Harsh realities of rewatching Star Trek Voyager

[Farscape One]

Those events that you describe.

Anything like that makes me irrationally angry.

Ah. I can see that.

 

[Oddish]

How were Molly and Kirayoshi tortured? (Other than the events of "TIME'S ORPHAN", which was not a fun time for Molly.)

Those events that you describe.

Anything like that makes me irrationally angry.

Agreed. There was no rational argument for not at least trying to prevent the tragedy. Fortunately, alt-Molly understood what her parents did not.

 

[J. Frank Doobie]

As Beltran said, the character should have been an Mayan.

Would have made this issue much simpler and given writers something real to work with. Saying someone is "European" is about as useful as saying their "Native American" --- which is to say, it tells you next to nothing about their life and culture. I do think cultures will certainly change in a couple hundred years, but that doesn't mitigate the realities of historically atrocious representation of indigenous North Americans since media depictions of those groups began.

To me, the very biggest issue, as has been said 1,000 times, is that it dropped its premise immediately. The Maquis were one of the most interesting aspects of '90s-era Trek, and they just left any narrative tension from that instantly. And the Voyager itself didn't have to change and evolve over time, scraping by, etc. A ship of Theseus, the Voyager in name and spaceframe only, returning to the Federation would have been cool.

 

[Lynx]

Nope. Just the one season. That's the one where the Ewing cousins, Jack and Jamie, played a huge part. Jack basically filled Bobby's role as J.R.'s Ewing Oil sidekick as they pursued their deals and schemes with the foreign cartel. As I recall, Jamie is killed in the season finale (collateral damage in a bomb meant for someone else, probably J.R.; she's married to Cliff Barnes at this point).

In the meantime, Pam and a new guy (don't recall his name) go hunting for emeralds in South America, and back home on the ranch Jenna goes stark-raving nuts in her grief for Bobby. Ray and Donna find out that their coming baby will be Down's Syndrome, so they throw themselves into learning about that and meeting and interacting with Down's Syndrome kids.

It was quite an exciting season overall, until Pam woke up one morning and went to take a shower. Instead of the guy she'd gone to South America with, it was Bobby in the shower, smiling at her, and saying, "Good morning."

End of season. We're left to wonder for months wtf happened, and how Bobby got in that shower when he's supposed to be dead. And at this point Dallas and Knots Landing ceased to be part of the same continuity, as Bobby stayed dead in the Knots Landing continuity (Gary and Val Ewing named one of their children after Bobby).


Thankfully Voyager only had 2 characters from another continuity and the situation wasn't so convoluted that it made it impossible to reconcile. I find the forgotten Borg baby more annoying than Harry and Naomi being from an alternate universe.

Then I remember it wrong, which I apologize for. But I thought it was an eternity between Bobby's death and his spectacular return.

However, I still consider it the most spectacular events ever in the history of TV series and movies.

Considering that T&A is arguably the ULTIMATE Reset Button episode, it's strangely appropriate that it was one of VOY's first.

Not so surprising, considering that it was only the third episode of the series.

Still, it was the best one because it gave the episode an unexpected twist in the tale at the end. I remember that I was very surprised when it showed up. Later "reset button episodes" looked more like lame attempts to correct something badly planned or stupid.

And still going on. Every present-day effort to bring justice to the character has been stymied.

So sad, actually that grown up people act like this.

Very true. But what do you expect when you take advice from a humbug?

What i would have expected was that the producers and writers of such a popular and highly appreciated series over the whole world as Star Trek is should do better than take advices from a third class humbug. Instead they could have spent some time going through information about a particular tribe, let's say the Mayans and used that in Chakotay's background story.

Lol. One character and the dog. That's pretty sad.

I thought Phlox was pretty cool, too.

You're actually right about Phlox. He wasn't that bad. I guess I add him to the list.

With the exception of Worf and Jadzia in DS9

But that one didn't end well

And Miles and Keiko.

You're right about Miles and Keiko! That was actually a good and normal couple.
Worf and Jadzia was OK actually, but as Unimatrix Q wrote, it didn't end well.

