Is STAR TREK Inherently Dark?

[Qonundrum]

Picard isn’t really any darker than what we see in DS9.

The only difference is that characters emotionally react to negative things more. In Bermantrek nobody shows their anguish, they react to it stoically and mutedly, then they cut to a comic scene to raise the mood.

Or comedic as far as TNG was allowed to go; Roddenberry's ideal was that humans would evolve to be like Vulcans over the last 80 years. This is also reflected in DS9 and VOY, and retracted for ENT given the time period in which they were in. Berman had quite the job in trying to keep true to that WHILE providing engaging material. If conflict doesn't come from within the crew then exterior baddies are necessary and unlike TOS nobody wanted bickering, as by season 2 almost everyone hated Pulaski. It's amazing Gene authorized her crotchety side.

 

[Lord Garth]

At some point, I should really create a thread dedicated to all the quotes in TOS and Early-TNG where someone talks about the state of Humanity and/or the Federation. Everything from when Gene Roddenberry was in direct control. I won't count Mid-TNG because he was more of a figurehead who gave the rubber stamp at that point.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I don't think it was just about Roddenberry. Even DS9 and Voy tried to keep the mood from getting too dark or intense by having the conversational beat of sitcoms. Every emotional moment is followed up by some one liner quip or mood lightener. Dark episodes often end on an upbeat note.

 

[Lord Garth]

I think how dark DSC and PIC are has been exaggerated. Maybe there might've been a case for it during the first season of Disco. But definitely not the second season of DSC or Picard.

Without spoiling anything, PIC has moments of darkness, but it's not the entire series. If that's all people are seeing, they're not seeing the actual show. Just a colored view of it. Is it darker than TNG? Yes. Is it darker than the absolute darkest of DS9? Not really. I think it's safe to say at least that.

 

[Vger23]

It's really dark. Like imagine Alien 3 had a baby with the ending of The Mist.

That's how dark Star Trek is.

 

[Lance]

TOS was far more willing to acknowledge humanity's darker sides.

It wasn't shy about those aspects. But, it also acknowledged the ability to move past them as well.

Very true. And quite apart from obvious things like "The Enemy Within" (a human can not live without both light and dark), in terms of humanity as a whole, we see correctional facilities for the mentally ill in "Dagger of the Mind" and "Whom Gods Destroy" (and Star Trek III, after McCoy is locked up), and supposedly enlightened future humans like Mudd, Merrick, and Captain Ronald Tracey are proof enough that not everything is hunky-dory with human beings in this allegedly utopian future. Even Kirk enters moments of psychosis in episodes like "Obsession" and "The Children Shall Lead".

The idea that humans no longer act like modern humans really only entered the picture with TNG, where 'Roddenberry's Rules' included no conflict, humans not needing to grieve after death, etc etc. There are moments in even TNG when modern hunan frailties rear themselves, but by and large it shows a very skewed perspective on humanity in Star Trek's time. And even then, we occasionally see humans acting differently to Roddenberry's utopia. Why would Thaddium Okona become a privateer seeking personal fortune in a post-scarcity society where he can presumably have anything he wants? Why would Tasha Yar's colony planet descend to violent brutality? Because humans are flawed, and humans are dark. The thing is, on TNG, we only saw the world from the comfortable beige chaise-lounges on the bridge of the Enterprise, a far cry from the 'reality' of what's going on out there in the universe. One of TNG's most moving moments to me is where Ensign Ro takes Picard to see what the Cardassians did to Bajor, and gives her tunic to a child. It shows just how far away from the sharp end of things the Enterprise crew generally are.

 

[fireproof78]

I think how dark DSC and PIC are has been exaggerated. Maybe there might've been a case for it during the first season of Disco. But definitely not the second season of DSC or Picard.

Without spoiling anything, PIC has moments of darkness, but it's not the entire series. If that's all people are seeing, they're not seeing the actual show. Just a colored view of it. Is it darker than TNG? Yes. Is it darker than the absolute darkest of DS9? Not really. I think it's safe to say at least that.

