Is DS9, a true Trek show?

[Emperor-Tiberius]

I mean, TOS and TNG are pretty much Roddenberry's Trek as he envisioned it (maybe with at least a 20% original stuff coming from others, no doubt). Both depicted an utopian Trek universe - TNG more so.

But what makes DS9 click as Trek? How does it fit to the Roddenberry shows? Does it at all deviate from his idea of the 24th century? Or is it truthfull enough?

What do you think?

 

[Kegek]

It's got Star Trek in the title and it is a product released by Paramount, at the time the copyright holders to the Star Trek label. Ergo, it is a true Star Trek show.

Of course, what your question pertains to is this: Is the show consistent with Gene Roddenberry's philosophy? Yes and no. It upholds more of Roddenberry's ideals than it is sometimes given credit for, but it is also critical of them. It kind of meets the TNG utopia halfway and undercuts it wherever possible.

Would Gene Roddenberry have liked it? I have no idea. Nor, honestly, does anyone else.

 

[Michael]

Since no-one can really define what true Trek is (you just have to stay long enough on this board to reckon that every fan has his own view on the matter) it's hard to say if DS9 meets the criteria. TOS wasn't really that "utopian Trek universe" that many want it to be. Also, TOS had the great chemistry of the Big Three and I think DS9 certainly captures this feeling of camaraderie. TOS was also fun — DS9 didn't take itself too serious either (as TNG sometimes tended to do). So I'd say, yes, DS9 is true Trek (whatever that really is).

But really, who cares if it is Trek, when it was just a truly fantastic television series? Not me for sure.

 

[Cyke101]

Whatever one would think throughout its run, in my opinion it exceeded some aspects of Roddenberry's dream by the end of the Dominion War: the top three rivals of TOS -- the Federation, the Klingons, and the Romulans, were all united against a common threat and forged an unprecedented alliance in Trek history. Peace reached even bigger heights than ever before.

 

[EnsignRicky]

I always thought it was more in line with J.M. Straczynski's philosophy; But that's a whole other floating tin can of worms.

 

[blueone]

Personally, I think it is. Forgetting about the Dominion War for a moment here - DS9 took place in a fixed location; The station, Bajor and the Wormhole. Now because of this you can't have the crew gallivanting across the galaxy in a big ship - they had to let things come to them. And that's why it comes across as different, and why it had to be different.

Now, the whole Dominion War escapade was another deviation from the guidelines that the previous two Treks had laid down. But, personally, I'm of the disposition that if TNG came out in the mid 90s then it too would have had more combat and possibly a bigger war with the Borg simply because the technology would've been available to them that wasn't previously at their disposal.

 

[Ezri]

Answer - NO

 

[HRHTheKING]

Answer - YES

The only people who say "no" are those who have plucked so called "Star Trek ideals" out of thin air, and some gibberish about Roddenberry and his "vision" and decided arbitrarily that DS9 doesn't match up to them.

 

[scorpius1701]

Well, really the only thing that the show had in regard to dealing with the unknown was the wormhole which was used to greater effect in dealing with Sisko's character development as the Emissary. The wormhole wasnt really necessary for the Dominion as tehy could just as easily have come from somewhere in the AQ. The wormhole was virtually ignored completely in the last 2 years anyway. Id say that it takes place in the Star Trek universe but isnt really a true "Star TREK" show. (emphasis mine)

 

[Navaros]

As I said last time this subject came up on this board:

I don't buy into the "Star Trek is only for showing a perfect, positive future" philosophy that many Trek fans do. In fact it wasn't until I started reading Trek forums that I even realized such a philosophy existed. Because it certainly wasn't evident from me watching the TOS show for all the years of my life. TOS has conflict between the characters and aliens of the week, and internal conflict amongst it's crew. DS9 had the exact same thing, which makes them two peas in a pod.

There was a Poll on the General Trek board of this site a year or two ago, which asked the question something like "Which other Trek shows best carries on the spirit of TOS?" and DS9 won that Poll by a landslide. For very good reasons in my view.

I would argue that in addition to making the shows TOS and DS9 shows spiritually akin to each other, it also made them be the only entertaining Trek shows. By taking all the conflict out of TNG and VOY, in my view that made them extremely dull and boring & that boringness is unbecoming of what Trek should be. That boringness pervades the other Trek shows constantly, something TOS and DS9 rarely suffer from.

I'd say that if any other show is not Star Trek, then by TNG and VOY abandoning those things (conflict, adversity etc.), it is TNG and VOY that are not Star Trek. I haven't seen enough of ENT to comment knowledgeably about if it abandoned those things too.

So yes, DS9 is definitely Star Trek. DS9 is basically just a much more fleshed-out, sophisticated, and deeper verison of TOS.

 

[KayArr]

Of all 5 series, this show is the only one that I find dull. I own all the seasons of TOS and Enterprise, I intend to purchase Voyager this summer (I already own season 4), and I own seasons 2-5 of TNG. I don't intend to buy any seasons of DS9 ever, though I'm glad to have a few episodes on the fan collectives. The worst are on the Captain's Log, though--after reading about how great In the Pale Moonlight and Far Beyond the Stars were, I made sure to vote for them on a variety of computers to put them in that set. I ended up sadly disappointed--both of those were extremely obvious and heavy-handed episodes. Perhaps Moonlight was daring for Trek, but as far as just a work of fiction? Not so much.

I'm not saying it's a bad show--the characters, actors, and writing are perfectly fine, but the focus of the show doesn't interest me. I was initially turned off by feeling like the first season or two were all about Israel/Palestine, and after watching some Dominion War stuff later, I'm even more turned off. I'm not going to say it's bad or not Star Trek--I'm just going to say that its focus was not interesting to me. I get enough of war and torture and religious conflict in the real world, and thus I'm just not interested in watching it fictionalized on t.v. Heck, the real stuff is slanted and fictionalized enough in the media!

