Discovery's approach to leadership and Trek's interpersonal dynamics

[Charles Phipps]

My biggest issue with Discovery is that Michael disobeys orders exactly like movie Kirk and is lauded like a great leader.

The latest season is the most ridiculous as she's unreasonably hostile to the President of the Federation just for daring to believe she can give orders.

 

[valkyrie013]

It's so weird how some fans react so badly to ST having well-written three-dimensional characters instead of cardboard cutouts like on VOY or TNG.

It's not melodrama; you just don't like it.



You almost defeated me with your clever game of words! Fortunately, I think context makes it pretty clear that I was referring to DIS's primary characters, not its supporting recurring characters.

In Tng you knew all the bridge crew, even non bridge crew like Obrian Barclay, even guest character more than the Disco Bridge crew. I honestly forget there names alot because there so non memorable. If you spaced them and got another bridge crew id probably not notice.
The touchy feely has been a bit grating this Season. It's okay to have emotions, get overwhelmed, but to literally take a 5 minute comfort break in the middle of battle to talk is a but much.

 

[plynch]

There are so many characters. Just not the bridge crew. This show paints by different numbers in that regard. So it goes.

 

[fireproof78]

I like it better than knowing the Bridge crew. TOS I never felt like knew the crew, and knew more from ancillary material.

 

[Richard S. Ta]

It's okay to have emotions, get overwhelmed, but to literally take a 5 minute comfort break in the middle of battle to talk is a but much.

Good job that literally didn't happen then.

 

[valkyrie013]

Good job that literally didn't happen then.

Literally DID happen then.

Spoiler

Twice, once with Michal and Na'an, when fighting book, Book fired, then amazingly they go to the ready room and talk for minutes, and book .. just waits.. then again with Michal and the Pres..

 

[Richard S. Ta]

Literally DID happen then.

Spoiler

Twice, once with Michal and Na'an, when fighting book, Book fired, then amazingly they go to the ready room and talk for minutes, and book .. just waits.. then again with Michal and the Pres..

So you're telling me 'literally' ten minutes of an episode was devoted to it? As in 'literally' a couple of 5 minute scenes?

Stop (figuratively) typing bullshit.

This 'support group' canard has been cropping up more and more. I feel like it's what 'crying' was to 2020 and what 'whispering' was to 2021. The latest exaggerated hyperbole stick to hit Discovery with and just as boring and arbitrarily applied as the previous sticks.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

(Sorry if this comes off as patronising, words are hard).

I think with any criticism it's a good idea to look at what could be causing someone to say something, not just what they're saying. Like as an easy example, if someone says 'this season has too many episodes' they don't necessarily want fewer stories, they may even be satisfied if it stuck to the same pace, it could just be that the mysteries are being drawn out too much or whatever.

So when you see 'support group' show up more and more often, I reckon that's because viewers are reading what other viewers are saying and thinking 'yes, that best describes the problem I'm also having!' It doesn't necessarily mean that is the root of the problem they're having with it. It doesn't necessarily mean that they have any clue how best to solve it either (unless they're also talented writers). But it does indicate that there is a problem.

Like here:

That's Burnham getting emotionally distraught or screaming in pain in literally every single episode of season 2. Almost anything is going to become unwelcome with enough repetition (even criticism ).

But what's the real problem here? Is it that Burnham overreacts to things and it makes her less credible? Is it that she's been faced with too many things that anyone would have a reaction to? Is it something else? The writers are the ones that have to look at their feedback and then figure out the root of these issues and how to fix them (or not, if they're happy), all we can do is say 'Burnham's crying again?'

 

[The Wormhole]

And Meredith Grey usually gets away with anything she does, because she's Meredith and can tell off the Chief of Surgery and do what she thinks is right for the people she cares about while advancing upward, just like Michael does when she decides that she's going to do things her way.

Both Meredith Grey and Michael Burnham are the lead characters of their shows, so of course they can do as they like. Just like the leads on all the other Star Treks. Just like Jack Bauer on 24, Fox Mulder on X-Files, Leroy Jethro Gibbs on NCIS.

