Spoilers Do you think the original main arc was scrapped once Berg/Harberts left?

[Midquest]

I would add that where we've ended up so far is pretty well telegraphed from the start of the season.

The very first scene of the season was all about Michael losing her parents, and that's exactly where we find ourselves eleven episodes later.

The final scene of the third episode mentioned Control, and that too is where we've ended up.

The theme of faith entered the picture in the first episode, when Burnham asked Pike to trust Discovery as they plummeted toward an asteroid. The initial concept of faith was about trusting in people (which is also how Kurtzman has defined faith in interviews). That notion of faith is still alive in the ninth episode, when Spock suggests that Stamets's issue is a lack of faith, and visible again in Spock's conviction in the Red Angel in the tenth episode.

We do seem to have lost the idea of faith in a sublime other and its accompanying sense of wonder, which does make me a bit sad--but I guess I'd argue that it was never necessarily the key form of faith the season offered, and that it's made good on faith as initially promised in "Brother."

 

[Lord Garth]

I think we might've been done a favor by having the season not focus on "faith vs. science". Star Trek's ultimate statement on this subject would've been "The God Thing", and Paramount didn't want to touch that with a one-million-foot pole in 1975. They wouldn't want to today either. That's why in TFF they didn't encounter the "real" God. That's why they had it both ways with the Prophets on DS9: they were either Wormhole Aliens or Gods and it was left for the audience to decide. They won't take an outright stand. Not ever. Neither will CBS. So it's not worth having an entire arc about.

The best "Who Watches the Watchers?" did was say that advanced technology didn't make you a God. The best "Who Mourns for Adonias?" did was say Ancient Greek Gods -- who people no longer believe in -- weren't anyone to worship. They won't make a statement about whether or not any of our beliefs (or non-beliefs), today, are right or wrong. The absolute closest we get to a definitive stand being taken is in "Encounter at Farpoint" when Q said "400 years ago you were trying to divide the precious resources of your tiny world and 400 years before that you were killing each other over tribal God images." Even there, Gene Roddenberry put a distance between people of our time and people 400 years earlier. They just won't go all out. They won't do it. So there's no point in pretending they will.

If they won't take a stand one way or another, then at least "In the Hands of the Prophets" took the most balanced approach in showing the difference facets of Faith vs. Science. Kai Winn is the religious extremist. Bariel was religious but more open-minded. Keiko was dermined to teach science. Jake thought the Bajorans' beliefs were stupid and his father defended them saying that the Bajorans had to believe in something more than what they had during the Occupation because there was more. That's the best we're realistically going to get.

Anyone who thought the second season of DSC would be anything like Contact was lying to themselves. So, like I said, I think they did us a favor by not seriously going the Faith vs. Science route.

 

[fireproof78]

Anyone who thought the second season of DSC would be anything like Contact was lying to themselves. So, like I said, I think they did us a favor by not seriously going the Faith vs. Science route.

Yes, probably for the best.

 

[gblews]

Regardless, I should say that while I'm enjoying Season 2 from front to back much better than the first season, it seems in some ways markedly more disjointed - almost two series at once. In the initial interviews, they seemed to indicate that "science vs. faith" was going to be an important element this season.

I don't think "science vs faith" was ever going to be a "main arc" as your thread title implies. It might have been intended to be an "element" as your post above states, though whether or not the word 'important" could have been applied is likely debatable.

So, from what I can see, the main arc is unchanged, unless you know otherwise, and an element that appeared in the first few episodes has not been present in the last few episodes. Since the season isn't over there is at least a chance we might see 'science vs faith' again.

So. what was this thread about again?

 

[thribs]

Considering how rushed everything feels now, I think most of their ideas are scrapped.

 

[Alan Roi]

Considering how rushed everything feels now, I think most of their ideas are scrapped.

"Everything feels rushed."

One of the top criticisms of Disco from the beginning.

 

[thribs]

"Everything feels rushed."

One of the top criticisms of Disco from the beginning.

Season one didn’t feel rushed to me. Just that the story wasn’t that great and they telegraphed everything so there wasn’t any big surprises

 

[SpocksOddSocks]

I don't think "science vs faith" was ever going to be a "main arc" as your thread title implies. It might have been intended to be an "element" as your post above states, though whether or not the word 'important" could have been applied is likely debatable.

So, from what I can see, the main arc is unchanged, unless you know otherwise, and an element that appeared in the first few episodes has not been present in the last few episodes. Since the season isn't over there is at least a chance we might see 'science vs faith' again.

So. what was this thread about again?

Agreed, it was the main theme rather than an arc. And I still contest the theme is still running, but not as related to religion as a lot of people were expecting.

