Star Trek and SF....

Given Star Trek's genre this might sound silly, but...

Were you interested in science fiction before you got into Star Trek or after because you got into Star Trek?


Back in the mid to late '60s I read some superhero comic books (which are tangetal to SF) and I watched or was aware of shows like Adventures Of Superman, Lost In Space, Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea, Time Tunnel, Land Of The Giants, Space Ghost, Johnny Quest and some others. At the time (being not even 10 years old) I wasn't aware of this as a separate and distinct genre.

But Star Trek changed that for me in 1970 (I missed the original run) and everything that came before paled in comparison. After that my perspective of what I liked in SF became more, uh, focused. I became more aware of SF as something distinct as well as having different flavours to it. Star Trek also piqued my curiosity in other things referenced in the show that I would look into in greater detail at the library.

I know it can be hard to draw a definite line for this sort of question. As a child I watched certain things with a definite sci-fi flavour to them so it would appear I already had a leaning to that kind if materiel. But I didn't think of it that way until I got older.

One thing I do know for certain is that I didn't begin reading SF literature until sometime after getting into Star Trek. Whether that was inspired by the show itself or beginning to read the James Blish adaptations I can't say because it was a long time ago. Perhaps the earliest non Trek book I recall reading was Isaac Asimov's The Stars, Like Dust. There's also reading The Making Of Star Trek which explained a lot of the show's background and inner workings.

If I hadn't found and gotten into Star Trek (which seems unlikely given my earlier leanings) it's impossible to say whether I would have gotten into reading science fiction or not. But my interest in Star Trek definitely further fueled my interest in other non Trek SF in literature as well as film and television.

If there is a distinction in the before and after (for me) it's that before Star Trek I didn't see SF or sci-fi as anything more than something fun to watch. At this point I hadn't yet become aware of shows like The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits or things might have unfolded differently. So Star Trek made me aware that science fiction could be multilayered and have more meaning than simple escapist fun. it helped me more clearly define what SF was, what it could be and what forms it could take from the ridiculous to the moving and inspirational.


Anyone else?

I think I went from watching Star Wars on tv to watching TNG to watching more Trek to reading Trek and then onto reading and watching more sci fi and fantasy too.

Star Trek and Star Wars were what got me into my love of science fiction and space science.

Oh yeah. I watched sci fi movies on tv before there was Trek.

Here I thought this thread was going to be about the San Francisco Fleet Yards!

Born in 72, Star Wars and Star Trek are my two earliest memories of SF. Seeing SW at 5 definitely left an impression, and I don't remember if I'd seen ST reruns before that, but I'd def seen many eps before seeing TMP in the theater when I was 7.

ST eventually led me to SF literature including ST books but also Niven, Asimov, Ellison, Clarke, Dick, etc. My first SF convention opened me to smaller films like Buckaroo Banzai and the whole world of fan-fiction, parody and homage, and to a degree lesser know horror. All due to SF. It gave me an interest in the work of actors and directors and composers and also a greater appreciation for classic literature and social politics, which subsequently furthered my appreciation and understanding of SF as metaphor.

Not bad for a 3-season 1960's TV show. As much as I appreciate later Trek movies and series, I wish Roddenberry, Bennet and Berman kept closer ties to SF writers for the spin-offs. Many of the unique ideas present in ST were overwhelmed by character in later iterations with the SF becoming more window dressing. ENT and VOY seemed at times to make an attempt to strike more of a balance between SF concepts and character but didn't serve either as well as ST, TNG or DS9 did separately.

It was simultaneous for me. I discovered Science Fiction and Star Trek at the same time. I was already watching SF fims and TV when TOS premiered. By the eary 70s, when I really got into Trek via syndication, I had already read Asimov, Verne and Burroughs and was deep into SF lit.

The '70s were "my time" so to speak in the sense they were my teenage years. I was about 11 when I came upon Star Trek and 20 when when I saw ST-TMP in 1979.

The sci-fi of the '60s were something I caught up with into the early '70s, but that I lost most interest with upon finding Star Trek and a new wave of somewhat more evolved SF such as U.F.O. and the early seasons of The Six Million Dollar Man. Incredibly, while I was aware of and had seen episodes of the original Twilight Zone, I never saw the original Outer Limits until a few years ago when (based on reccommendation) I bought the series set and thoroughly enjoyed most of it. It's easy to see a template for Star Trek in much of the original Outer Limits. I only wish I had see The Outer Limits much earlier.