I think one aspect of new Trek is the longer form narrative storytelling as well as the fact that it is willing to sit in the discomfort of difficult emotions. Episodic shows allowed a lot more comfort at the end, while newer shows are more willing to engage in ambiguity.

It's uncomfortable and also necessary.

 

[Midquest]

I think one aspect of new Trek is the longer form narrative storytelling as well as the fact that it is willing to sit in the discomfort of difficult emotions. Episodic shows allowed a lot more comfort at the end, while newer shows are more willing to engage in ambiguity.

It's uncomfortable and also necessary.

The way I think about it, (as one example among many) TNG engaged constantly with incredibly dark and disturbing events, but the Enterprise had the luxury of warping away when the titles rolled. We went with them, and enjoyed their relative paradise. Meanwhile, the people who stayed behind had to answer questions like, "Where will these people live now?" "What do we do with this unhinged admiral?" "How deep does the conspiracy go? "What political fallout comes from this decision?" "Who will speak for these people now?" "What do we tell their family?" and so on. The darkness and difficulty was always present, but not always presented.

What I appreciate about these newer shows is, as you say, that they are willing to sit with the trouble. They sit with the trouble that has always been there, and in a way earn the more paradisal notes that the franchise likes to play. Episodic Trek produces a whole lot of moral greys, loose ends, and nasty situations for the sake of story; series like Picard are taking that mountain of troubles as a real fact of the secondary universe and examining it. Personally, I think that's an intellectually responsible way to tell these stories.

 

[Lance]

I think one aspect of new Trek is the longer form narrative storytelling as well as the fact that it is willing to sit in the discomfort of difficult emotions. Episodic shows allowed a lot more comfort at the end, while newer shows are more willing to engage in ambiguity.

It's uncomfortable and also necessary.

The way I think about it, (as one example among many) TNG engaged constantly with incredibly dark and disturbing events, but the Enterprise had the luxury of warping away when the titles rolled. We went with them, and enjoyed their relative paradise. Meanwhile, the people who stayed behind had to answer questions like, "Where will these people live now?" "What do we do with this unhinged admiral?" "How deep does the conspiracy go? "What political fallout comes from this decision?" "Who will speak for these people now?" "What do we tell their family?" and so on. The darkness and difficulty was always present, but not always presented.

What I appreciate about these newer shows is, as you say, that they are willing to sit with the trouble. They sit with the trouble that has always been there, and in a way earn the more paradisal notes that the franchise likes to play. Episodic Trek produces a whole lot of moral greys, loose ends, and nasty situations for the sake of story; series like Picard are taking that mountain of troubles as a real fact of the secondary universe and examining it. Personally, I think that's an intellectually responsible way to tell these stories.

I like that. "The secondary universe", we could easily have scratched beneath the surface of any previous Trek to find the grey in situations, but until now our primary protagonists have always been Starfleet. So now, at last, we get a wider perspective.

 

[RandyS]

I think one aspect of new Trek is the longer form narrative storytelling as well as the fact that it is willing to sit in the discomfort of difficult emotions. Episodic shows allowed a lot more comfort at the end, while newer shows are more willing to engage in ambiguity.

It's uncomfortable and also necessary.

Why is it necessary?

 

[fireproof78]

Why is it necessary?

Because I think that in current culture there is a strong desire for simple answers, and life is not that way. While I am generally opposed to education through mass media I think the ability to sit in ambiguity is an important skill that is less focused upon in day to day activity. So, having a show that provides that challenge is building an important skill, to my mind.

 

[Orphalesion]

Picard isn’t really any darker than what we see in DS9.

The only difference is that characters emotionally react to negative things more. In Bermantrek nobody shows their anguish, they react to it stoically and mutedly, then they cut to a comic scene to raise the mood.

