I randomly started thinking this when watching "Civil Defence" - the only explanation I can think of, is "The measurements needed would be too complicated for the layperson to describe to a replicator".
Don't replicators make Garak's tailor business redundant?
- Thread starter hxclespaulplayer
- Start date
Replicators never substituted for artistry, and it wouldn't do so with regard to fashion, where the tailor/designer interprets the wishes of the customer and the tastes of the time into subjective work.
In all probability, Garak does use replicators to create his products. Or then other machines that are equally convenient. Why there still needs to be a special shop run by this special person is simple enough: the customer interface is of utmost importance when selling something to a buyer whose first (and often only!) question is "Do I look good in this?".
Garak sells artistic visions. A replicator can create the product, but it won't have the vision, or at least it can't sell the vision the way the honey-tongued Cardassian can. Sure, the replicator could scan you to produce a perfectly fitting jacket and quote accurate research indicating that it increases your chances of scoring by 47.0% sharp, but you wouldn't believe the machine. Yet you would believe Garak.
(Garak no doubt also purchases some of his material readymade, instead of replicating it on the spot - but again for the look of the things. He needs to have some physical cloth available for the customer to fondle, and it helps if he can tell the story of obtaining that cloth, other than "I pushed the button for creating this just ten minutes ago".)
Timo Saloniemi
Garak sells artistic visions. A replicator can create the product, but it won't have the vision, or at least it can't sell the vision the way the honey-tongued Cardassian can. Sure, the replicator could scan you to produce a perfectly fitting jacket and quote accurate research indicating that it increases your chances of scoring by 47.0% sharp, but you wouldn't believe the machine. Yet you would believe Garak.
(Garak no doubt also purchases some of his material readymade, instead of replicating it on the spot - but again for the look of the things. He needs to have some physical cloth available for the customer to fondle, and it helps if he can tell the story of obtaining that cloth, other than "I pushed the button for creating this just ten minutes ago".)
Timo Saloniemi
Besides, in a replicator-based economy, artisan-made goods would probably have a special cachet. We see that even today, where microbreweries are considered classier than just buying factory-made beer from some big chain, and where small, boutique bookstores are having a renaissance as a cozier alternative to the big, faceless businesses like Amazon. People who go to Garak's for their clothes are like people who go to the local farmers' market for produce rather than the supermarket.
^Agreed, and to add more to Timo's point about the cloth, there might be something to say about the quality and texture of the fabric as well. We already use synthetic fabrics today, but it's quite different than something that's homespun, or made with certain materials. Fabric is something that adds some feel to the clothes, and trying to determine a balance between feel and color/pattern is also part of fashion.
It could also be that the craft of certain fabrics just can't be replicated, akin to how certain mixes of recipes and spices for foods can't be replicated (at least, according to Riker, the Picards, the Siskos, etc), which would drive their value up.
It could also be that the craft of certain fabrics just can't be replicated, akin to how certain mixes of recipes and spices for foods can't be replicated (at least, according to Riker, the Picards, the Siskos, etc), which would drive their value up.
Depends on the perspective you're coming at this from.
From the perspective of making materials, clothes etc, there is clearly a level of craftsmanship that replicators cannot....um replicate, which would appeal to the customer as a luxury item
However, if this is the case (and money doesn't exist) then why wouldn't everyone want these luxury items of clothing. There should be a queue all the way around the habitat ring for these kinds of goods (yet this does not appear to be the case)
From the perspective of why anyone would start a project (to call it a business would suggest profit) in a world where personal material gain is demonstrably redundant and there is no noticeable profit or status attached to such an endeavour. Well under those circumstances, I guess the answer would be that it's purely a hobby that provides an individual with a great sense of artistic expression
Though this again would suggest that a shop is entirely unnecessary. I believe Garak does make money (credits) for his product though (from what I recall) so clearly his luxury produce would sell
Only humans have bettered themselves into being above that sort of thing apparently
From the perspective of making materials, clothes etc, there is clearly a level of craftsmanship that replicators cannot....um replicate, which would appeal to the customer as a luxury item
However, if this is the case (and money doesn't exist) then why wouldn't everyone want these luxury items of clothing. There should be a queue all the way around the habitat ring for these kinds of goods (yet this does not appear to be the case)
From the perspective of why anyone would start a project (to call it a business would suggest profit) in a world where personal material gain is demonstrably redundant and there is no noticeable profit or status attached to such an endeavour. Well under those circumstances, I guess the answer would be that it's purely a hobby that provides an individual with a great sense of artistic expression
Though this again would suggest that a shop is entirely unnecessary. I believe Garak does make money (credits) for his product though (from what I recall) so clearly his luxury produce would sell
Only humans have bettered themselves into being above that sort of thing apparently
Because not everyone is interested in the same luxuries. Me, I couldn't care less about clothes or fashion. As long as I'm warm and comfortable enough and have pockets to keep stuff in, I'm set. If any luxury is available to anyone, then different people are going to seek out different luxuries. Some would go for clothes, some for artwork, some for specialty foods, some for real estate, etc.
