They do all of that in Stargate. I can't think of any others that do all those, but I'm probably forgetting/unaware of others.
Is military sci fi alien to Trek or at least harder to market?
- Thread starter Lexx Shrapnel
- Start date
They do all of that in Stargate. I can't think of any others that do all those, but I'm probably forgetting/unaware of others.
I suppose what makes Star Trek unique is that it is about a military that has rejected militarism. Starfleet will go to war when it has to, defending the Federation is part of its primary mission. But it's an organization that views the defense of the state as being better served through diplomacy, exploration, and the advancement of science first, and through violence and warfare second. The Federation Starfleet has embraced the idea that learning to accept and care about your neighbors as your equals, that learning to set aside differences to work together, is itself an instrument of national defense.
To coin a phrase, "What he said." And thanks, Mr. Bennett, you said it rather well.
As I recall, from the very beginning, Roddenberry conceived of Starfleet as being more paramilitary than military. And as I recall, there is at least one novel that explicitly compares it with the United States Coast Guard.
If they do, it's probably not the focus of the novel, or it will probably end up leading to a combat scenario (e.g. the explorers awaken a vicious alien horde -- think Aliens -- or a diplomatic mission turns out to be a cover for an invasion). Again, as I understand it, military SF is generally focused on war and combat, the hardware and mechanics and tactics thereof, the culture and ethos of soldiers/warriors, etc. If you advertise a novel as military SF and the whole thing turns out to be about peacetime diplomacy or exploration, the military-SF fans are probably going to feel cheated.
The United States Coast Guard is a military, not a paramilitary.
Pointedly ignoring any argument over the military status of the Coast Guard, it is a fact that its primary missions are maritime law enforcement, aid to ships in distress, and search-and-rescue. NOT fighting wars. Just as the primary mission of Starfleet is "To explore strange new worlds; to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where none [from the Federation] have gone before." With some law enforcement, aid to ships in distress, and search-and-rescue, too. Or as Kirk said to Flint, "Our missions are peaceful, our weapons defensive. If we were barbarians, we would not have asked for ryetalyn. Indeed, your greeting, not ours, lacked a certain benevolence."
Does anybody here recall offhand WHICH author explicitly compared Starfleet to the Coast Guard? And in which book? (As I recall, the "more paramilitary than military" description of Starfleet came from The Making of Star Trek.)
Does anybody here recall offhand WHICH author explicitly compared Starfleet to the Coast Guard? And in which book? (As I recall, the "more paramilitary than military" description of Starfleet came from The Making of Star Trek.)
It's not a matter of debate, it is a matter of fact: The United States Coast Guard is a military.
Sure, and the USCG is an excellent comparison in that regard. It is also a good comparison insofar as the USCG does participate in fighting the U.S.'s wars when it needs to, but this is not its primary mission.
I would quibble insofar as I think it's clear that fighting the UFP's wars when necessary is co-equal to Starfleet's missions of exploration, diplomacy, and science, but I agree wholeheartedly that Starfleet -- like the USCG -- is a military that has abandoned militarism. It is a military with a non-militaristic ethos.
As far as I know, the comparison has been routinely made here on the TrekBBS whenever debates erupt about whether or not Starfleet is a military.
There's the novel The Human Division by John Scalzi, part of his Old Man's War series. The novel focuses on a military ship which is on detached service for the diplomatic corps. The novel, actually a collection of e-books follows many missions for this ship.
I know that's what is always said, but really watching season 1 of TOS always leaves me under the impression that Starfleet is meant to be the military. In many ways the Enterprise in that season is basically a US Navy ship in space.
Bingo. Star Trek as a format is broad enough to encompass a wide variety of storytelling modes: courtroom dramas, murder mysteries, morality plays, social allegories . . . and even the occasional war story.
But, yes, Kirk certainly seemed to think Starfleet had its military aspects:
"I'm a soldier, not a diplomat."
This. Star Trek is not really as a whole military science fiction. I wouldn't like it very much if it was, just like I don't like war movies/shows.
I don't say either that it can't or should not explore the genre every now and then, Star Trek as a setting (that's what it is in my mind) holds room for every kind of scifi if the author/screenwriter/director wants to tell it. The Siege of AR-558 is a perfect example for military scifi within trek, as is "Balance of Terror".
Few of the characters in Star Trek even exhibit a military mindset, behavior or characteristics, even the rebellious Marquis rebels in Voyager went back to being happy, prim-and-proper scholars and scientists once Janeway had them out of their fatigues.
With very, very few exceptions (Jellico comes to mind) Starfleet officers are not modeled after actual military personnel but rather hark back to the romantic ideal of the cultivated, highly scientific military scholar of the Golden Age of Sailing who was equal parts fighter, diplomat and scientist (you know "I am the very model of a modern Major-General/I have information vegetable, animal and mineral...)