^That's the main thing. Even in DS9 there are quite often situations when bad or horrible things happen, but the show mostly just spends a scene or two on them and then we carry on. Even with Kira, who's past as a victim of genocide and as a terrorist defined here, it was often kind of understated. Or when emotional turmoil happened it was done away in one or two episodes, like with O'Brien and the time he was mind-raped into believing he had spent decades in prison and killed his cell mate. He was haunted by it for one episode, the next it was over.
While the more modern shows tend to be more realistic in the way they affect characters.

 

[Qonundrum]

I think how dark DSC and PIC are has been exaggerated. Maybe there might've been a case for it during the first season of Disco. But definitely not the second season of DSC or Picard.

Without spoiling anything, PIC has moments of darkness, but it's not the entire series. If that's all people are seeing, they're not seeing the actual show. Just a colored view of it. Is it darker than TNG? Yes. Is it darker than the absolute darkest of DS9? Not really. I think it's safe to say at least that.

Perhaps. But some of the gore is a bit more frequent, and consistent, compared to the prior record, despite being a one-off, achieved in TNG S1's "Conspiracy" with Remmick being turned into a meaty stew with lots of tasty crabmeat as Hors d'œuvres.

Then again, loading a Klingon ship with tribbles is actually quite grizzly as they'd suffocate the Klingons and then the ship would explore IF there was enough food to keep the little fritters from dying first, they aren't from Gideon, much less Magicunicornville where they live on forever. They never really said how tribbles excrete so there's a missed opportunity there for modern day comedic effect. It's not unlike watching the fairly tame comedy "Planes Trains and Automobiles" when it first came out, watching decades worth of fart jokes in later comedies, then rewatching the "Planes" movie and wondering why there aren't any "pffft" gags, right on cue, in that movie...

 

[FormerLurker]

Tribbles don't excrete. They're the cleanup crew of their biosphere, eating anything that doesn't walk away, and storing that energy for use as either reproduction, or food for larger predators. The tribbles themselves are their excretion, as they must disperse the energy they take in so they don't explode, so they reproduce to disperse the energy, while totally converting any and everything they eat to stored energy with no waste.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

I don't think Star Trek is inherently dark. TOS has a lot of action, dark stuff at times, but overall, through my limited experience with it, it seems to be an optimistic show. They have problems with the Klingons but it's not an all-out war. Kang was crying that Kirk broke the rules of the treaty.

And TNG went in an even more softer direction. Yeah, they had dark episodes like the Borg but that was to shake things up for a brief moment, to create some suspense before our heroes saved the day.

I'm not too familiar with DS9 but from what I've seen of it from all the seasons it has a darker vibe to it. The focus on the Jews and the Nazis, then the Dominion War made it feel less like Star Trek and more like it's own science fiction series to me. Maybe if this war occurred in TNG it would feel more like a natural progression but everything in DS9 seemed confined to the show itself. I felt like they should have had Picard and the Enterprise play a significant role in appearing in DS9 to drive home how huge this war was and how significant it was to the Star Trek story as a whole. Were any of the TNG films taking place during the Dominion War? If it was so big, shouldn't the movies have been about that?

 

[AresB]

I felt like they should have had Picard and the Enterprise play a significant role in appearing in DS9 to drive home how huge this war was and how significant it was to the Star Trek story as a whole. Were any of the TNG films taking place during the Dominion War? If it was so big, shouldn't the movies have been about that?

They wanted to keep the ENT-E in the movies, DS9 to stand on its own feet, and (perhaps most importantly) to not pay the TNG actors' substantial salaries so they didn't bring them back to the small screen.
The Dominion War happens between First Contact and Insurrection. The latter makes some references to it, but not too much so as not to confuse casual viewers. And of course there are novels and comics that cover the flagship's deeds during the war.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

They wanted to keep the ENT-E in the movies, DS9 to stand on its own feet, and (perhaps most importantly) to not pay the TNG actors' substantial salaries so they didn't bring them back to the small screen.
The Dominion War happens between First Contact and Insurrection. The latter makes some references to it, but not too much so as not to confuse casual viewers. And of course there are novels and comics that cover the flagship's deeds during the war.