After all, if anyone can get luxuries, then it's not a status symbol anymore, not an ostentatious display to show off how rich and powerful you are. So the only reason to get such luxuries is for personal satisfaction. So rather than trying to stock up on every luxury item around, you'd just go for the particular ones that you liked or found useful.
But clothing isn't a luxury in the sense of status or fashion. It's a luxury of comfort. No amount of...money doesn't exist and we're all happy in the Trek future....can change the fact that people prefer comfort to lack of comfort
I know some people will fight tooth and nail to defend the Trek non-money utopia but if you analyse it more closely, holes start to appear
I'm still trying to work out how Sisko's dad has a restaurant. Does everyone get a restaurant?
Why does Garak get a shop on the station? Are Starfleet charging rent? What if someone with significantly greater tailoring skills applies for that shop space?
Etc etc
I know some people will fight tooth and nail to defend the Trek non-money utopia but if you analyse it more closely, holes start to appear
I'm still trying to work out how Sisko's dad has a restaurant. Does everyone get a restaurant?
Why does Garak get a shop on the station? Are Starfleet charging rent? What if someone with significantly greater tailoring skills applies for that shop space?
Etc etc
DS9 did Trek a service as well by suggesting that there were different types of replicators that had specialty functions. Sure, you could get some bland tomato soup out of the average household model, but what if you want something complex? Maybe you needed a special industrial replicator that could, at best, give you the parts you needed to assemble the item. Or there were catering-oriented replicators. Not every model was a magical door to instance luxury or power.
The luxury isn't the clothing, it's the tailor. Some people find artisanal goods to be more desirable or special than their mass-produced equivalents.
So? There are plenty of holes in our economic system. The entire global economy nearly fell through one of them in 2008. And now the robber-baron bankers whose greed caused the '08 crash are more powerful and unrepentant than ever, which seems like an enormous logic hole to me. Then there's the whole thing about how the richest 1 percent of the population will soon own more than the other 99 percent put together. If the current world economy were fiction, few would believe it.
Obviously, not everyone would want one. And nobody said that capitalism is forbidden, just that it isn't mandatory. My take is that the Federation uses a system where the basic needs of survival are guaranteed for everyone, so that you can lead a comfortable life without money, but if you want to engage in commerce or trade or own special possessions like your own restaurant or spaceship or whatever, then you can participate in capitalism as an optional activity.
Basically, the fault with all your questions is that you're treating them all as universal, asking about "everyone." That's a profound oversimplification. Different people want different things. Today, we live in a society where everyone has to work and earn money just to stay alive. In the Federation future, working and earning money are simply optional. They're no longer something that everyone has to do. And since people are different, that means that some people wouldn't do it but other people still would. It's become a matter of choice rather than grim necessity.
It's a Bajoran station. Starfleet just administers it.
So we can all have these artisanal goods at any time for no cost...but most of us just don't fancy them for some delightfully convenient reason?
So? Our economies are constantly reported on and discussed. Show me the Trek episode where they discuss the ridiculous, giant holes in their Utopia and that answer night mean something. The criticism for Trek is that it ignores those holes. Thus, they are worthy of discussion and ridicule, no?
Actually I think most would believe it. People are dicks. An economy that reflects that would therefore surprise no one. That's why the Federation utopia of immensely nice people who don't ever want anything is so bewildering
Your take is speculative. We can all speculate. I speculate that LOTS of people would like restaurants, shops, buildings for their own art, projects etc......the question is......do they all get one?
The answer is no
This is what people always say when defending the no money utopia. Not everyone wants things. Again, isn't this highly convenient. Not everyone wants a restaurant, not everyone wants that beautiful house overlooking the beach, not everyone wants all the comforts and luxuries that others do what. Well thank God they don't because if they did.....revolution
Ask a billionaire today why everyone isn't a billionaire and a lot of them will say....they don't want to be....they're happy with what they've got
Yeah, its possibly that not everyone wants them but LOTS of people do! Additionally, if I come along and decide that my groovy, free love restaurant that serves egg noodles and cheese would be perfect in the location where Sisko has his restaurant, who is to decide that I cannot have that location?
Then do the Bajorans (who also live in our post scarcity universe) expect rent? When a brilliant Betazoid tailor comes along and wants Garak's shop space, how do they give it to him?
