First time watcher - community Q's

[bjj8383]

I recently watched TNG, start to finish, for the first time, previously only having had a passing familiarity with it. I figured as a scifi fan it was about time I did. While on the whole I don't consider the experience a waste of time, there were a lot of themes and instances that drove my opinion down quite a bit. Like, a lot. Like, I couldn't stop thinking about how strange/dumb/rediculous/outrageous they were, to the point of being upsetting. I was just curious how the "fan base" regarded these things.

* The extremely predictable formula half the episodes follow; 30% science mystery, 70% personal emotional conundrum. Mash the two elements together, messily, with Elmer's glue. Rinse, repeat.

* How Federation technology is the best in the universe and its designers are idiots. What I mean is, any piece of equipment can be "reconfigured" to do anything. And yet these thousands of save-the-day features are never designed to be -standard-.

* The fact that Data's super speed is limited to his fingers. The many occasions where he could have swiftly disarmed bad guys saw him instead standing idly by with his thumb up his rear.

* How Data disobeyed direct orders and risked his friends lives for the sake of the rights of maybe-beginning-to-be-sort-of-sentient helper bots, who he himself compared to robo-bacteria, and yet aparently had no moral objections whatsoever about interfering with the Enterprise when it began to develop an intelligence of its own.

** While we're on the subject, how apparently there is a species who floats around in space and is entirely dependent on replicator-equiped ships just randomly passing by for reproduction. O_o

* How Klingon culture is portrayed so horribly. Everything is a ritual-this and a ceremony-that. No culture refers to themselves in such a way in reality, it just sounds so unnatural and fake. When was the last time you were invited to something like a Ritual of the Human Life Partnership Ceremony? Never, because that sounds rediculous.

* How they can learn to communicate with every space cloud, jellyfish and glowing bacteria they come across in less than a day. I mean, please.

* Tamarian language being entirely metaphore. I realize this is a very specific example but it's the same kind of rediculous think-about-it-for-30-seconds-and-you'll-see-how-impossible-it-is situation that crops up all the time. In order to have stories to draw metaphore from, you need a story. To have a story you need actual language. If you have actual language, why do you have to talk in metaphore? If they can understand English, why can't they talk in it? How can you possibly develop star travel when you have no technobabble words? Etc etc.

* Just becasue your DNA is magically changing... doesn't mean you are going to turn into some other creature in a day. Your bones, for example, are only totally replaced a handful of times in your life in standard maintenence processes. It's a slow thing. If the DNA your body is using as a blueprint for that process is different, you aren't going to take on a different bone structure in a day, ala Spot the Iguana.

* How the Borg were able to swipe a dozen outposts off the face of the world along the Neutral Zone, and then never used that technology again, didn't reapear for quite some time, and after they did were only interested in one target, Earth, which despite their supposedly vast territory, and thus resourses, they never even sent more than one ship at a time to get.

* How the Cardassians are portrayed from the beginning as being a formidable enemy, yet the first time a Cardassian ship has a scuffle with the Enterprise, their shields were barely scratched and no one on the bridge was even concerned. Ooo big scary bad guys alright...

* The Prime Directive. I mean, please. Could allowing a species to go extinct really be worse than the chance that interfering with them will be bad in the long run? Some possible bad moral choices in the future are worse than definite extinction? Yeahhhh....


I realize I got a little ranty there but I really don't mean to be confrontational or start some flame fest. Again, I just was curious how the fan base, as a whole, felt about these aspects of the series I have trouble with. Not looking for an argument, just the pre-established concensus opinions that I'm not aware of.

Also, as I said, I don't consider the watching of the series a waste of time. I enjoyed a good bit of it and had a lot of laughs, despite myslef. "Spot, down. Down Spot. Down. Down. Spot." :P

 

[Start Wreck]

First of all, glad you enjoyed it! It's my favourite show ever.
Second of all, it's ridiculous. It's not red.
Thirdly, I'll try to answer your questions as a long-time fan since the nineties...

- The predictable formula. Yeah, fair enough. Lots of shows follow a predictable formula. It's not unique to Star Trek, and certainly not to TNG. I do tend to prefer the episodes that stray from it, though. eg. Cause and Effect.

* Federation technology. I dunno, it never really occurred to me.

* Data's speed. Actually, that's not totally unbelievable. Fingers are small and nimble things. It's far harder to move an entire body (that supposedly weighs quite a bit) at high speeds through an atmosphere. But Data's apparent abilities did vary depending on the needs of the plot, yeah. In the early days, he was just an artificial lifeform, no better than a fleshy person. In other instances, he's like the Terminator, almost invulnerable.

* Data and the sentient Enterprise.... I don't recall the specifics of the episode. Does he actually try to harm or supress the sentience of the computer? Or is he merely trying to help it fullfill its destiny? Sorry, it's been a while.

* Floating species dependant on replica-equipped ships for reproduction. Can't recall, sorry. I don't think this episode is a favourite of a lot of fans. Personally, I quite liked it.

* Klingon culture. Well, it's supposed to be alien, yeah. It's the planet of hats trope, isn't it? We didn't see enough Klingons for it to bother me, but, again, they weren't my favourite episodes.