Thanks for the link about the novels and comics. I'll be checking that out.

I get the practical realities of why we didn't see Patrick Stewart and the rest in DS9, and why the DS9 storyline didn't carry over significantly into the TNG movies. But purely as a fan and as a member of the audience, I felt it hurt the overall Star Trek saga. It truly felt like DS9 was this spin-off and this great war that threatened the Federation was contained into this tiny corner of Star Trek.
I really disliked the direction that TNG took once it got to the movies and the Enterprise became a battle ship without the apartment complex-like nature of the original. Yes, it was pretty crazy when you think about it, but that was the identity of the ship and the show. The newer Enterprise in FC and on felt too different and not in a good way. It's not a ship that I would like to be on. The Enterprise in TOS films? Those were fun from what I remember. The original from TMP felt like this massive place to explore, it felt truly like this vast space ship. The one in TWOK was cool too.
TNG show Enterprise? Aside from the possibility of getting assimilated or vaporized, it looked like a great place to live and also get the chance to explore along the way.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

more like it's own science fiction series to me

To some extent, each series is its own thing, as it should be. They share certain common assumptions about the nature of the universe and the place of humanity therein, and they share major events in common. Often the series will refer to one another and cross over. Although there is a lot of continuity within Star Trek, its strength as a storytelling device is not in the unity of its universe, but in the flexibility it has with regard to the types of stories it tells. Star Trek can capably cross many genres in a way that other science fiction franchises do not.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

With fiction, sky's the limit. You can cross into as many different genres as you want, as long as you have financial backing and the resources to produce it.

For my own experience, I don't think DS9 was successful in feeling like a continuation of Star Trek straight from TNG, in-universe, time-wise. TNG set up the Cardassian-Bajor conflict, but once I started watching DS9 it felt more like a space station mall with all these quirky people passing through The look itself didn't feel congruent with Starfleet designs because the space station was actually a Cardassian design. In-story I get it, but visually it felt off.

I ended up tuning out. I did catch later episodes when Sisko became a stronger or "cooler" character which seemed to coincide with the shaved head and goatee look. My favorite episodes, that also felt more "Star Trek" to me were ones away from the space station. Like Jake searching for adult Sisko, or when Sisko was on Earth and worried about the conspiracy of changelings.
The Klingons went from being these intimidating, coarse, warriors to some affable band. The aged Kor and gang are funny old guys. Martok's making jokes about married life, and Alexander is a bumbling fool but instead of the Klingon's killing him for insubordination or kicking his ass off the ship, they just laugh it off. It worked within the confines of the episode, becasue it's meant to show that while the crew more or less accept Alexander, it's Worf that's embarassed. But overall the shift in tone seemed inconsistent with what we'd seen before.

Worf can't get with Grilka because of his dishonor, but she has no problem getting with a Ferengi and marrying him? Again, it made for a cute episode, one of my favorites because of the character of Grilka, but it just seemed off. It felt much more sitcom-like to me.

 

[fireproof78]

For my own experience, I don't think DS9 was successful in feeling like a continuation of Star Trek straight from TNG, in-universe, time-wise.

Personally, while it took me a while to warm to DS9 I think this can be best reflected in the first episode. We have Picard meeting with Sisko and the emotional challenges that Sisko feels there. The feeling of things being "off" strikes me now as being very deliberate because Sisko is off. He is a man who is struggling with his sense of self, his new life aboard the station, and new role as the Emissary.

Worf can't get with Grilka because of his dishonor, but she has no problem getting with a Ferengi and marrying him?

Yes, because cultural expectations for Klingons are different from Ferengi. And Quark demonstrates that at the end, which Gowron acknowledges.

I agree that on a very surface level these elements feel very disparate but I think it is deliberate.