Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by Vger23, Mar 17, 2015.
My philosophy in a nutshell.
I thoroughly agree with the change in Trek ethos he perceives. From go and understand and hopefully make friends to defeat-the-current-vengeance-obsessed-baddie film. Trek '09 had me with the beautiful opening sequence. Began to lose me when our hero is instead a young prick; and totally lost me with the cursory attempt not to kil Nero, then they blow-the-crap outta him.
I truly -- not saying this here for effect -- believed at that point in the theater, "Yes, HERE comes the Trek humanity moment a la Gorn, Horta, Day of the Dove, whatever . . . "I won't kill today." Nope. Had a bit of it in STID where Kirk didn't kill Khan from long distance and tried to capture him. Maybe Nu3 will get back to wonder/explore/make friends. Yes, I know it wasn't in every ep, but was always a strain throughout and in my opinion, is lacking in the movies since, well, V, I'd say. YMMV.
Peace to all who read this. You all have entertained me, challenged me, humored me for many years, and I am grateful.
I think people are starting to learn a lot about the real meaning of free speech, as opposed to the myths they've built up about it.
It was designed to protect people from being incarcerated or censored by the government simply for voicing an opinion.
Getting fired from a job because you were caught making an offensive comment about something on your own time-- that is not a violation of free speech.
Except when someone's foolish enough to threaten a total stranger with violence online in view of a gazillion people--then you might be brought on charges.
Good for her.
I think you might have missed the actual point of Gerrold's post. But based on some of the other comments, you're not alone.
Yes, I skipped his whole people are a-holes to agree with a side note. Trying not to be a-holish in doing so.
Oddly, I don't really think people are that a-holeish here, though we get in pissing matches. I will never agree, for instance, with Christopher's wrong belief about infinitives. Baha. I hear people disliking or even reviling a certain incarnation of Trek, but not so much hating on figures. I'm not fond of JJTrek, but many people are, and I suspect he's a decent enough dude. Some people rag on GR for what I think. are common enough faults and sins of his day. Berman comes in for some criticism, deserved imho. Maybe I jus bail on threads if they're too nasty and avoid it. Or maybe the hatred he decries is fiund more elsewhere. Unknown.
Yeah,most people around here are okay. The true a-holes are a very small minority.
Unfortunately they are usually pretty loud.
I love that Gerrold basically said two things: "don't try to make Trek a hobby-horse for conservative causes" and "don't engage in personal attacks on the people making it." And somehow this has become some kind of Rorschach blot in which people see Gerrold attacking their particular favourite kind of kibbitzing.
I think he's perfectly right on both counts. (On every count, really, including the "Trek needs to be about something more than bashing the latest villain" count.) On conservative hobbyhorses: it's depressing to see people rage-quitting Trek groups on Facebook because someone present says homophobia isn't cool; if Trek doesn't stand for actually broadening your mind and outlook and becoming more accepting in any way, what's the point? About not personally attacking the people making the product: that should be a no-brainer.
But no, apparently he's a narrow-minded old coot who's the real problem. Whatever.
This is true.
That said, however...this (TrekBBS) is without a doubt the most civil and mature of all the Star Trek forums I have ever participated in.
Such is the nature of a-holes
Indeed. Left one do to the immense hatred in different corners of the fandom. Nice to be able to have discussion here.
I actually enjoy much of the discourse that happens in Star Trek fan forums. Unless it goes to a personal level, it is actually a satisfying part of the whole Trek experience to me. Just think about how boring it would be if we all agreed on everything. Discussion stimulates me to think about things from different points of view, and process things better. Besides, if you think Trek forums are bad, try a car or motorcycle forum. -Wow. Talk about vicious.
Another plus is that Trek fans are, overall, a very intelligent lot. You can see that in the grammar and spelling. I'm not a spelling and grammar Nazi or anything, but geez, try discussing your favorite motorcycle with a guy who can't write a coherent sentence, or even spell 'motorcycle.'
I think the author really needs to lighten up. People are going to display passion regarding the things about which they are passionate. A diatribe about zealot-like actions probably won't change that. Besides, there is nothing that I've seen with Trek fans that's out of line with other passionate fans, such as sports and fantasy show fans. Short of death threats and egging the houses of Trek writers, he probably just needs to accept that there are persons who aren't going to take things lightly when they see their favorite passion being destroyed.
But I acknowledge that my perspective may be dramatically different if a Trek fan had insulted my mother, or impugned my work incessantly on a forum for 25 years. I guess that would grow old to me too.
Mine also...and, I hope, many others.
I use the "telephone" game in the classes that I teach fairly often. You know, it is where you tell the first student something like "Star Trek is the Best", and he is supposed to whisper it to the next student and on and on until you get to the last student, and he is supposed to tell everyone out loud what he heard. In this case, given the original message, it would probably be something like "T-Rex has a desk"
It is a listening and remembering game.
I am amazed with all the different versions and interpretations of Gerrold's post, and the wide range of agreement-disagreement and positive-negative regarding "what he said". Once again, a demonstration of how diverse we are, in this case, responding to words about this Franchise that we all love in different aspects and ways.
I have to disagree with Gerrold here:
"The failure of all those who have made Trek since then has been to make Trek about finding villains and kicking the crap out of them."
Um - what? TNG was all about "finding villains and kicking the crap out of them"??? That was a show that lived what Gerrold here purports to find so appealing about Trek.
And don't tell me "Enterprise" with that Xindi arc didn't do the same thing - they went out to "kick the crap" out of the villains, and in true Trek style, Archer was able to foster peace, understanding...
While I agree with the main point of "not being an idiot", Gerrold doesn't come off great in this.
That is appropriate, as most actual buttholes aren't all that big, but they can make enough noise to fill a room.
It was a fairly coherent post. The fact of the matter is that people who needlessly and endlessly criticize an entertainment product seem to feel it is their holy obligation to restore things to the way 'it should be', and if anyone criticizes how they are going about their Holy Quest they immediately accuse them of being the Gestapo, Stasi, and SAVAK wrapped up into one.
Indeed, it is very well moderated and full of intelligent people. A far cry from the old StarTrek.com message boards, isn't it?
This is the only corner of Trek fandom I even know about, so maybe I have missed a lot of nastiness. Good.
Agree. Trek isn't always about finding new places and friends. Sometimes, that's true, but at other times, it is truly about finding villains and kicking the crap out of them. That's part of the beauty of Trek; exploration and discovery. Sometimes it's a romp in paradise (usually not) and sometimes its full-on beast mode. The writers set that tone, so that's where he needs to look when discussing the essence of Trek.
Spend a little time over at Star Destroyer and you'll know this to be true.
Yeah, did anyone else pick up on the subtle indicatiors that Gerrold just might be liberal?
There are some conservative (and yes liberal too) storylines and characters in Star Trek, something that Gerrold either is blind to owing to his own political mind set, or that Gerrold simply chooses to ignore.
The first one that comes to mind for me is A PRIVATE LITTLE WAR, involving Kirk's necessary ''balance of power'' argument and including McCoy's sensible opposing views. The Kirk-view prevails here, but nobody's happy....least of all Kirk. Neither man is necessarily wrong in this instance, which ups the ante dramatically.
Or they were not "true Star Trek"
While I am more conservative in my politics the idea that Star Trek is more liberal has never really bothered me. I mean, differing political views in media? The horror.
Also, I have definitely appreciated the civility of this board versus some other ones that I have been on. It is quite amazing how crazy the discussions can go.
I have been on other boards for other fandoms and the one thing that I have always enjoyed is the respectful exchange of ideas.
Separate names with a comma.