Ways that SNW actually improved TOS

[Cr0sis21]

I thought about this after some posts I made in the Gen Trek forum, but one of the things I love about Strange New Worlds is the way that it makes certain aspects of the Original Series so much better than they already were. Here's a list of a few I could think of:
1) This was the first one I thought of, and that's T'Pring. SNW has really expanded and improved her character, along with adding depth to her relationship with Spock AND providing a motivation for her actions in Amok Time that is sympathetic.
2) Along the same lines, it also adds a lot of depth to the relationship between Spock and Chapel. Whereas on TOS Chapel just seemed like someone with an unrequited crush on Spock, in SNW we see that it's much deeper than that, and the Spock we see in TOS is probably reacting to Chapel the way he does because he's still very emotionally damaged from how their relationship ended.
3) Speaking of relationships, we get a much stronger explanation for why Spock would literally risk his career (And death, apparently, har-har) to take Pike to Talos. When you consider that Spock knew Pike was aware of his own fate, and chose to live with it anyway in order to save Spock's life, that is a powerful motivator for what Spock did to help Pike.
4) Another relationship that really gets fleshed out? The explanation of Sarek's attitude towards Spock. Now it's not just a trite "Oh, my son didn't pursue the career I WANTED him to pursue", it's literally a slap in the face to Sarek since he sabotaged Burnham's choice with the assumption Spock would take her place. So Spock tossed all of Sarek's plans in the bin and damaged his reputation in the process. Suddenly, the bitterness makes a lot more sense.
5) The war with the Klingons goes a long way in contextualizing the animosity we see towards the Klingons in TOS, as well. It explains the Fed's actions all the way up to Star Trek 6 and Cartwright's conspiracy.
That's what I can think of off the top of my head. Anyone have any other ways the new Trek has improved on what came before?

 

[Annie McCoy]

I was slightly dubious of this post (though that's because while I like aspects of SNW its not my favourite, TOS is) but I love it! The expansion of T'Pring's character is something I'm really grateful for as it also allows for an expansion into Vulcan culture in a way not necessarily expanded on before. Similar thing with Sarek (I must say I am quite fascinated by Sarek as a character so anything that shows more context for that is great in my books). I agree with all of these points (except point 2 but that's just a personal thing because Im not the biggest fan of Spock/Chapel being a requited thing - I project onto Spock I'm sorry yall). I also quite like seeing the crew at the beginning of their friendships, I can't wait for more Scotty content that's the main thing im looking forward to to be honest.

 

[Christopher]

I thought about this after some posts I made in the Gen Trek forum, but one of the things I love about Strange New Worlds is the way that it makes certain aspects of the Original Series so much better than they already were. Here's a list of a few I could think of:
1) This was the first one I thought of, and that's T'Pring. SNW has really expanded and improved her character, along with adding depth to her relationship with Spock AND providing a motivation for her actions in Amok Time that is sympathetic.

I have to disagree here. Yes, in most respects the handling of T'Pring is better, although SNW does make Vulcans a bit too human in their romantic expression (whatever happened to the finger touching?). But it badly undermines "Amok Time" in one key way. The reason for T'Pring's actions in "Amok Time" was that koon ut kalifee was her only option for getting out of an unwanted marriage. But "The Serene Squall" showed that Spock and T'Pring could sever their engagement quite easily just by declaring it over, which would mean that T'Pring forced Spock to fight his best friend to the death for absolutely no reason.

2) Along the same lines, it also adds a lot of depth to the relationship between Spock and Chapel. Whereas on TOS Chapel just seemed like someone with an unrequited crush on Spock, in SNW we see that it's much deeper than that, and the Spock we see in TOS is probably reacting to Chapel the way he does because he's still very emotionally damaged from how their relationship ended.

Here I agree completely. It makes Chapel a much better character if she's an ex who still has feelings for Spock rather than just someone pathetically obsessed with an unrequited crush. And it's not that hard to reconcile with TOS if you squint a little.

3) Speaking of relationships, we get a much stronger explanation for why Spock would literally risk his career (And death, apparently, har-har) to take Pike to Talos. When you consider that Spock knew Pike was aware of his own fate, and chose to live with it anyway in order to save Spock's life, that is a powerful motivator for what Spock did to help Pike.

Agreed here too, and more. You're discussing ways SNW improves TOS, but realizing this about SNW made me realize something about The Wrath of Khan. I realized that Spock had known in advance for years that Pike would sacrifice himself to save cadets from a radiation leak... and then Spock chose to do the exact same thing in TWOK. I was boggled when that hit me.

