For sensationalism, not the cause of Romulan refugees.
Picard: Is it really that dark?
- Thread starter Charles Phipps
- Start date
For sensationalism, not the cause of Romulan refugees.
Apparently the word utopia gets thrown around a lot with TNG. However, how much do we really see of the Federation and its surroundings during TNG?
Everything seems to be fine on the Enterprise and apparently on Earth too but there are places where things suck. Federation colony in Turkana IV, government fell apart resulting what we see in 'Legacy'. Meanwhile Cardassians are robbing Bajor of just about everything they have. Just because the flagship of the Federation is doing great does that make TNG an utopia?
Everything seems to be fine on the Enterprise and apparently on Earth too but there are places where things suck. Federation colony in Turkana IV, government fell apart resulting what we see in 'Legacy'. Meanwhile Cardassians are robbing Bajor of just about everything they have. Just because the flagship of the Federation is doing great does that make TNG an utopia?
It doesn't but it is often held to that, rather impossible, standard and then used a club to bludgeon new Trek with for not being warm, and ideal and utopic in its presentation.
I get that people want this warm place and have that sense that no matter what the good guys will win out. I like that too, but I also love the awareness that these are supposed to be real people with real needs and real emotions and the capacity to be really affected by an ongoing string of attacks, and demands, and traumas. I can't imagine that burnout is only limited to current humanity.
I think part of the thing is TNG was always visiting areas other than the Federation with the exception of Risa and Starfleet Academy. So, really, the Federation feels like the "Hotel in Space" that was the Enterprise-D. We actually saw way-way more of Earth on Deep Space Nine than we ever saw on TNG.
The funny thing is that the majority of Picard takes place in the former Neutral Zone. Pretty much the "Borderlands" that are a lawless Mos Eisley meets Space Vegas sort of place (or the Terminus Systems for Mass Effect). A place that is meant to be a wild frontier and without the rule of the Federation's law.
Which is ALWAYS how Star Trek does it.
The funny thing is that the majority of Picard takes place in the former Neutral Zone. Pretty much the "Borderlands" that are a lawless Mos Eisley meets Space Vegas sort of place (or the Terminus Systems for Mass Effect). A place that is meant to be a wild frontier and without the rule of the Federation's law.
Which is ALWAYS how Star Trek does it.
Picard is a bit closer to DS9 than to TNG. Of course, the straight line to Picard doesn't go through TNG so expecting a TNG style sensibility when there is a ton of history that has impacted the Federation since "All Good Things" and Picard is unreasonable, at best.
Also, it does bear reminding that a lot of what happens is outside the Federation. The only negative I can see in the Federation is that they opted, after suffering great tragedy, not to try and help the Romulans and to ban synths. Which is pretty dang consistent with how the Federation tends to overreact based upon given information, i.e. genetic engineering, holograms, etc. The only thing Picard does is point a great big light at these things that are normally glossed over with a sensible chuckle and a "Engage, Warp factor 5."
So weird, general audiences, who are not Star Trek fans, get that TNG, Star Trek was Utopian, but for certain Trek fans it's trivial.
Star Trek, in particular TNG was to give us something to aspire to, despite our mistakes and failings there was something inherently good, and noble about the human race and one day we would move past these weaknesses to be something better. Which sets our sights on loftier goals to engage the unknown possibilities of existence. Questions like yours gives me a sad realization there's an ever increasing part of Trekdom who likes taking a dump on the concept because their brains will never wrap their pessimistic thoughts on it.
There are so many dystopian SciFi shows whirling into the toilet bowl of sh*t you crave, why is it so important to say what Star Trek established needs to be disputed or examined through a fine, tooth comb for it to be true???
Really? Dial it down a bit.
I'm not sure if I didn't make my point clear enough or am I misunderstanding your post but for me TNG is about humanity getting better. I don't need a dark atmospere in every scene, the bright future feels a lot better. There might have to be some ugly elements in a story to make it work but hopefully it all turns out for the best. =)
TOS is also about humanity getting better. It just acknowledges that there is dark aspects but can be worked through. The thing about TNG is that humanity is supposed to start better and stay better and never stray, which strikes me as quite a bit unrealistic.
Brightness comes from the challenges overcome.
Brightness comes from the challenges overcome.
A common theme in TOS is that utopia is in fact undesirable as it leads to stagnation and ruin. In TNG, utopia is what everyone is supposed to aspire to achieve.