But no surprise that the best realtionships was in DS9 where the writers and producers actually tried to come up with something good and realistic.

As Beltran said, the character should have been an Mayan.

Exactly my opinion too.

 

[Oddish]

Later "reset button episodes" looked more like lame attempts to correct something badly planned or stupid.

The worst use of the Reset Button was that nothing that happened in an episode mattered. Voyager blasted to hell and back? She'll be pristine next week. Some poor sap undergo a brutally life altering experience? It's forgotten next week. Wih rare exceptions, nothing that happened on VOY mattered.

So sad, actually that grown up people act like this

Sadder still that so many Trekkies take a twisted pleasure in yakking "eternal ensign" this and "poor dumb Harry" that. I always hate it when the bullies get what they want, and they've gotten it in a big way here.

 

[Lynx]

The worst use of the Reset Button was that nothing that happened in an episode mattered. Voyager blasted to hell and back? She'll be pristine next week. Some poor sap undergo a brutally life altering experience? It's forgotten next week. Wih rare exceptions, nothing that happened on VOY mattered.

In this I totally agree.
I mentioned Deadlock in an earlier post as an example of this. The whole ship is more and less shot to pieces in the episode. Still, it looks like new in the next episode. Just like it's been rebuilt in record time at some federation Starbase.

I mean, if the premise is that the ship is lost on the other side of the galaxy and there are shortages of practically everything, then avoid creating situations where the ship is so totally damaged.
The same for the constant loss of shuttles and torpedoes. Fortunately some smart person came up with a brilliant explanation to solve that!

The same with some character having a devastating life experience and nothing more is mentioned about it.

Unfortunately, those in charge didn't bother about such things. Every time they did hit a bump in the road, it was always: "Ah, don't bother, the viewers won't notice."

Sadder still that so many Trekkies take a twisted pleasure in yakking "eternal ensign" this and "poor dumb Harry" that. I always hate it when the bullies get what they want, and they've gotten it in a big way here.

Well, I must admit that I have came up with some negative comments about Harry too now and then. Like comments about his "whipping boy" status. But not because of dislike of the character or for "joining the pack" who constanly baits him but more as criticizm to the way the character was showed up in the series.

Harry did have a good premise. With better writers he could have developed like Tim McGee in NCIS, from ridiculed nerd to responsible and competent field agent. Or become Voyager's Geordi LaForge, a whizz kid, noot in engineering but when it came to computers and his job as an Operations Officer.

In the Voyager boooks, he's more prominent when it comes to solve such things and he's involved in some real dangerous situations too. The only problem is that "the whipping boy syndrome" can be seen in too many books.

But despite how Harry has been treated by those in charge, it doesn't come close to how ill-treated Kes was. First dumped, then brought back for no other reason than to be humiliated and totally destroyed.

 

[fireproof78]

Sadder still that so many Trekkies take a twisted pleasure in yakking "eternal ensign" this and "poor dumb Harry" that. I always hate it when the bullies get what they want, and they've gotten it in a big way here.

Well, it's easier with fictional characters (see also the O'Brien memes). They are not treated as real but puppets for writers pleasure. Also known as the George Lucas approach.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Hmmm.......yes!
Why not!

One of the cool tropes of Star Trek was the Captain had a unique tunic variant from the standard Starfleet uniform. Kirk had the wrap around tunics from seasons 1 & 2, and Picard sometimes wore a black and gray tunic with a red velvet jacket (DARMOK). Does anyone know if there were designs for an alternate duty outfit for GOAT Janeway?

 

[Oddish]

Well, I must admit that I have came up with some negative comments about Harry too now and then. Like comments about his "whipping boy" status. But not because of dislike of the character or for "joining the pack" who constanly baits him but more as criticizm to the way the character was showed up in the series.

I did the same, here and there. I only stopped when I found out what I was abetting.