* Universal Translator.

* The Tamarians (is that what they were called) may well have had a proper language once, to tell those stories in the first place. Now, they don't. I liked it, it's one of my favourites. Bear in the mind, the Universal Translator was translating their alien words in English equivalents, but that wasn't enough without the context to turn it into something relatable to the Enterprise crew. It was an interesting idea, I thought.

* The DNA thing. Definitely bad science. I shrug it off. It's fantasy.

* The Borg aren't sinister moustache-twirling villains. They're a force of nature, spread throughout the galaxy. They have no specific interest in Earth as such. That said, a lot of their early history is a bit hazy, because they were still being written. Originally, the aliens responsible for the Neutral Zone attacks were the parasite things from Conspiracy, who were supposed to be the Borg, before they became cyborgs due to budget reasons. As such, these early inconsistencies don't really bother me.
The Borg were ruined by First Contact and everything afterwards, not by TNG.

* Cardassians. Yet another Big Bad Alien that didn't turn out all that badly, really. See also: the Ferengi. Didn't bother me. Although the Enterprise is the flagship, so it should be more awesome than anything else!

* The Prime Directive. No, I like this one. We're not gods, we need rules. It creates good drama. We might think we're doing the right thing but we can't know for sure. Who are we to say what consequences our actions will have in the long run? Plus, some of the best acting from Patrick Stewart revolved around prime directive plot stuff, so I'm all for it.

 

[MikeS]

I think The Prime Directive is the main thing seperating Trek from other sci-fi and therefore a cornerstone of the show.

 

[sonak]

I think The Prime Directive is the main thing seperating Trek from other sci-fi and therefore a cornerstone of the show.

yeeesh, I hope not. I like Trek a lot, but I HATE the Prime Directive, so I hope that's not considered one of the more important ingredients that makes Trek what it is.




As for the opening post, those are some pretty insightful and clever observations.

 

[T'Girl]

* 70% personal emotional conundrum.

One of the deserved criticisms of the original series was the lack of character development, what there was was pretty small. TNG had far more character growth, part of which was through "personal emotional conundrum." Barclay and his transporter phobia, Worf reveled to be a lousy father, LaForge's difficulty with romance and Picard discomfort around children (which he apparently outgrew). Real people have real emotions, it's just the way it is.

* How Federation technology is the best in the universe ...

Except it really isn't. The Federation's technology is at best equal to many of their interstellar peers and opponents. This is why Starfleet usually has to solve problems with strategies, tactics and wisdom. In the case of the Dominion War, the Federation's victory was only partially the result of Starfleet's efforts on the "battlefield."

* What I mean is, any piece of equipment can be "reconfigured" to do anything. And yet these thousands of save-the-day features are never designed to be -standard-.

Perhaps because they could not? This might go back to the Federation's technology not being the best. Their machines can't be everything at once. For instance, the federation can not equip it starships with a shield that can simultaneously stop everything, so they make them "tunable" to different frequencies and portions of the spectrum.

* The fact that Data's super speed is limited to his fingers.

I've come across people whose fingers can move nearly as fast as Data's, typing on keyboards and playing musical instruments. But their arms and bodies can't move as fast as their fingers.

* ... the Enterprise when it began to develop an intelligence of its own.

when was this, I mean which episode?

* How Klingon culture is portrayed so horribly. Everything is a ritual-this and a ceremony-that. No culture refers to themselves in such a way in reality, it just sounds so unnatural and fake.

The Klingon culture is one of the most fully realized cultures in the Star Trek universe, with it's own language, religion, history and yes rituals. No, they're not quite Human. But we have more than our share of rituals and ceremonial occasions. They're so much apart of our culture that sometimes we don't even realize that they are a ritual.

* When was the last time you were invited to something like a Ritual of the Human Life Partnership Ceremony? Never, because that sounds ridiculous.

I been a bridesmaid twice this year, and have been invited to a total of nine weddings. What's ridiculous about a "Ritual of the Human Life Partnership Ceremony" anyway? If it's the terminology being used, one of the weddings in which I was a bridesmaid was partially in Sanskrit, I had no idea of what was being said.

* Tamarian language being entirely metaphore. I realize this is a very specific example but it's the same kind of rediculous think-about-it-for-30-seconds-and-you'll-see-how-impossible-it-is situation that crops up all the time.

In my above post, I used the term "wedding." but if I had used the metaphor "jump the broom," the majority of people in my culture would know what I was referring to, even if they couldn't actual describe where the metaphor came from.

If one of the Children of Tamar was talking to you and repeatedly said "the seven encirclements of the Fire-Deity," would you understand? (refers to a Hindu wedding) Personally, I do think it is so much they can't describe what their metaphor mean, as they see no need to, or are otherwise unwilling to.

* How the Cardassians are portrayed from the beginning as being a formidable enemy, yet the first time a Cardassian ship has a scuffle with the Enterprise, their shields were barely scratched and no one on the bridge was even concerned. Ooo big scary bad guys alright...

You're aware that the Enterprise is an unusually powerful ship in Starfleet right? Picard spoke of his previous ship having to run as fast as it could from the "big scary bad guys." The fact that the Federation and the Cardassians had such a protracted conflict and the treaty that ended it was so disadvantageous to the Federation indicate that indeed the Cardassian are a force to be reckoned with.

