Spoilers Dr. Hugh Culber Despite Yourself Spoilers!

[caper_guy]

So a question is how will they know Tyler killed him and why (ie - Culber discovered Voq theory)...if I recall, didn't TOS 1701 have ability to look at in-ship camera/replay to at least see what transpired in that room at a particular time? Better not blame poor Stamets...I know there are other (mirror) issues to deal with first, but perhaps Saru might get on that one...

 

[XCV330]

So a question is how will they know Tyler killed him and why (ie - Culber discovered Voq theory)...if I recall, didn't TOS 1701 have ability to look at in-ship camera/replay to at least see what transpired in that room at a particular time? Better not blame poor Stamets...I know there are other (mirror) issues to deal with first, but perhaps Saru might get on that one...

That was the ISS Enterprise and Kirk's Tantalus Field.
But yeah, one would think there'd be security cameras almost everywhere on a secret ship like Disco.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

Nobody is saying that. However, it is entirely valid to point out that gay characters, especially those who actually engage in same sex activity on screen, have a disproportionate tendency to die, and it's not only disappointing that a show which touted its diversity as a selling point went to that well, it's really regrettable that the producers openly admit knowing about that trope and its impact but doing it anyway, saying it was ok because they "didn't mean it that way". That's pretty short sighted, especially for a gay writer.
Star Trek had its first gay couple and they were natural, believable, and brilliant. And then they killed it off before season 1 was even over. However much you hate criticism of the show, that's a valid point to make.

A sci-fi resurrection/reset button may well be in Culber's future but that doesn't change that this episode contained the brutal murder of yet another gay character on TV, and adds the element that Discovery isn't sticking to another of its selling points, 'anyone can die'.

Im inclined to agree to a point BUT , I think part of the we are all equal thing is to kinda follow through. With it. Just because they are gay doesn't mean one dying is a "bury your gays" trope.

They are also the most accessible and relatable romantic couple on the show, and killing off a husband or wife or deeply loved companian has been a practical dramatic tool since forever. It isn't like they played up the gay character and then the gay guy dies and its sad because it was a gay person. This is the federation, it isn't a "thing" that they are gay. But their relationship? now that's something workable and they absolutely showcased the natural loving relationship

 

[JD]

I'm definitely disappointed that they killed Culber, and the fact that it plays into the gay characters getting killed trope is unfortunate. I want to give the producers and writers the benefit of the doubt here, and believe that they didn't mean anything by killing off a gay character, it still does look kinda bad.
I'm really hoping they're going to be bringing him back.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

Not every gay character killed is a kill your gays trope.

 

[cultcross]

Not every gay character killed is a kill your gays trope.

By definition, it is - that's what the trope means - the tendency for gay characters to get killed off in fiction. Nobody says it's written that it's because they're gay, it's just pointing out the disparity.

Im inclined to agree to a point BUT , I think part of the we are all equal thing is to kinda follow through.

I see where you're coming from with this, but the thing is we aren't all equal. We are talking about Star Trek's first ever unambiguous, canonical, gay couple. And they die within the first season. After all the myriad of straight relationships on Trek, the heteronormative dialogue, the fact every alien we encounter seems to be male and female getting together just like God intended, it is a real real shame that this was included.

They are also the most accessible and relatable romantic couple on the show, and killing off a husband or wife or deeply loved companian has been a practical dramatic tool since forever. It isn't like they played up the gay character and then the gay guy dies and its sad because it was a gay person. This is the federation, it isn't a "thing" that they are gay. But their relationship? now that's something workable

I get why they did it, it was hugely dramatic, and it is the only relationship that close they've established. But given the writers have said they knew of the issue and its impact, in my view the correct choice was not to go ahead with it. Write it a different way.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

I think it shows that they were more focused on writing a good story and not the social whims of the outside looking in.

Personally I just don't see it as an issue unless it was some deliberate "kill the gay guy" choice.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

..I get why they did it, it was hugely dramatic, and it is the only relationship that close they've established. But given the writers have said they knew of the issue and its impact, in my view the correct choice was not to go ahead with it. Write it a different way.

Hmmm. I don't know.

If the story they want to tell includes the aspect of one character losing another character in which they were in a romantic relationship, then to me it seems a little pretentiously reactive to say "Oh wait...I know we want to do that with this story, but we can't because the characters are gay".

I'm all for writing stories for gay characters/couples the exact same way you would write stories for straight characters/couples.

