Berman Memoirs

[Andy Mangels]

May I just ask, as Star Trek is based in the future, would a beings sexuality actually really matter?

I suppose not. So to be fair, let's suggest that any scene of heterosexual flirtation, affection, or sex be edited out of every Trek series. Because, hey, it doesn't matter. This means any reference to husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, mate. Any hand-holding, kissing, sex, meaningful looks, Klingon biting. Any decontamination scenes between opposite genders on Enterprise will now be CGI-enhanced to add clothing.

That will take running time of half of the original TOS episodes down by 2/3, and the Enterprise episodes down by 1/2. DS9 and TNG would probably only lose 1/4 of each episode.

After all, if sexuality doesn't matter, why keep the heteronormative scenes in?

 

[Tulaberry whine]

And as it stands now, it still remains to be seen whether Trek will endure beyond an ever-dwindling group of rusted on fans. The approach to drama you're defending as essential to Trek's long-term survival seems to have left it sidelined and irrelevant.

Never defended the approach, you'd know this is you'd read the whole thread.

Apologies. 'Defending' was the wrong word to use in this context in retrospect, perhaps 'rationalising' is more appropriate.

Beyond that, I made no criticisms of Berman personally (just the exclusive, beige creative climate he fostered while managing Trek) or you in my post, so I find this comment rather odd:

I've simply been defending Rick Berman from being convicted as a 'bigot' based on the evidence at hand. Nothing more, nothing less. But here on the internet is seems you're "guilty until proven innocent". And if you attempt to jump into the argument to protect someone you're guilty as well (George W. Bush's whole 'if you're not for us, you're against us' mindset.). Which is why it seems Star Trek as a whole has devolved into nothing but shipper talk.

I think your thoughts have been generally treated with a lot more respect and fairness in this thread (on a pretty emotive issue I might add) than this would imply.

 

[neogothboy74]

May I just ask, as Star Trek is based in the future, would a beings sexuality actually really matter?

I suppose not. So to be fair, let's suggest that any scene of heterosexual flirtation, affection, or sex be edited out of every Trek series. Because, hey, it doesn't matter. This means any reference to husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, mate. Any hand-holding, kissing, sex, meaningful looks, Klingon biting. Any decontamination scenes between opposite genders on Enterprise will now be CGI-enhanced to add clothing.

That will take running time of half of the original TOS episodes down by 2/3, and the Enterprise episodes down by 1/2. DS9 and TNG would probably only lose 1/4 of each episode.

After all, if sexuality doesn't matter, why keep the heteronormative scenes in?

Exactly. I've made this same point in other conversations, usually with people missing the boat, and thinking/saying 'that's just crazy talk.'

 

[BillJ]

May I just ask, as Star Trek is based in the future, would a beings sexuality actually really matter?

Not so much this as... I don't watch Star Trek for relationship drama. To me that has always been the absolutely least interesting part of the show.

Perhaps that's why the issue doesn't really resonate with me. The lack of gay characters would probably stick out more to me in comedies or dramas set in contemporary setting. I watch/read sci-fi for big ideas.

Apologies to anyone who found my comments callous.

 

[Sci]

May I just ask, as Star Trek is based in the future, would a beings sexuality actually really matter?

Not so much this as... I don't watch Star Trek for relationship drama. To me that has always been the absolutely least interesting part of the show.

Perhaps that's why the issue doesn't really resonate with me. The lack of gay characters would probably stick out more to me in comedies or dramas set in contemporary setting. I watch/read sci-fi for big ideas.

Apologies to anyone who found my comments callous.

And that's completely fair -- Star Trek, after all, is a lot of things, and it appeals to different people for different reasons.

I don't think that LGBT Trekkies want Star Trek to become a relationship drama, nor do they want LGBT characters to take over the franchise. But by the same token, they object to having their existence being completely, at best, ignored, or completely, at worst, denied (depending on how one interprets the canonical depictions of LGBT sexuality). Which I think is a completely fair objection either way.

 

[Frontier]

Well, if worse comes to worse, in 30 or 40 years, the Piller family could always go the "My Triumphs, My Mistakes" route in defiance of the establishment, and make the book/manuscript available for free. The black market, especially now in the internet age, would be ripe for such, I'm sure.

