DSC and the "No Conflict" Rule

[Balok's Decoy]

So EW is reporting that DSC won't follow the old (very old) "no conflict" rule.

The article is kind of funny because it forgets that DS9 also threw out this rule back in the 90s and they're reporting on this as if it's a newfangled approach in Star Trek.

Nevertheless! Still thought I might post it because the debate about the "Roddenberry Ideal" still goes on, although I think most Trekkies are perfectly fine with conflict between the Starfleet characters. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course.

This article also confirms DSC will be serialized. Not sure if that had been previously confirmed. Basically it looks like they're taking their influence from DS9, BG, stuff like that.

 

[Tosk]

The "no conflict rule" isn't much of a rule. It never even lasted the whole run of one show. TOS, DS9, VOY, and ENT all disregard it to differing degrees.

 

[The Grim Ghost]

There was conflict in TNG. Maybe not so much as some people might have liked, but it was there. Riker and Picard clashed at times. Data and Pulaski. Worf and Picard. Crusher and Picard. Lots of other examples. No conflict might have been an intention in TNG but it is not the reality if you watch the actual show.

Every other incarnation of Trek just had more conflict than TNG and of course I expect nothing less from Discovery.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Even in the article it states that...

This guideline wasn’t strictly followed across all 700 previous franchise episodes, of course.

 

[Campe]

Regardless, not even making a pretense on following that rule is progress for sure. It was a stupid rule in the first place.

 

[Gojira]

McCoy and Spock's relationship seemed to be nothing but conflict!

 

[Campe]

The rule was implemented during TNG. Apparently humanity overcame their petty differences and lost the ability to have passionate arguments in the 24th century.

While I definitely agree that we as a society have some petty arguments, I personally don't want to live in a world where we lose the ability to have passionate debates. They're important for growth and change.

 

[Nyotarules]

Apparently humanity overcame their petty differences and lost the ability to have passionate arguments in the 24th century.

They were busy with their love instructors....

 

[Campe]

They were busy with their love instructors....

I bet they never had passionate angry sex or makeup sex with their love instructors.

 

[Sci]

The no conflict rule was a terrible rule that kept Star Trek's characters emotionally stunted and inhibited Star Trek's full artistic development.

You can do optimistic storytelling that insists people in the future will learn to be better, without insisting that they're cardboard cut-outs of near-perfect virtue.

 

[Mudd]

DS9 threw nothing out - there was less conflict in a season of that show than in any random 15 minutes of NYPD Blue.

That rule didn't exist when Trek was becoming a phenomenon. It's 80s revisionism.

Good riddance.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

DS9 had plenty of conflict, I thought.

In any case, this is excellent news.

 

[Mark_Nguyen]

The Berman-Piller era of Trek almost immediately brought in Ensign Ro as a source of conflict, and all the subsequent series' character ensembles were deliberately deigned to have some built-in conflict to overcome (Starfleet-Bajor, Starfleet-Maquis, Starfleet-Vulcan/Boomer/Beagle), all with varying levels of success. This isn't as much news as DSC following in what's already been evolved, with a modern-day twist, whatever that ends up being.

Mark

 

[The Lensman]

The "no conflict" rule was exclusive to TNG. Wasn't there before, wasn't there after. I remember writers talking about how challenging it was to create conflict because it always had to come from an outside source.

 

[Mirror Mirror]

Good, let it die

 

[Cox of Seagulls]

Great news. That stupid rule is one of the reasons I find a lot of TNG and Voyager very sterile and dull. Give me characters that actually feel alive.

 

[Mudd]

Give me characters that actually feel alive.

Then it won't be Modern Trek.

 

[The Wormhole]

So EW is reporting that DSC won't follow the old (very old) "no conflict" rule.

Best news all day. I was already excited for Discovery, now I'm triply so.

 

[retroenzo]

So if it was brought in during TNG's time then it shouldn't be an issue during Discovery's time, right?

For the shows that came after TNG's fourth season you have to look outside of Starfleet. Ensign Ro had a troubled history. So, while DS9's Starfleet staff were usually not likely to be having a blazing row with each other, the same couldn't be said from the station's Bajoran staff (as well as Quark, Odo, Garak, etc). Also, they were at war for most of it!

Whether it was fully utilised or not is debatable, but Voyager had the potential for conflict between Starfleet and the former Maquis crew, as well as ex-convict Tom Paris, Neelix, Seven and Kes (okay Kes is a bad example. I can't see her losing her temper with anyone, she's just too nice )

Enterprise and the Kelvinverse movies are obviously also set before the rule was brought in on TNG so they haven't needed to worry about conflict within Starfleet.

I think they only need to worry about it if ever (please please pleas!!!) another series comes out and is set after the Dominion War.

 

[The Wormhole]

think they only need to worry about it if ever (please please pleas!!!) another series comes out and is set after the Dominion War.

Even if we ever get a post-Nemesis series, if it knew what was good for it, it would ignore this rule along with all of Roddenberry's other grand ideas. I want love instructors made canon more than I want another series where no conflict is a rule.