Charlie Jane Anders has written a terrific essay comparing and contrasting the essences of Star Trek and Star Wars.
I posted this response to the article, and would like to also share it here:
I grew up loving both Star Trek and Star Wars. Thanks to syndicated reruns, Star Trek was the first to imprint itself upon my psyche, but that in no way diminished my wonder upon seeing the first Star Wars film in May 1977.
I’ve been fortunate in that, over the past 20 years, I’ve had the privilege of writing for Star Trek — first on television (for Deep Space Nine), then subsequently for games, comics, and novels (over two dozen and counting).
In that capacity, I’ve had a lot of time to reflect on what makes Star Trek and Star Wars distinct from one another, not just stylistically but philosophically. I agree with what Charlie Jane has posited here about the two series’ disparate views with regard to power, society, and the individual. However, I think it’s on that last element — the roles of individuals in the narrative — that the most salient difference between Lucas’s and Roddenberry’s respective visions can be found.
As a “family saga,” Star Wars is predicated upon the “great men” theory of history, which holds that most persons are inconsequential as political actors, and that the majority of history’s great events and humanity’s most significant advancements are the result of extraordinary individuals. We see it in the much-reviled midichlorians of the prequel trilogy, and in the films’ emphasis on family lineage, the notion that talent with the Force runs in family lines. Star Wars is about dynasties, and the idea that only a handful of people in the galaxy are special enough to affect the course of events.
In contrast, Star Trek is founded upon the idea that all sapient beings are special, and that progress is achieved through consensus, teamwork, and friendship. Although we meet many extraordinary characters in the tales of Star Trek, they are almost always members of a team, and no matter how exceptional certain persons might be, they are always stronger for being part of something greater than themselves.
Last but not least, I think CJA summarized the difference between the series perfectly when she wrote:
Star Wars is destroying, Star Trek is building
This is it, in a nutshell. Star Wars brings us an endless cycle of war and rebellion, revolution and oppression, around and around, a cruel Karmic wheel rolling roughshod over the hapless trillions of innocents populating its galaxy of far away and long ago. Star Trek invites us to strive for a brighter future in this galaxy—one founded on peace, knowledge, wisdom, and compassion.
Don’t get me wrong. I’ve enjoyed (most of) the Star Wars films. They are great entertainment, amazing mythology, and a compelling series of tales about coming of age. (And I’d love to write a Star Wars novel someday.) But if offered a chance to live in Lucas’s most famous fictional universe or the one imagined by Gene Roddenberry for Star Trek, I know which one I would choose: the one where I could live long and prosper.
