Re: If you were the creator of VOY, what would you have done different
That may be true. I personally think considering that the fans of trek are generally attracted to trek because of its message of peace and equality they would in general and in the long run fine with it. The 90's, at least from my perspective as a gay, was that cusp where people were more open to being gay, hence Will and Grace, too wong foo, and my so called life (i know that show was cancelled but even I thought it was boring.)
and I know homosexuality exists in star trek and it's no big. BUT, another purpose of trek was to tell "morality plays" as Roddenberry put it in a way that wouldn't deeply offend the public in a sci-fi setting that sort of masks what the show's message was really about. In reality, being gay was an issue and still is, so in my opinion it's unfair to shy away from that social message when that is what the show was originally intended for.
Yeah it would've been risque, but so was the original series. It was supposed to be, to teach tolerance and equality. That's why I would've included gay characters.
I agree the subject would have to be handled with care. I would be to biased to take over that issue I would leave it to a group of straight and gay people who didn't care as passionately as I did.
BUT i could have, and should've, been done. IF NOT Voyager, then by the time Enterprise rolled around. But honestly, i think at that point it would've made star trek look like it was merely jumping on the bandwagon. It should have been the leader.
I don't just care cause' i'm a gay, even though that's a part of it. I care because i love star trek, and I hate to see its message marred because of social views. that was not what it was intended for. the 90's was more open and they could've gotten away with it if it was done right.
That may be true. I personally think considering that the fans of trek are generally attracted to trek because of its message of peace and equality they would in general and in the long run fine with it. The 90's, at least from my perspective as a gay, was that cusp where people were more open to being gay, hence Will and Grace, too wong foo, and my so called life (i know that show was cancelled but even I thought it was boring.)
and I know homosexuality exists in star trek and it's no big. BUT, another purpose of trek was to tell "morality plays" as Roddenberry put it in a way that wouldn't deeply offend the public in a sci-fi setting that sort of masks what the show's message was really about. In reality, being gay was an issue and still is, so in my opinion it's unfair to shy away from that social message when that is what the show was originally intended for.
Yeah it would've been risque, but so was the original series. It was supposed to be, to teach tolerance and equality. That's why I would've included gay characters.
I agree the subject would have to be handled with care. I would be to biased to take over that issue I would leave it to a group of straight and gay people who didn't care as passionately as I did.
BUT i could have, and should've, been done. IF NOT Voyager, then by the time Enterprise rolled around. But honestly, i think at that point it would've made star trek look like it was merely jumping on the bandwagon. It should have been the leader.
I don't just care cause' i'm a gay, even though that's a part of it. I care because i love star trek, and I hate to see its message marred because of social views. that was not what it was intended for. the 90's was more open and they could've gotten away with it if it was done right.