 

[bjj8383]

Thanks much for the replies.

Start Wreck:

* Yes a lot of shows do follow formulas, I just found TNG to be the most predictable, on occasion, compared to other scifi shows I enjoy. For example, my favorite show, SG-1, I wouldn't say they ever really followed much of a consistent formula. You generally couldn't predict the KIND of thing that would happen next. A fight? An escape? A pep-talk? With TNG, if it starts out like: "Stardate June 13th-point-two. We're investigating the mysterious transmission in the nebula of intrique." Then, you KNOW the very next scene is going to introduce the personal drama plot. The next scene will continue it. Then you'll switch back, BRIEFLY, to encounter non-clever techno-babble. Etc etc etc.

* Really? To me it's fairly face-slapping. How many times do they reconfigure something to function in a non-standard way that saves the day? How many times do they tweak out 300% output with nary a bad side-effect?

* The Data's-behavior thing; In one ep. he refuses to use little robo-helpers to save the Captain becasue they might maybe be developing senteince. In another, the Enterprise is acting strangely, develops shielded computer nodes, and takes over the holodeck. They discuss how the ship is developing a conciousnes, rapidly, with different holo-characters representing different ship systems. In order to be consistent, Data should have refused to interfere with its development, or at least he should have been more reluctant to do some of the things he did since he had no way to know if it would hurt the ship or not. Or that's how I see it.

* The Klingon thing, I do realize it's supposed to be "alien," but in my mind, there are subtler and more interesting ways to make something alien than to slap you in the face with dialog that says "I'm an alien let me show you how I do my alien things alien alien." Just personal taste I suppose.

* Yes but, in any science fiction I've always found the universal translator idea to be unrealistic. I know it's a plot device but I still have trouble looking past it. Piecing together a whole language based on a sentence or two? Yeahhh...

* I have read about the out-of-universe troubles developing various enemies. I realize the in-universe result is just a few logical inconsistancies. Interesting that they seem willingly overlooked.

T'Girl:

* I don't have any problem whatsoever with character development. I think you miss my point a little. I was just upset by the presentation of that development in the episodes as a whole.

* I don't buy your technological-limitations thing for one reason. Supposedly, Earth and starfleet and the bunch don't use money. There are two reasons for not including something in design. 1) You don't have the tech. 2) You don't have the cash. If you can jurry-rig something in many ways, as they do in every other episode, you have the tech. And money is no object. So, there is no reason not to include every concievable peice of tech in every ship. What's there to stop them?

* But, Data isn't a real person you've come across. Besides, we've seen his arms move at super-speed in NON-combat. He had to replace a jillion computer chips that Drunk-Wesley & Co. removed once. That took more than his fingers. So, he does have super arm speed. And we know he has super strength. Soooo why not disarm a bad guy from time to time?

* "They're so much apart of our culture that sometimes we don't even realize that they are a ritual." Exactly my point!!! And it would be so much more believable, it would flow so much smoother if they acted in the same way. But they don't.

* Yes, the rediculous part IS the terminology. Which is not the same thing as a foreign language.

* Yes, I'm aware that at the time the Galaxy-class was pretty much as badass as it got. That doesn't change the fact they the fight was portrayed as being about as lopsided as a Rancor vs. an Ewok, after having just previously making it sound like the other way around.

 

[T'Girl]

I don't buy your technological-limitations thing for one reason.

In one episode (The Child) in order to make heavy use of the replicator, the ship was incapable of going to warp. Yes, the technology depicted in the show did have limitations.

Supposedly, Earth and starfleet and the bunch don't use money.

Wrong, in over seven hundred hours of Star Trek, there were four references to no money, and dozens and dozen of references to there being money. And not just the Ferengi either. With a degree of difficulty the few no money statements can be reconciled, however all the yes money examples simply can't be explained away, no matter how hard you try.

There are two reasons for not including something in design. 1) You don't have the tech. 2) You don't have the cash.

3) You don't have the room. By incorporating pieces of equipment that can be reset and adjusted to different functions, it makes it unnecessary to haul around equipment you might never ever use. Plus, providing the capacity to handle never foreseen events.

They're so much apart of our culture that sometimes we don't even realize that they are a ritual." Exactly my point!!! And it would be so much more believable, it would flow so much smoother if they acted in the same way. But they don't.

Don't buy it. I'm alway explaining aspect of Brazilian culture to people I know. Differences in language usage. Same with general Latin culture. Same with transgender culture. Worf would be talking to someone and casually use a Klingon word or phrase, stop and explain what he meant, again I do this all the time.

Yes, the rediculous part IS the terminology. Which is not the same thing as a foreign language.

With respect, that statement makes no sense.

How many times do they tweak out 300% output with nary a bad side-effect?

In Best of Both Worlds, pushing the deflector beyond it's limits disables the ship for hours.

In another, the Enterprise is acting strangely, develops shielded computer nodes, and takes over the holodeck. They discuss how the ship is developing a conciousnes, rapidly, with different holo-characters representing different ship systems.

