First Mutineer?

[BillJ]

Burnham has been called both the "first" and "only" Starfleet mutineer. "First mutineer" by Landry. Then Admiral Kat, episode 5: "This organization's only convicted mutineer is viewed by many as the cause of our conflict..." Other than that, it's usually just "the mutineer".

I think they could have just had her be a mutineer. The "first" and "only" is supposed to make her seem special in the grand scheme of things, and really wasn't needed.

 

[zar]

I think they could have just had her be a mutineer. The "first" and "only" is supposed to make her seem special in the grand scheme of things, and really wasn't needed.

Of course, it couldn't possibly have been in recognition of canon, or any real significance to the story. Those hack writers must have just thrown it in to make her seem special without a second thought. In case I missed it, remind me how you feel about this show again?

 

[BillJ]

In case I missed it, remind me how you feel about this show again?

How I feel about the show has nothing to do with it. She simply could've been a mutineer that started a war, without the canon song-and-dance. It was a poor decision.

But, of course, people who love the show are unbiased about what does and doesn't work. Though the people who like it, most seem to love it unconditionally. Pointedly taking offense that anyone has the audacity to point out possible flaws.

 

[zar]

How I feel about the show has nothing to do with it. She simply could've been a mutineer that started a war, without the canon song-and-dance. It was a poor decision.

I mean, why is she a mutineer at all, right? She could have been convicted of gross negligence instead. Very poor decision.

Pointedly taking offense that anyone has the audacity to point out possible flaws.

No, I totally agree with you. Why would the writers write a thing when they could have written another, slightly different thing? It's obviously a flaw, and this is a perfectly reasonable criticism that definitely isn't grasping at straws.

 

[The Wormhole]

But, of course, people who love the show are unbiased about what does and doesn't work. Though the people who like it, most seem to love it unconditionally. Pointedly taking offense that anyone has the audacity to point out possible flaws.

Oh, you're such an Orville Fan!

 

[The Mighty Monkey of Mim]

The very point of such specific and deliberate choices is to show that what we think we know from the record—i.e., from TOS and the other shows, especially as collectively (sometimes selectively) digested and passed through fandom up to this point—isn't necessarily the way it really happened at all. The record we "know" is wrong in some places, or at the very least incomplete and inconsistent. The record has outright lied at times and subtly obfuscated and obscured at others. Yet the point is not to invalidate or ignore TOS and the other shows, but to subvert our assumptions about what we see there and force a reinterpretation of them in light of new context. It's addition, not subtraction. The record, for all our careful study of it, has left us ignorant of much. DSC is here to fill us in on some of what we've missed and set us straight in some of our misconceptions...one such misapprehension being that we can trust the record.

 

[zar]

DSC is here to fill us in on some of what we've missed and set us straight in some of our misconceptions...one such misapprehension being that we can trust the record.

If you squint real hard here:

... It says "Mapped by famous Russian astronomer Ivan Borkoff". It turns out Chekov actually knows everything that was covered up after the war and he's been trying to set the record straight for years. He was testing Spock.