The other four series help me feel hopeful about the future, they help me want to strive for a better future, they make it seem possible. DS9 seems relentlessly grounded in the present--it doesn't make me feel hopeful about anything. It's fine drama, no doubt, but it doesn't have any of the hallmarks of what I tune in to Star Trek for. I might love a regular old series, miniseries, documentary, or big screen feature about the themes that DS9 covers--but I want something else from Star Trek.

 

[Trekwatcher]

I am currently rewatching DS9 from the begining and it is clearly a trek show in, essentially, every possible way. I remember how when it originally aired it was supposed to be so "gritty" but on rewatching the series it looks, by modern standards (i.e. new BSG, Sarah Connor Chronicles, etc) to be practically squeaky clean (like the rest of modern Trek). Even from the very first episode the ideals of Trek are very directly presented, and the show could be considered nothing BUT a Star Trek show. When it first aired it felt, at least to me, different but with the passage of time it seems to fit right in with the other shows of it's era (TNG and VOY) in terms of Trek themes, messages, and ideals.

 

[KayArr]

I am currently rewatching DS9 from the begining and it is clearly a trek show in, essentially, every possible way. I remember how when it originally aired it was supposed to be so "gritty" but on rewatching the series it looks, by modern standards (i.e. new BSG, Sarah Connor Chronicles, etc) to be practically squeaky clean (like the rest of modern Trek). Even from the very first episode the ideals of Trek are very directly presented, and the show could be considered nothing BUT a Star Trek show. When it first aired it felt, at least to me, different but with the passage of time it seems to fit right in with the other shows of it's era (TNG and VOY) in terms of Trek themes, messages, and ideals.

Good observation--new BSG it ain't! I loved that show for its first 2 seasaons, then it rode off the rails, darn it.

 

[Photon]

Not this shit again.

Lets see. Opening credits it says:

A) Deep Space 9
B) Deep Space 8 (from the infamous song on YouTube)
C) Star Trek: Deep Space 9
D) None of the above

Somebody help me w/this.

 

[Michael]

Not this shit again.

Lets see. Opening credits it says:

A) Deep Space 9
B) Deep Space 8 (from the infamous song on YouTube)
C) Star Trek: Deep Space 9
D) None of the above

Somebody help me w/this.

D) None of the above

It says: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

 

[Cyke101]

Of all 5 series, this show is the only one that I find dull. I own all the seasons of TOS and Enterprise, I intend to purchase Voyager this summer (I already own season 4), and I own seasons 2-5 of TNG. I don't intend to buy any seasons of DS9 ever, though I'm glad to have a few episodes on the fan collectives. The worst are on the Captain's Log, though--after reading about how great In the Pale Moonlight and Far Beyond the Stars were, I made sure to vote for them on a variety of computers to put them in that set. I ended up sadly disappointed--both of those were extremely obvious and heavy-handed episodes. Perhaps Moonlight was daring for Trek, but as far as just a work of fiction? Not so much.

Wait, you think In the Pale Moonlight and Far Beyond the Stars are heavy-handed, but you have whole seasons of ENTERPRISE?!

Ooooh, them's fightin' words! You and me, 3 o'clock, by the Starfleet Academy flagpole!

Answer - YES

The only people who say "no" are those who have plucked so called "Star Trek ideals" out of thin air, and some gibberish about Roddenberry and his "vision" and decided arbitrarily that DS9 doesn't match up to them.

I wouldn't be so quick on the judgements: after all, the person who said no before you has a board name and an avatar from DS9...

 

[EnsignRicky]

Not this shit again.

Lets see. Opening credits it says:

A) Deep Space 9
B) Deep Space 8 (from the infamous song on YouTube)
C) Star Trek: Deep Space 9
D) None of the above

Somebody help me w/this.

D) None of the above

It says: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

It also says: Based Upon Star Trek, Created By Gene Rodenberry
That's almost like saying any similarities between persons living or dead is purely coindidental; They may as well have added that it was filmed entirely on location, and that no Tribbles were harmed in it's production. But in the end, yeah, it's totally Babyl...er, um Star Trek.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

I've always felt that DS9 was more the inheritor of Trek than TNG. It didn't always treat itself seriously, had a sense of humor and took risks; much like TOS. Although, DS9 is postmodernist. It is a deconstruction of the Trek universe, whereas TNG was a celebration of it.

 

[Cyke101]

Not this shit again.

Lets see. Opening credits it says:

A) Deep Space 9
B) Deep Space 8 (from the infamous song on YouTube)
C) Star Trek: Deep Space 9
D) None of the above

Somebody help me w/this.

D) None of the above

It says: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.

It also says: Based Upon Star Trek, Created By Gene Rodenberry
That's almost like saying any similarities between persons living or dead is purely coindidental; They may as well have added that it was filmed entirely on location, and that no Tribbles were harmed in it's production. But in the end, yeah, it's totally Babyl...er, um Star Trek.

I could be wrong, but Voyager and Enterprise both have the same taglines, don't they? If so, does that mean they're not Star Trek as well?

I also wouldn't be surprised if the upcoming movie has the same line. Would we discount that as being non-Trek?

 

[KayArr]

Wait, you think In the Pale Moonlight and Far Beyond the Stars are heavy-handed, but you have whole seasons of ENTERPRISE?!

Ooooh, them's fightin' words! You and me, 3 o'clock, by the Starfleet Academy flagpole!

Lol, point taken, I suppose! To each his or her own. I'm truly not trashing DS9, I'm just saying that it isn't my taste.