You might be thinking of a science fiction series other than Star Trek.

 

[RAMA]

I recently watched TNG, start to finish, for the first time, previously only having had a passing familiarity with it. I figured as a scifi fan it was about time I did. While on the whole I don't consider the experience a waste of time, there were a lot of themes and instances that drove my opinion down quite a bit. Like, a lot. Like, I couldn't stop thinking about how strange/dumb/rediculous/outrageous they were, to the point of being upsetting. I was just curious how the "fan base" regarded these things.

I think some of these things have certainly been mentioned before...

* The extremely predictable formula half the episodes follow; 30% science mystery, 70% personal emotional conundrum. Mash the two elements together, messily, with Elmer's glue. Rinse, repeat.

All shows have some sort of pattern they follow, I don't think STNG was always successful with A/B stories but I find the "formula" to be superior to the original series' formula where allegories often led to unfortunate incidents of interference that may have decimated societies and a lack of real characters, with an exception of the big 2, where only Spock really changed much over the years.

* How Federation technology is the best in the universe and its designers are idiots. What I mean is, any piece of equipment can be "reconfigured" to do anything. And yet these thousands of save-the-day features are never designed to be -standard-.

Says who? If anything their technology is somewhat middle-of-the-road. They constantly encounter superior technology.

It stands to reason as machines advance in space they will have multiple uses, modularity and great flexibiity. We have a very narrow view of what "technology" is today...STNG is "technology unchained". Eventually nanotech and other technologies will erase distinctions between man-made and natural.

* The fact that Data's super speed is limited to his fingers. The many occasions where he could have swiftly disarmed bad guys saw him instead standing idly by with his thumb up his rear.

I give kudos to STNG for not doing the obvious and making Data a Transformer or Terminator...he rarely used his skills for fighting, but mostly on intellectual or informational levels. However, I DO recall him disarming people rather quickly..."Big Goodbye" comes to mind, as well as "Power Play".

* How Data disobeyed direct orders and risked his friends lives for the sake of the rights of maybe-beginning-to-be-sort-of-sentient helper bots, who he himself compared to robo-bacteria, and yet aparently had no moral objections whatsoever about interfering with the Enterprise when it began to develop an intelligence of its own.

Quite understandable considering his personal experiences. Although ifthe ship he serves on becomes sentient--and at that point they had no idea of the result of the incident--his existence could be uncertain.

** While we're on the subject, how apparently there is a species who floats around in space and is entirely dependent on replicator-equiped ships just randomly passing by for reproduction. O_o

I don't recall that episode, but it does seem logical that over time within the process of evolution, with the existence of starlanes and multitudes of starships that some symbiosis may occur with certain orders of life and the machines traveling within.

* How Klingon culture is portrayed so horribly. Everything is a ritual-this and a ceremony-that. No culture refers to themselves in such a way in reality, it just sounds so unnatural and fake. When was the last time you were invited to something like a Ritual of the Human Life Partnership Ceremony? Never, because that sounds rediculous.

I don't mind ritual so much, but I hate that religious elements were added to Klingons and Vulcans...when their culture did not start out to be developed that way.

I think many cultures are proud of their rituals but are also private with them, which Worf was.

* How they can learn to communicate with every space cloud, jellyfish and glowing bacteria they come across in less than a day. I mean, please.

Ok this is barely worth answering but...its is a 20th century show where viewers need to know what's going on...lack of communication means no episode..hence the universal translator...

* Tamarian language being entirely metaphore. I realize this is a very specific example but it's the same kind of rediculous think-about-it-for-30-seconds-and-you'll-see-how-impossible-it-is situation that crops up all the time. In order to have stories to draw metaphore from, you need a story. To have a story you need actual language. If you have actual language, why do you have to talk in metaphore? If they can understand English, why can't they talk in it? How can you possibly develop star travel when you have no technobabble words? Etc etc.

I don't have a problem with it, Science fiction in general often comes up with such cultural macGuffins that may not be realistic but can often make for an internally consistent good story.

* Just becasue your DNA is magically changing... doesn't mean you are going to turn into some other creature in a day. Your bones, for example, are only totally replaced a handful of times in your life in standard maintenence processes. It's a slow thing. If the DNA your body is using as a blueprint for that process is different, you aren't going to take on a different bone structure in a day, ala Spot the Iguana.

Yes the science there wasn't particularly good but I found Genesis to be entertaining...there have been worse scientific "crimes" in SF...

* How the Borg were able to swipe a dozen outposts off the face of the world along the Neutral Zone, and then never used that technology again, didn't reapear for quite some time, and after they did were only interested in one target, Earth, which despite their supposedly vast territory, and thus resourses, they never even sent more than one ship at a time to get.

Anything said here would be speculation. One, the lone Borg ship was prob one of only a handful pushing the boundaries of exploration and might occasionally need to reinvigorate itself with raw materials it found worthy. Secondly, while we did NOT see them scoop up any more planetary cities we DID see the Borg do the exact same thing on the Enterprise-D before they were stopped in Q Who. No other situation onscreen presented itself though Earth was assimilated in STFC. As for the lone ship invasions...well they are pretty far away and Earth may not have been the subject of much attention, if any beforehand. Perhaps the Borg ships were only a small link an an exploratory chain, and there were few others nearby.