Or is there something specific to Grey or Burnham that bothers you?

I'll argue Chief O'Brien just on TNG was a more memorable and defined character than Bryce or Nilsson any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Eh? O'Brien didn't even get a name until the second season, and even then it was just a last name. He didn't get a full name until the fourth, along with a proper rank, a wife and a backstory. And even after two episodes to himself in the fourth season, his contribution afterwards was the same as before, he operated the transporter. And that was it until the sixth season when he left TNG and moved over to DS9.

 

[Citiprime]

Both Meredith Grey and Michael Burnham are the lead characters of their shows, so of course they can do as they like. Just like the leads on all the other Star Treks. Just like Jack Bauer on 24, Fox Mulder on X-Files, Leroy Jethro Gibbs on NCIS.

Or is there something specific to Grey or Burnham that bothers you?

Yes, they're both horribly written.

For example, from your list, Jack Bauer and Fox Mulder do what they think is right, but there are prices to be paid for all of those decisions. They suffer consequences, and those consequences give their choices weight. It's the reason they're "heroes." For a Star Trek example, Search For Spock. Kirk damns the rules to steal the Enterprise and save Spock, but there are consequences (within that film). Both he and the rest of the crew sacrifice their careers and the Enterprise to help their friend.

When you instead write characters where they either get rewarded or the consequences are ignored for breaking the rules, it robs all of those character decisions of their impact, and makes the entire situation unbelievable. And when it happens over and over, then we're closer to the fantasy of a soap opera (which is what Grey's Anatomy is) than the fantasy of Star Trek.

Eh? O'Brien didn't even get a name until the second season, and even then it was just a last name. He didn't get a full name until the fourth, along with a proper rank, a wife and a backstory. And even after two episodes to himself in the fourth season, his contribution afterwards was the same as before, he operated the transporter. And that was it until the sixth season when he left TNG and moved over to DS9.

Over the course of just TNG, O'Brien is defined as the survivor of a massacre, we learn of his issues/bigotry towards the Cardassians, and his relationship with Keiko. Name anything close to that depth that we know about Nilsson, Bryce, or Rhys.

 

[fireproof78]

Over the course of just TNG, O'Brien is defined as the survivor of a massacre, we learn of his issues/bigotry towards the Cardassians, and his relationship with Keiko. Name anything close to that depth that we know about Nilsson, Bryce, or Rhys.

We don't have the same episode count as we did with TNG. So, how do you compare that when the episode count is close to Season 3 of TNG.

 

[valkyrie013]

But O'Brien wasn't a main character. He's like Tig showing up whenever. Not a bridge crew. We're 4 seasons in and I know basically nothing of the bridge crew.. Hell the begining of season 2 they Literally had Pike do a Roll Call!
But basically .. If you like the season.. Great! Happy your enjoying it!
But for me it's hit or miss. It's wholly predictable, and the writing is sub standard. But that's me.
@Richard S. Ta that was an example. Not BS.. Thanks..

 

[fireproof78]

But O'Brien wasn't a main character. He's like Tig showing up whenever.

He literally got whole episodes devoted him, and treated as secondary character. But, even so, we didn't get that in Season 2 or 3?

 

[plynch]

Good lord, people, move on. This show develops ancillary characters, not the bridge crew. That’s the way it is.

I could harp and harp on how modern Trek has mishmash minimalist unhummable opening credits music with the Courage fanfare tacked on oddly at the end. But I don’t. Cuz why bother? They went in a different direction.

Ok, I was one of the original carpers about Burnham and that ubiquitous sad/sincere look and tears welling. But I stopped. Cuz why bother? We don’t always get what we want.

 

[eschaton]

As I've said elsewhere, my issue with the interpersonal dynamics on this show is not that they're too touchy feely per se. It's that they're so one-note now that it's hard to actually discern the personalities of individual characters. Everyone is a broken bird that "needs help" - and yet they're all also super-supportive allies who are willing to chime in with just the right advice. As a result, in 90% of cases, any "emotional scene" could be rewritten to swap out one or both characters and still be pretty much exactly the same. This is an awful way to structure storytelling, as (except for limited cases like Bill & Ted) you want the main characters to be definably different so there is some dynamism to character interactions (if not outright conflict).