Seems to me that there's a great deal of ownership and wealth in the utopia
Last edited:
I'm bewildered. Why do you find it hard to believe that different people have different tastes and interests? That should be axiomatic. Some people devote themselves to collecting fancy wines or coffees -- I can't stand either of those things. And I'm sure there are things I'd love to collect that you couldn't care less about.
Discussion, sure. Ridicule, no, because it's not an economic treatise, it's an action-adventure series. The show doesn't have to discuss the workings of the economic system any more than a cop show has to discuss the workings of the city's sewer system. If it's actually relevant to an episode, then it can come up, but otherwise it doesn't matter.
Heck, that was one of Roddenberry's foundational rules for ST -- that space heroes shouldn't stop and explain the workings of their technology or their society any more than a cop should stop in the middle of a car chase to give a treatise on the internal combustion engine. The characters already know how their world works. And we don't need to know, unless it's specifically relevant to the plot.
That's probably true, which is why it still makes sense that they have money. But as I said, capitalism would be a peripheral, optional activity rather than the basis of the economy and society. You can find similar conjectural systems discussed in other science fiction (I believe Kim Stanley Robinson gives Mars such a system in his novel 2312, drawing on similar lines to the Martian society he conjectured in his earlier, separate Mars trilogy), and in real theoretical discussions today, such as advocacy for a universal basic income guarantee. There are existing theoretical models that come reasonably close to what's portrayed in Trek.
And as I've made clear, I'm not saying anything about a "no money" system. I've acknowledged that it's logical to conclude that money does exist in the Federation; it's simply not a sine qua non for basic survival. If you want something more than your guaranteed necessities like housing, food, education, and health care, then you can work for them and earn the money to acquire them; but if you choose not to work, then you won't starve to death or be deprived of medical treatment, and thus can still lead a comfortable life.
Okay, you've crossed a line. Don't you dare compare my position to the self-serving rationalizations of greedy billionaires. I'm not saying anything remotely like that, and I'm offended that you'd accuse me of that. You don't seem interested in listening to my actual positions -- you're just ignoring them and spouting your prescripted attacks on what you wrongly imagine I'm saying. And that's not how actual conversations work. So I'm done here.
I accept that different people have different tastes but not to the extent that they would disregard the opportunity to having something of quality that they cared little about. I am best described as fashion challenged and have absolutely no interest in clothing (the materials, the styles, the trends etc) but if I could get a fantastic bespoke suit without having to invest any of my time, money or energy....
I would (since it require absolutely nothing of me, why not)
You're going to force me to use the dreaded words.....a show must follow it's own internal logic. If they're using this paradise society as a backdrop "for the entire show" then I feel that I am definitely entitled to know a little more about it and how it works and I am certainly entitled to to ridicule it when it fails to do so (or fails to do so convincingly)
That's fine for technology and such but I would argue that this paradise society that these characters inhabit is specifically relevant to every single plot. Isn't the Federation and it's "better ourselves" philosophy entirely built on the fact that they live in paradise. I would say it's a subject that is very much up for closer inspection, discussion, ridicule.
My main issue with the system is property ownership. I see no way around this and if people own property then we do not do things simply to better ourselves. It would seem clear that pursuit of wealth, greed, envy, self interest and all those other juicy things that make human beings so flawed and so beautiful must still exist in the trek world. If they do (and they must) then I would have liked to have seen the show address it a little more (DS9 came close)
I'm not ignoring anything. I'm offering a counter argument and for what it's worth, I'm having a hugely enjoyable and interesting discussion in the process. This is a forum designed for exactly that, is it not? I wasn't accusing you of anything. I was pointing out that defending the utopia by saying some people want things but other people don't, is too convenient.
It has a tendency to be the position that most people who defend the Trek paradise society usually take
For me that's not good enough though
Thanks for the intelligent discussion. We obviously won't agree but it was fun
I don't understand how it could possibly work even in TNG considering that other civilizations in the galaxy are very definitely monetarily-based, and there would be commerce between them the the Federation.
^Because money and currency are not the same thing. It's possible to pay someone for their works and goods with the latter.
By what, just printing up a bunch of Ferengi money? Or just telling them to update their account with X amount? does the money the Federation takes in from the outside just sit and collect dust until they use it to buy something from the outside? There is obviously no concept of interest in the Federation economy. There are serious problems with this as an economic model.
Money is conceptual, currency is measurable. In a capitalist economy, there is usually more money than currency. Anything else you would like to know I think you should look up yourself.
Just because someone can have something does not mean they will want that something.