* How the Cardassians are portrayed from the beginning as being a formidable enemy, yet the first time a Cardassian ship has a scuffle with the Enterprise, their shields were barely scratched and no one on the bridge was even concerned. Ooo big scary bad guys alright...

I believe the reason was suggested in the episode..Cardassians had diminished power because of the treaty, and probably were not at the same level militarily they were in the conflict...it appeared by re-arming they were trying to change that...at least this seemed pretty obvious to me.

* The Prime Directive. I mean, please. Could allowing a species to go extinct really be worse than the chance that interfering with them will be bad in the long run? Some possible bad moral choices in the future are worse than definite extinction? Yeahhhh....

Well first contact directives are a hot topic....there are different ways to accomplish the goals of not contaminating a cultures progress/or lack thereof...some suggest guidance and the most careful levels and at a distance...like 2001/2010, Contact; or direct intervention at sapiency as in Brin's Uplift series. I think the modern PD takes into account not only Earth history where rampant interference destroyed whole cultures but intricate possibilites of chaos theory, where subtle interference..even not allowing a planet to die may have unforseen causal consequences to history and space..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect

 

[Tosk]

In another, the Enterprise is acting strangely, develops shielded computer nodes, and takes over the holodeck. They discuss how the ship is developing a conciousnes, rapidly, with different holo-characters representing different ship systems.

You might be thinking of a science fiction series other than Star Trek.

No, he's talking about "Emergence", the third last episode of TNG.

 

[T'Girl]

Data ... and yet aparently had no moral objections whatsoever about interfering with the Enterprise when it began to develop an intelligence of its own.

... he's talking about "Emergence", the third last episode of TNG. .

From his description, I couldn't place the episode.

The problem is the Enterprise's computer wasn't actually becoming an intelligence of it's own (although that was Data's early supposition), rather a "emergent intelligence" was using the Enterprise's systems to create a new lifeform.

The term "emergent intelligence" is where the episode's title comes from.

Another error in bjj8383's basic point was that Data didn't argue or insist on the preservation of the new life form, as he did on other occasions. The thing is Data did not have too. Captain Picard was the one who said "it deserves the same kind of respect as any other being". Data and the rest of the Enterprise's crew didn't interfere with the emergent intelligence, they assisted it in it task of creating the new life form, using a modified torpedo to create the particles require for the new life form. Once the new life form was created, the emergent intelligence disappeared, or as Troi put it, died after procreation.

 

[bjj8383]

Wrong, in over seven hundred hours of Star Trek, there were four references to no money, and dozens and dozen of references to there being money. And not just the Ferengi either. With a degree of difficulty the few no money statements can be reconciled, however all the yes money examples simply can't be explained away, no matter how hard you try.

Annnd by that logic, you can't explain away all the references to Earth and the Federation using no money, no matter how hard you try. So I guess all we can conclude is that this is a huge glaring ugly error?

With respect, that statement makes no sense.

Um. How? Terminology is not the same thing as foreign language. Labeling something with superfluous terms is not the same thing as saying its name in another language.

In Best of Both Worlds, pushing the deflector beyond it's limits disables the ship for hours.

Maybe it's my fault for exaggerating or maybe you don't know what that is. I never said those kind of situations were always without concequence. But those beyond-the-limits situations did crop up a lot.

-----

Says who? If anything their technology is somewhat middle-of-the-road. They constantly encounter superior technology.

Maybe we just talk more colloquially where I'm from. Again, I wasn't being literal from an in-universe perspective. Obviously the Borg, etc. have better tech than the Fed. I was just trying to point out how it seems any piece of tech can be modified in a few hours to produce some entirely new result.

-----

I do thank everyone for the discussion. Seeing actual fans' perspectives is interesting.

On a separate note, I've been working my way thru DS9, which in a lot of ways I find more enjoyable than TNG. (My best friend was shocked when I said I liked Garak more than Data.) Anyway, I know this is the TNG board but just to continue showing you where I'm coming from, I thought I'd present another example of this sort of situation, from my perspective.

They run across a planet. It has a human population. The population is the descendants of the ship crew. Apparently, the ship is supposed to get sent back in time when they try to leave. Once stranded back in time, they populate the planet. With me so far?

Instead of trying to avoid this accident, though, they decide to repeat the accident, otherwise, "all 8000 people" on the planet would cease to exist. Sounds reasonable.

Except for the fact that the descendants have already told the crew EVERYTHING about their past and history. By giving the crew these experiences and memories, there is absolutely no reasonable way things could ever turn out the same way again.

For example, if they had succeded in going back in time AGAIN, they would know how things are supposed to turn out. But their very knowledge would make their thought processes different. People wouldn't concieve children at the exact same instant as they did the first loop around. Thus different random bits of genetic material would create different children entirely. Thus all 8000 of those people would STILL cease to exist; they would have just created 8000 new individuals.

-----

Anyway, I hope you all at least see where I'm coming from with these sorts of examples. It's been nice hearing you respod to my specific points, but on a broader note, how do you feel about the existance of all these things? How is it that it doesn't get in the way of your enjoyment? Because it sure does for me, sometimes. One scifi fan to another, what makes your perspective different from mine, I wonder?

