Far Beyond the Stars: Deep Space Nine Speaks on Race

[Dusty Ayres]

Star Trek's Original Series began by showcasing the ultimate diverse cast for that time, a black woman, an Asian man, a Scotsman, a fiendish looking alien and eventually even a Russian.

While Pavel Chekhov frequently engaged in Russian nationalistic quips "We Russians invented it first" that became a running joke and Scott's Scottish national pride came up as well, Uhura and Sulu were present as representatives of other races, but not truly accounted for. Uhura was given an occasional line about an African background, but that too was done in a nationalistic, rather than racial affirmation. Sulu, who it appears was Japanese-American, is simply treated as a given.

Star Trek had fulfilled the idea of Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination introduced by Gene Roddenberry in the third season, but simply presenting diversity on camera is not the same thing as giving it context and meaning. Presenting a black woman or an Asian man in a position on a ship is not the same as a genuine dialogue about race, undisguised by metaphor and analogies involving alien societies and cultures. That was what the Deep Space Nine episode, "Far Beyond the Stars" attempted to do,

"Star Trek Deep Space Nine", the third series in the Star Trek franchise and Star Trek The Next Generation's first spinoff, had a black Captain, but it was by this point hardly a revolutionary act. When Star Trek first aired, a black Captain of a spaceship might have been shocking, but well into the 90's, it was nothing particularly extraordinary, no more so than a female Captain would be some years later on the franchise's next spinoff, "Star Trek Voyager."

Presenting racial diversity is not the same thing as presenting historical context and it was this historical context for the presentation of race, that Avery Brooks, the actor who portrayed Captain Benjamin Sisko, wanted.

History on Star Trek was in some ways divorced from reality. Star Trek's original backstory, crafted during the Cold War foresaw an apocalyptic world war destroying much of the earth from whose ashes a new and better civilization that gave birth to the Federation had arisen. To its credit, the war in question did not involve the Soviet Union and the United States, but instead involved genetically engineered warlords seizing power and fighting among themselves. The date for that history had been set too absurdly close to the show's own timeline, happening in the 1990's, a mistake not unique among Science Fiction TV series.

"Far Beyond the Stars" was in many ways a sequel of sorts to "Past Tense." But unlike "Past Tense" which dealt with race only by implication, shoveling it into the wider net of social problems, "Far Beyond the Stars" would focus explicitly on race in the context of Science Fiction and Star Trek as well as our own society.

In doing so however, "Far Beyond the Stars" ran into a number of problems. The first and foremost one was self-congratulations. To have an honest dialogue on race in Science Fiction would have required the franchise and its writers to admit some of its own flaws. Instead "Far Beyond the Stars" chose to dishonestly portray Science Fiction as a whole as racist, countering that image with Star Trek as a beacon of racial tolerance.

The basic dishonesty of that begins with the fact that "Far Beyond the Stars" is set in the 50's and contrasts the Science Fiction of the day with the content of Star Trek, not as it was in Kirk's time, but in its Deep Space Nine form, as produced in the 1990's. Obviously this is not a fair comparison.

Additionally "Far Beyond the Stars" misrepresents Science Fiction, both in how a Science Fiction magazine functioned and in a general portrayal of the field. Pabst, the magazine's editor, who appears to be based on Astounding Stories editor John W. Campbell, claims that no story with a black man as a lead character could be published at the time, this is quite untrue. In fact the 50's saw the publication of genuinely controversial stories, both in and out of Science Fiction. John Campbell himself likely was a racist and would probably not have published a story such as Benny's, but Galaxy editor Horace Gold would have.

Far Beyond the Stars: Deep Space Nine Speaks on Race

Agree, or disagree? I'm not so sure myself right now.

 

[Navaros]

That is the first time I've ever seen:

1. A person bashing Far Beyond the Stars.

2. A person claiming Past Tense is more deep than Far Beyond the Stars.

3. A person claiming that Far Beyond the Stars is sort of a sequel to Past Tense. (For those who do not know, that is a "WTF smiley", which bears pointing out here because of how very whacky that idea is --- WTF indeed?!).

The reason that is the first time I've ever seen that, is because most people recognize Far Beyond the Stars for what it truly is: a masterpiece.