 

[TEH BABA]

Ron moore should write a book.

 

[Praetor]

I must say, having just read this thread the whole way through for the first time, there are some rather shocking facts presented here. I think most people on this board will agree that they think Berman led the franchise in the wrong direction and made many mistakes along the way - but of course, he's only human.

I have also heard the rumor that Berman basically 86'd any gay-friendly plots that came his way before, but understanding his motivations for doing so are a bit tricky, IMO. I'd like to give the guy the benefit of the doubt for once - but I can't disagree more with what he was doing.

I think that Berman thought he was doing what was best for the franchise, whether or not it was based on personal bias. I think Andy Mangels has presented compelling evidence that it was indeed Berman who was ultimately responsible for shooting down any gay references repeatedly. I just don't know that we have the evidence to support the idea that it was based on his personal beliefs.

Re: Berman as bigot.

To be fair, the sense that I get from all of that is not so much that Berman is a bigot as that he's... I don't know if there's a word that's been developed for it, but, if there's a distinction between racism and ethnocentricity, I'd say that it's the same with Berman. "Heterocentricity?"

The queer studies people I know prefer "heteronormative": broadly speaking, the assumption of heterosexuality and consequent marginalization of any state of being or mode of life that differs from the common male/female dyad. This might actually be the better word considering the examples that BillJ raised and Andy's subsequent debunking of them: such relationships were not entirely ignored, but the episode always ended in such a fashion as to deny the idea that such relationships could take place, raising the issue and then dismissing it.

That said, it's general my view that 'ethnocentrism' or 'heteronormative' are passive stances, taken not out of malice but ignorance and lack of sensitivity, whereas racism/cultural chauvisism and heterosexism or homophobia would be the active modes. And while you're right that I've never heard of Berman applauding funerals or any of that Westboro Baptist shit, there's a difference between not including gay characters simply because one never thinks of it, because of limited contact, and actually playing a blocking role against people who do want to include LGBT characters/themes into the show, a stance of active denial. This is more than a failure to take a stand--something which I've decried Trek for in the past, even when I thought it was just a reflection of general television conservatism--but an outright refusal to do so, and preventing people who did want to from doing so. I would call that a prejudiced stance.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

I think you've summed it all up nicely, Trent. That sounds to me, like what might have been going on.

Roddenberry’s Assistant - Ernie Over, an openly gay man who was Roddenberry's personal assistant at Paramount, and who was quoted in The Advocate, was dismissed shortly after Roddenberry's death. Rick Berman takes control of the Star Trek franchise.

May I clarify, as explained to me at the time by Ernie Over himself. Ernie was ordered to be removed from the Paramount payroll when it became obvious that Roddenberry was too ill to come into the studio regularly. They argued, why did Paramount have to pay for a chauffeur when Gene was working from home, or too ill to work?

Roddenberry began paying Ernie's salary from his own coffers, and Majel continued the deal after GR's death.

But wasn't Richard Arnold fired as well?

Susan Sackett and Richard Arnold were locked out of the Star Trek Offices on the day after GR's death. Susan was escorted in by security and permitted to take only her personal items. She had to leave behind her personal collection of reference books because they had no inscriptions on them and had to wait until the Estate decided if they were really hers. Richard Arnold was kept on staff for a few weeks/months, and then went freelance as an advisor to selected licensees.

A lot of that seems very shameful to me - except of course Gene and Majel paying Ernie Over from their own pockets.

May I just ask, as Star Trek is based in the future, would a beings sexuality actually really matter?

I suppose not. So to be fair, let's suggest that any scene of heterosexual flirtation, affection, or sex be edited out of every Trek series. Because, hey, it doesn't matter. This means any reference to husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, mate. Any hand-holding, kissing, sex, meaningful looks, Klingon biting. Any decontamination scenes between opposite genders on Enterprise will now be CGI-enhanced to add clothing.

That will take running time of half of the original TOS episodes down by 2/3, and the Enterprise episodes down by 1/2. DS9 and TNG would probably only lose 1/4 of each episode.

After all, if sexuality doesn't matter, why keep the heteronormative scenes in?

See - this is my thought to.