 

[sonak]

TOS reused a lot of plot elements as well, from God-like beings, to planets developing as parallel Earths, to Kirk tricking comupters with simple logic games, etc. To me, it just goes with the territory of genre fiction.

 

[indolover]

I recently watched TNG, start to finish, for the first time, previously only having had a passing familiarity with it. I figured as a scifi fan it was about time I did. While on the whole I don't consider the experience a waste of time, there were a lot of themes and instances that drove my opinion down quite a bit. Like, a lot. Like, I couldn't stop thinking about how strange/dumb/rediculous/outrageous they were, to the point of being upsetting. I was just curious how the "fan base" regarded these things.

* The extremely predictable formula half the episodes follow; 30% science mystery, 70% personal emotional conundrum. Mash the two elements together, messily, with Elmer's glue. Rinse, repeat.

Star Trek is based on exploring the human condition, and is in part both personal and science-fiction.

* How Federation technology is the best in the universe and its designers are idiots. What I mean is, any piece of equipment can be "reconfigured" to do anything. And yet these thousands of save-the-day features are never designed to be -standard-.

It is not mean to be the best in the universe, when is that ever said? Presumably many Federation technologies have compatible protocols or standards.

* The fact that Data's super speed is limited to his fingers. The many occasions where he could have swiftly disarmed bad guys saw him instead standing idly by with his thumb up his rear.

* How Data disobeyed direct orders and risked his friends lives for the sake of the rights of maybe-beginning-to-be-sort-of-sentient helper bots, who he himself compared to robo-bacteria, and yet aparently had no moral objections whatsoever about interfering with the Enterprise when it began to develop an intelligence of its own.

Continuity errors, so what?

** While we're on the subject, how apparently there is a species who floats around in space and is entirely dependent on replicator-equiped ships just randomly passing by for reproduction. O_o

What is this you're referring to?

* How Klingon culture is portrayed so horribly. Everything is a ritual-this and a ceremony-that. No culture refers to themselves in such a way in reality, it just sounds so unnatural and fake. When was the last time you were invited to something like a Ritual of the Human Life Partnership Ceremony? Never, because that sounds rediculous.

Does the culture of some fictional alien species have to mirror reality? Even in the real world, we have some cultures that have practices that don't "make sense". it is fiction, some imaginary/abstract licence is permissible.

* How they can learn to communicate with every space cloud, jellyfish and glowing bacteria they come across in less than a day. I mean, please.

Dramatic licence?

* Tamarian language being entirely metaphore. I realize this is a very specific example but it's the same kind of rediculous think-about-it-for-30-seconds-and-you'll-see-how-impossible-it-is situation that crops up all the time. In order to have stories to draw metaphore from, you need a story. To have a story you need actual language. If you have actual language, why do you have to talk in metaphore? If they can understand English, why can't they talk in it? How can you possibly develop star travel when you have no technobabble words? Etc etc.

Again, licence.

* Just becasue your DNA is magically changing... doesn't mean you are going to turn into some other creature in a day. Your bones, for example, are only totally replaced a handful of times in your life in standard maintenence processes. It's a slow thing. If the DNA your body is using as a blueprint for that process is different, you aren't going to take on a different bone structure in a day, ala Spot the Iguana.

* How the Borg were able to swipe a dozen outposts off the face of the world along the Neutral Zone, and then never used that technology again, didn't reapear for quite some time, and after they did were only interested in one target, Earth, which despite their supposedly vast territory, and thus resourses, they never even sent more than one ship at a time to get.

* How the Cardassians are portrayed from the beginning as being a formidable enemy, yet the first time a Cardassian ship has a scuffle with the Enterprise, their shields were barely scratched and no one on the bridge was even concerned. Ooo big scary bad guys alright...

* The Prime Directive. I mean, please. Could allowing a species to go extinct really be worse than the chance that interfering with them will be bad in the long run? Some possible bad moral choices in the future are worse than definite extinction? Yeahhhh....


I realize I got a little ranty there but I really don't mean to be confrontational or start some flame fest. Again, I just was curious how the fan base, as a whole, felt about these aspects of the series I have trouble with. Not looking for an argument, just the pre-established concensus opinions that I'm not aware of.

Also, as I said, I don't consider the watching of the series a waste of time. I enjoyed a good bit of it and had a lot of laughs, despite myslef. "Spot, down. Down Spot. Down. Down. Spot." :P

No offence, but your questions are all on the same tangent.

I frankly don't care if everything is not accurate, realistic or logical. As said, in some literally works, some imaginative licence is required, and to be expected.

 

[T'Girl]

Wrong, in over seven hundred hours of Star Trek, there were four references to no money, and dozens and dozen of references to there being money. And not just the Ferengi either. With a degree of difficulty the few no money statements can be reconciled, however all the yes money examples simply can't be explained away, no matter how hard you try.

And by that logic, you can't explain away all the references to Earth and the Federation using no money, no matter how hard you try. So I guess all we can conclude is that this is a huge glaring ugly error?