Even then, there's a very good argument that TNG has a series-long story arc that "Humanity thinks its achieved utopia but encounters with the Borg and Cardassians expose that it's not as enlightened as it thinks it is."
SF Debris' best moment was probably the FIRST CONTACT review where he says you can draw a straight line from Picard laughing off Q's assertions of humanity still being violent to Picard ranting about how he wants the Borg dead.
Last edited:
The utopia only refers to the Federation. No one ever said that the Cardasians/Klingons/Romulans/Gorn/Tholians/Sheliac/pre-membership Bajorans/Telarians (sp?)/Kziniti/Tzenkethi/etc. were living in luxury.
Interesting discussion. If I were a bit more awake, I'd make some cogent points about the respective time periods the shows were/are made in and how that zeitgeist effects both the shows themselves and how they are regarded.
Maybe tomorrow.
Maybe tomorrow.
Data dead. --> Came from Nemesis
Romulus destroyed. --> Came from Star Trek (2009)
Federation changed because of War. --> Came from DS9
Picard having a terminal illness. --> Came from "All Good Things"
Picard didn't create these situations. That's just the state it found things in.
As far as the times they were made:
"All Good Things" --> 1994, Clinton Era
DS9 --> 1993-1999, Clinton Era
Nemesis --> 2002, Bush Era
Star Trek (2009) --> Obama Era
It being 2020 or "the times we live in" had nothing to do with it, beyond certain Federation Worlds threatening to secede, ala Brexit. It was, like I said, just looking at where things were and extrapolating from there.
They had an image of Picard at the Vineyard, just like "All Good Things", and that's what they showed us in the very first teaser for Picard. Then they had to figure out how to get there. It was actually a two-step process. They had to figure out how to get Picard off the Enterprise and then to the Vineyard. And it had to be dramatic. It couldn't just be, "And then Picard retires and lives happily ever after" because then there would've been no character conflict. And Patrick Stewart didn't want to be back with Picard in a Starfleet Uniform (not including dreams, flashbacks, or the like). He couldn't go back to Starfleet.
So they used the destruction of Romulus to connect the dots. Picard left the Enterprise to help with the Romulan Crisis, he had a major disagreement with Starfleet, then left Starfleet altogether. But that wasn't enough either. There had to be a disaster. And that's when they borrowed from Star Trek VI, a little. In that movie, there were some Klingons and some members of the Federation who didn't want peace and cooperation between the two powers. They adapted that into Picard and took it to the next level. They had some members of the Federation threaten to secede from the Federation if they went too far with helping the Romulans and they had shady, mistrusting Romulans -- in the form of the Zhat Vash -- mastermind an attack on Mars, using the Federation's AI to cover their tracks. But no one is ever able to prove this, and it leads to a huge argument that blows up in Picard's and Musiker's faces.
And once they figured out how to get Picard where he is, they went back and figured out how to get Seven where she is, and at a point where she'd be in an equivalent mental space. So they shook up her own personal world. And that wasn't Starfleet or the Federation. It was Icheb. The only other Ex-Drone she knew. And they did something horrific enough to him that it would push her to the Fenris Rangers.
I say Ex-Drone and not Ex-B, because I don't think Seven ever stopped seeing herself as Borg. Not in VOY, and not in PIC. She just didn't see herself as being part of the Collective anymore. Whereas Hugh and those he was trying to help actively wanted to distance themselves from the Borg label as much as possible. Seven and Icheb didn't look at things quite the same way as Hugh did, so losing Icheb would hit Seven that much harder. And she has to figure out what to do after she gets her revenge because that had been what was on her mind until the very end of "Stardust City Rag", putting her in a fork at the road where she has to ask "What's next?" Which is why she's on La Sirena at the end of the season with everyone else who's also wondering, "What's next?"
Everything going wrong was part of the fabric of how Picard begins. Then, from the absolute worst, it's about an upward trajectory from there.
The plot by the Zhat Vash is exposed, Picard has closure regarding Data's death, and -- in a way -- is cured of his own terminal illness by having a new body with that illness removed. He still doesn't return to Starfleet, but at least they're more open to hearing what he has to say now. Picard even saved the day with a speech and by reasoning with Soji. If that's not an ending with a TNG sensibility, then I don't know what is.
Picard isn't dark overall. It just starts in darkness, and then emerges from it.
Romulus destroyed. --> Came from Star Trek (2009)
Federation changed because of War. --> Came from DS9
Picard having a terminal illness. --> Came from "All Good Things"
Picard didn't create these situations. That's just the state it found things in.