4) Another relationship that really gets fleshed out? The explanation of Sarek's attitude towards Spock. Now it's not just a trite "Oh, my son didn't pursue the career I WANTED him to pursue", it's literally a slap in the face to Sarek since he sabotaged Burnham's choice with the assumption Spock would take her place. So Spock tossed all of Sarek's plans in the bin and damaged his reputation in the process. Suddenly, the bitterness makes a lot more sense.

That's from Discovery rather than SNW, but yes. "Lethe" deepened "Journey to Babel" in a remarkable way. Though I don't see it as bitterness on Sarek's part, I see it as guilt that he sabotaged Burnham for no reason. He couldn't face the guilt, so he took it out on Spock.

5) The war with the Klingons goes a long way in contextualizing the animosity we see towards the Klingons in TOS, as well. It explains the Fed's actions all the way up to Star Trek 6 and Cartwright's conspiracy.

Also from DSC, but yeah. I mean, it was always implicit in TOS that there had been conflict with the Klingons in the past, but DSC helped spell that out more. I do think it made the war too big, though, since it contradicts the lines in TWOK and "The Infinite Vulcan" about Starfleet keeping the peace for a hundred years prior.

That's what I can think of off the top of my head. Anyone have any other ways the new Trek has improved on what came before?

Making Pike a better, more interesting character, and more distinct from Kirk (who was literally just Pike with a name change at first, so that most of Kirk's bio in the writers' guide was copied verbatim from Pike's bio in the series prospectus). Finally giving Uhura character development and doing a generally great job with her. Establishing a history between Uhura and Spock to explain their closeness in early TOS. Developing Robert April as a character and making the Enterprise's first captain a person of color. (Presumably TAS just drew him wrong.)

 

[fireproof78]

for absolutely no reason.

No.

It was a building resentment. It makes very good sense.

since it contradicts the lines in TWOK and "The Infinite Vulcan" about Starfleet keeping the peace for a hundred years prior.

Well, that was after Vulcan was conquered.

 

[Jayson1]

Pike's hair.

 

[Annie McCoy]

Pike's hair.

(un)arguably the most important part of SNW to me is Anson Mount and his hair as Pike

 

[Cr0sis21]

I have to disagree here. Yes, in most respects the handling of T'Pring is better, although SNW does make Vulcans a bit too human in their romantic expression (whatever happened to the finger touching?). But it badly undermines "Amok Time" in one key way. The reason for T'Pring's actions in "Amok Time" was that koon ut kalifee was her only option for getting out of an unwanted marriage. But "The Serene Squall" showed that Spock and T'Pring could sever their engagement quite easily just by declaring it over, which would mean that T'Pring forced Spock to fight his best friend to the death for absolutely no reason.

I think a lot of that depends on what you want to keep from Amok Time. To me, the idea that Vulcans can only divorce if they fight to the death (And from a prearranged marriage to boot) seems like the antithesis of logic.
Instead we have two families that brought they kids together because it seemed like a logical match. And then when it wasn't working out, T'Pring used Spock's pon Farr to make it as uncomfortable for him as possible. She probably saw Kirk as a stand-in for all of Starfleet.
As for Vulcans actually boning? At first I was put off by it, but then I realized that since Vulcans still have emotions, it makes logical sense for them to privately indulge in pleasurable sensations. After all, if the pleasure of such things didn't matter, there'd be no such thing as Vulcan cuisine or Vulcan music either.

 

[Christopher]

I think a lot of that depends on what you want to keep from Amok Time. To me, the idea that Vulcans can only divorce if they fight to the death (And from a prearranged marriage to boot) seems like the antithesis of logic.

The whole thing is illogical. That's kind of the point, that it's a relic from the times before logic, a set of rituals so deeply ingrained as a means of coping with the mating frenzy that they can't really get rid of it. There are parts that they probably could reform, but they're so ashamed of the whole thing that they just prefer not to deal with it more than they have to, so the archaic practices remain.

Instead we have two families that brought they kids together because it seemed like a logical match. And then when it wasn't working out, T'Pring used Spock's pon Farr to make it as uncomfortable for him as possible. She probably saw Kirk as a stand-in for all of Starfleet.