You guessed wrong.

The no money references can be explained away. Let us do this now, shall we? First off, there are very few references to no money to start with. Kirk in TVH, Picard in GEN and The Neutral Zone, and Sisko in The Price.

When Picard says "we have no money," you ever wonder just how many people compose this "we?" In the face of so many example of financial compensation, monetary exchanges and value exchanges in the 24th century, Picard might have just been expressing a personal philosophy. One that embraced by relatively small segment of Humanity. When Picard was speaking of his evolved sensibilities to the Businessmen (Stackhouse) he really sounded more like a starry-eyed dreamer than someone describing a actual system.

We've seen non-Human members of the Federation, can you name a few incident of any of them making direct references to "No Money?"

In TVH, Gillian Taylor said "Don't tell me, they don't use money in the 23rd century?" to which Kirk replied "Well, we don't." But later in GEN, Kirk in reference to the house he and Picard are standing in said "But I sold this house months ago." By definition Sold: to give up for a valuable consideration. I believe what Kirk was telling Gillian was that he had no currency, no folding money. That in the future that was what wasn't being used. And not that value didn't get exchanged. In the TVH again, after witnessing someone purchase a paper from a vending machine, Kirk said "They're still using money, Kirk didn't say "They're still paying for things."

When Kirk says "money," he meant physical currency.

In the DS9 episode The Gift, when Jake attempted to borrow money from Nog, Nog pointed out that the Human species (not the Federation) had abandon a currency based economic system, currency means a medium of exchange. Jake needed the money for a auction.

Today, many auctions are "cash only."

Maybe it's my fault for exaggerating or maybe you don't know what that is.

Yes, I do know what a exaggeration is, please continue.

I never said those kind of situations were always without concequence. But those beyond-the-limits situations did crop up a lot.

This Side of Paradise, Spock ovetaxed the engines and they failed, the ship was crippled for months.
Mudd's Women, Kirk overtaxed the engines and destroyed most of the dilithium crystals.

Every time Picard pushed the Enterprise Dee's engines, it's possible that he was reducing the life span of the warp coils or various support systems. In a couple of episodes, prior to ordering a increase to high speed, Picard would visibly stop and consider, and then make the order. Weighing the consequences perhaps?

 

[sonak]

Wrong, in over seven hundred hours of Star Trek, there were four references to no money, and dozens and dozen of references to there being money. And not just the Ferengi either. With a degree of difficulty the few no money statements can be reconciled, however all the yes money examples simply can't be explained away, no matter how hard you try.

And by that logic, you can't explain away all the references to Earth and the Federation using no money, no matter how hard you try. So I guess all we can conclude is that this is a huge glaring ugly error?

You guessed wrong.

The no money references can be explained away. Let us do this now, shall we? First off, there are very few references to no money to start with. Kirk in TVH, Picard in GEN and The Neutral Zone, and Sisko in The Price.

When Picard says "we have no money," you ever wonder just how many people compose this "we?" In the face of so many example of financial compensation, monetary exchanges and value exchanges in the 24th century, Picard might have just been expressing a personal philosophy. One that embraced by relatively small segment of Humanity. When Picard was speaking of his evolved sensibilities to the Businessmen (Stackhouse) he really sounded more like a starry-eyed dreamer than someone describing a actual system.

We've seen non-Human members of the Federation, can you name a few incident of any of them making direct references to "No Money?"

In TVH, Gillian Taylor said "Don't tell me, they don't use money in the 23rd century?" to which Kirk replied "Well, we don't." But later in GEN, Kirk in reference to the house he and Picard are standing in said "But I sold this house months ago." By definition Sold: to give up for a valuable consideration. I believe what Kirk was telling Gillian was that he had no currency, no folding money. That in the future that was what wasn't being used. And not that value didn't get exchanged. In the TVH again, after witnessing someone purchase a paper from a vending machine, Kirk said "They're still using money, Kirk didn't say "They're still paying for things."

When Kirk says "money," he meant physical currency.

In the DS9 episode The Gift, when Jake attempted to borrow money from Nog, Nog pointed out that the Human species (not the Federation) had abandon a currency based economic system, currency means a medium of exchange. Jake needed the money for a auction.

Today, many auctions are "cash only."

Maybe it's my fault for exaggerating or maybe you don't know what that is.

Yes, I do know what a exaggeration is, please continue.

I never said those kind of situations were always without concequence. But those beyond-the-limits situations did crop up a lot.

This Side of Paradise, Spock ovetaxed the engines and they failed, the ship was crippled for months.
Mudd's Women, Kirk overtaxed the engines and destroyed most of the dilithium crystals.

Every time Picard pushed the Enterprise Dee's engines, it's possible that he was reducing the life span of the warp coils or various support systems. In a couple of episodes, prior to ordering a increase to high speed, Picard would visibly stop and consider, and then make the order. Weighing the consequences perhaps?

er, you're overlooking a rather large one that would defy a lot of your attempted explanations. In ST: First Contact," Picard not only says that money doesn't exist in the 24th century, but just so you can't rationalize it as only referring to physical currency, he says that the ECONOMICS are different, and that people work to better themselves, not out of a motive for profit. That's pretty much a description of a utopian socialist-type system there.

