Gene gets much bad talk around here....

[JonnyQuest037]

Also, just, y'know, the sexual politics of a woman in Starfleet longing for a dominant man to take over her life, and then Khan doing just that and she falls for him after he's borderline assaulted her? That's, um. That's some misogynistic sexual politics there, and they're not all Khan's politics; a lot of that is the narrative's politics -- it depicts McGiver's submissiveness uncritically.

I dunno. I don't think I've ever viewed that scene where Khan literally crushes McGivers' hand until she's crumpled onto the floor and she still asks him to let her stay as anything but twisted and pathetic. "Space Seed" certainly doesn't portray it as a normal or healthy relationship.

Also, if Gene was a rapist, which there's a strong chance it was him that raped Grace Lee Whitney, then I tend to think that outweighs most of the good he did.

YUP.

Ultimately, I'm more inclined to take the broad strokes of "Gene's Vision" than I am to take Gene himself, or the more detailed "in the future nobody fears death and nobody feels pain ever under any circumstances not even when their loved ones die" bullshit.

Well said! The utopia we saw in TOS is one that I can generally believe in. The one we saw in the early seasons of TNG? Nope.

 

[scotpens]

. . . The 1960s was a decade of rapid change, so apparently that stuff was okay by the time "The Cage" was mixed into "The Menagerie" and aired in late 1966 (though Pike's "wild little animal" line was deleted).

No, it wasn't. Not in the original broadcast of "The Menagerie," anyway.

Yeah, I mean, on the one hand, it's cool that they portrayed someone who wasn't white as being "genetically superior."

On the other hand, I think Khan in "Space Seed" is still a problematic character. First off, it's a Mexican actor of European descent playing a Sikh, which gives the impression that the producers essentially lumped all non-Anglo people together into one big pile.

Or they cast a talented and charismatic actor who could believably sell the character.

In any case, the episode doesn't really tell us much about Khan's ethnicity or religion. The only on-screen canonical reference to Khan being a Sikh is a single offhand remark by Lt. McGivers: "From the northern India area, I'd guess. Probably a Sikh. They were the most fantastic warriors."

 

[CorporalCaptain]

To the extent that Gene imagined a world where the things that make us fully human were no longer present (e.g., nobody mourning for their loved ones anymore), Gene was a fool trying to use his fiction to escape the pain he had caused his family in his own life.

I don't know about the fool part here. That's bit climatically on the nose for me, and I can't even see that makes sense to call someone a fool in that context.

But about every other point you made in that post, yeah, pretty much.

 

[Sci]

Yeah, I mean, on the one hand, it's cool that they portrayed someone who wasn't white as being "genetically superior."

On the other hand, I think Khan in "Space Seed" is still a problematic character. First off, it's a Mexican actor of European descent playing a Sikh, which gives the impression that the producers essentially lumped all non-Anglo people together into one big pile.

Or they cast a talented and charismatic actor

Of course! But casting someone from a totally different ethnicity from the character is inherently problematic at best.

who could believably sell the character.

Yeah, that Mexican accent is real believable for someone from the Indian subcontinent.

 

[fireproof78]

One of the stupidest assumptions ever made in Trek history was the ethnicity of Khan.

 

[David cgc]

In any case, the episode doesn't really tell us much about Khan's ethnicity or religion. The only on-screen canonical reference to Khan being a Sikh is a single offhand remark by Lt. McGivers: "From the northern India area, I'd guess. Probably a Sikh. They were the most fantastic warriors."

And her painting of him in a turban. And his name being "Singh." All circumstantial, but strongly suggestive taken together that the show was trying to communicate that he was Indian by repeatedly indicating that he was Indian.

 

[XCV330]

Unintentional and unconscious. But a man of his times. Who at least envisioned the nations of earth all finally cooperating as a glorious UESPA!

Sometimes I wonder what we are.all gonna be pilloried for in 50 years. Seriously. Where all the people will commonly just think us immoral about something. Maybe eating meat. Maybe destroying the climate. Yet most of us go about those two endeavors not conscious ly meaning harm. Maybe burning up all the petrochemicals. People are of their time, except for the very rare individual here and there.

I think we are in a bit of a very odd time that threatens to go neo-victorian as a backlash to all the abuses, but the truth there were real abuses that went beyond the norm of what was considered acceptable even in their time.

 

[BillJ]

Unintentional and unconscious. But a man of his times. Who at least envisioned the nations of earth all finally cooperating as a glorious UESPA!

Sometimes I wonder what we are.all gonna be pilloried for in 50 years. Seriously. Where all the people will commonly just think us immoral about something. Maybe eating meat. Maybe destroying the climate. Yet most of us go about those two endeavors not conscious ly meaning harm. Maybe burning up all the petrochemicals. People are of their time, except for the very rare individual here and there.

Roddenberry was a poor individual even by the standards of the time. Unless you think rape and theft were smiled upon?

 

[137th Gebirg]

Ironic how a thread originally designed to question why bad things are said about Roddenberry actually succeeded in making me like him even less as a human being than I did before... Mission Accomplished!

 

[fireproof78]

Well said! The utopia we saw in TOS is one that I can generally believe in. The one we saw in the early seasons of TNG? Nope.

