I've a feeling that the actual people who work in space (our own astronauts and cosmonauts) are probably just as informal as the rest of us, even when on the job.
Do you feel the dialogue is, at times, unfitting of military/science personnel?
- Thread starter ISS_Einstein
- Start date
I guess I need an example. With the exception of Tilly, who is written as still learning the ropes.
Maybe we've been around different scientists, but my experience is that they're just as informal in a workplace as anyone else. As for objectivity, strictly speaking, it's all socially constructed and we're all human. No true thing as objectivity. If you're referring to plain language, sure, technical people do sometimes use it to communicate across disciplines, which in fact Discovery does a heck of a lot with analogies and simple word choice when describing scientific phenomenon.
All of that said, this show makes a concerted effort to show that these people don't think of themselves as deathly formal post-Lorca, but have normal workplace chats on the bridge, etc. What I see in the looser way Pike runs things is a workplace that scientists would actually join--it always seemed ludicrous to me that so many academics and researchers would all want to join a pseudo-military structure. Sure, some would, but many I know would balk. I'd say this is in a lot of ways more believable.
More realistic dialogue would include a ton more "F" bombs from Tilly & friends. But I'll be fine without more of that.
My dad was a petty officer in the Navy and is not bothered. I asked.
Agreed. I liked her in Season 1. In Season 2 she has all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. They might as well play a laughter track whenever she opens her mouth. She's so overplayed it's become irritating and cringey.
Tilly - the Jar Jar Binks of the Star Trek franchise. That she hasn’t been blown out an airlock yet is greatly disappointing. Her most distinguishing contribution to ST is dropping an f-bomb. To some this is a major accomplishment, but I’d prefer better story telling than a forced expletive. I believe such brilliant dialog could only have been improved if said in Tilly’s Native tongue - “missa thinkin missa should drop a f bomb here”
The Federation's Slogan at the time; Understanding, Empathy and Fellowship through Superior Firepower makes sense now.
I've noticed plenty of fine moments for her this season. Many people only seem to see her faults and ignore everything else she's done this season. That's sad.
No, no she isn't.
Starfleet just fought a war, so, it's either a military, or something close; I've always figured a hybrid agency - humanitarian and scientific in focus - but equipped to defend the Federation in the worst case.
I would have to watch the show again to provide comprehensive examples, which I'm not willing to do for the sake of a thread that will be forgotten in a couple of days.
If you can forgive me for picking lame examples (which will no doubt be taken out of context and used against me maliciously)... 1). take the line that Pike gave the Chancellor in this episode: "it's difficult to explain". How hard would it be for him to tell her that her son has grown up faster due to a time anomaly. Why is it hard? Emotionally hard? Then say "this might be difficult to hear, but your son has grown into an adult, thanks to the effects of the time crystals". 2). Why did Burnham conceal that she was seeing visions of the Red Angel from Pike, when this was highly pertinent information "Captain, I was injured, so may have been hallucinating, but I thought I saw an entity on the asteroid". That is all that needs saying. Really important duty to provide all possible pertinent information to your CO.
3). Why does Tilly never pause to create a cogent sentence? Is this an anxiety disorder, and if so, why wasn't she screened from Starfleet? Sadly not everyone is fit for service on a starship loaded with megatons of antimatter weapons. 4). Why did Burnham not inform anyone that Tyler was suffering major difficulties, in a very crucial situation operating a laser torch, in season one? 5). Check out the science officer in episode one, who presented a barely heard piece of exposition about the red flashes, and subsequently got killed displaying absurd levels of arrogance in a life-and-death situation. These are just a few examples of a frequent tendency toward ridiculous characterisation of professionals and incompetent communication. Why are they so infantile at times? The contrast with say SG1 is especially bad, where people with a dizzy spell returning from a mission, would immediately be sent to medical for a check-up, as you would expect in an unknown situation like space travel - procedure was followed. Where Carter's scientific analogies actually aided clarity instead of sounding hollow.
On a positive note, Stamets gave a "like a baloon" type analogy a couple of episodes ago that actually worked, rather than being out of place. I am guessing some of the staff understand that you need to deliver technical ideas with some conviction, and others don't. Most such analogies do nothing to express things clearly, and are just there because someone think it's a twee Star Trek trope.
I would have to watch the show again to provide comprehensive examples, which I'm not willing to do for the sake of a thread that will be forgotten in a couple of days.
If you can forgive me for picking lame examples (which will no doubt be taken out of context and used against me maliciously)... 1). take the line that Pike gave the Chancellor in this episode: "it's difficult to explain". How hard would it be for him to tell her that her son has grown up faster due to a time anomaly. Why is it hard? Emotionally hard? Then say "this might be difficult to hear, but your son has grown into an adult, thanks to the effects of the time crystals". 2). Why did Burnham conceal that she was seeing visions of the Red Angel from Pike, when this was highly pertinent information "Captain, I was injured, so may have been hallucinating, but I thought I saw an entity on the asteroid". That is all that needs saying. Really important duty to provide all possible pertinent information to your CO.
3). Why does Tilly never pause to create a cogent sentence? Is this an anxiety disorder, and if so, why wasn't she screened from Starfleet? Sadly not everyone is fit for service on a starship loaded with megatons of antimatter weapons. 4). Why did Burnham not inform anyone that Tyler was suffering major difficulties, in a very crucial situation operating a laser torch, in season one? 5). Check out the science officer in episode one, who presented a barely heard piece of exposition about the red flashes, and subsequently got killed displaying absurd levels of arrogance in a life-and-death situation. These are just a few examples of a frequent tendency toward ridiculous characterisation of professionals and incompetent communication. Why are they so infantile at times? The contrast with say SG1 is especially bad, where people with a dizzy spell returning from a mission, would immediately be sent to medical for a check-up, as you would expect in an unknown situation like space travel - procedure was followed. Where Carter's scientific analogies actually aided clarity instead of sounding hollow.
On a positive note, Stamets gave a "like a baloon" type analogy a couple of episodes ago that actually worked, rather than being out of place. I am guessing some of the staff understand that you need to deliver technical ideas with some conviction, and others don't. Most such analogies do nothing to express things clearly, and are just there because someone think it's a twee Star Trek trope.
isn't it just awful when characters on TV behave like actual human beings?
You're taking this way too seriously.
No, I'm basically just taking it as seriously as a professional writer is meant to.
All some forumers here ever do is post one liners to considerate posts, or employ invective against anyone making a point they don't like, so I'm not gonna bother any further. I've said what I meant to say, and it is there for anyone who wants to actually have a tactful discussion.
All some forumers here ever do is post one liners to considerate posts, or employ invective against anyone making a point they don't like, so I'm not gonna bother any further. I've said what I meant to say, and it is there for anyone who wants to actually have a tactful discussion.
People are trying. You're just not listening.
Or maybe it's the other way around? I have patiently made my points, whether others reciprocate is beyond my control.
Similar threads