 

[thetibettour]

The author is too strong

 

[Gary7]

bjj, you do touch on a lot of weakness points about Star Trek. Every show has weaknesses. The big time fans who want Star Trek to be more than it was get all fixated on all the flaws/gaps and try to explain them away, with neatly tied-together theories. You wouldn't believe some of the discussions that have gone on at TrekBBS, with some people picking apart flaws while others imagining "plausible" explanations for them with off-screen elements and ideas. The exchanges have at times gotten fierce, because there are some people who really want their Star Trek world to make complete sense. But the fact is that the gaps and flaws do exist. ~50 minutes per episode means a very tightly constricted format. True, they broke away from that occasionally with 2 part episodes, first with season end/start and then a few mid season. It would've been great to see more, but time ran out. With only 50 minutes, you can't go over every little detail to neatly wrap things up. There are going to be holes. It happens. Even on Stargate SG-1, though I'd say that they probably have fewer of them. It's a very different production style and it came after Star Trek TNG, benefiting from advances in production management and story writing.


The only real way to enjoy Star Trek is to look at the enjoyable things it offers and overlook the flaws. If the good outweighs the deficiencies, then it's worthwhile to watch. If not, then you walk away. Star Trek series explore a lot of fascinating ideas, but often with holes in them. It's about the exploration and the journey, not the completeness.

 

[T'Girl]

er, you're overlooking a rather large one that would defy a lot of your attempted explanations. In ST: First Contact," Picard not only says that money doesn't exist in the 24th century, but just so you can't rationalize it as only referring to physical currency, he says that the ECONOMICS are different

As I understand it, the Next Generations movies are supposed to be concurrent with the episodic television shows, so FC takes place basically between The Ascent and Rapture on DS9, and between Microcosm and Fair Trade on VOY. They're all in the same in-universe.

On December 13, 1996, First Contact opens in the theaters. In which Picard informs Lily that the economy of the future is different.

On September 10, 1997 the Voyager episode The Gift airs, in which Janeway relates the story where Tuvok (with Janeway) buys a meditation lamp from a Vulcan master, who doubles the price when he notices their Starfleet insignia.

So how sonak is the economy of the 24th century different?

not out of a motive for profit

A Vulcan, who is selling (not giving away) a item with value (to the customer) doubles the price (value is going to be exchanged) which will increase his profit (any way you look at it) when he realizes he dealing with certain customers.

and that people work to better themselves

Also during FC, Picard makes his "We have a more evolved sensibility" speech to Lily, it's similar in many ways to the speech he gave years earlier to the businessman Stackhouse. In the course of the following discussion with Lily, she finally convinces Picard that basically his philosophy is built on a house of cards.

That Picard, the representative of the future man, doesn't know what he is talking about.

Picard was wrong about being more evolved, wrong about the economy being different, wrong about there being no money. Picard (and a very few others) are advocating a personal philosophy.

This is no different than Riker telling alien ambassadors that "we don't eat animal meats" (paraphrasing), and then finding out that Joseph Sisko serves animal meat in his restaurant. All Picard is doing is pushing a personal agenda, in a future where that agenda isn't embraced.

 

[sonak]

er, you're overlooking a rather large one that would defy a lot of your attempted explanations. In ST: First Contact," Picard not only says that money doesn't exist in the 24th century, but just so you can't rationalize it as only referring to physical currency, he says that the ECONOMICS are different

As I understand it, the Next Generations movies are supposed to be concurrent with the episodic television shows, so FC takes place basically between The Ascent and Rapture on DS9, and between Microcosm and Fair Trade on VOY. They're all in the same in-universe.

On December 13, 1996, First Contact opens in the theaters. In which Picard informs Lily that the economy of the future is different.

On September 10, 1997 the Voyager episode The Gift airs, in which Janeway relates the story where Tuvok (with Janeway) buys a meditation lamp from a Vulcan master, who doubles the price when he notices their Starfleet insignia.

So how sonak is the economy of the 24th century different?

not out of a motive for profit

A Vulcan, who is selling (not giving away) a item with value (to the customer) doubles the price (value is going to be exchanged) which will increase his profit (any way you look at it) when he realizes he dealing with certain customers.

and that people work to better themselves

Also during FC, Picard makes his "We have a more evolved sensibility" speech to Lily, it's similar in many ways to the speech he gave years earlier to the businessman Stackhouse. In the course of the following discussion with Lily, she finally convinces Picard that basically his philosophy is built on a house of cards.

That Picard, the representative of the future man, doesn't know what he is talking about.

Picard was wrong about being more evolved, wrong about the economy being different, wrong about there being no money. Picard (and a very few others) are advocating a personal philosophy.

This is no different than Riker telling alien ambassadors that "we don't eat animal meats" (paraphrasing), and then finding out that Joseph Sisko serves animal meat in his restaurant. All Picard is doing is pushing a personal agenda, in a future where that agenda isn't embraced.

well, all you can really take from the contradictory examples is that Trek has been very inconsistent on this matter. I don't think Picard's statement was meant to merely express a personal philosophy of his, but it's a reasonable attempt at making things fit together better.