I must therefore conclude that opinions in the article about Far Beyond the Stars are seriously messed up, inaccurate and erroneous. :thumbsup:

 

[Tomalak]

Instead "Far Beyond the Stars" chose to dishonestly portray Science Fiction as a whole as racist, countering that image with Star Trek as a beacon of racial tolerance.

Utter rubbish.

All of Benny's co-writers are thoroughly supportive. It is Mr Stone, the capitalist owner, who probably couldn't care less about science fiction except for on a profit level, who is the racist.

Far Beyond the Stars is critiquing society as a whole, which would not accept the idea of a black captain. Science Fiction is shown as a beacon of hope, just as Kay Hunter tries to push strong female characters.

But as Pabst says, for society at the time, such ideas were only for liberals and intellectuals. The episode makes it perfectly clear that Benny's stories have a great deal of merit, but society wasn't ready for them. Obviously by the 1990s, it was. That is the point of the show.

 

[Sean Aaron]

I have to disagree with the author of that article. Certainly there were controversial science fiction stories, but the setting of Far Beyond the Stars is not invalid. Science fiction is not automatically superior to other forms of fiction in its reflection of society. The images of women (also indicated in the show) on the covers of the science fiction magazines of the period and long afterwards attest to that fact.

I don't think that science fiction itself was presented as racist, but the environment at the publishing company was representative of the overtly racist society that was America in the 1950s. It's certainly the case historically that popular science fiction writers are not a terribly diverse group ethnically; this may be due to many factors, but let's not ignore that fact because it might say something negative about a genre we like. It would probably be useful to look at the experience of a black author like Samuel R. Delany who I believe was part of the "new wave" of science fiction authors and who certainly wrote a lot of controversial stuff (I'm thinking mainly of the prominence of gay characters and gay sex in several novels during the 60s and 70s). I haven't read his autobiography, but I'd be surprised if it didn't have something to contribute to this discussion.

Damn, now I need to track down his books again...

 

[Jonz]

I disagree. It reminds me of the concept of theory-fishing. The author has an opinion beforehand. He then tries to 'adapt' the episode to his belief and opinions. It's something i think we see far to often whenever someone 'intellectually' tries to pick some of Treks better aspects apart. But it is a well written piece. I just disagree.

Someone here has a great article on his blog about ph.d. thesises trying to bash Star Trek.

 

[Opus]

It's incredible really. How can an author who used so many words completely and utterly miss the point of 'Far Beyond the Stars'. The premise of the show was NOT meant to show racism in 1950's science fiction writing. It was MEANT to show racism in the 1950's, using science fiction writing at a backdrop!

Completely missed the point...

 

[Dusty Ayres]

Jonz said:
I disagree. It reminds me of the concept of theory-fishing. The author has an opinion beforehand. He then tries to 'adapt' the episode to his belief and opinions. It's something i think we see far to often whenever someone 'intellectually' tries to pick some of Treks better aspects apart. But it is a well written piece. I just disagree.

Someone here has a great article on his blog about ph.d. thesises trying to bash Star Trek.

Who is that person? I'd love to read it.

 

[Jonz]

Dusty Ayres said:
Who is that person? I'd love to read it.

I just found it. It's forum members TiberiusK's blog.

The (wonderfully written) article can be found at his blog here

 

[Tralis]

I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think that it has more merit than the Trek Bashing essays I have seen posted here. It is kind of a self-congradulating episode.

 

[Judas Ascendant]

Jonz said:
It reminds me of the concept of theory-fishing. The author has an opinion beforehand. He then tries to 'adapt' the episode to his belief and opinions.

I think most people theory-fish. They are just better at masking their true intentions. This article is full of episode reworking

for instance:

"Past Tense" allowed Avery Brooks to take on another character who genuinely informed and changed the world around him.

What about the episode leads one to believe that Gabriel Bell was anything other than a man in the wrong place at the right time?

 

[TiberiusK]

One scholar critiqued FBTS as making us feel good about the progress we've made since the 50s, without acknowledging how far we still have to go. In her mind, the episode was not critique of contemporary racism. It was a feel good episode meant to demonstrate that those problems no longer exist.

I'm blanking on the author's name right now, but the book had IDIC in the title.

 

[firehawk12]

I wrote a paper on it... I'm still not sure if I can put it online anywhere, but if you wanted to read it and don't have access to SAGE through a university.
You can find it here though... I'm sure no one will find it outside of the people here!
(February 2007 issue of the Bulletin of Science and Technology).