'Star Trek' at its best is about showing an optimistic future - in TOS, originally one where the various races cooperated as was uncommon in the time. Some people construe the inclusion of Uhura, Sulu, and Chekov as tokenism - but I see it as a subtle signal of hope. I fail to see why latter-day Trek should have avoided at least referencing a similar sunny outlook for civilization's treatment towards LGBT people. Even a 'token' background reference would have been helpful, IMO.

 

[Therin of Andor]

A lot of that seems very shameful to me.

That's showbiz. Lock-outs of staff is the way many corporations handle retrenchments, to prevent embarrassing sabotage of sensitive data by disgruntled workers.

A friend of mine was secretary to a head honcho in a big cinema organisation. Her boss was fired during a board meeting reshuffle one day, and she came back from lunch to find out she, too, was fired and her office door was sealed up, with new locks.

 

[Trent Roman]

It's not just 'showbiz'; corporate culture broadly speaking is paranoid and sociopathic this way.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[AJBryant]

Isn't it possible that in the Roddenberrian view of the future, where there is no more crime, sickness, or even money (but, apparently, lots of heterosexual nookie to be had), they will have figured out a way to CURE "teh ghey"?

 

[JB2005]

Isn't it possible that in the Roddenberrian view of the future, where there is no more crime, sickness, or even money (but, apparently, lots of heterosexual nookie to be had), they will have figured out a way to CURE "teh ghey"?

seeing as how it's not a disease i'm guessing not

be nice if they cud cure "teh bigotry" though...

 

[Therin of Andor]

they will have figured out a way to CURE "teh ghey"?

By making everyone bisexual?

 

[neogothboy74]

they will have figured out a way to CURE "teh ghey"?

By making everyone bisexual?

More likely by making everyone smarter.

Besides, Gene wrote the novelization of "The Motion Picture" which has Kirk acknowledging that homosexuality exists and that he has no problem with it. Sure that's a novel but that's Kirk voicing the words of Gene Roddenberry. Or did I get that wrong?

 

[David cgc]

If everyone was smarter, no one would be willing to date women, which seems a little counterproductive if you're trying to find a "cure."

 

[Sci]

Isn't it possible that in the Roddenberrian view of the future, where there is no more crime, sickness, or even money (but, apparently, lots of heterosexual nookie to be had), they will have figured out a way to CURE "teh ghey"?

Sure, along with bisexuality, lesbianism, transexualism, and transgenderism, and asexuality! They probably figured out a way to cure being Asian, too! And being black! And Native American! And being Eastern European! Being a Muslim probably has a cure, too. Maybe being an Atheist has a cure as well -- or being a Christian! Being Armenian, definitely. Probably being Palestinian. or a Jew. Or a Tutsi. Possibly being Hindu. Maybe being Mandarin? Japanese? Oh, hey, maybe being English has a cure. Or Irish! Or being Québécois! Or being intersexed! And being polyamorous! Or being a woman!

Hey, maybe they've cured unapproved political opinions, too! I bet there's a cure for Socialism. And Capitalism! And Libertarianism! And Objectivism! And Conservatism. Definitely Liberalism. I bet there's a cure for Environmentalism. And Zionism. Probably one for Existentialism and Absurdism. Maybe there's one for Neo-Liberalism. Sure there's one for Neo-Conservatism. Classical Liberalism's just got to go. So does republicanism. Probably monarchism, too. Definitely a cure for Communism. Anarchism, too, can't have that. Feminism, definitely cured. So's Fascism. Certainly there's one for Nationalism. And by golly, I sure do hope there's a cure for Peronism, Blairitism, Chavism, Clintonism, Obamaism, Bushism, Gaulism, Gandhism, Leninism, Stalinism, Maoism, Machiavelliism, McCarthyism, Thatcherism, Calvinism, Confucism, Zoroastrianism, Friedmanism, Keynesianism, Malthusianism, Darwinism, and Victorianism!

Anyone else whose existence you'd like to "cure?"

 

[Stevil2001]

I'd settle for a cure for being an idiot fanboy on the Internet.

 

[Praetor]

A cure for ignorance in general would work for me.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I'd settle for a cure for being an idiot fanboy on the Internet.

Ah, you take away everyone's fun. Be careful, or I'll post my photograph of Therin Park again.

 

[Stevil2001]

There's nothing fun about idiot fanboys! It's perhaps the biggest social crisis of our times.