A replicator can probably make a set of clothing that is confortable. A tailor is there to add more exotic touches to the clothing. Garak adds speific kinds of silk and whatnot to certain peoples clothing due to conditions, levels of confort or style choices. Fitting of said clothing may require a personal touch rather than just a replicator for the first item of clothing. After the tailor has the measurements and the individual is happy with the way it fits, the replicator can duplicate the product. It is the fine tuning and artistry the tailor does. Not just make clothing.
Some people like to looks unique. Some people have unusual builds. Some like to have a specific form of comfort, or require specific thread type or counts else they get itchy. Other people just want a pair of pants in a certain color that fits their waistline and that's it. They don't need a tailor for that, just a size and a color.
It is the tailor's skills that are for sale. The clothing can be replicated, even by Garak. It is knowing what to put into the replicator, that is also a skill, as it could be incredibly detailed.
What I would like to know is, what was Dr. Crusher going to do with the bolt of material she purchased at Farpoint Station.
A replicator can probably make a set of clothing that is confortable. A tailor is there to add more exotic touches to the clothing. Garak adds speific kinds of silk and whatnot to certain peoples clothing due to conditions, levels of confort or style choices. Fitting of said clothing may require a personal touch rather than just a replicator for the first item of clothing. After the tailor has the measurements and the individual is happy with the way it fits, the replicator can duplicate the product. It is the fine tuning and artistry the tailor does. Not just make clothing.
Some people like to looks unique. Some people have unusual builds. Some like to have a specific form of comfort, or require specific thread type or counts else they get itchy. Other people just want a pair of pants in a certain color that fits their waistline and that's it. They don't need a tailor for that, just a size and a color.
It is the tailor's skills that are for sale. The clothing can be replicated, even by Garak. It is knowing what to put into the replicator, that is also a skill, as it could be incredibly detailed.
What I would like to know is, what was Dr. Crusher going to do with the bolt of material she purchased at Farpoint Station.
Probably tell the story of how she got it - whether it ends up becoming a dress or a wall ornament.
Are the Feds polite? The problem with replicators is that they are also excellent duplicators: Quark can feed in an alien device neither he nor anybody in the known universe understands, and a working duplicate pops out nevertheless. If the sustenance of the Denebians depends on selling nice cloth to outsiders, they have not just lost most of the UFP market there - they also risk losing everybody else, as those potential customers can go to a not-so-polite Federation citizen who hands out these 100% genuine copies for free.
The thing with that scenario is that nobody in the UFP ought to bother with such tricks. Sure, it's a nice joke to play on a planet, but it's more trouble than worth as far as practical jokes go. In the larger scale, the UFP society can well afford to be polite, never making any sort of profit in any of its transactions and indeed voluntarily making massive loss as a form of aid to alien cultures they like. It's just funny money to them anyway, as they are self-sufficient as far as is known.
As for the "moneyless" thing, it's easy to postulate a money-free economy operating within a money-based one. Indeed, the world today runs on those. We simply can take that one step further and decide that the money-free element in the economy is the consumer market. Today, consumers are important to the global market. Tomorrow, they might be irrelevant; far bigger and more abstract clients would exist, and the profits from dealing with those could be used to fund a "consumer market" where nobody ever needs to pay for anything.
Which becomes outdated first, consumers or labor, is difficult to predict. But a society that can offer free life for consumers is probably already in a position to operate without labor, save for whatever comes its way through volunteering.
Timo Saloniemi
Are the Feds polite? The problem with replicators is that they are also excellent duplicators: Quark can feed in an alien device neither he nor anybody in the known universe understands, and a working duplicate pops out nevertheless. If the sustenance of the Denebians depends on selling nice cloth to outsiders, they have not just lost most of the UFP market there - they also risk losing everybody else, as those potential customers can go to a not-so-polite Federation citizen who hands out these 100% genuine copies for free.
The thing with that scenario is that nobody in the UFP ought to bother with such tricks. Sure, it's a nice joke to play on a planet, but it's more trouble than worth as far as practical jokes go. In the larger scale, the UFP society can well afford to be polite, never making any sort of profit in any of its transactions and indeed voluntarily making massive loss as a form of aid to alien cultures they like. It's just funny money to them anyway, as they are self-sufficient as far as is known.
As for the "moneyless" thing, it's easy to postulate a money-free economy operating within a money-based one. Indeed, the world today runs on those. We simply can take that one step further and decide that the money-free element in the economy is the consumer market. Today, consumers are important to the global market. Tomorrow, they might be irrelevant; far bigger and more abstract clients would exist, and the profits from dealing with those could be used to fund a "consumer market" where nobody ever needs to pay for anything.
Which becomes outdated first, consumers or labor, is difficult to predict. But a society that can offer free life for consumers is probably already in a position to operate without labor, save for whatever comes its way through volunteering.
Timo Saloniemi
Similar threads
