The sad irony about the message of Star Trek

[JarodRussell]

In Star Trek, humans are better people, and it's a bright and glorious future.

But the sad truth is, they are only better people because they live in luxury. No one needs to starve, because they have replicators. Nobody gets sick, because they have advanced magical, err, medical treatment. And nobody is poor, because they don't have money. Fortunately, DS9 recognized this.

So ultimately, it's just a very poor guide for humanity. "If you have everything, you don't need to worry." You can afford good ideals when you don't have to face any danger. The message would have some meaning if they were better people despite bad living conditions.

 

[MacLeod]

Well people still get sick in ST and get treated for it, so a form of Universal Health care. Give me a second here, Quite a few nations have a form of Universal Health Care

As for starvation, we might possible able to solve that today with better allocation of resources. Gentic Modified Crops could possible be taiolered to work in regions with lower rainfall, Bu some people are against any form of GM crops.

 

[Count Zero]

I think the message is more that we can overcome all these fundamental problems like poverty and crime and have a bright, almost paradise-like future.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think the only real message Trek has is that the future is something to look forward to. Anything about the nuts and bolts of that future are just sci-fi trappings done solely for storytelling purposes and shouldn't be looked at as how the future will really be.

 

[Greg Cox]

In Star Trek, humans are better people, and it's a bright and glorious future.

But the sad truth is, they are only better people because they live in luxury. No one needs to starve, because they have replicators. Nobody gets sick, because they have advanced magical, err, medical treatment. And nobody is poor, because they don't have money. Fortunately, DS9 recognized this..

That wasn't really the case on TOS either. You had hardscrabble miners struggling to make a living, remote colonies were constantly under attack or on the verge of collapse. Weird alien plagues wiped out crops, causing famine. Con men, dangerous lifeforms, mail-order brides, and so on.

Heck, practically every other episode in the third season has the Enterprise rushing to deal with some sort of epidemic or famine on an imperiled Federation colony. Even McCoy came down with a terminal disease at one point, as did that female ambassador in "Metamorphosis." And let's not forget the outbreak that nearly kills the crew in "Requiem for Methuselah." Or the fact that Dr. Sevrin was apparently the far-future version of Typhoid Mary.

TOS was never about a utopian paradise. It was about imperfect people doing their best on the final frontier.

 

[BillJ]

I think the only real message Trek has is that the future is something to look forward to.

Well that and most of the women are smoking hot.

 

[Knight Templar]

In Star Trek, humans are better people, and it's a bright and glorious future.

But the sad truth is, they are only better people because they live in luxury. No one needs to starve, because they have replicators. Nobody gets sick, because they have advanced magical, err, medical treatment. And nobody is poor, because they don't have money. Fortunately, DS9 recognized this..

That wasn't really the case on TOS either. You had hardscrabble miners struggling to make a living, remote colonies were constantly under attack or on the verge of collapse. Weird alien plagues wiped out crops, causing famine. Con men, dangerous lifeforms, mail-order brides, and so on.

Heck, practically every other episode in the third season has the Enterprise rushing to deal with some sort of epidemic or famine on an imperiled Federation colony. Even McCoy came down with a terminal disease at one point, as did that female ambassador in "Metamorphosis." And let's not forget the outbreak that nearly kills the crew in "Requiem for Methuselah." Or the fact that Dr. Sevrin was apparently the far-future version of Typhoid Mary.

TOS was never about a utopian paradise. It was about imperfect people doing their best on the final frontier.

True of the Original Series,

The "everything in the future is perfect" largely came about because of Executive Producer Michael Piller who interpreted Gene Roddenberrys later comments in that fashion.

IIRC, in one of the yearly Star Trek issues of Cinemafantastique, a Star Trek writer mentioned how things were supposed to be in the future and said that he once wrote a script featuring a "luxury cruise liner" on Star Trek.

Piller supposedly shot it down because "in the 24th century they don't have cruise liners because everyone is rich anyway".

Which makes no sense because if everyone is rich then nobody is rich.

