Spoilers Let’s talk about the destruction of Trek utopia…

[Lord Garth]

Picard is exactly like that. It's the very conceit of the show.

That's why it works. It shows that we (humans) don't need space magic tech to try and better ourselves. We can be like that now. Use the tech as a tool. Not a crutch.

In no way is this better presented than with the Trois' home. It's placed in this serene aboral landscape. They live an almost Amish-like existence, save for the bare 24th-century necessities. They've created as ideal of a life as any human could possibly ask for. But it isn't perfect. It isn't utopia. Because utopias don't exist. The word literally means "no place." They're not real.

Therefore, it's a much more positive and optimistic outlook on the future of civilization than "Well everyone's life is perfect. we're all shiny happy people thanks to space magic."

No. It's not. Picard is more than pew-pew. Picard is more than about gadgets. It's about a man in the twilight of his life trying to rescue a woman who represents the last remnants of his departed friend. It's about a man who's been disenfranchised from the organization he was once part of and has been forced into taking matters into his own hands. That's not about gadgets. That's not about pew-pew. That's human fucking drama. The people against Picard refuse to admit it because they can't get the image of the JJ Abrams films out of their heads, so now that's how they see all new Star Trek whether it's true or not. They won't even stop to consider that maybe they might be wrong. And they are wrong.

Furthermore, the main concern the Zhat Vash have are that AI will destroy everything. In present day, we don't have AI that's even remotely capable of destroying everything. But we do have humans who can drop nukes. But that's not AI. And in the 75 years we've been capable of Armageddon, no one has caused it as of yet.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The entire main theme of the season revolves around the progress of super-advanced technology. (And so does the B-plot, really.)

It's about gadgets.

All those other things are mutually exclusive.

 

[Lord Garth]

The entire main theme of the season revolves around the progress of super-advanced technology. (And so does the B-plot, really.)

It's about gadgets.

All those other things are mutually exclusive.

Do you deny that there's human drama in Picard? Yes or no.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Dystopia is a society with an unaccountable illuminati backend that subverts the will of everybody working for that society and everything it stands for.

No it isn't. A dystopia is specifically a state that is either post-apocalyptic, a society that is totalitarian or a society with great suffering, injustice and lawlessness. It is very literally a failed civilisation. Nothing in Picard comes close to a dystopia. The Federation is not totalitarian, Picard is free to openly question and criticise Starfleet and the Federation without risk of arrest. Earth is still a paradise where self-confessed drug addicts can still live a comfortable life with a roof over their heads.

Dystopia is a word very much on it's way to becoming cliche because people like yourself, use it incorrectly.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Do you deny that there's human drama in Picard? Yes or no.

Why would I deny it? Star Trek has always been a human drama. But that has nothing to do with whether or not the main theme is about technology.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Why would I deny it? Star Trek has always been a human drama. But that has nothing to do with whether or not the main theme is about technology.

I think to say the main theme of Picard is 'technology' is incredibly basic. I would say that the main theme is 'how to find meaning when you have lost everything'. The technology aspect is just a tool to explore this.

 

[SolarisOne]

1984, a novel portraying what is arguably the quintessential dystopia, is one of my favorite novels of all time, and the Federation looks nothing like it.

 

[The Old Mixer]

I'd say that the main theme is expressed by Picard in the quote that I posted here...

The future is left for us to write. And we have powerful tools...openness, optimism, and the spirit of curiosity. All they have is secrecy and fear, and fear is the great destroyer.​

The tech involved is a MacGuffin.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Every facet of the show relates back to human interaction (or not) with technology.

Soji obviously. But more her transformation of going from passively studying the effects of technology to become an active personification of it.

Raffi as the Trekish derivative of the modern "hacker girl" trope whose reliance/dependence of technology leads her down a rabbit hole that inevitably leads to her own self-destruction.

The XBs literally detaching themselves from technology in order to be reborn (and, in a way, being a opposite or reflection of Soji.)

Rios's ship is literally a living technological entity It isn't just an emergency hologram. It's a lot of different holograms working in unison (as literally depicted n the last episode) in control of all the ship's critical systems. The ship is itself a technological evolution.

And there's about a good dozen other little things.

**Heck, even Seven not allowing herself to succumb to the collective was her using the Borg technology as a tool and not a crutch.

 

[Greg Cox]

Yes a lot of people watched TNG in the 90s. That doesn't mean a show made in the 2020s would have the same success.

Exactly. The Love Boat and Charlie's Angels drew huge audiences back in the 1970s. Doesn't mean shows made in that style would be successful today.

Heck, when STAR TREK debuted, westerns and variety shows were all over TV. Doesn't mean that a reboot of GUNSMOKE, mimicking the style of the original series, would be a huge hit today.