 

[cultcross]

I think it shows that they were more focused on writing a good story and not the social whims of the outside looking in.

Many decades of people "just writing good stories" is why this is our first gay couple. If you don't try with this stuff, it doesn't just happen.

 

[GeekUSACarl]

Many decades of people "just writing good stories" is why this is our first gay couple. If you don't try with this stuff, it doesn't just happen.

As said above, if you have a good story and good material but stop because "we can't do that cause they are gay" you are creating a sub world of straights only.

The best way to move on with issues is to pick which is which. This one IMHO was a tasteful and well written story, and I like that they didn't let the characters being gay keep them from telling it.

Else wed either have two deeply rkmantic relationships which would be too much to tell, or the romantic relationship woulda had to be between two straight folk. Then we are right back where we started, treating gays differently.

 

[cultcross]

As said above, if you have a good story and good material but stop because "we can't do that cause they are gay" you are creating a sub world of straights only.

The best way to move on with issues is to pick which is which. This one IMHO was a tasteful and well written story, and I like that they didn't let the characters being gay keep them from telling it.

Else wed either have two deeply rkmantic relationships which would be too much to tell, or the romantic relationship woulda had to be between two straight folk. Then we are right back where we started, treating gays differently.

I entirely disagree, as this is the same argument that gives rise to claims of "reverse racism" and so on. However it isn't much to do with Discovery, and I'm liable to get on a soapbox, so I'm going to leave it there I appreciate discussing your viewpoint.

 

[eschaton]

I know he's a secondary character, but aside from being Stamets' boyfriend and a doctor, can anyone name a single thing about Culber? The more I think about it, the more hastily he seems to have been conceived.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Many decades of people "just writing good stories" is why this is our first gay couple. If you don't try with this stuff, it doesn't just happen.

It seems to me that Stamets and Culber's relationship could work out exactly as it did if they were straight and one was a woman.

Nothing about their relationship as written so far would matter if they were a same-gender gay couple or if they were a straight couple of opposite genders. Nothing about the way the character so far was written (say, for example, Culber) would matter if Culber was a straight woman.

So why suddenly care about how the story of one of them dying gets written? Why not just continue writing for those characters as if it didn't matter if they were gay or straight?

 

[GeekUSACarl]

I know he's a secondary character, but aside from being Stamets' boyfriend and a doctor, can anyone name a single thing about Culber? The more I think about it, the more hastily he seems to have been conceived.

Well he isn't all that bright, that's about all I know

 

[cultcross]

"Hey, you're a Klingon spy! Wait here nicely while I finish this paperwork!"

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Well he isn't all that bright, that's about all I know

In Culber's defense, I don't think he could have automatically assumed that Tyler would hurt him. Culber didn't really understand what his "scan" meant; he wouldn't necessarily realize that Tyler had a Klingon personality ingrained on top of his own.

Maybe if he thought about it, he would have thought it possible, but he didn't necessarily think that Tyler would be an immediate danger to his life.

We viewers had the advantage of seeing into Tyler's mind during his flashbacks. Culber did not have that advantage.

 

[Feron]

In Culber's defense, I don't think he could have automatically assumed that Tyler would hurt him. Culber didn't really understand what his "scan" meant; he wouldn't necessarily realize that Tyler had a Klingon personality ingrained on top of his own.

Maybe if he thought about it, he would have thought it possible, but he didn't necessarily think that Tyler would be an immediate danger to his life.

Bingo.

People forget that the character Dr. Culber does not have all of the information that we the viewers have. All he can see is that someone that he assumes was a human had some incredibly weird and traumatic things done to him in a Klingon torture chamber. He didn't really have any advance warning that Tyler posed an immediate danger to him.

As I said earlier, the murder took me by surprise. I can't fault Dr. Culber for failing to see something coming that I failed to see myself.

 

[Nyotarules]

Its about time they got a CMO on the ship, why was a junior doctor dealing with Tyler situation?

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

...As I said earlier, the murder took me by surprise. I can't fault Dr. Culber for failing to see something coming that I failed to see myself.

And you (as a viewer) had even more information than Culber had.

 

[Jackson_Roykirk]

Its about time they got a CMO on the ship, why was a junior doctor dealing with Tyler situation?

Meh. I have a feeling Stamets (who is looking very Gary Mitchell-Like) will use Gary Mitchell-Like powers to bring Culber back.