Does the current state of Star Trek say anything about what fans want?

[JirinPanthosa]

The reason I proudly declare myself "un-woke" is because in a world where accused witches are being burned, I would rather not associate myself with the people building the bonfires.

Here’s the problem though. That idea of “Wokeness”, the Fox News version, is entirely made up. It doesn’t exist, or if it does, it’s a handful of people on social media with no actual power to build a bonfire.

The only people to actually lose work over it are people who used outright racial slurs and hate speech, and half of them got million dollar standup specials over it.

You’re raging against a problem that just doesn’t exist and gets used by actual bigots to manipulate you into getting mad over much more reasonable issues of representation and personal freedoms.

So no, I am not “Woke” either. I just have basic human empathy, and showing it to people who don’t match their cultural prescription is what the antiwoke babies are really upset about.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Based on feedback it seems like “More like Strange New Worlds” is what more if the fans want.

 

[fireproof78]

Based on feedback it seems like “More like Strange New Worlds” is what more if the fans want.

Until Kirk showed up I would have agreed.

 

[Greg Cox]

I still remember when a well regarded Trek writer said "I actually say through the whole first season of Deep Space 9, just for research purposes" or some such thing. Clearly the implication was that DS9 was so outré, it was only worthy of being viewed in small amounts, for research purposes. If it could be underappreciated, couldn't other Treks be as well?

I still remember a long-time Trekkie friend and colleague of mine declaring, back in the day, that "DS9 is good, but it's not STAR TREK."

So, yeah, "the fans" have always had differing views of what exactly constitutes "Star Trek," let alone good Star Trek.

And given that nowadays "Star Trek" consists of 13 movies, at least a dozen TV series, and umpteen books and comics and games, created by divers hands over the course of 60-plus years . . . . it stands to reason that "the fans" are hardly going to be a monolith.

 

[fireproof78]

And given that nowadays "Star Trek" consists of 13 movies, at least a dozen TV series, and umpteen books and comics and games, created by divers hands over the course of 60-plus years . . . . it stands to reason that "the fans" are hardly going to be a monolith.

Indeed. Star Trek has moved from the TOS style sandbox to a veritable playground. Declaring something "not Star Trek" is like saying a slide is not a piece of play equipment.

 

[Greg Cox]

Indeed. Star Trek has moved from the TOS style sandbox to a veritable playground. Declaring something "not Star Trek" is like saying a slide is not a piece of play equipment.

I'm reminded of pizza purists who insisted that only a slice as served by a certain NYC or Chicago pizza shop on a certain street is a "real" pizza.

Me, I like pineapple on pizza, figs on pizza, whatever tastes good to my palate.

 

[drt]

I feel that 9 times out of 10 you can replace “That’s not Star Trek” with “That’s not Star Trek:The Next Generation” and the meaning seems to be he same.

 

[Greg Cox]

I feel that 9 times out of 10 you can replace “That’s not Star Trek” with “That’s not Star Trek:The Next Generation” and the meaning seems to be he same.

That's my impression, too. "Not STAR TREK" seems to mean "not like TNG" to a lot of people.

Don't get me wrong. TNG is great. Heck, I've written at least four TNG novels, but it's not the Gold Standard to which all Trek shows, past and present, must be compared against.

"Star Trek" is bigger than just TNG.

 

[ThankQ]

Woke Filters really sucked after Tom Waits kicked them off his tour.

When I was writing my four-novel series on the history of animal-shaped terracotta planters, I would wake up at 5:00 AM every morning and sit down with three #2 pencils, a legal pad, a pot of black coffee and two packs of Woke Filters.

 

[Oddish]

@JirinPanthosa, I disagree with everything you said... but this is about Star Trek Discovery. If I were a moderator, I would ask all involved in the discussion on general wokeness to take it elsewhere.

Star Trek Discovery ushered Trek into a new era of the franchise. Nothing will ever change what it accomplished. And I still intend to give it another look, preferably once I'm able to watch it on something other than a smartphone.

