Maybe then you should do a better job at making your point because I'm not the only one in this thread who took that as your meaning.
There is no possible way for me to do a better job than coming right out and clearly stating that I feel the quality and skill in the execution of Deep Space Nine was just as good as The Next Generation, and that different people having differing tastes is what led to the bit of disparity between the two show's level of success.
Seriously? That's the road you are going down? Because the same thing can be said about your view. Is this the game you want to waste time playing?
That would be a scathing retort if I had just kept repeating "DS9 is not heavily serialized, it's episodic!"
Unfortunately for you that's not what I did. I claimed that DS9 was heavily episodic, with a minor serialization element. Then when challenged on this I provided figures to back up my claim. I don't believe any objective person would call a show with over 150 stand alone stories of it's 170-something episodes a serial. Or even "heavily serialized" for that matter, let alone point to that as a reason said show was unfairly shunned.
But here's the crazy part... even if the episode ratio was heavily tipped in favour of serialized storytelling, that STILL wouldn't be a valid reason for the show's
imagined lack of deserved success. The "X-files" was a comparable property with even more serialization than DS9 airing at the same time, and it did EVEN Better than TNG! Surely that would prove the presence of serialization in storytelling cannot be responsible for limiting the audience in a meaningful way.
Nonsense. By the very nature of it being a show that took place on a station which rotated in the same section of space meant it had no choice but to rely more heavily on continuity and on a semi-state of serialization. To claim that it didn't do so any more than TNG suggests you are in a state of denial; you are taking a position that no person who writes reviews or commentaries of the show ever takes.
Continuity and serialization are not the same thing. I have NEVER claimed that TNG had any serialization integrated into it's format. It however had all kinds of continuity.
Now of course through dictate from Paramount DS9 had to remain in theory an episodic show with its own number of self-contained storylines, something that would make it easier for any casual viewer to drop into any showing of DS9 and not be confused. But the thing is countless folks still complained about being confused when doing just that. DS9 was never as accessible a show as TNG and TOS because there was always so much more back story and the characters themselves could be different from season to season. Not to mention backdrops, relationships, alliances, political statuses are constantly in flux. For the first five or possibly six seasons it is almost as if TPTB did a reset at the beginning of the year. That makes it practically a requirement to rebroadcast the eps in order to not throw off more casual viewers. Otherwise you tune in one day and Kira and Sisko are at each others' throats and the next episode the two of them are having a sober conversation about faith in the Prophets. One episode the series regulars are all on DS9 the next they are scattered throughout the galaxy after The Federation was forced to abandon the station. One episode it is peace time in which the Federation is trying to help lead Bajor to a better future and the next the Federation's future is in jeopardy as the war with the Dominion is not going well. One episode Dukat is an ally to Sisko and his crew and the Klingons are the major threat, the next the Klingons are Sisko and his crew's most reliable allies and Dukat is now part of great threat to the Federation and the rest of the Alpha Quadrant.
Yes that's called continuity, and it doesn't alienate anybody. Things evolve over the course of a show. You could tune in one day and Ross and Rachel are kissing in the corner, and then you tune in another day and he's engaged to some british chick... HOW DEEP I CAN'T POSSIBLY FOLLOW THIS SHOW!
I've never argued that Deep Space Nine was a truly serial show like BSG or even B5. But it has far more serial elements than TNG. First of all DS9 was a Trek show that first introduced a three-parter. It then brought to Trek a six-parter that was preceded by two episodes that led to that six parter and succeeding hour episode coming after that six-parter that immediately followed up and wrapped up all that occurred before (essentially making it a nine-part arc). And then there was a final ten hour wrap up that was truly serialized (the whole final season would have been serialized like that if Paramount had agreed). Once more....please tell me the examples of TNG coming close to doing anything like that.
When did I claim TNG did?
Serialization and continuity are not the same thing. It appears from the facts you're citing here that you're in complete agreement with me, and yet you're spouting them as if you're in opposition to my sentiment?
DS9 was more likely to make use of continuity. That's why Sisko and Kira could spend the entire first season being at odds and distrustful of one another before coming to some kind of truce in the final episode of the season. Where is the TNG equivalent of that?
Picard and Q.
During season five Odo can adjust to no longer having his shapeshifting abilities for about a 1/3 of a year before regaining them. On TNG that would all happened and been over in a span no longer than a two-parter.
On TNG Worf can adjust to becoming a father for a hell of a lot longer than 1/3rd of a year.
