Does anyone else dislike Raffi?

[fireproof78]

I like Raffi OK for the same reasons as a lot of others, she's a "real" person, not a perfect example of Gene's Utopian vision. I think we'd have to go way farther than 400 years into the future to break out of this particular mold.

This is something I prefer as well. I get tried of being told about "Roddenberrian" humans, as if somehow some behaviors are going to just stop? I enjoy history a lot and there are a lot of behaviors that humans have done for a long time. Addiction is one, and is shown throughout Trek. Raffi is not new with any of her presented problems.

 

[Airmandan]

Any bets on if she survives season 3?

 

[Camren]

Dreadful character.

 

[Mogh]

Liking a character, disliking a character. Either is just fine. Starting threads and posting so you can be borderline misogynistic and/or borderline racist is "other level" stuff.

I always think these are rather serious accusations to make without some sort of proof or very strong indicators. Can you quote the parts for which sexism or racism are the unambiguous motivations?

You missed out the wanker that is Les Monves.

Nah, I'd grouped it under "studio politics". As someone who had a front row seat to the action - I mean, he was being a self serving arse, but that's what working in studios is. To be fair, the show wasn't so bulletproof that it was a hard move for him.

Maybe it's OK if it's regarding something that's almost universally liked. For instance, if someone didn't like "The City on the Edge of Forever", or Star Trek II, or "The Best of Both Worlds". They might start a topic about it to see if anyone else agrees with them.

Do you reckon nobody ever started a thread about Wesley Crusher, back in the old Usenet days and days of fan magazines? I'd be surprised. People love a bit of catharsis, whether or not it's a soft target.

This is something I prefer as well. I get tried of being told about "Roddenberrian" humans, as if somehow some behaviors are going to just stop? I enjoy history a lot and there are a lot of behaviors that humans have done for a long time. Addiction is one, and is shown throughout Trek. Raffi is not new with any of her presented problems.

I wonder if those living in Europe in the late 1600s could envisage a post-Enlightenment world in which behaviours like witch-burning, eye-for-an-eye 'justice', religion being state-mandated, etc etc could somehow "just stop". If anything, once you take a helicopter view and get away from individual data points, human behaviour has not only quantifiably improved over the last 400 years, but the pace of that has only accelerated. Forget Roddenberry - extreme poverty has fallen by over two thirds since 1990; deaths by war and homicide continue to fall decade-on-decade; literacy rates and access to education and equality for women continue to increase; and official measures of democracy show that still more nations are becoming increasingly democratic than the reverse. Forget 400 years; at this rate, we'll be there in a good deal less than half that time.

 

[ED-209]

Any bets on if she survives season 3?

She might only have a minor role since the TNG cast are returning.

 

[Danja]

I like Raffi and it's a good thing because it looks like she's The Last Original Picard Character Standing.

For now ...

If there's a Seven spinoff, Elnor and Borgati might come back (Kore might come back as a Traveler).

Any bets on if she survives season 3?

I think she'll survive, lest Picard commit the sin of "drowning its gays" (TPTB got an earful from the fans when they did it during Disco S1).

 

[fireproof78]

I wonder if those living in Europe in the late 1600s could envisage a post-Enlightenment world in which behaviours like witch-burning, eye-for-an-eye 'justice', religion being state-mandated, etc etc could somehow "just stop". If anything, once you take a helicopter view and get away from individual data points, human behaviour has not only quantifiably improved over the last 400 years, but the pace of that has only accelerated. Forget Roddenberry - extreme poverty has fallen by over two thirds since 1990; deaths by war and homicide continue to fall decade-on-decade; literacy rates and access to education and equality for women continue to increase; and official measures of democracy show that still more nations are becoming increasingly democratic than the reverse. Forget 400 years; at this rate, we'll be there in a good deal less than half that time.

I agree that human behavior as improved, despite the current headlines. Perhaps that makes people who don't fall in line with this idea more egregious?

 

[Mogh]

I agree that human behavior as improved, despite the current headlines. Perhaps that makes people who don't fall in line with this idea more egregious?

Couldn't agree more. We find bad behaviour less and less tolerable, and get more worked up about it than ever we did, because we see what good behaviour actually looks like.

Probably why I've always been drawn to the Roddenberry take on the future. If you see enough ideas of what it might look like, you can start to imagine being there; once you imagine being there, you can probably do it.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I always think these are rather serious accusations to make without some sort of proof or very strong indicators. Can you quote the parts for which sexism or racism are the unambiguous motivations?

At least half of the statements in this questionable thread, not to mention the other poster who's around, with his comments about Rafi's hair "looking like a hookers" being one of his greatest hits.

I can't make you see what I see if you don't wanna see what I see, you see? But lots of others do see it and have commented as such.

 

[ED-209]

I’ve never said that, by “lots of others” you mean one poster.

 

[Mogh]

At least half of the statements in this questionable thread, not to mention the other poster who's around, with his comments about Rafi's hair "looking like a hookers" being one of his greatest hits.

I can't make you see what I see if you don't wanna see what I see, you see? But lots of others do see it and have commented as such.

