"Spock's World" is about Vulcan wanting to leave the Federation. DS9 toyed with the idea of Vulcan leaving, behind the scenes, before deciding to kill the Khitomer Accords.
"Spock's World" is about Vulcan wanting to leave the Federation. DS9 toyed with the idea of Vulcan leaving, behind the scenes, before deciding to kill the Khitomer Accords.
This is where my contradiction comes in. I don't like dark Trek I say. I don't want strife. But the sort of world building and political intrigue I like."Spock's World" is about Vulcan wanting to leave the Federation. DS9 toyed with the idea of Vulcan leaving, behind the scenes, before deciding to kill the Khitomer Accords.
Spock's World - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
I know the Voyager post series novels alluded to issues in the a Federation after the dominion war. I'd like more exploration of that.
I think it is all in how its delivered, honestly. Obviously, Star Trek is a drama, so some strife makes sense. I guess, for me, is it strife for the sake of strife or does it make sense within the context of the story they are telling.
Last edited:
I think the Federation isn't an entirely "one size fits all" organization and that different arrangements are worked out by each member world. Some may keep their original planetary fleets and work in conjunction with or separately from Starfleet, while others may indeed disband their fleets and leave everything to Starfleet. Being an Earth-based service, some member worlds may look at Starfleet as "that Human thing" that serves the Federation with many traditions and customs that carried over from the navies of Earth's past. The farther you get away from Earth--and specifically, Starfleet--the less its influence might be.
You wouldn't be able to pronounce at least some Vulcan names.
For my part, I liked how the FASA gaming Trekverse played around with the concept of membership. This was mainly during the TOS/TMP era with only a little bit of the TNG era added in before FASA lost their license from Paramount. They generally tried to be consistent both with the more limited canon of the early 80s and other sources that were considered to be official at the time, like the Spaceflight Chronology and the Franz Joseph Technical Manual.
The FASA Federation, in keeping with what TOS seemed to hint at, is kind of more like a galactic U.N. There are four main categories, full members (such as Vulcan and Andor), associate members (with fewer responsibilities and more limited voice, but who might eventually transition to full membership), colonies, and protectorates. Troyius and Memory Alpha are examples of associate members, while Halka is a more rare example of a fully independent world with Federation ties.
The Federation Assembly (which provides central government and creates legislation for Council ratification) has two representatives from each full member and one from each associate member. Rarely, protectorates and colonies can have special non voting representation on world-specific matters, but it's uncommon. The Federation Council, which implements Federation policies, treaties and oversees Starfleet (among other duties), has five permanent seats for the founding members and a rotating group of six seats for other worlds, chosen by popular vote and confirmed by the Assembly.
Not all of the planets within the Federation are comfortable with how full membership might impact their cultures, and some prefer the minimal level (associate, colony or protectorate) desirable in order to share some of the benefits of protection from enemies like the Klingons and the technological advancements. Being auxillaries in this context means the potential benefits aren't the same as for a full member, but that's also an incentive to consider that option one day.
Starfleet, as an exploration and military body, is generally subject to local laws within a star system (although this can be overridden in special circumstances, if the mission is considered extremely vital to Federation interests), and many worlds retain their own currency which can be exchanged for the standard Federation credit. This was long before the "no currency" goofiness.
The Andorians are a major factor in the production of some of the fleet, and the Vulcans also make smaller contributions primarily in the exploration branch. Andorian contributions are more military, with the Tellarites mainly contributing in engineering and support.
You mean the TNG novels
I don't mind *some* dark Trek. DS9 was dark in comparison to the other series of the time, and I thought that was fine for what it was.
My problem is when they think *everything* has to be dark. Trek has always been a show that portrays a generally good future with a sense of optimism. Of course there are opportunities to tell dark stories or have dark shows, but that is not appropriate for all of Trek. But Hollywood has a habit of finding one formula and trying to stick to it over and over and over again. It's the same reason we got "TNG Lite" instead of what Voyager really could have been.
This is one reason I am so fond of the TOS films. Those six films really ran the gamut of what Star Trek could be. You had hard sci-fi, you had character drama, you had action adventure, you had straight up comedy. I like that kind of variety, rather than trying to churn out cookie cutter films that are all the same basic thing.
Well, nobody who's ever lived on the moon calls it Luna, either. That's just something they say on Earth.
Longer.
Orrrrr that.
Do we count Q's court?
I prefer the Kurtzman style of storytelling.
Over the past ten years, I've come to realize that this notion of people setting their political, racial, and religious divisions aside and skipping arm-in-arm down the primrose path of unity and brotherhood is a fantasy. It cannot happen. It WILL not happen.
Not everyone agrees with Federation ideals. Not everyone WANTS to agree with Federation ideals (especially when your entire identity is grounded in OPPOSITION to Federation ideals).
Last edited:
KIRK: Well. But they've rejected all that and all that this technology provides. And they seek the primitive.
SPOCK: There are many who are uncomfortable with what we have created. It is almost a biological rebellion. A profound revulsion against the planned communities, the programming, the sterilised, artfully balanced atmospheres. They hunger for an Eden where spring comes.
KIRK: All do. The cave is deep in our memory.
SPOCK: Yes, that is true, Captain.
SPOCK: There are many who are uncomfortable with what we have created. It is almost a biological rebellion. A profound revulsion against the planned communities, the programming, the sterilised, artfully balanced atmospheres. They hunger for an Eden where spring comes.
KIRK: All do. The cave is deep in our memory.
SPOCK: Yes, that is true, Captain.
Okay, but, that is the literal opposite of the entire premise of Star Trek. I mean, there's a lot of "gatekeeping" on these boards about what is or isn't Star Trek, but you really, truly are espousing just tossing the fundamental premise of the franchise in the trash. At that point, why even call it Star Trek? Why not just make a different show?
Running across people who don't agree with "Federation ideas" didn't start with Kurtzman. Therein lies the drama.
What is "the fundamental premise of the franchise"?
Figuring out how to get along then finding aliens to kill?
Something like that, I reckon.
No.
But thanks for playing.
Similar threads
