Someone on ignore?
How Do Social Conservative Star Fans Enjoy Star Trek?
- Thread starter JeffOakland
- Start date
- Status
Someone on ignore?
I’ve just read through this whole thread and it is a very US centric idea of the left and right and conservatives, not that that’s bad as i’m guessing the question was posed in a US centric manner. However, personally being from a country where the actual leaders of the party do not play a main role in people’s political ideals (Ie the link between conservative and trump supporter being so strong in the US is nowhere near as strong with our own conservative party and their leader here, it is more of the party no matter who the leader is thing) and then viewing this question as a conservative vs leftist pov rather than anything else I can’t see, at least where i’m from people, conservatives being into star trek if they do recognise and agree with the politics.
Having read the replies I can see how especially in the US those on the more conservative leaning side can still love and agree with it (even if i am extremely anti-gun and disagree with those particular arguments in this thread, but i have grown up somewhere where they are non-existent with civilians, which this thread seemed to focus on) I can’t see that from a different political system perspective it being as easy
Okay, thanks. Appreciate you checking.
Ah, okay. That has to be it, because I checked on a few other pages in other threads in other sections, and there are the usual 20 posts in a page, but there are a few random pages in some threads that have less than 20. (17, 18, 19 posts... not a big difference, but it is less than 20.) And I know my math is correct because I double checked.
Thank you, BillJ, for thinking that up... I completely forgot to take that into consideration. Something seems odd or wrong when it comes to a device, I'm used to it being the device's fault.
Instead, my own damned faulty memory is to blame this time. (Too many things happening the last few months at once to stay sorted, mentally. Devil's in the details, I guess.)
Source? Because I've always heard it was rejected for being "too cerebral".
Correct. This claim comes straight from William Shatner, too. (https://archive.org/details/uptillnowautobio00shat/page/n9/mode/1up)
In Roddenberry's introduction for the VHS release of "The Cage" in 1986, Roddenberry claims part of the blowback he got from the network was because he refused to cast the show "sensibly," which according to Roddenberry meant "all white." And one of the compromises between "The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" is the disappearance of Number One, since it seems the network didn't think audiences were ready for a woman as the XO second-in-command.
RODDENBERRY: "I just wanted to share with you something that may lift your spirits as it did mine those many years ago. All that nonsense about the dangers of mixed races living together on a spaceship, or anywhere, and how some parts of our country were certain to refuse to televise Star Trek because we showed such things, the hatred that would supposedly flood our mail, turning sponsors against us – in all the years of Star Trek we never received so much as one such letter. Not one."
Clearly pre-social media and YouTube.
The same way social liberals watch STAR TREK: as pure entertainment with an allegorical bent.
I would like to clarify that the words “too political” was never used by the cast or crew in reference to why the original pilot was rejected but that the reasons that were given are inherently political (ie it wasn’t rejected because they ask you too think too much about space or delve into that prospect it was because of Roddenberry being too progressive for mainstream US networks)
Think the One Nation Tories would likely be the ones who would find commonality with Trek - especially as those tended to be the Pro-EU Tories and the Federation feels like it has similarities to the EU in that it is a coalition of a wide range of different countries (and their conflicting at times cultures) coming together to create a unified bloc working together for overall betterment.
They also tended to be the more socially liberal end though - far away from the ultra far right of Patel, Braverman etc
I think with UK though there is an awful lot of crossover that isn't necessarily there in the US - places like Hartlepoole which are socially very conservative but have traditionally been Labour due to Union support and economic reasons being a prime example. Many within Labour are socially conservative and there many Tory supporters who are quite socially liberal (although they are now moving towards Lib Dems) so it is more fluid here and explains why people across the spectrum were/are attracted to it
Take anything from Roddenberry or those who make claims of “Roddenberry’s vision” with a huge grain of salt.
Also because Roddenberry had cast his then-mistress in the role.
Er no......
Apologies for my wording but there is nuance to the wording political, and the correct wording “too cerebral” which has been used by the cast and crew in combination with what we do know about the pilot is inherently political at least in theme. Maybe I misused the word progressive in this context, but i could not and cannot think of another word that might fit
The pilot of Trek might be cerebral but Number One as the XO is the only progressive thing about it.Apologies for my wording but there is nuance to the wording political, and the correct wording “too cerebral” which has been used by the cast and crew in combination with what we do know about the pilot is inherently political at least in theme. Maybe I misused the word progressive in this context, but i could not and cannot think of another word that might fit
And the suits couldn't handle that.
I don’t think it’s progressive in todays context (some of the stuff in the original i just try to ignore lmao) but i was referring to the time it was written and the rejected pilot
Which is false. They had issues with Roddenberry casting his mistress in the role.
I don’t think it’s progressive in todays context (some of the stuff in the original i just try to ignore lmao) but i was referring to the time it was written and the rejected pilot
What would have been considered progressive about "The Cage" in 1965/1966 besides the first officer being female?
- Status
Similar threads
