though.
The starfleet look staying the same - That was because they shared costumes, props and sets with the other shows.
This probably sounds like I'm shitting on DS9 but I'm not, it was a very good show but they still played it realitvely safe, there was a bit more ambiguity to the federation's actions but that was largely done via section 31 which the "proper" starfleet heroes were very much opposed to.
If DS9 had actually taken chances O'Brien and Bashir would have been lovers cheating on Keiko. Two of the main characters in a gay relationship and portraying their actions negatively would have been a big deal because it would have pissed of both sides, conservatives because "omg, gays on tv" and liberals because of "omg, awful representation by having them cheat".
Having Terry Farrel kiss Susanna Thompson is not taking a chance because lesbians are more easily accepted and the entire thing was not even framed as them being gay or bi, it was the slugs in their bellies remembering being in a straight releationship.
Discovery will obviously change a lot by necessity:
- It's 2017, they cannot do a show in the style of TOS or TNG without looking dated right out of the gate.
- The old sets are gone, even if they wanted to, redressing the Defiant bridge as alien vessel #34 isn't going to happen.
- Star Trek is pretty much dead as a tv franchise at the moment, back during the 90s the goal was to keep the audience they had, now it's to find a new one.
We forget though that even doing a space station setting was a risk because it"goes nowhere" which was a big complaint at the time. For many people you can't do Star Trek unless it involves a Federation starship. Discovery is still going off that old idea, even if they are shaking it up a little by having 2 ships on the show.
Also they seem to be looking towards the Kelvin Universe when it comes to design so it's not like they are coming up with stuff that looks truly unique. It does look great but I think you can't top the design look of "DS9" in terms of looking like something new. Plus you had a promenade which had never been done on Trek before and they managed to not have a main engineering room which is one of the more frequent settings used in Trek.
Also while you are right in how our starfleet people looked at Section 31 as bad guys we did see perspectives other than Starfleet to balance that out with Kira,Odo, Quark and important guest characters like Garak and Martock to just name 2. Plus as the show went on even the starfleet people seemed to move away from a pure TNG feeling to something a little edgier.
I think if people think the "Discovery" people are going to have the edge of a "Sopranos" character I think we might be disapointed. I think we will see flawed people of course but i'm not sure we are going to see people who are unethical on a HBO level. It is a CBS show and not cable in the end.
Jason
Terrorism was an issue in the 90s, even if it was no where on the scale it is today it was, imo, a risk for DS9 to take. Of course not nearly as risky as Battlestar Galactica having the Colonials using suicide bombers against the Cylons, and perceived collaborators in a post 911 world.
Not only were the Bajorans terrorist but Kira has even admitted they sometimes had to kill innocent people who were in the way and like she said in "The Defiant" if she had the ship back then she would have destroyed the station and attack Carddisans with the intent of hurting them until they cried for peace.
While she showed regret over some of the things she had to do she seemed very comfortable with the idea that what they did was the right things to do.
Jason
While she showed regret over some of the things she had to do she seemed very comfortable with the idea that what they did was the right things to do.
Jason
Ratings were sliding, and they added a starship.
Considering it isn't going to be on TV really, I don't see it conforming much to anything, but also not getting the views it will need due to the platform it will be on. For all we can guess at right now it could be like in Star Trek was made for Showtime or HBO rather than prime time syndication, or a network like NBC or UPN.
Just as with The High Ground, it was reminiscent of an attitude of equating terrorism with a romanticised notion of a noble freedom fighter that was less controversial in the US of the 80s and 90s than it was in, for example, the UK, which banned The High Ground from unedited broadcast until 2006 because of the reference to the Irish Troubles being a successful example of violent extremism. I think the era when the mainland US was not the target of terrorist activity, combined with a nostalgic view of fighting the evil empire from revolutionary days, made the comparison between terrorist and freedom fighter more palatable within the US in a way that would not be acceptable today. Even BSG went out of its way to have characters react to suicide bombing as too far in a way that DS9 didn't bother with when it portrayed terrorism.
I didn't see that in BSG - there was both sides of the argument there with Tigh winning outright with his speech that could be summed as as "Life is hard, deal with it and shut up" - and worked. Roslin was the main opposition for suicide bombing, and she was regularly shown to have dodgy opinions (such as the labour issue).
Terrorism and motivations for have also been quite prominent in shows like Homeland. Granted, it's not on the same "public access, family friendly" level as Star Trek, and is political in nature, but that show made a big effort to show both sides of the argument with neither being more 'right'. If anything, the morality of the situation was not in the US's favour - particularly when Saul had to listen to why a child willingly became a suicide bomber.
DS9 never really romanticised it. They did show it was a shitty situation and they had to do whatever it took to overcome. Kai Winn even had one of her best moments in talking about it. But this wasn't the Taliban or the IRA - it was La Résistance in space - but the fact that these former terrorists and killers were in the main cast was certainly a change of pace from Star Trek's usual routine and a bit risk opposite the 'utopia' the TNG era wanted to present.
As for religion - again, the atheist view that can be gained from TOS is certainly different from DS9's perspective. Yeah, they confirmed these were aliens from the Starfleet perspective. But to the Bajorans, they were their Gods - and that conflicting view was seen from both sides without belittling the religion or raging against the science. That didn't really happen elsewhere in Trek - even in TNG - Picard felt disappointed in Worf for being a Klingon doing Klingongy things as per Klingon law!
Terrorism and motivations for have also been quite prominent in shows like Homeland. Granted, it's not on the same "public access, family friendly" level as Star Trek, and is political in nature, but that show made a big effort to show both sides of the argument with neither being more 'right'. If anything, the morality of the situation was not in the US's favour - particularly when Saul had to listen to why a child willingly became a suicide bomber.
DS9 never really romanticised it. They did show it was a shitty situation and they had to do whatever it took to overcome. Kai Winn even had one of her best moments in talking about it. But this wasn't the Taliban or the IRA - it was La Résistance in space - but the fact that these former terrorists and killers were in the main cast was certainly a change of pace from Star Trek's usual routine and a bit risk opposite the 'utopia' the TNG era wanted to present.
As for religion - again, the atheist view that can be gained from TOS is certainly different from DS9's perspective. Yeah, they confirmed these were aliens from the Starfleet perspective. But to the Bajorans, they were their Gods - and that conflicting view was seen from both sides without belittling the religion or raging against the science. That didn't really happen elsewhere in Trek - even in TNG - Picard felt disappointed in Worf for being a Klingon doing Klingongy things as per Klingon law!
I based my statement on comments Ira Behr has made, in that he was glad to have done DS9 in a pre-9/11 world because many stuff, most notably Kira being a "heroic terrorist" would not be tolerated in the post 9/11 world.
Similar threads