Which, if true, is the very thing that destroys her as a character. If the system was designed, however illogically, to leave T'Pring with no other escape, then she's as much a victim of the system as anyone else and her actions can be read sympathetically. But if there was an easy way out of the marriage and she chose needlessly to force Spock to kill his best friend, acting purely out of vindictiveness, that's downright psychopathic.

As for Vulcans actually boning? At first I was put off by it, but then I realized that since Vulcans still have emotions, it makes logical sense for them to privately indulge in pleasurable sensations. After all, if the pleasure of such things didn't matter, there'd be no such thing as Vulcan cuisine or Vulcan music either.

That's not the issue. D.C. Fontana always insisted that Vulcans were sexually active outside of pon farr. The issue is having them express it in such a conventionally human way, with kissing and so forth (indeed, kissing isn't even a universal human practice), rather than the more alien way that TOS established.

 

[Cr0sis21]

The whole thing is illogical. That's kind of the point, that it's a relic from the times before logic, a set of rituals so deeply ingrained as a means of coping with the mating frenzy that they can't really get rid of it. There are parts that they probably could reform, but they're so ashamed of the whole thing that they just prefer not to deal with it more than they have to, so the archaic practices remain.

The aspect of it I like quite a bit.

Which, if true, is the very thing that destroys her as a character. If the system was designed, however illogically, to leave T'Pring with no other escape, then she's as much a victim of the system as anyone else and her actions can be read sympathetically. But if there was an easy way out of the marriage and she chose needlessly to force Spock to kill his best friend, acting purely out of vindictiveness, that's downright psychopathic.

No matter how you slice it, what she did could be considered psychopathic from a human point of view. As a VUlcan, she might view it in purely logical terms (Remember: Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end). But now we've seen that she spent decades with Spock, she went out of her way to research his human side, she defied her parents in support of him...and then he lied to her. And she could clearly see he was smitten with Chapel, to boot.
If Sarek can cut off his son for literal decades (It legitimately took Spock dying to bring Sarek around), then I think it's certainly within the realm of possibility for T'Pring to react in such a manner.

That's not the issue. D.C. Fontana always insisted that Vulcans were sexually active outside of pon farr. The issue is having them express it in such a conventionally human way, with kissing and so forth (indeed, kissing isn't even a universal human practice), rather than the more alien way that TOS established.

Ah. Well, I always took the finger thing as both a bit of foreplay (Star Trek 3) and a publicly acceptable form of affection (Thus why the waiter was so chuffed about Spock and T'Pring's PDA).

 

[fireproof78]

No matter how you slice it, what she did could be considered psychopathic from a human point of view. As a VUlcan, she might view it in purely logical terms (Remember: Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end). But now we've seen that she spent decades with Spock, she went out of her way to research his human side, she defied her parents in support of him...and then he lied to her. And she could clearly see he was smitten with Chapel, to boot.
If Sarek can cut off his son for literal decades (It legitimately took Spock dying to bring Sarek around), then I think it's certainly within the realm of possibility for T'Pring to react in such a manner.

Agreed. The death of one in service to her goals is of little consequence from a logic standpoint. Her decision, from a Vulcan perspective, is ironclad. She abided by traditional ceremony, satisfying any and all obligations in society, while not limiting herself.

As Spock noted, logical. Flawlessly logical.

 

[Christopher]

If Sarek can cut off his son for literal decades (It legitimately took Spock dying to bring Sarek around), then I think it's certainly within the realm of possibility for T'Pring to react in such a manner.

It's not about whether it's possible, it's about how it redefines her action as something far more malicious and gratuitous than what Theodore Sturgeon no doubt intended, and that's at odds with the rest of how SNW portrays her.

I mean, I certainly appreciate the intent of SNW's writers to distance themselves from the rather misogynistic system depicted in "Amok Time" where women were "the property of the victor" and had no good way out of a marriage they didn't want, but in trying to fix it, they inadvertently made it much worse. If T'Pring could get out of the marriage just by saying "I don't want it," then the entire plot of "Amok Time" has no reason to occur the way it did.

 

[Cr0sis21]

It's not about whether it's possible, it's about how it redefines her action as something far more malicious and gratuitous than what Theodore Sturgeon no doubt intended, and that's at odds with the rest of how SNW portrays her.

I mean, I certainly appreciate the intent of SNW's writers to distance themselves from the rather misogynistic system depicted in "Amok Time" where women were "the property of the victor" and had no good way out of a marriage they didn't want, but in trying to fix it, they inadvertently made it much worse. If T'Pring could get out of the marriage just by saying "I don't want it," then the entire plot of "Amok Time" has no reason to occur the way it did.