Times change and STAR TREK doesn't not exist in a bubble outside the rest of pop culture.

 

[cooleddie74]

Watch any nuclear war movie from the 1980s. That's dystopia.

 

[Noname Given]

It draws no conclusions for me. You’re not telling me why fiction needs to be “realistic” and what even makes something “realistic”. I love TOS best as well, and it was utopian. Certainly more so than the war porn of DS9

HUGE TOS fan who saw the last few episodes of The third season first run on NBC in 1969; and if you think TOS was Utopian; my response is:

WTF were you watching; because it sure wasn't TOS. In TOS the Federation still use money; and most people were still working to get rich or obtain. power The Federation also let political concerns guide it's decisions regarding "The prime directive". That's evident in episodes like TOS S2 "Friday's Child" where it's obvious that the Federation suspended the prime directive with regard to the Capellans because they needed to mine a rare mineral to run their life support systems.

Now yes, TOS showed that Earthlings at least had for the most part grown beyond prejudice of other Earthlings; yet there was still prejudice regarding some alien species. Yes overall things were better for human beings on Earth but it was hardly a Utopian existence either on Earth or in the Federation during the 23rd century of TOS.

 

[cooleddie74]

The Mudd androids also wanted to rule over humans because they saw us as corrupt and full of impulsive decisions and bad emotions. Why would they see humanity as inferior and needing order and direction if Earth and the wider Federation were a utopian society?

 

[Mark 2000]

Well, it's not a terrible definition, but it only applies to this show at a truly absurd level of hyperbole. Seriously, dude, "subverts the will of everybody"? You know nobody's going to take that seriously. "Everything it stands for" is just as bad.

If you say so. But the Ira Behr called section 31 “Why is Earth a paradise in the twenty-fourth century? Well, maybe it’s because there’s someone watching over it and doing the nasty stuff that no one wants to think about.” Nasty stuff being a necessity is the definition of pessimism. What does what Kirk and Picard’s deeds and speeches mean if everything they do is followed by a secret, unelected, inculpable organization doing the opposite? Conspiracies are anti democratic and often racist. And here we have a diaspora of people in the Romulans experiencing a tragedy and are not appreciated or wanted, but they are also infiltrating civilization and causing major upheaval. It’s literally Czarist fever dreams come true. I honestly find all of this offensive as a member of a belittled diaspora who has suffered from this kind of thing. “They’re coming to get us” fantasies are the thing of kristallnachtes and holocausts and Star Trek is currently telling us they are possible. I’m sorry, but this kind of story telling is not for me. And I don’t care if TNG: Conspiracy did something similar. Pod people stories aren’t the same thing and even if they were it was a one episode blip that they dumped, not the whole show arc.

 

[cooleddie74]

No, in most cases nasty stuff that no one wants to think about but needs to be done is called "life." The excesses of Section 31 were war crimes and evil, but that doesn't mean that "nasty stuff no one wants to think about" always equals terrible things.

 

[Mark 2000]

No, in most cases nasty stuff that no one wants to think about but needs to be done is called "life." The excesses of Section 31 were war crimes and evil, but that doesn't mean that "nasty stuff no one wants to think about" always equals terrible things.

Sorry, dude, but that’s something a fascist would say. I know you’re just saying it to defend yourself, but really take in what it means. I’m out. Goodnight.

 

[cooleddie74]

 

[fireproof78]

No, in most cases nasty stuff that no one wants to think about but needs to be done is called "life." The excesses of Section 31 were war crimes and evil, but that doesn't mean that "nasty stuff no one wants to think about" always equals terrible things.

Honestly, even the day to day negotiations of politics could be considered "nasty stuff" that our heroes never have to deal with. Kirk or Picard fly off while Federation ambassadors deal with the fine print.

Regardless of what one thinks of Section 31, their existence doesn't automatically make Star Trek dystopian.

The fact that Picard deals with uncomfortable possibilities of Starfleet deciding not to spend resources on a rescue and the outcome that comes from it is not dystopian. It is a part of hard decisions of life that, apparently, Trek has spared its precious viewers from.

 

[cooleddie74]

No one wants to see how the sausage is made, they just want to feel good about eating it and think that there's no way the process should be distasteful.

 

[Noname Given]

Sorry, dude, but that’s something a fascist would say. I know you’re just saying it to defend yourself, but really take in what it means. I’m out. Goodnight.

Good Lord... Please open a book and read up on political science and the terms you're using. Nothing said in this thread so far is:

"... Something a fascist would say..."

I mean come on you know we're talking about a TV series who's primary function is to entertain. Yes Star Trek occasionally draws parallels to some real life events; but again, it's not presented as any sort of real life philosophy no matter what Gene Roddenberry might want you to believe about it.