Anyhow, if you don't want to go through my paper, I basically examined race in the entire franchise. In fact, I asked about Far Beyond the Stars right here when I was doing the paper initially for the class I was in back in 2006.
My take was that it is the one and ONLY attempt to put explicit inter-human racism in the franchise and that it should be applauded for that alone. I just had a problem with the execution, mainly the fatalistic nature of the ending.
I understand the argument that by having him committed at the end, the episode is implying that he is the only "sane" person in this time and that the other characters are the ones that are "insane". In fact, I'm partially sympathetic to this interpretation. However, given that this is taking place right around the time of the Montgomery bus boycotts and the rise of Martin Luther King Jr's movement, you just think that they could have ended it differently. Rosa Parks sits on a bus, is arrested and becomes a national hero. Benny can't get his book published, sees cops beat his "son" to death and has a breakdown?
I would have greatly preferred the ending where he stands on the set of Deep Space Nine as an old man, watching his stories become a reality.

Now, I didn't examine Past Tense simply because I felt it dealt with class rather than racism. In fact, the issue of race isn't raised at all. Already, in 22nd Century (right?) Trek world, race is just forgotten.

The only other episode of DS9 that addresses human racism explicitly is "Badda Bing, Badda Bang", and I don't buy the whole "holodecks are for fun, so we can forget context" argument.
If you are an African American and you could go ANYWHERE, why would you go to a place where your ancestors were lynched, killed, or at the very least treated as less than human?
Imagine if a Jewish character decided to take a holodeck trip to 1940s Germany to have some fun. Or a Chinese character going back to 1940s Nanjing. What the hell?

In the end though, as I did in my paper, I'm willing to give DS9 full credit for even bringing up human racism without allegory. DS9 suffers from many of the same problems as the other series, namely Rom and Nog's fervent desire to become more human and drink root beer, but that's something else entirely.

 

[CoveTom]

Most people here have discussed the author's take on FBTS, and rightly so since this is a DS9 forum, but I'd also like to disagree with the author's initial point regarding TOS and race.

The author disapproves of the way TOS handled race because more overt discussion was not made of the characters' racial backgrounds, aside from the humor that derived from the ethnic backgrounds of Chekov and Scotty. The author even says:

Sulu, who it appears was Japanese-American, is simply treated as a given.

But, to me, that's the point! The idea was to portray a future in which the vast majority of racial problems had been solved long ago and weren't even so much as an afterthought. On the bridge of that starship, in this TV show from the 1960's, you had a senior staff consiting of a white American, a Scottsman, an African, an Asian-American, a Russian, and even an alien from another planet! The fact that they didn't sit around and discuss race all the more drives home the point that an ethnically diverse crew is nothing extraordinary in the 23rd century, but so much the norm that it's not even worth discussion.

The fact that TOS didn't choose to (very often) get on a soapbox about race but, instead, simply showed a multi-racial crew working together in harmony is, IMHO, one of its greatest strengths, not a weakness.

 

[Navaros]

Wow firehawk, great post there. Everything in it is totally spot-on. Thanks for the insight!

Although, that link doesn't work for me when I click on it, it's just a blank page for me. EDIT: Just found out it was/is (depending on future edits by firehawk) missing an "o" in the link provided.

I thought the character Laas on DS9 was phenomenal in depicting a character who didn't wanna be like humans because of how horrible human beings are - he made an extremely compelling case for that argument. So whilst it is true that DS9 suffered the common flaw by making Rom/Nog/Moogie/Nagus etc. desire to be human, at least DS9 also had the fortitude to show the other side of that coin via Laas. :thumbsup:

 

[firehawk12]

^
Thanks. I fixed the link, so hopefully it's good now.
I don't remember Laas at all... which episode was that?

CoveTom said:

The fact that TOS didn't choose to (very often) get on a soapbox about race but, instead, simply showed a multi-racial crew working together in harmony is, IMHO, one of its greatest strengths, not a weakness.

The problem is that it's a, at least in the modern context, conservative American viewpoint. Everyone speaks English, has Western values. All other values are treated as quaint and friendly as long as they do not interfere with the dominant norm.

I think that at the time it was progressive because there simply wasn't anything else on that had characters like it, so in context it's a great show when dealing with race. But, as Enterprise has taught is, just having a black actor in your cast isn't really the best thing ever. It depends on what you do with them.