Harry did have a good premise. With better writers he could have developed like Tim McGee in NCIS, from ridiculed nerd to responsible and competent field agent. Or become Voyager's Geordi LaForge, a whizz kid, noot in engineering but when it came to computers and his job as an Operations Officer.

Not developing Harry was like missing a slam dunk. They could have done anything with a character as new and unformed as he was.

In the Voyager boooks, he's more prominent when it comes to solve such things and he's involved in some real dangerous situations too. The only problem is that "the whipping boy syndrome" can be seen in too many books.

Another reason why I like "Autobiography". It doesn't go there at all.

But despite how Harry has been treated by those in charge, it doesn't come close to how ill-treated Kes was. First dumped, then brought back for no other reason than to be humiliated and totally

I agree, "Fury" was offensive. But I sort of liked the way they said goodbye to her in "The Gift". Of course, keeping her and running ten (or more) characters would have been better.

Well, it's easier with fictional characters (see also the O'Brien memes). They are not treated as real but puppets for writers pleasure. Also known as the George Lucas approach.

All characters are puppets. Otherwise, most writers would be mass murderers.

 

[at Quark's]

I think everyone has different sensitive points. For example, I think what they did to Kes was rather vile and meanspirited, I can get a bit angry about that, and I get wound up less about Harry Kim's lack of promotion. But when I think about it rationally, they're really in the same corner, it's just less of a sensitive point for me for reasons I don't entirely understand myself.

But at the end of the day, they're only story characters and therefore they're free game, as far as I'm concerned, whether I like what they do with them or not. I don't consider 'bullying' of story characters on the same level als the bullying of real people. So I have less issues with Ensign Kim being bullied than with Garett Wang being bullied by having him denied reappearance on a Trek Show (if that is even a real issue in the first place and not just a matter of bad luck). The only thing I worry about in the line of characters being bullied is the bulliers getting away with their behaviour vindicated, as that sends out a wrong message.

 

[Oddish]

But at the end of the day, they're only story characters and therefore they're free game, as far as I'm concerned, whether I like what they do with them or not.

Oh, I know that. As writers, we can do what we want with them. Such as killing a character off to resolve a love triangle. Illegal in real life, but just fine for a writer.

I think everyone has different sensitive points. For example, I think what they did to Kes was rather vile and meanspirited, I can get a bit angry about that, and I get wound up less about Harry Kim's lack of promotion. But when I think about it rationally, they're really in the same corner, it's just less of a sensitive point for me for reasons I don't entirely understand myself.

I'd be lying if I said I did.

So I have less issues with Ensign Kim being bullied than with Garett Wang being bullied by having him denied reappearance on a Trek Show (if that is even a real issue in the first place and not just a matter of bad luck).

Maybe "bullied" is not the right term. But I see it as a deliberate attempt to embarrass the actor by making his character an object of ridicule. Clearly, it was a deliberate and calculated action, and it mattered to the people doing it. Otherwise, when the viewers started complaining, they would have been accommodated.

The only thing I worry about in the line of characters being bullied is the bulliers getting away with their behaviour vindicated, as that sends out a wrong message.

Not only have we vindicated the bullies, we've taken over for them, and continued their antics for over two decades. If Harry had ended the series as a JG (or a full el-tee, which is what a competent Naval officer would more likely get), tropes like "eternal ensign" and "poor dumb Harry Kim" would probably not be a thing.

 

[Dee1891]

I see this thread is still discussing Harry Kim. I'm surprised that a separate thread had not been created for him.

Not developing Harry was like missing a slam dunk. They could have done anything with a character as new and unformed as he was.

Harry's character did develop. But it also remained the same. Which is the basic nature of many people. Unless you're confusing a lack of promotion with the lack of character development.

 

[Oddish]

I see this thread is still discussing Harry Kim. I'm surprised that a separate thread had not been created for him.

Here's the main one. There's another that went 1000+ posts, but it's gotten buried in the archives, plus it's past the 365-day limit.

https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/garrett-wang.305402/

 

[Akiraprise]

Every thread eventually discusses Harry Kim.

 

[Oddish]

Every thread eventually discusses Harry Kim.