Same here. I think the thin façade of TNG's utopia made it far less appealing to me as a viewer. I think that the efforts of newer shows to flesh that out ended up exposing that paradise wasn't all that it appeared to be.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

The only reason ethnicity cross casting is considered problematic is that many pairings of that have a history of being used to demean one of them. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with it.

 

[Odo]

Not as damning as some of the other things mentioned here (far from it), but the fact that Roddenberry put Wesley in TNG as a stand-in for himself - he was basically implying that he was a genius like Wesley was (or at least as Wesley was meant to come across as). That always rubbed me the wrong way.

 

[Noname Given]

Yeah, that Mexican accent is real believable for someone from the Indian subcontinent.

In the same way that Patrick Stewart's obviously Oxford English accent really helps sell the fact that Jean-Luc Picard is a Frenchman.

 

[Sci]

Yeah, that Mexican accent is real believable for someone from the Indian subcontinent.

In the same way that Patrick Stewart's obviously Oxford English accent really helps sell the fact that Jean-Luc Picard is a Frenchman.

I mean, yeah, but I also don't think that the power dynamics are the same at all. One is a white American lens that treats brown people as a threatening, interchangeable commonality; the other is a white American lens that treats all Europeans as English (and therefore depicts them with levels of social prestige and empathy not seen in depictions of threatening brown people). They're both forms of stereotypes, but one is far more disempowering and dehumanizing.

 

[Odo]

You bring up some good points Sci, but I want to point out that there are Sikhs from Mexico and that there have been South Asians living in Mesoamerica for 500 years, since the European invasion and colonization.

I like multicultural diversity within single individuals in Trek, since so many people today (including myself) come from multicultural backgrounds. A Sikh from Mexico doesn't sound strange to me. Not that Khan is a great example, for some of the reasons you mention.

 

[The Wormhole]

Not as damning as some of the other things mentioned here (far from it), but the fact that Roddenberry put Wesley in TNG as a stand-in for himself - he was basically implying that he was a genius like Wesley was (or at least as Wesley was meant to come across as). That always rubbed me the wrong way.

Meh, many writers often insert proxies of themselves into their stories, if not as the main character, then as a supporting character who is considered The Best, A Genius, or some combination thereof.

 

[CuriousCaitian]

I've never been sure what to think of Gene, largely because a lot of what's said about him is opinion, and subjective, and few sources are ever quoted. For example, many people in this thread have alluded to his ill-judged ideas of utopia and human perfection - people no longer mourn loss, for example - but what are the sources?

All that said, having just read the season one TNG Writer's and Director's Guide (while there are references to improved humans, they're certainly not to the extreme extent mentioned upthread) it's pretty clear his attitudes toward women were...poor, to say the least. Not Ian Fleming bad, but certainly enough to instill a queasy feeling.

Consciously, subconsciously, or degrees of both, he was a hypocrite, but does that detract from Trek for me? No, because he was never a prominent figure for me; the idea itself mattered far more than who first germinated it. if it were proven he was a sexual predator, however, that would be a little more difficult.

Oh, and every writer puts something of themselves, and those around them, into their characters, and any saying otherwise are lying. The trick is not to make it obvious.

 

[Odo]

Yeah, his views on women weren't great. And for sure, every writer puts themselves in their character - I just found his Wesley self-insert a bit silly.

For more on what Roddenberry himself thought about Star Trek, rather than what others think he thought, here's the third revision of the bible for the original series:
https://www.bu.edu/clarion/guides/Star_Trek_Writers_Guide.pdf

Some of it seems forward thinking: "As with all female Crewman aboard, during duty hours she is treated co-equal with males of the same rank, and the same level of efficient performance is expected."

Some of it is certainly not: "Sulu is contemporary American in speech and manner. In fact, his attitude toward Asians is that they seem to him rather "inscrutable". Sulu fancies himself more of an old-world "D'Artangnan" than anything else. "

 

[JonnyQuest037]

For example, many people in this thread have alluded to his ill-judged ideas of utopia and human perfection - people no longer mourn loss, for example - but what are the sources?

...The show itself? Comments from the staff in The Next Generation Companion?

All that said, having just read the season one TNG Writer's and Director's Guide (while there are references to improved humans, they're certainly not to the extreme extent mentioned upthread) it's pretty clear his attitudes toward women were...poor, to say the least.

"BEVERLY CRUSHER – Leslie's 35-year-old mother. She serves as the chief medical officer on the Enterprise. If it were not for her intelligence, personality, beauty, and the fact that she has a natural walk of a striptease queen, Capt. Picard might not have agreed to her request that Leslie observe bridge activities; therefore letting her daughter's intelligence carry events further."

 

[Odo]

^ Regarding the original casting call for the Dr. Beverly Crusher character posted above - Gene left that bit about the "striptease queen" in the series bible, even after they cast Gates McFadden! But someone (another producer?) wrote on their copy of the guide: Can we lose this sexist bit? It doesn't resemble Gates' characterization in any way! (pdf page 39 https://www.roddenberry.com/media/vault/TNG-WritersDirectorsGuide.pdf )

Also, I've just learned that (allegedly) David Gerrold produced the series bible, but Gene took credit. (from the Joel Engel Myth and Man book). Whether this is true or not, I'm not sure - but these definitely sound like Gene's ideas to me. Maybe Gerrold organized his thoughts into a formal document for him.