The '70s were also a time when classic SF films were aired on television. There was a lot of shlock, but it was also a chance to see better SF such as The Day The Earth Stood Still, Them, 2001, Planet Of The Apes, Silent Running and others. Strangely there were a few classics I knew of but had somehow missed until decades later such as The Time Machine, War Of The Worlds, Forbidden Planet, The Thing, and a handful of others. And while many remember the late '70s and early '80s as the birth of Star Wars it was also the time of Logan's Run, Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, Star Trek - The Motion Picture, Alien, Outland and The Final Countdown, Aliens, E.T., Star Trek II - The Wrath Of Khan--a decent variety of SF. The original BSG (I saw the theatrical release) was a spin on Star Wars in my view and never really interested me.

Space: 1999 was something I disdained back when it was new. Back then and for decades I felt it was nowhere on the same level of Star Trek or other things I preferred. But a few years ago I took a chance and watched the entire series. While I still feel it can't touch Star Trek I found it wasn't as bad overall as I once thought. In general the first season is much better than the second and the are interesting ideas throughout, but the premise is still nuts and the overall execution is uneven.

Star Trek also led me to Starlog magazine (basically the internet of the time) which kept me informed of forthcoming films and series as well as behind-the-scenes aspects and even the broader field of SF literature as a whole.

Starborn Dragon said:

Star Trek and Star Wars were what got me into my love of science fiction and space science.

Click to expand...

Kind of the same here, I think I must have watched some sci fi before I watched both these (probably Battlestar Galactica) but it was SW and ST that made me explore science fiction in general.

Not just space exploration and such but also how technologies have an impact on society such as transhumanism, artificial intelligence, or how we are changed as we learn more and more about the world around us and our place in it.

It definitely made me read the books of various well known science fiction writers, for the entertainment value but also the ideas they showed.

An interesting question.

For me, like you Warp9, I was interested in "juvenile" sci fi like Lost in Space, Bat Man,
and Jonny Quest. But only on TV. I never read.

Then I saw Star Trek. I think the 1st I saw was The Tholian Web or The lights of Zatar.
I was only 10 and I was hooked. But it was on too late for me to watch and it went off the air soon after.
My real Star Trek experience Started when it was syndicated. I would get home from school and watch it every afternoon at 5pm on ch 56 in Boston.

This led me to the Blish books which led me to Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, and Niven and a life long love of SF reading.

But Star Trek gave me more. I joined the Air Force, became a pilot, and based my leadership style on James T Kirk.
I'm now a commercial pilot. I owe a lot to a short lived SF show from the '60s.

It is tough for me to recall which came first, because I was aware of Star Trek and had watched it a couple of times on VHS (grew up in the late 80s-early 90s).

I certainly had an interest in space and can recall reading about the Van Allen belts, how astronauts traveled to space, as well as different accounts by the astronauts themselves. I knew a lot about the Apollo 15 mission, and all that.

In addition to that, one of my uncle's was (and still is) a huge science fiction fan, and introduced me to Heinlein's "Tunnel in the Sky" and "Space Cadet." I read those things multiple times and expanded my SF repertoire and that gave me more of an appreciation of Star Trek and its world.

I definitely got more in to Star Trek as I read more SF, but I could not tell you which came first.

I had been watching The Twilight Zone, Men Into Space, The Outer Limits, Supercar, Fireball XL5, My Living Doll, Science Fiction Theater, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost in Space, just about anything with a sci-fi flavor before Star Trek ever showed up. For me, sci-fi caught my attention at 8 in 1959.

Good question. In my case, STAR TREK was part of a larger interest in sci-fi, fantasy, comic books, and horror, encouraged by my father who made sure I was properly exposed to all the good stuff: STAR TREK, THE TWILIGHT ZONE, THE OUTER LIMITS, THE AVENGERS, Batman, Superman, The Shadow, Universal Monster movies, Godzilla, THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL, THE AMAZING COLOSSAL MAN, THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON, etc.

I think the first "adult" novel I ever read The War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells, and growing up I read most of the classic SF authors: Asimov, Clarke, Wyndham, Bradbury, Matheson, Leiber, Sturgeon, etc. (Never really got into Heinlein or Andre Norton or Van Vogt.) And I also devoured every book I could find by Edgar Rice Burroughs, Robert E. Howard, H.P Lovecraft, and so on.

(Yes, I'm old.)

STAR TREK was a big part of that, and it definitely made more of an impression on me than, say, LOST IN SPACE or VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA, but it was still part of a larger spectrum that stretched from Olaf Stapledon to THE BEAST FROM 20,000 FATHOMS.