Hmmm, I wonder who we should blame for tha... wait a minute, why is everyone looking at me all of a sudden?

Harry's character did develop. But it also remained the same. Which is the basic nature of many people. Unless you're confusing a lack of promotion with the lack of character development.

I'd be curious what about him you thought changed. Because while a lot of potentially life-altering stuff happened to him, I didn't see much in the way of actual change in who he was.

 

[Uhura's Song]

Chakotay's Native American background was literally entirely made up by a fraud who pretended to be Native American yet actually wasn't. What's worse is that he had already been exposed as a fraud years before Voyager began, and yet was hired anyway.
Also, fans widely agree that the sexualisation of Deanna, Seven, and T'Pol was unacceptable. Believe it or nor, objectification is not a prerequisite to making a successful TV series.

Not just the women either. Shatner manages to rip/lose his shirt an awful lot and Tripp spent a lot if time in decon with T'Pol.

Seven & T'Pol are obviously the most egregious.

 

[fireproof78]

I think everyone has different sensitive points. For example, I think what they did to Kes was rather vile and meanspirited, I can get a bit angry about that, and I get wound up less about Harry Kim's lack of promotion. But when I think about it rationally, they're really in the same corner, it's just less of a sensitive point for me for reasons I don't entirely understand myself.

But at the end of the day, they're only story characters and therefore they're free game, as far as I'm concerned, whether I like what they do with them or not. I don't consider 'bullying' of story characters on the same level als the bullying of real people. So I have less issues with Ensign Kim being bullied than with Garett Wang being bullied by having him denied reappearance on a Trek Show (if that is even a real issue in the first place and not just a matter of bad luck). The only thing I worry about in the line of characters being bullied is the bulliers getting away with their behaviour vindicated, as that sends out a wrong message.

Indeed yes. It is an interesting little bit of insight in to people's psychology in what values and sensitive points pop up. I have my own of course, but ultimately it's not usually mean in the vile or meanspirited way that we audience members take. It can be ignorance, or misunderstanding, or just flat out apathy towards a character, but just because we disagree with the choices made doesn't make these people mean. They might be; but I won't assume that.

To quote a friend of mine when discussing Star Wars (but applies to all art): "George Lucas (at the time) can do whatever the hell he wants and doesn't owe me a damn thing."

Damn right.

 

[DrMike]

Actually, I believe my main issues for "Voyager" are the same as my main issues for "Next Generation" and "Deep Space Nine".

I hear you. It was a real mistake to shoot it on video and not film, no amount of remastering can make up for the crap video quality.

I assume that's what you meant

 

[Phaser Two]

I hear you. It was a real mistake to shoot it on video and not film, no amount of remastering can make up for the crap video quality.

I assume that's what you meant

Interesting. I think Voyager looks great today even without any retouching. Deep Space Nine less so, at least S1 through S3.

And now back to our regularly scheduled topics . . . .

 

[Lynx]

I think everyone has different sensitive points. For example, I think what they did to Kes was rather vile and meanspirited, I can get a bit angry about that, and I get wound up less about Harry Kim's lack of promotion. But when I think about it rationally, they're really in the same corner, it's just less of a sensitive point for me for reasons I don't entirely understand myself.

But at the end of the day, they're only story characters and therefore they're free game, as far as I'm concerned, whether I like what they do with them or not. I don't consider 'bullying' of story characters on the same level als the bullying of real people. So I have less issues with Ensign Kim being bullied than with Garett Wang being bullied by having him denied reappearance on a Trek Show (if that is even a real issue in the first place and not just a matter of bad luck). The only thing I worry about in the line of characters being bullied is the bulliers getting away with their behaviour vindicated, as that sends out a wrong message.

I can agree with a situation in which a character is bullied if there is some meaning in it, if it have something which brings the story forward.

Like Kim being almost fooled by Quark in Caretaker, then rescued by Paris and they are becoming friends.
But I'm not too fond of the idea of a character being constantly ridiculed and mistreated during a whole series or destroyed in the worts possible way.