There are no such thing as aliens, you know. Not these specific Romulan, Klingon, Vulcan, aliens, anyway. This is all fiction and these aliens are analogs for certain human characteristics, qualities, traits, etc... When one of these aliens receives a "human lesson" this is really an attempt at social commentary disguised as science fiction.
That’s a little too personal.
Please provide evidence that aliens don't exist. While you're at it, you may as well also provide evidence that deities don't exist, either.
With respect, you can’t prove a negative. To belabor the very old truism, extraordinary claims — such as aliens and, yeah, deities — require extraordinary evidence, or at least something other than “this other person saw them and I believe them”. (And in the usual context, deities are a matter of faith, not evidence — but generally, if you want non-religious folk to start believing in them, you’re kinda going to need some.)*
*NOT intended as any kind of shade on religious belief as such. One of the sweetest people I know is a deeply religious believer; if it supports her and her kindness, more power to her.
Backstory! Backstory! Backstory!
Of course, then, as an author, you'll want to share that backstory, which is fodder for more stories, making the characters richer (and maybe introducing a few more with interesting backstories). Win/Win scenario.
Of course, then, as an author, you'll want to share that backstory, which is fodder for more stories, making the characters richer (and maybe introducing a few more with interesting backstories). Win/Win scenario.
Context is hard. I clarified my statement with the second sentence.
I went on to explain, in this work of fiction we call Star Trek, that these aliens depicted in this work of fiction are analogs for certain aspects of the human condition the writers are commenting on.
Knee jerk reactions that resort to taking comments out of context is, to coin a phrase, illogical.
For me the interesting human characters in these settings are the ones who managed to strike out on their own in some capacity. Federation planets make having a nice home, easy access to food very easy. Being a member of Starfleet grants you access to space exploration in one form or another (with many drawbacks). But the interesting federation citizens will have their own holdings. A bar somewhere, an asteroid hideout, their own ship, and they'll have made their way through life with a bit more freedom from the federation and less protection.
So, they don't have to be flawed or broken or suffered past trauma to be interesting? What a fresh concept!
My initial reaction was that episode of Gilmore Girls (don't judge me) where Rory is having dinner at the home of this intellectual and his family. Real Ivy League stereotype with them all sitting around the dinner table tossing intellectual puzzles at each other. They have 1 other daughter who isn't with them, but that's too depressing to talk about. We get the impression she's curled up in some corner, needle sticking out of her arm while she screams "Sid"! Turns out she's a bright girl who has shunned Ivy League for the working life. She has 2 (or more) jobs so she's busy working instead of study study study.
Someone going against the grain. Rejecting the Federation's idea of paradise for a life on the frontier. Not broken, not orphaned, not running from failed marriages or escaping some hellscspe. Just a star shaped peg in a triangle hole, flying to the thrum of their own warp core.
I can dig it man. I reach.
Hah, to be honest I was thinking that most federation citizens don't have enough reasons to become properly interesting in the first place. Sure, you get a lot of aspirational people working to 'better themselves' in 24th century Earth culture, but it looks like it becomes kind of a given that you're going to take one of the government-issued paths into contributing to society or take up a civilian vocation.
Yup.
Put them on a frontier world and do old West style town as they adventure and make a life.
And lose their romantic illusions about the frontier.
Because they're surrounded by people who came there chasing fortunes or running from something. Or were born there and don't embrace the adventuring interloper.
Remember Kira and Bashir's first encounter? The one true note in the DS9 pilot.
Supposedly, it gives them a person to stand next to in contrast - someone who differs from all humans in weird ways (which are metaphors for all the ways we differ - an alien with transparent skin instead of a human culture that speaks their mind and is open about private matters, an alien that shape changes instead of a human who's an emotional/social chameleon, etc. - no reason the alien can't be both, but the alien superpower points up the personality/cultural characteristic by being the same or the opposite)
Sarek and Amanda are upset at not being acknowledged as the first alien/human couple seen in Star Trek!
How often has Trek done that with their human-alien relationships?
Not quite so obviously, but they do make up things like the alien being "our culture values this, humans do not at all/to the same extent (at least the ones I know/those in the present day)"
There's so much you can show about the human just from their choice of alien companion and the nature of their relationship together, honestly. And the human can be the weird one in the relationship; the relationship itself can be a loose way to signal _how_ they are weird.
She's not human, but we see Dax and Worf's relationship do this a lot; Dax is a lot more reckless and free-spirited than most joined Trill seem to be, and that's reflected deeply in her relationship with Worf and Klingons in general. And when we see tension in their relationship, it shows us Dax's nature/values again except this time we see how they differ from Klingon cultural values and we get to see more of her Trill side.
Similar threads
- Locked