Honestly, I can't really remember a time when I wasn't interested in Trek and SF . . . .

Were you interested in science fiction before you got into Star Trek or after because you got into Star Trek?

Click to expand...

After. I didn't even know what sci-fi was at 12. Once I learned, I became interested. The same friend that introduced me to Star Trek also introduced me to Heinlein and I was off and running.

I liked to imagine what the future would be like. I especially loved anthologies dealing with life in the future.

One thing they all got wrong - they all assumed women would stay in the house. None that I read in the early to mid 1970s seemed to foresee the entrance of women into the workforce en masse.

T'Bonz said:

One thing they all got wrong - they all assumed women would stay in the house. None that I read in the early to mid 1970s seemed to foresee the entrance of women into the workforce en masse.

Click to expand...

True story: Several years back I reprinted an old SF novel from the early sixties. With the author's permission, I quietly removed some casual sexism from the text, on the grounds that it dated the book.

For example: changing "the senators and their wives" to "the senators and their spouses." That kind of thing.

The author, who was a woman, had no problems with this.

Star Trek came first, but I wouldn't say that it was solely responsible for my interest in SF. Other science fiction shows in syndication in the US in the early 1970s, either first run or rerun, also contributed. I was extremely interested in Gerry Anderson's Thunderbirds and UFO, and also Captain Scarlet. By the time first grade rolled around, I was a fan of all four of those shows. The only Irwin Allen show in our market was Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, and it didn't grab me as much.

So, I'd say that at the early age of pre-first grade, it was the three Gerry Anderson shows and Star Trek equally that fueled my interest in sci-fi.

If it comes down to which show I saw first among these mentioned, it was probably Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea. For another baseline of comparison, the first science fiction prose book (200+ pages for children) I read was The Wonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet, in second grade. Shortly thereafter, I started cracking the Blish novelizations of Star Trek. At some point, I also developed an interest in comic books. I'm really not sure what the first SF movie I saw was. By the time Space: 1999 came out, my interest in SF was well entrenched.

CorporalCaptain said:

For another baseline of comparison, the first science fiction prose book (200+ pages for children) I read was The Wonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet, in second grade.

Click to expand...

I read that one, too. And some other kids SF books like The Forgotten Door and The Runaway Robot.

Interesting that you mention The Forgotten Door, Greg. Escape to Witch Mountain (1975) was certainly one of the first SF movies I saw in the theater, although given its late year I can't say that it was my very first.

Again, I honestly can't remember what my first SF movie was. Probably some old classic on TV like THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL or WAR OF THE WORLDS.

Maybe KING KONG? Or GODZILLA?

As for the first one I saw in a theater .. . who knows? We went to a lot of drive-in movie double features when I was a kid.

I wasn't quite old enough to watch ST during its original run (as I was born in 1964) but I do remember watching 50s sci-fi movies on TV and also understand Universal monster flicks and loving them when I was around 10 or so. That was before I discovered ST in reruns so already a fan. But ST took me to a different level. It was just amazing.

Warped9, thank you for starting this thread, and no, it doesn't sound silly at all.

TOS was my first proper introduction to science fiction, bar a Spider Robinson novel or three plus an excellent Niven short story called "The Cloak of Anarchy."

Here I thought this thread was going to be about the San Francisco Fleet Yards!

Click to expand...

True, GNDN, that abbreviation does take some getting used to. I tend to spell out "science fiction" or abbreviate as "sci-fi" for that very reason.

It gave me an interest in the work of actors and directors and composers and also a greater appreciation for classic literature and social politics, which subsequently furthered my appreciation and understanding of SF as metaphor.

Click to expand...

Interesting--we seem to be approaching the science fiction experience in general and the Trek experience in particular from opposite ends of the spectrum. I have a background in literature and something of an appreciation for social politics and current events, so watching the various metaphors take shape on the screen in TOS was a beautiful thing. Before a friend introduced me to Trek, I thought science fiction was inaccessible to me. No more.

Not bad for a 3-season 1960's TV show.

Click to expand...

Not bad at all.

As much as I appreciate later Trek movies and series, I wish Roddenberry, Bennet and Berman kept closer ties to SF writers for the spin-offs. Many of the unique ideas present in ST were overwhelmed by character in later iterations with the SF becoming more window dressing. ENT and VOY seemed at times to make an attempt to strike more of a balance between SF concepts and character but didn't serve either as well as ST, TNG or DS9 did separately.

Click to expand...

I'm curious about the distinction you're drawing between sci-fi and character writing. Can you tell me a bit more about it? (As you can see, I'm still rather new hereabouts.)