 

[Greg Cox]

It's probably worth noting that we never actually see what future Earth looks like on TOS, so we can't really say how "perfect" it is. The only time we see Earth on TOS is in the time-travel eps, set during the Great Depression or whenever. And most of what we see of the future consists of remote mining colonies, struggling scientific outposts, and weird alien cultures that probably worship computers.

Indeed, humanity is far from perfect in Kirk's time. Humanity is often described as a half-savage, child race that, on its good days, is gradually evolving away from its bloodthirsty past.

TOS is about progress, not perfection.

 

[Knight Templar]

It's probably worth noting that we never actually see what future Earth looks like on TOS, so we can't really say how "perfect" it is. The only time we see Earth on TOS is in the time-travel eps, set during the Great Depression or whenever. And most of what we see of the future consists of remote mining colonies, struggling scientific outposts, and weird alien cultures that probably worship computers.

Indeed, humanity is far from perfect in Kirk's time. Humanity is often described as a half-savage, child race that, on its good days, is gradually evolving away from its bloodthirsty past.

TOS is about progress, not perfection.

Why do you think the writers in the modern Trek era started making Earth out to be "perfect" and "paradise"?

 

[Greg Cox]

It's probably worth noting that we never actually see what future Earth looks like on TOS, so we can't really say how "perfect" it is. The only time we see Earth on TOS is in the time-travel eps, set during the Great Depression or whenever. And most of what we see of the future consists of remote mining colonies, struggling scientific outposts, and weird alien cultures that probably worship computers.

Indeed, humanity is far from perfect in Kirk's time. Humanity is often described as a half-savage, child race that, on its good days, is gradually evolving away from its bloodthirsty past.

TOS is about progress, not perfection.

Why do you think the writers in the modern Trek era started making Earth out to be "perfect" and "paradise"?

As he got older, Roddenberry seemed to get more invested in the idea that Trek was some sort of visionary utopian manifesto, as did some fans--who often seem to forget how rough-and-tumble Trek originally was.

Plus, of course, the shows couldn't keep avoiding future Earth forever. And it made sense that Earth would be more peaceful and civilized than the outer fringes of the Federation, which is where the Enterprise usually ran into trouble and adventure.

 

[Mr Silver]

I think the only real message Trek has is that the future is something to look forward to.

Well that and most of the women are smoking hot.

And none of them are lesbians.

 

[Mage]

The sad irony of the message is, that Trek fans don't seem to get it. Because instead of respecting others for who they are and their opinions, fans seem to attack every other fan that feels differentý about their favorite character/ship/series/episode...

That's what I call irony...

 

[Mr Silver]

The sad irony of the message is, that Trek fans don't seem to get it. Because instead of respecting others for who they are and their opinions, fans seem to attack every other fan that feels differentý about their favorite character/ship/series/episode...

That's what I call irony...

People have argued over preferences and what is perceived as best, since the dawn of time and this has swept across pretty much everything from relationships, to food and drink, to athletes, to movies, to music and of course, to fandom.

Besides, Trek itself isn't much better, politics is still a major factor in society and people still sink low when the pressure mounts - just look at the Dominion war where virtually everyone played dirty, prejudices were formed and constant bickering about whose plan of action was right was common place. Humanity may have improved, but it hasn't changed it's nature.

 

[Deckerd]

I hate to break it to you but Earth is paradise. It's what people do in it that makes or breaks every individual's experience.

 

[Nightdiamond]

In Star Trek, humans are better people, and it's a bright and glorious future.

But the sad truth is, they are only better people because they live in luxury. No one needs to starve, because they have replicators. Nobody gets sick, because they have advanced magical, err, medical treatment. And nobody is poor, because they don't have money. Fortunately, DS9 recognized this.

So ultimately, it's just a very poor guide for humanity. "If you have everything, you don't need to worry." You can afford good ideals when you don't have to face any danger. The message would have some meaning if they were better people despite bad living conditions.

But is that so wrong? Maybe when we take care the basic needs, then it frees people to focus on other things like improving the human condition more, looking at things differently, getting along etc.

Hard to do that if you're always struggling. But then again, I was always curious about this idea also.

Trek characters, humans in particular, have some dirty little secrets about themselves.