As far as the times they were made:
"All Good Things" --> 1994, Clinton Era
DS9 --> 1993-1999, Clinton Era
Nemesis --> 2002, Bush Era
Star Trek (2009) --> Obama Era
It being 2020 or "the times we live in" had nothing to do with it, beyond certain Federation Worlds threatening to secede, ala Brexit. It was, like I said, just looking at where things were and extrapolating from there.
They had an image of Picard at the Vineyard, just like "All Good Things", and that's what they showed us in the very first teaser for Picard. Then they had to figure out how to get there. It was actually a two-step process. They had to figure out how to get Picard off the Enterprise and then to the Vineyard. And it had to be dramatic. It couldn't just be, "And then Picard retires and lives happily ever after" because then there would've been no character conflict. And Patrick Stewart didn't want to be back with Picard in a Starfleet Uniform (not including dreams, flashbacks, or the like). He couldn't go back to Starfleet.
So they used the destruction of Romulus to connect the dots. Picard left the Enterprise to help with the Romulan Crisis, he had a major disagreement with Starfleet, then left Starfleet altogether. But that wasn't enough either. There had to be a disaster. And that's when they borrowed from Star Trek VI, a little. In that movie, there were some Klingons and some members of the Federation who didn't want peace and cooperation between the two powers. They adapted that into Picard and took it to the next level. They had some members of the Federation threaten to secede from the Federation if they went too far with helping the Romulans and they had shady, mistrusting Romulans -- in the form of the Zhat Vash -- mastermind an attack on Mars, using the Federation's AI to cover their tracks. But no one is ever able to prove this, and it leads to a huge argument that blows up in Picard's and Musiker's faces.
And once they figured out how to get Picard where he is, they went back and figured out how to get Seven where she is, and at a point where she'd be in an equivalent mental space. So they shook up her own personal world. And that wasn't Starfleet or the Federation. It was Icheb. The only other Ex-Drone she knew. And they did something horrific enough to him that it would push her to the Fenris Rangers.
I say Ex-Drone and not Ex-B, because I don't think Seven ever stopped seeing herself as Borg. Not in VOY, and not in PIC. She just didn't see herself as being part of the Collective anymore. Whereas Hugh and those he was trying to help actively wanted to distance themselves from the Borg label as much as possible. Seven and Icheb didn't look at things quite the same way as Hugh did, so losing Icheb would hit Seven that much harder. And she has to figure out what to do after she gets her revenge because that had been what was on her mind until the very end of "Stardust City Rag", putting her in a fork at the road where she has to ask "What's next?" Which is why she's on La Sirena at the end of the season with everyone else who's also wondering, "What's next?"
Everything going wrong was part of the fabric of how Picard begins. Then, from the absolute worst, it's about an upward trajectory from there.
The plot by the Zhat Vash is exposed, Picard has closure regarding Data's death, and -- in a way -- is cured of his own terminal illness by having a new body with that illness removed. He still doesn't return to Starfleet, but at least they're more open to hearing what he has to say now. Picard even saved the day with a speech and by reasoning with Soji. If that's not an ending with a TNG sensibility, then I don't know what is.
Picard isn't dark overall. It just starts in darkness, and then emerges from it.
Last edited:
Picard is about as dark as the Berman-era episodes that end with a reset button. Let’s hope the upcoming storyline hasn’t brought back the disposable-reality trope despite what the trailers suggest.
Wow. Thank you for a terrific analysis!
What I was trying (sleepily) to say last night wasn't so much about world events themselves, but the zeitgeist, the "tone" of the times. If I figure out where I was going with that, I'll put it here.
Of course, I could've just been tired.
Picard is a story about an old man wanting to come out of retirement to help the daughters of his best friend. He inspires a rough crew of people who have screwed up their lives to be better versions of themselves as well as continuously states the optimistic solution to events. In the end, he's proven right.
Star Trek is about tackling deep and hard questions about society as well as morality while suggesting that doing the right thing is its own reward versus the wrong.
Your anger is misplaced here.
There are moments in TNG when not everybody in Starfleet are doing the right thing. For example TNG and 'The Offspring'. Admiral wants to take Data's daughter away just by giving Data an order. Picard fights it.
There are challenges in the world of TNG too. Example, 'Yesterday's Enterprise', Picard has to send Enterprise-C back into a battle which most likely they can't survive.
Similar threads