No, there is worlds of difference:
Star Ship Troopers is all about the experience of the front-line grunt during warfare and is just a ugly and brutal as such things ought to be, let alone the highly militaristic mindset of the general populace.
Just take the scene where they all decide to get the same tattoo to showcase alliance to their unit, can you imagine such a scene in a Star Trek medium? In my eyes it would go against the general cosy, highly individual and sophisticated air Starfleet is presented in the TV shows.
Battle Star Galactica (I assume 20 fridge meant the re-imagined series) also focused more on the "hard" and "ugly" side of the military. Grey and Black morality, "though" choices and people who were broken beyond repair by the things they have seen and have been forced to do. It was pretty much "the Iraq War in Space", at least judged by the little I have seen of it and read about it.
Can you imagine someone like Starbuck in Star Trek? People like to compare her to Yar, yet the only thing they have in common is blonde hair and a military background. Can you imagine Tasha acting as low or pragmatic as Starbuck?
Star Gate, however, despite having its characters run around in fatigues is actually not much more militaristic than Star Trek (at least what I remember of it, it has been years and years) What I remember a lot of its characters were scientists and the stories focused mainly on exploration, archeology, planets of the week, mysteries found on the other side of the gate etc, with the occasional armed conflict, just like it Trek. Aside from being contemporary, largely planet bound and having that "Ancient Astronauts" angle you could argue its remarkably similar To trek, so I would not call it military scifi either.
Last edited:
Well, Stargate did have a stronger military component than Trek -- both in-story, where most of the series was driven by the ongoing battle against alien conquerors, and in real life, in that the producers consulted closely with the US Air Force for technical advice. But I agree, it did tend to focus on exploration and scientific crises about as much as Trek did. Like Trek, it had room for a wide range of different types of story, but I'd say it went to the military-SF well more often than Trek.
Depending on the episode, one can very easily tune into Stargate (more SG-1 than the others) not knowing what they're watching and think it's a modern day military drama.
Well, it was -- but it was a drama about the modern-day military dealing with space travel and alien invasions. That was part of its distinct character, the way it was both contemporary and futuristic at the same time.
I'm just wondering If Starfleet was contemporary, would they not be dressed similarly to the Stargate team and work under similar protocol?
I think that the issue of Starfleet's status as relates to being a military is that it is indeed a military - among other things. Its role is not defined as military because military is simply one function it serves. Starfleet is the premier space vehicle service of the United Federation of Planets. It's essentially a Federation itself - in fact, the fleet system introduced in the Rise of the Federation novels makes this pretty much exactly what it is. Military defence; exploration; cutting-edge scientific research; resupply and maintenance; colonial expansion; diplomacy - all of these were mission statements found somewhere among the founding worlds' space forces, and the united Starfleet gradually merged them into one force, whose members are expected, at the higher end of the ability spectrum, to be all of these things - soldier, technician, scientist, diplomat, explorer. Starfleet officers hold rank, wear uniform and observe a militaristic disciplined hierarchy because one of their functions is to serve as a military force. That doesn't define them, though, because they have other functions that are equally, and indeed from the idealistic point of view common in the Federation, more important.
Some people say Starfleet isn't a military. Targ manure; of course it is. But it's a lot more than that. It transcends the military, but still most definitely incorporates it.
Some people say Starfleet isn't a military. Targ manure; of course it is. But it's a lot more than that. It transcends the military, but still most definitely incorporates it.
I'd guess they'd dress like the characters from Stargate Atlantis. But that whole show felt like it was trying to be Star Trek.
Actually, though, all of those things can and have been part of the function of a military. We tend to think of "military" as meaning "pertaining to war and fighting," and that is what it generally means in a discussion of "military science fiction." But militaries throughout history have engaged in science, exploration, engineering, and diplomacy as well. Of course there's the Army Corps of Engineers, which does all sorts of peacetime construction projects like building dams and levees and diverting rivers and the like. The US military also has a diplomatic corps, which is mainly about security at embassies, but can entail military personnel actually participating in diplomacy. And historically there's been a lot of military involvement in exploration, like the close collaboration between the US Air Force and NASA, or Charles Darwin's famous Galapagos survey aboard the Royal Navy's HMS Beagle.
So no, Starfleet is not "a military among other things." It is a military whose duties include all of the wartime and peacetime functions of a real military, but with a strong emphasis on the peacetime functions.
Hmmm, very good point. I don't think, though, that there could be said to have ever been a military whose foremost purpose wasn't defence and/or politically-motivated combat. Other duties and functions, no matter how frequent, are surely secondary to that purpose, otherwise why have civilian institutions? Those other roles are surely expansions of the military's utility, and not defining of the organization as a whole. Starfleet often stresses that its foremost purpose is scientific or exploratory. Is it possible to have a military in which political violence and/or defence is not the primary purpose of the institution? I suppose that in itself is an intriguing transcendence.
Similar threads
- Poll
