• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Do you feel the dialogue is, at times, unfitting of military/science personnel?

ISS_Einstein

Lieutenant
Red Shirt
Speaking personally, this is something that frequently breaks the illusion for me.

In a military, or in the sciences, clear communication is of paramount importance. Arguably the single most important directive in either field. A military officer must make themselves clear and communicate appropriately. A scientific paper is meant to convey it's findings in an understandable way, using correct technical language, so that anyone can pick it up and understand it, requiring no cultural context. The crew of USS Discovery often seem to employ very non-clear forms of communication, sometimes even about important topics.

Episodes vary quite drastically in how objectively and clearly people express themselves. People speak unclearly on the bridge at crucial times. People burst in on officers at begin addressing them informally, as only McCoy was sanctioned to do in TOS. Subjective emotional language is sometimes employed by people with backgrounds in the sciences, where they could be expressing themselves in more universal objective ways. Scientific dialogue is in particular frequently delivered in an unclear way, sometimes employing incorrect basic technical terms.

We are meant to accept that the officers of Starfleet are trained astronauts. Also potentially trained military personnel depending on your interpretation of Starfleet. They should express themselves professionally like Major Samantha Carter from Stargate SG1, or like Spock/Data if they are a science officer. As the original Star Trek writer's guide suggested, the illusion of a professional force of officers following set procedures is important to maintaining the illusion that we are watching a future navy.
 
I like the informal tone people take with each other, especially the way Pike commands. The moments in early TOS when things could get weirdly militaristic and strict (remember Spock's retrospectively hilarious "you have to be perfect in the eyes of the crew" comment from The Enemy Within) were just offputting and awkward IMO. Obviously Starfleet are professionals in dangerous situations and a chain of command is vital, but I think we'll get gradually less and less formal and authoritarian by the time of the 23rd century.

The only problem I have with the dialogue in Discovery is that people slip into really weird melodramatic talk half the time.
 
Dialogue that sounds like a scientific research paper is a) not what anyone wants to listen to and b) indicative of Trek's weakest tendencies toward technobabble.

As for "militaristic" dialogue, Trek has generally ignored that apart from addressing everyone by rank. It's rare that orders on the bridge are repeated back, for example. In this case, Pike deliberately fosters a less formal approach from his first day.
 
Okay, no offence to anyone, but please can we drop the idea that this topic is about formality vs. informality, and stilted vs. natural, before it takes over the thread. Again the discussion is getting polarised into a dichotomy that it was never advocating - something that happens to almost every thread. Scientists and military folk are not formal all the time, but generally do try to make themselves clear and use more objective language - basically anyone in a technical profession tends to. This is also easier for audiences from a wide variety of backgrounds to understand. Universalism.

I am not arguing for an autistic android crew. Nothing about the sentiment "I feel the dialogue can be immersion breaking / unclear / unobjective", indicates that I believe dialogue should be dialed to mechanistic computer language, 100% of the time. You can convey emotions and frustrations perfectly well using clear language. What I am arguing is that compared to other major shows like say SG1, the character's way of speaking on duty can break the immersion, and lack clarity. Again, this is my opinion, feel free to disagree. I would argue, (again: my opinion), that this happens quite a lot - especially with Tilly, as someone else noted, but Michael is also bad for it. Saru, Spock and Pike speak more clearly.

I'm just trying to nip the usual TrekBBS "take original post to the extreme" / "completely out of context" stuff before it goes too far. If you want a (possibly false) dichotomy, try objective vs subjective, or universalism vs. obscuritanism - i.e. people (again: sometimes) expressing themselves in subjective ways that are hard to interpret, when as technically trained people they will be familiar with more objective universal language even for emotion.
 
Okay, no offence to anyone, but please can we drop the idea that this topic is about formality vs. informality, and stilted vs. natural, before it takes over the thread. Again the discussion is getting polarised into a dichotomy that it was never advocating - something that happens to almost every thread. Scientists and military folk are not formal all the time, but generally do try to make themselves clear and use more objective language - basically anyone in a technical profession tends to. This is also easier for audiences from a wide variety of backgrounds to understand. Universalism.

I am not arguing for an autistic android crew. Nothing about the sentiment "I feel the dialogue can be immersion breaking / unclear / unobjective", indicates that I believe dialogue should be dialed to mechanistic computer language, 100% of the time. You can convey emotions and frustrations perfectly well using clear language. What I am arguing is that compared to other major shows like say SG1, the character's way of speaking on duty can break the immersion, and lack clarity. Again, this is my opinion, feel free to disagree. I would argue, (again: my opinion), that this happens quite a lot - especially with Tilly, as someone else noted, but Michael is also bad for it. Saru, Spock and Pike speak more clearly.

I'm just trying to nip the usual TrekBBS "take original post to the extreme" / "completely out of context" stuff before it goes too far. If you want a (possibly false) dichotomy, try objective vs subjective, or universalism vs. obscuritanism - i.e. people (again: sometimes) expressing themselves in subjective ways that are hard to interpret, when as technically trained people they will be familiar with more objective universal language even for emotion.
Do you have examples of what you mean?
 
Yet they fight the wars and Jim Kirk is a "soldier". :p

Fair.

And in Trek 2009, Pike calls the Federation "a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada." However that makes any sense.

Point being, they've never been consistent on the idea of Starfleet being a military organization or not. And I don't worry about the military or science lingo on any of the series. Because the level of professionalism is wildly inconsistent. Or its just different in the 23rd century.
 
I think you're incorrectly seeking a story-telling type of consistency in a show that has multiple writers with assorted backgrounds and experiences, who are encouraged to use that to their fullest extant to describe the tales of a futuristic made-up science-fiction show.

Obviously the main goal of any serialized entertainment is to create an engaging story over a number of episodes with some kind of internal consistency, and if DISCOVERY was a factual period piece using the Military as we know it today, I would probably find the writing of these characters to be somewhat off-putting as well.
But it isn't, and from what we have seen in a multitude of past episodes, Star Fleet is only loosely based on how our current Military operates.

So, with that in mind and taking into account that the writers are trying to convey that the characters in this story are at times, more like a somewhat Dysfunctional Family rather than a strict Military Organization, I'm willing to overlook the absence of dialogue that fits into some kind of codified military jargon.
:cool:
 
Only when Tilly is onscreen. She acts like a babbling idiot most of the time.
She is the number one disappointment this season. In first season there was depth to her nervousness. This season she screws up every time she speaks, and it’s just not cute anymore, it’s obvious she’s overacting.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top