 

[Uhura's Song]

And we have dozens of definitive episodes about time travel. I'd rather take another crack at science-vs-faith than go to the people mucking about in the timeline story for the umpteenth time.

Amen.

No more freaking time travel. At least as a dominant theme.

Barf.

 

[Mr Awe]

I'm not a religious man, and I don't think it is a stupid question.

But, how do you answer it? Science is real. No evidence for faith. And, if there was evidence, it would not longer be "faith." There's just nowhere to go with it. Sure, great question for individuals to ponder but no real answer for a show like ST.

I'm glad they deemphasized that aspect.

 

[SG-17]

Examining how Earth religions that involve all powerful dieties react to the future of Star Trek (particularly the existence of beings like Q) would be interesting. From what we know by the 24th century religion is mostly gone from human culture, but it would be interesting to see "the other side", if only to further discredit and deconstruct religion.

 

[fireproof78]

But, how do you answer it? Science is real. No evidence for faith. And, if there was evidence, it would not longer be "faith." There's just nowhere to go with it. Sure, great question for individuals to ponder but no real answer for a show like ST.

I'm glad they deemphasized that aspect.

Some things do not require answers. And that's OK.

 

[Noname Given]

I disagree. There's only so many times you can go to the Trek trope well before it becomes a farce of itself.

What's 7 years of TNG got to do with this?

 

[Kor]

I doubt much changed. I suspect all their "science vs faith" talk in interviews was just the usual Hollywood hot air (such a shame we never got to see Pike go full Fundamentalist Space Christian though)

Much like "Star Trek: Beyond" supposedly being about some thought-provoking ideological struggle that ended barely getting a passing mention in the movie itself.

Kor

 

[Gepard]

Skipping over the last three pages of discussion, yes I do.

I just can't believe that the Red Angel, as presented in the first half of the season, was a normal human in a suit of armor built by humans. It just doesn't fit with the general themes of encountering things outside our normal reality (e.g. the bizarre behavior of the dark matter asteroid, the colonists of New Eden being transported thousands of light years beyond anywhere human technology had been able to reach). And I 100% believe the rumors that Pike was being reimagined as a devout Christian who prayed before making command decisions. His characterization in New Eden screamed setup for a later reveal of his religious faith.

All that shit has been dropped like a dirty plate. The transition of the Red Angel from figure of mystery and intrigue to time travel technowank was so abrupt and had so little impact, emotionally, on the characters that I don't believe it was the original plan.

They throw in a little lip service here and there from Spock about faith, but none of the conflicts or characterization touches on faith or science at all any more. The writers backpedalled, hard.

I'm enjoying well enough where things have ended up, but I'd have loved to see where things were originally headed. I suspect it would have been less well paced, but much more interesting.

 

[Kemaiku]

Skipping over the last three pages of discussion, yes I do.

I just can't believe that the Red Angel, as presented in the first half of the season, was a normal human in a suit of armor built by humans. It just doesn't fit with the general themes of encountering things outside our normal reality (e.g. the bizarre behavior of the dark matter asteroid, the colonists of New Eden being transported thousands of light years beyond anywhere human technology had been able to reach). And I 100% believe the rumors that Pike was being reimagined as a devout Christian who prayed before making command decisions. His characterization in New Eden screamed setup for a later reveal of his religious faith.

All that shit has been dropped like a dirty plate. The transition of the Red Angel from figure of mystery and intrigue to time travel technowank was so abrupt and had so little impact, emotionally, on the characters that I don't believe it was the original plan.

They throw in a little lip service here and there from Spock about faith, but none of the conflicts or characterization touches on with or science at all any more. The writers backpedalled, hard.

I'm enjoying well enough where things have ended up, but I'd have loved to see where things were originally headed. I suspect it would have been less well paced, but much more interesting.

I was expecting the Angel to be some form of physical being that was trying it's best to guide Discovery towards "something" they needed to prepare them. This was just the laziest, most idiotic and disappointing reveal they could have made other than Michael herself being the damn thing.

Any hope of a genuinely good ending to this season went out the window.

 

[BillJ]

Any hope of a genuinely good ending to this season went out the window.

I think they can turn it around (don't have a clue how?), but they only have four episodes to do it.

 

[Lord Garth]

I hope during the third season Michelle Paradise stays from start to finish.

 

[Kemaiku]

I think they can turn it around (don't have a clue how?), but they only have four episodes to do it.

The real Red Angel appears to strike her mother down for copyright theft (in a cringe worthy meta joke) only to have the Enterprise appear and zap it Shaka-God style?

 

[BillJ]

I hope during the third season Michelle Paradise stays from start to finish.

It can't hurt the show to have some stability in the writers room at some point.