On DS9 Sisko's slow acceptance and growing comfort over his role as Emissary occurred year from year. What's the TNG equivalent?
On TNG Picard's slow acceptance and growing comfort with his role as leader occured from year to year, culminating in his willingness to open himself and connect with those under his command.
Unlike TNG which would introduce a galactic showdown in a season ender only to conclude it in the season opener of the following season, DS9 provided a conflict with the Klingons that lasted one entire season, a buildup of antagonism with the Dominion that brewed over the course of three years and an all-out galactic war involving Dominion that lasted two whole seasons.
The looming threat of the borg built for a year and a half, climaxing in an all out invasion and then a few more years of looming threat. That didn't go away just because there was no formal declaration of war. Not to mention managing the tensions between the Federation and Cardassian Union, and the Federation and the Romulan Empire. These things were treated with the same amount of continuity as they would have been had the Federation been in a state of war with these entities
i.e. A few episodes here and there dealing with the situation in between unrelated stories. Just like Deep Space Nine.
DS9 also had roughly 20 recurring characters on heavy rotation who were either forever affected by game-changing events in some cases or whose presence forever altered the path of individuals and empires in other cases. That is what you call continuity.
I disagree. Deep Space Nine has great recurring and guest characters, but most of them were not changed during the show's run. How was Morn or Joseph Sisko or Vic Fontaine or Admiral Ross forever affected by game-changing events? There were also great ones who really did go through some ordeals during the show really shaking up their status quo. Nog, Garak, Dukat, etc. Just like Wesley Crusher, Ensign Ro, Q, etc. That IS what I call continuity.
You know if you have to resort to condescending retorts you already lost the argument. Stick to your points if you have any. I know you are a fan of DS9. I can read after all. I wouldn't waste my time trying to convince anyone that DS9 is a good show anyway. That is something I stopped doing during the 90s. And besides liking or disliking the show is all subjective and therefore totally dependent on a person's tastes.
That wasn't condescending... I hadn't adressed you at all, and you went out of your way to basically tell me how you prefer DS9 to TNG and that you're not alone in that opinion, as if that was somehow relevant, despite the fact that two posts earlier I had said this;
"I prefer TNG (only by an infinitesimal margin), but I honestly couldn't find any fault with anyone who's taste led them to prefer DS9."
Let me say it again... it's irrelevant. If pointing that out means I've lost the argument, then congratulations.
For God's sake take your own advice and reread your own posts. Because you were clearly arguing that DS9 was no more complex than TNG. Stop shifting the goal posts at every opportunity. That wastes both of our time.
Let me paraphrase this to break it down nice and simply for you and anybody reading this...
ME: Both TNG and DS9 have conflicted characters, one is not more conflicted than the other.
YOU: By all means please list all these more complex TNG characters because me and my buddies will make fun of them!
ME: That's not what I said... I never claimed that TNG has more complex characters than DS9...
YOU: Stop shifting the goal posts!
... okay?
The rest of your post seems designed to try and dismiss the 3 examples I provided when you requested them. All I can say is that they speak for themselves. They are all complex and difficult situations for the characters involved in them. If you feel that Picard's ordeal in The Best Of Both Worlds was dramatically impotent and less important because he was forced to do these terrible things instead of choosing to do them, then I don't think you'll understand my reasons for disagreeing. If you think that because Data didn't become a vicious killer after pulling the trigger on Kivas Fajo or because he was pulled out before the weapon fired the story is somehow less dark and complex than other examples you cited, then I'm not sure there's anything I can say to convince you otherwise.
I, on the other hand, am not going to try and diminish some of the cool dilemmas set up in DS9 like "In the Pale Moonlight" or "For the Uniform". These are just as good as the great ones TNG threw at us.
Totally awesome.
S9 was Misjudged" article. I was there to witness this stuff. I had friends and family members who did some of the very things I mentioned above. I had contact to the new message forums on the internet to read remarks by people who didn't care for DS9 and those remarks were similar to the ones covered in this article. So for some of you to claim that the writer is off track with his assessment is a bit much. There were maybe a couple of things he included that didn't belong as well as a couple of examples that he failed to use. But for the most part he got it right. Now if you disagree with those facts I tossed out based upon my own experience and argue that this position of mine is simply my opinion then so be it. But your counters, which I find lacking in evidence, is also merely an opinion. So what makes yours more legit than mine or vice versa? 