Is that a 'no' on a direct quote, then? I did search the 10 pages of this thread for "hair" and didn't come up with anything, so a quote would be a help if your argument is going to carry more weight than "if you don't believe what I'm asserting with no evidence you are surely intentionally blind".

Incidentally, kudos on the avatar - I'm a massive fan of the boys from the Dwarf. Though, it does occur to me that the quote in your sig about killing Belgians is something I find very funny and in context; but doubtless someone irritated at your opinion could equally point to it as evidence of you being 'racist'. See how throwing that tag around loosely works?

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Is that a 'no' on a direct quote, then? I did search the 10 pages of this thread for "hair" and didn't come up with anything, so a quote would be a help if your argument is going to carry more weight than "if you don't believe what I'm asserting with no evidence you are surely intentionally blind".

Incidentally, kudos on the avatar - I'm a massive fan of the boys from the Dwarf. Though, it does occur to me that the quote in your sig about killing Belgians is something I find very funny and in context; but doubtless someone irritated at your opinion could equally point to it as evidence of you being 'racist'. See how throwing that tag around loosely works?

That one might have been in a different thread. Search for "hooker" for that nugget of wisdom by the other one.

 

[ED-209]

I NEVER said that.

 

[Dukhat]

He didn’t say you did.

 

[ED-209]

So I’m a woman hating racist because of something someone else said? I assumed he meant me since it’s me he’s accusing. Well isn’t that wonderful?

He clearly meant me, get real. Of course he’ll deny it once he realises it’s wrong.

 

[fireproof78]

Couldn't agree more. We find bad behaviour less and less tolerable, and get more worked up about it than ever we did, because we see what good behaviour actually looks like.

Probably why I've always been drawn to the Roddenberry take on the future. If you see enough ideas of what it might look like, you can start to imagine being there; once you imagine being there, you can probably do it.

So, how do we handle people who don't quite hit the mark? For instance, the OP's premise is Raffi is not "Roddenberrian" which strikes me as well, not living up to a preconceived standard, rather than meeting people where they are at and helping them out.

As a counterexample, I would say that Barclay is not very "Roddenberrian" in that he is socially awkward, to the point of avoidance, and hiding out in the holodeck, to the point he prefers holoprograms to real people. He is avoidant, similar to Raffi, but his perhaps is not as noticeable. So how do we frame that idea, within this concept of people becoming better and how to we engage them? Because I'll bet that Raffi already feels likes like an outsider and treating her as outside the ideal only would cement that opinion.

 

[Mogh]

So, how do we handle people who don't quite hit the mark? For instance, the OP's premise is Raffi is not "Roddenberrian" which strikes me as well, not living up to a preconceived standard, rather than meeting people where they are at and helping them out.

As a counterexample, I would say that Barclay is not very "Roddenberrian" in that he is socially awkward, to the point of avoidance, and hiding out in the holodeck, to the point he prefers holoprograms to real people. He is avoidant, similar to Raffi, but his perhaps is not as noticeable. So how do we frame that idea, within this concept of people becoming better and how to we engage them? Because I'll bet that Raffi already feels likes like an outsider and treating her as outside the ideal only would cement that opinion.

Barclay was thus a low-ranking Starfleet officer. Raffi's lack of detachment, demeanour and other issues would seem to belie her high rank and status.

The other issue being of course that nearly *every* character was "not very Roddenberrian", which I know for me quickly used up the tolerance I had: a show full of Barclays would not have worked for me (or at least, not as Star Trek).

 

[fireproof78]

Barclay was thus a low-ranking Starfleet officer. Raffi's lack of detachment, demeanour and other issues would seem to belie her high rank and status.

The other issue being of course that nearly *every* character was "not very Roddenberrian", which I know for me quickly used up the tolerance I had: a show full of Barclays would not have worked for me (or at least, not as Star Trek).

I think that's an interesting experience because for me that sets a tone for how does this world work. And my question is how does this "Roddenberrian" society treat those who fall along the outside fringes?

I think Raffi was someone who had hit those marks, but needed a lot more external support to continue forward and when that was lost it really impacted her motivation.

I imagine the tolerance for the characters is going to vary from person to person. To me, as someone who often feels on the outside, these characters appeal in a different way than other Trek characters.

 

[Ssosmcin]

What is "Roddenberrian?" Bones was an insult spewing speciesist and he is one the most popular characters in the original series. He was also very quick to hit the hard stuff. Reminds me a little bit of my father, who is something of a functional alcoholic.

Roddenberry had a red shirt ensign drawing his phaser simply because they saw a Klingon. There were plenty of people acting rashly and becoming obsessed with their own personal demons.

Perhaps the humans of TNG were supposed to be perfect. However, in the original concept, there were plenty of imperfect human beings muddling through and rising above. I rather felt that was the whole point.

 

[Lord Garth]

For now ...

If there's a Seven spinoff, Elnor and Borgati might come back (Kore might come back as a Traveler).

I've got a feeling we won't be seeing the last of the 25th Century after Picard ends. Especially since not everyone is keen on more "TOS" Trek (quotations deliberate), and The Future in Discovery isn't everyone's cup of tea. The 25th Century is the one I think people have the least problem with.