 

[Jonesy]

This statement probably isn't directly addressing what fans want, specifically, but in regard to Discovery (whether you like it or not) there has been a lot of behind the camera drama on that series. To my understanding, there has been showrunner shakeups on that series for at least the first few seasons. For me, it's almost seemed like the show has done a soft reboot of sorts every year.

 

[cooleddie74]

Even the use of the Enterprise and Captain Pike came after Bryan Fuller was gone. Season 1 was tumultuous. It's my least-favorite season by a mile but at least tthere are real world reasons why the series often felt so scattershot.

 

[fireproof78]

This statement probably isn't directly addressing what fans want, specifically, but in regard to Discovery (whether you like it or not) there has been a lot of behind the camera drama on that series. To my understanding, there has been showrunner shakeups on that series for at least the first few seasons. For me, it's almost seemed like the show has done a soft reboot of sorts every year.

This is absolutely the case, and each shake up created more and more limits. It was not consistent and that impacts the outgoing product.

Even the use of the Enterprise and Captain Pike came after Bryan Fuller was gone. Season 1 was tumultuous. It's my least-favorite season by a mile but at least tthere are real world reasons why the series often felt so scattershot.

Indeed. The one thing that helped me get through was characters like Burnham. But, if you didn't like her then yeah the tumultuous development of the show behind the scenes would stand out even more egregiously.

 

[Mechanoid1]

I am so sick of people that use prejudice to push their agenda. For example: You don't like STD, STP, LD becaise you are a sexist or racist and or homophobic.
No thats not it at all! It's amazing how many articles are now appearing about how amazing the writers of Picard S3 are.
Just give us a plausable sci fi plot, and watch the positive response. I like the direction of SNW. KEEP IT UP! Picard S3 (so far) is awesome!
Just read that a Dominion war spin-off is in the works. FANTASTIC!
Just keep it more sci-fi, and less Peyton place!

 

[fireproof78]

The writing doesn't feel that different is my struggle. Season 1 dealt with similar themes and was panned.

Now, LCARS and uniforms and happy feelings! YAY...?

 

[Lord Garth]

I have to laugh at the fact that if you went back exactly 20 years ago, to March 2003, people were shitting on the TOS Prequel and the TNG Movie of the time. Now people love the TOS Prequel and TNG Movie of today.

Granted, I also prefer SNW and PIC Season 3 to ENT and Nemesis, but still. It drives home the idea that people care less about the setting than they thought.

 

[BillJ]

I am so sick of people that use prejudice to push their agenda. For example: You don't like STD, STP, LD becaise you are a sexist or racist and or homophobic.

When someone uses 'woke' in their complaints, that is usually a huge clue as to what their complaints are.

 

[Greg Cox]

It's perhaps worth remembering that STAR TREK is not and never has been just for us hardcore fans. It needs to appeal to more casual fans, newbies, and the general audience as well. Indeed, almost by definition, us diehard Trekkies are outliers at the far end of audience spectrum, with total non-fans at the other end.

Star Trek was never meant to some cliquey, cult thing aimed only at the True Believers and preaching to the converted. Heck, it started out as a prime-time series on NBC, aimed at the general audiences.

 

[BillJ]

It's perhaps worth remembering that STAR TREK is not and never has been just for us hardcore fans. It needs to appeal to more casual fans, newbies, and the general audience as well. Indeed, almost by definition, us diehard Trekkies are outliers at the far end of audience spectrum, with total non-fans at the other end.

Star Trek was never meant to some cliquey, cult thing aimed only at the True Believers and preaching to the converted. Heck, it started out as a prime-time series on NBC, aimed at the general audiences.

I think it depends on whether or not it is a TV series or movie, at this point. The delivery of TV shows has changed radically and it seems most are now chasing niche audiences, especially in the streaming space, which explains the overabundance of nostalgia now being served in the CBS/Paramount shows.

 

[cooleddie74]

I mean, Chekov was added to TOS in 1967 to boost ratings. Davy Jones of The Monkees was one of the hottest celebs in the country at the time and NBC and Desilu thought a twentysomething, cute young guy with a moptop haircut on the Enterprise's bridge would boost the series' ratings when it came back for its second season.

Widespread appeal has always been part of Trek's cake and baked right into the franchise from the beginning.