 

[JarodRussell]

Well people still get sick in ST and get treated for it, so a form of Universal Health care. Give me a second here, Quite a few nations have a form of Universal Health Care

As for starvation, we might possible able to solve that today with better allocation of resources. Gentic Modified Crops could possible be taiolered to work in regions with lower rainfall, Bu some people are against any form of GM crops.

I think the message is more that we can overcome all these fundamental problems like poverty and crime and have a bright, almost paradise-like future.

I think the only real message Trek has is that the future is something to look forward to. Anything about the nuts and bolts of that future are just sci-fi trappings done solely for storytelling purposes and shouldn't be looked at as how the future will really be.

But is that so wrong? Maybe when we take care the basic needs, then it frees people to focus on other things like improving the human condition more, looking at things differently, getting along etc.

Hard to do that if you're always struggling. But then again, I was always curious about this idea also.

Trek characters, humans in particular, have some dirty little secrets about themselves.

That's the problem: it's impossible to achieve, because, especially in the later shows, all their wealth is based on magical technobabble. The actual reasons why their society is "better" isn't grounded in reality.

 

[Count Zero]

It's based on inventiveness and the will to do it, I'd say.

 

[RandyS]

In Star Trek, humans are better people, and it's a bright and glorious future.

But the sad truth is, they are only better people because they live in luxury. No one needs to starve, because they have replicators. Nobody gets sick, because they have advanced magical, err, medical treatment. And nobody is poor, because they don't have money. Fortunately, DS9 recognized this..

That wasn't really the case on TOS either. You had hardscrabble miners struggling to make a living, remote colonies were constantly under attack or on the verge of collapse. Weird alien plagues wiped out crops, causing famine. Con men, dangerous lifeforms, mail-order brides, and so on.

Heck, practically every other episode in the third season has the Enterprise rushing to deal with some sort of epidemic or famine on an imperiled Federation colony. Even McCoy came down with a terminal disease at one point, as did that female ambassador in "Metamorphosis." And let's not forget the outbreak that nearly kills the crew in "Requiem for Methuselah." Or the fact that Dr. Sevrin was apparently the far-future version of Typhoid Mary.

TOS was never about a utopian paradise. It was about imperfect people doing their best on the final frontier.

Exactly. That whole "perfect people" bit was a TNG creation that got blown waaaaay out of proportion.

But, it says alot about the concept, since so many people bitch about it all the time.

 

[RandyS]

Well people still get sick in ST and get treated for it, so a form of Universal Health care. Give me a second here, Quite a few nations have a form of Universal Health Care

As for starvation, we might possible able to solve that today with better allocation of resources. Gentic Modified Crops could possible be taiolered to work in regions with lower rainfall, Bu some people are against any form of GM crops.

I think the message is more that we can overcome all these fundamental problems like poverty and crime and have a bright, almost paradise-like future.

I think the only real message Trek has is that the future is something to look forward to. Anything about the nuts and bolts of that future are just sci-fi trappings done solely for storytelling purposes and shouldn't be looked at as how the future will really be.

But is that so wrong? Maybe when we take care the basic needs, then it frees people to focus on other things like improving the human condition more, looking at things differently, getting along etc.

Hard to do that if you're always struggling. But then again, I was always curious about this idea also.

Trek characters, humans in particular, have some dirty little secrets about themselves.

That's the problem: it's impossible to achieve, because, especially in the later shows, all their wealth is based on magical technobabble. The actual reasons why their society is "better" isn't grounded in reality.

A science fiction show grounded in reality is an oxymoron.

Why does nobody understand this?

 

[Sci]

A science fiction show grounded in reality is an oxymoron.

Why does nobody understand this?

Not inherently so. Science fiction can be plausible or implausible in its depictions of future technological advancements.

* * *

Meanwhile...

Star Trek is not about the idea that humanity is fundamentally different by nature, or that perfection is possible. It's about the idea that social structures can be improved upon, and that those improved social structures can bring out the best in us, our greatest potential. There's nothing wrong with the idea that we can eliminate the exploitative, oppressive social structures through political will rather than technological dependency -- remember, in the world of Star Trek, poverty, disease, racism, war, prejudice, sexism, classism, and oppression were eliminated on Earth long before the invention of the replicator.