I think it only has no reason to occur if you look at it in a vacuum.
However:
1) T'Pring is probably still really pissed.
2) Pon Farr gives her an excuse to end her marriage in a traditional way that would spare her family embarrassment.
3) We know she was already biased against Starfleet because she resented it for taking Spock from her
4) She'd already shown a willingness to act in ways that were not the norm for Vulcans, and a disdain for tradition.

Plus, we don't know what leads to Sybok not being in her care anymore, but I have a feeling it doesn't lead to warm fuzzy feelings between her and Spock. Especially as I'm assuming she took him on as a patient as a favor to Sarek and/or Spock.
Plus-plus, I'm willing to accept a less noble version of T'Pring if it means we can essential wipe away the whole "women as property" aspect of Amok Time.

 

[fireproof78]

I mean, it clearly didn't break up the betrothal as they still continue on.

And Tpring is absolutely cold in Amok Time. SNW at least gives her another dimension.

 

[Oddish]

I like the perspective that it throws on the earlier episode, with Kirk and the Romulans... we see later how Pike would have handled it: more thoughtful, more diplomatic, more Starfleet... and it would have led to disaster. Sometimes, you just need a cowboy diplomat.

 

[Christopher]

I think it only has no reason to occur if you look at it in a vacuum.
However:
1) T'Pring is probably still really pissed.
2) Pon Farr gives her an excuse to end her marriage in a traditional way that would spare her family embarrassment.
3) We know she was already biased against Starfleet because she resented it for taking Spock from her
4) She'd already shown a willingness to act in ways that were not the norm for Vulcans, and a disdain for tradition.

I repeat: This is not about whether she had a reason. It's about the nature of her reason and what it says about who she is as a person. Every motivation you give here reduces it purely to a spiteful, vindictive act she chose to perform, rather than the last-ditch option of someone who had no other way out. The issue is not the possibility of her acting that way, the issue is whether we want her to be defined as a character who would act that way, and I do not.

Don't forget -- she forced a situation that, if not for McCoy's trickery, would have resulted in someone's death. That's basically murder by proxy. "She was really pissed" or "she wanted to spare her family embarrassment" doesn't even begin to make that a justifiable act. If that was her only motive, it makes her a psychopath, or just plain evil. And that is not what "Amok Time" intended, and it's not how SNW portrays her, so it just doesn't fit.

Plus-plus, I'm willing to accept a less noble version of T'Pring if it means we can essential wipe away the whole "women as property" aspect of Amok Time.

"Less noble" is one thing. "Willing to make a man kill his best friend purely out of spite" is orders of magnitude away from that, and from the way SNW has developed her as a character. It's an unintended contradiction that they evidently didn't think through.

 

[fireproof78]

And that is not what "Amok Time" intended, and it's not how SNW portrays her, so it just doesn't fit.

Dude, Amok Time has manipulative and murderous. She wanted Stonn and used tradition to get what she wanted, with no concern for Kirk.

She came across as a psychopath long before SNW.

 

[Captain Jollydark]

No.

It was a building resentment. It makes very good sense.

YES makes perfect sense. Also, there could be a whole bunch of stuff that happens between them coming down the pike (so to speak). Her hurt and resentment are the seeds of something bigger. Also...I'm gonna go with the idea that they can only divorce with the fighty-fight because they waited too long to end it before he got the BURNING. Spock's dream in Spock Amok he says "but that's ritual combat!" like it's crazy and nobody does that anymore.

 

[Captain Jollydark]

Dude, Amok Time has manipulative and murderous. She wanted Stonn and used tradition to get what she wanted, with no concern for Kirk.

She came across as a psychopath long before SNW.

See, now I'm looking at it like she didn't want Spock to die either so she picked Kirk. It would be cold-hearted in the most extreme logical way but not vicious - but only if she doesn't know Kirk and Spock are friends. (And they aren't yet so she may never learn it). If she does know that's different and exactly as stated there.

 

[fireproof78]

See, now I'm looking at it like she didn't want Spock to die either so she picked Kirk. It would be cold-hearted in the most extreme logical way but not vicious - but only if she doesn't know Kirk and Spock are friends. (And they aren't yet so she may never learn it). If she does know that's different and exactly as stated there.

But someone still had to die.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Sometimes, you just need a cowboy diplomat.

Nah. The whole "cowboy" thing never made sense to me. Especially in TOS.