Discovery has lost dynamic character interactions for two reasons. First, the most different characters - people like Georgiou - have been slowly written off the show. Secondly characters who were initially more divergent from this wounded yet ally characterization have slowly edged towards it.

Imagine if someone attempted to sound off of a character and they got one of the following reactions instead:

• "Have you just tried being happy?"
• "Enough about you, let's talk about me instead!"
• "Grow the fuck up, we all have our pain, and we all sit with it in silence"
• "And you're bringing this up with me because?"
• Makes a joke, and tries to change the topic of conversation

These are not good responses, but they're normal human responses that some characters would make. It would be totally believable if some of the Discovery characters reacted like this some of the time. Because flawed characters are more interesting, and one of the ways that characters are flawed is how they treat one another, not just the trauma they have faced down.

 

[fireproof78]

• "Have you just tried being happy?"

• "Enough about you, let's talk about me instead!"

• "Grow the fuck up, we all have our pain, and we all sit with it in silence"

• "And you're bringing this up with me because?"

• Makes a joke, and tries to change the topic of conversation

Let's see: I get those quite often, and daily when I was in high school and college.

While I think Discovery could balance their moments but give me Discovery's approach because, well, honestly, humans kind of suck at the whole support thing and I want more of that! Maybe if people were more supportive of each other then I would be out of a job. Imagine that!

 

[shapeshifter]

Burnham is better now. She has grown and I think that was the point all along. Emotional maturity doesn't happen overnight.

 

[eschaton]

Let's see: I get those quite often, and daily when I was in high school and college.

While I think Discovery could balance their moments but give me Discovery's approach because, well, honestly, humans kind of suck at the whole support thing and I want more of that! Maybe if people were more supportive of each other then I would be out of a job. Imagine that!

My general experience has been the people with the most trauma and mental health issues tend to be the least supportive, because depression and anxiety pretty much by definition cause you to be focused on your own issues rather than others.

 

[fireproof78]

My general experience has been the people with the most trauma and mental health issues tend to be the least supportive, because depression and anxiety pretty much by definition cause you to be focused on your own issues rather than others.

In my experience trauma manifests itself in a variety of ways, including more supportive of others. The crew would be unified in their trauma so commiseration and camaraderie would be something I would expect.

And even if that isn't our experience, wouldn't we hope that the more evolved humans would have increased measure of compassion for their traumatized crew mates? Wouldn't we want to see that supportive attitude and openness even if it is outside our own experience? To me, that's what I want. And, perhaps this is letting the curtain a little bit much, but that's what I hope humans will be like some time in the future, rather than the personal missmash of platitudes and being talked down to in my own history.

 

[The Wormhole]

nd when it happens over and over, then we're closer to the fantasy of a soap opera (which is what Grey's Anatomy is) than the fantasy of Star Trek.

Well, it's still fantasy either way, it just sounds like one is your preferred fantasy and the other isn't. I'm no fan, but Grey's Anatomy is one of television's most popular television shows and has been on the air for a time period almost equal to the entire Berman era of Trek. So it's obviously doing something right and you can't fault Trek for trying to mimic its approach to television.

Over the course of just TNG, O'Brien is defined as the survivor of a massacre, we learn of his issues/bigotry towards the Cardassians, and his relationship with Keiko.

It really is disingenuous to say that happened "over the course of TNG." O'Brien didn't get any story material besides operating the transporter until the fourth season, and there was no relationship with Keiko depicted on screen until the episode where they get married. Likewise the fact he survived a massacre and had issues with Cardassians was only relevant for one episode as well. And while Keiko did make a few more appearances on TNG, O'Brien's attitude towards Cardassians was not touched upon at all for the remainder of TNG after The Wounded and wouldn't be until he moved over to DS9.