• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What was "The Burn" and what caused it?

Ugh. You know, Michael, people can know a song without it being a plot coupon. I was excited for the season, and laswt week was an improvement. But now they're going back to old habits. We're supposed to hate Vance (who's probably going to be a villain, knowing Disco), because he wisely wants to sideline Discovery for a bit to figure out what's going on.

Like she learned nothing about respecting the chain of command over all this. Interrupts Saru, tells the Admiral why he's wrong and how the Disco crew is so special. And somehow Hugh Culber, the medical doctor who has been acting as de facto counselor to everyone decides that Burnham should talk to that distraught Barzan guy instead of doing it himself.

About the song... we do know the Federation encompassed 350 alien worlds at its peak from what Vance mentioned.
The song could have originated from a time before the Federation shrunk (aka, before the Burn).
People communicated together throughout the entire Federation, exchanged ideas, resources, technology, science, art, literature (of which music would be included).

Even after the Burn... the music could have stayed with ex Federation members which became part of cultural heritage (a well known 'lullaby' - or at least it may have turned into it after long enough time).. but because it was made so long ago, people cannot remember where it originated from (though I'd imagine that if this was the case, then some record would exist in the Federation database - and ex Federation member worlds would probably STILL have older Federation databases leading to just up until the Burn... or at least, up until when long range subspace sensors/communications stopped working - and when Willa didn't find anything relating to it in the Federation HQ database, THAT could have triggered the notion that its a bit 'unusual').

Also, I didn't like Willa's explanation that 'some things get in the ether'.
Ether is a highly unsientific notion... why would Willa use that nonsense for a description in the 32nd century?
I know she's not a science officer, but come on, some logical reasoning could have led her to the same hypothetical description I just wrote about.

I don't understand why would people hate Vance.
He's from a time when (from his perspective) the Federation got out a messy Temporal War which lasted a good portion of the 30th century which was followed by the Burn.
I didn't agree with him on reassigning the crew, but on conducting debriefings and examining ships/crew's logs, yes (only sensible).

Oh and just because Discovery had Lorca as the bad guy in season 1, it doesn't mean Vance will turn out to be one.

As for Burnham having not much respect for the chain of command... well, she WAS on her own for a full year and she DID let go of Discovery crew during that time, but to be fair, both Saru and Burnham could have mentioned that this is what may make her seem 'abrupt' and 'dis-respective' at times but otherwise she doesn't exactly mean to be... she's merely voicing her opinion (and would it kill Discovery writers to make other characters similarly observant/knowing as Michael is? She's not the only one capable of being the voice of reason or stating the obvious).

To be fair, I didn't like how the writers contradicted themselves twice now with using Burnham.
First it was Culber (or Pollard) who were supposed to accompany Adira to Trill... I'm thinking Culber could have easily done what Burnham did and provide support for Adira.

Same in this episode with the seed ship. Burnham asks for Nhan to accompany them on an away mission because there was a Barzan family on board... and then Culber (again) asks Burnham to talk to Attis (and Nhan, who is apparently of the same species can't make the connection?).
I like MB, but the writers hadn't used her correctly in these instances.
 
I like Vance. He's prudent, he's smart and capable. Open-minded, too, compared to some Starfleet admirals. But, since Burnham disagrees with him he's almost certainly going to later be shown to be either:
1. Wrong
2. Bad, and also wrong

They even called out how much Burnham takes on, then they started handing her duties that really belonged to someone else in the crew.

For a brief, shining moment we had MB happy, and SMG able to really shine. Once they get to Starfleet and someone tells her no, she's back to the same person she was in the pilot.
 
I like Vance. He's prudent, he's smart and capable. Open-minded, too, compared to some Starfleet admirals. But, since Burnham disagrees with him he's almost certainly going to later be shown to be either:
1. Wrong
2. Bad, and also wrong
Wrong about what?
 
I don't think Vance is going to be the "Bad Guy" per se. But I do think he's holding back on the Burn. He knows more, but is just toeing the line that there are only theories but no evidence to back any of them up.

My guess is that it has something to do with the TCW. Maybe there was an incursion from further in the future by a faction which decided to disrupt this timeline. And Vance doesn't trust the Discovery crew yet to reveal what they know so far.
 
The Prophets, in their celestial temple, transcend all of time and space. Maybe this melody is their warning that the Pah Wraiths are free again or heralding the return of the Sisko or a new emissary (Burnham?)...
 
Last edited:
How do you know about a shortage? Earth has plenty as stated by the Earth Defense gal...

Earth may have enough dilithium to sustain its OWN needs, but not those of the entire Federation. So even if Earth rejoined the UFP and turned over all of its stash, it still may not be enough.
 
Everyone who doubts or contradicts Burnham is either shown to be wrong about what they want or believe, or they are the bad guy. If Burnham doesn't like what you say, you are wrong.
You just described a lot of main characters from a lot of series, including previous Star Trek series.

He's yet to be wrong yet though.
 
Anyone who disagrees is wrong. Except wasn't that being false the main lesson of S1? I can't remember.

I wouldn't mind if she were more . . . likable. She was for a couple eps there. Sigh.

I think Adm. was actually lax. Was even receiving intel reports in front of "1,000 year old people." In the star trek world, it's very likely they're shape shifters or Organians or mind altering thing of the week, moreso than real starfleet officers.
 
Everyone who doubts or contradicts Burnham is either shown to be wrong about what they want or believe, or they are the bad guy. If Burnham doesn't like what you say, you are wrong.
So she's the 23rd century version (well 32nd century now) of Jean-Luc Picard. What's your problem?
 
Earth may have enough dilithium to sustain its OWN needs, but not those of the entire Federation. So even if Earth rejoined the UFP and turned over all of its stash, it still may not be enough.

It was established in Episode 3 that Earth doesn't even use its dilithium.
Why would they need to?
Power cells exist in this century the size of a coin that should easily be able to supply all of people's needs and wants.
Advanced form of fusion technology could do the job... as could Geothermal.
Seriosuly, why would Earth need to use M/AM for power generation?
 
Antimatter is not a source of power. It's just a pretty convenient way of storing power in concentrated form. Planets might prefer to distribute. Then again, perhaps not.

Would power cells the size of coin, or warp engines the size of walnut, be dilithium-free? Nothing really establishes either as being that.

We have yet to learn how any dilithium survives at all. Or did it all go inert and the revert, meaning that only the bits involved in regulating annihilation were blown to pieces? Or is it all inert by default, and the bits in M/AM reactors need to be "energized" as the usual terminology goes, and this energizing universally failed, resulting in loss of ships and reactors but not of dilithium? Is the current shortage merely the same as the pre-Burn shortage?

Since the Burn is not just a mystery but also a secret, we're rather certain to learn more in the next few episodes. Is it going to hold up to scrutiny? Surprisingly, just about everything in S3 so far has. S1 and S2 were messy heaps of contradictions, but either on issues that did not matter (exact roles of personnel aboard a ship whose skipper revels in chaos), or then on hugely important issues that did not really need to be resolved after all (the Red Angel / Red Signs business). Both suffered from discontinuities in writing. S3 supposedly does not, and may be benefiting significantly.

Timo Saloniemi
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top