Just a television show...

[Captain Robert April]

That's David being his usual smartass self, and does nothing to answer the question of "why?"

 

[I-Am-Zim]

That's David being his usual smartass self, and does nothing to answer the question of "why?"

Did you actually expect it to?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Gerrold's answer is the only one that can be successfully defended against all challenge because it's the only one based in any kind of real-world measurement.

"Why" is a foolish question in this context - people bring their own values to bear on constructing an explanation that satisfies them, and there is absolutely no way to reach consensus or agreement with people who have different tastes or values, including those who share an enthusiasm for Star Trek.

Trek is a very successful television series/franchise. As far as the number of people who care very much about it, however, the fact is that we're a tiny minority even of folks who currently watch television - the whole number of people who've seen it and have any opinion about it at all is a minority. Fans exaggerate the importance of the thing because they look through the wrong end of the telescope. Its influence is limited at most.

 

[plynch]

40 years on and most of their contributions to culture are still as recognisable as those from Star Trek.

Not nearly as widespread. The other day a Fathers' Day card fell on my head in my closet. It opened and started playing the Star Trek theme. It was from Wal Mart.

I don't think there are musical cards at Wal Mart based on The Fugitive or Addams Family. I could be wrong.

Part of it might be the HUGE following with many spin off products in the marketplace Star Trek had in the '70s. It was a phenomenon the other shows mentioned never had.

Part of it might be that GR at least aspired to something meaningful sometimes, with Trek. That matters.

Part of it is lightning in a bottle, too. A lot of things clicked: actors, writers, the style, the music. It's got a magic to it. But I'm biased.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I don't think there are musical cards at Wal Mart based on The Fugitive or Addams Family. I could be wrong.

What about, oh, Peanuts?

It's a sometimes wise, at-one-time-or-another intriguing, often goofy four panel cartoon strip. Its influence on its own medium and its worldwide popularity dwarf Star Trek. All it lacks is an obsessive and vocal fanbase with self-important illusions.

And the same is true for other cartoons, comic books and media creations. The last seventy-five years of American popular culture has in fact generated numerous stories and characters that have become engrained in modern world culture.

One of Trek's most notable long-term limits, as the performance of the Abrams movie itself reminded, is its relative lack of popularity in most nations and markets other than the U.S.A.

Trek does not even stand astride the entertainment mediums in which it has appeared as the most successful of breed, much less constitute some kind of important social force.

 

[Noname Given]

Star Trek is just a television show.

On the face of it this is pretty self-evident. But is there something more going on here? I'd say yes largely depending on your perspective. Because if it were really just another disposable and eminently forgettable and meaningless television show would we be here discussing/debating/arguing over it more than forty years later?

Firstly, I'm talking about Star Trek the original series (1966-69) and not the franchise that was spawned of it out of increasing interest during the '70s and the collection of spinoff films during the '80s.

Is Star Trek TOS just another television show? Or on some level(s) does it actually have any genuine significance? Does it matter in some way?

Star Trek's overall approach to science fiction drama/adventure wasn't new. It's approach was already familiar to fans of science fiction literature, a handful of decent to good SF films and previous anthology series like The Twilight Zone and the The Outer Limits. But Star Trek brought that execution to a broader audience than could ever be reached by print and film.

On the face of it Star Trek shouldn't be remarkable. Almost all its ideas and concepts were already well established before the show came along. Star Trek's novelty was bringing so many familiar (to SF fans) ideas into a fresh coherent whole and beaming it through the then still young medium of television. On the face of it it seemed like mostly escapist entertainment yet with a more serious straightforward approach.

But something was different. Star Trek inspired countless people to go on to pursue interesting and ambitious careers and goals. It reflected ideas that resonated with successive generations of viewers. It became an archetypal template for how to do SF adventure/drama that would influence successive films and television series. It would be recognized and acknowledged by respected science fiction writers. It became assimilated and ingrained in the broader public consciousness.

Many shows are remembered, but few are actually remembered and influential.

Star Trek has been with us for so long and in some form or other that many can easily dismiss it as something that is just always there. And Star Trek TOS is often judged by the the merits of the successive spinoffs and films rather than its own merits and impact when it was new.

How many remember a time before Star Trek and decades before Trek became commonplace with little to distinguish it from the plethora of other sci-fi available on television and film? Back in the '60s and '70s it was a lot easier to see how distinctly different Star Trek was from anything remotely comparable. Star Trek didn't just reflect a future and ideas that were interesting. It reflected ideas and a kind of future we wanted to be realized. It was almost like a blueprint that spelled out this is where we want to go. This is what we can aspire to.

There are many surface things that can be fairly criticized about Star Trek and yet none of that diminishes why so many people have embraced it and it's effect on the broader public consciousness.

And so is Star Trek just another television show?

Um, yes. Look, if we're being honest, the show was panned by audiences and critics alike during it's network run (1966-1969). There's an arguement to be made that it did better in it's demographic during the network run; BUT it was never a top rated show, ever.

It did garner a VERY LOYAL and DEDICATED group of fans, but again, if we're being honest; IF NOT for the popularity of Star wars in 1977; and the fact that Paramount was hoping to ride that wave with 'Star Trek' (The decision to lead off the Paramount network; and then later decision to turn it into a feature film after the Network plan went bust, still owe the genesis of the idea to the popularity of the first Star Wars film.

So, yes, Star trek is 'just another TV show' - albeit, I think the first season really shows that it is a very good TV show; but I honestly do think the rabid fanbase like to ascribe more 'signifigance' to what it has then is justified.

And before the fflames and angry rants start, realize that I am a HUGE fan iof TOS; it's still my personal favorite #1 Star trek series, and TV show in general; but with all that's come out over the years, and the blatent over-hyping by GR himself as to 'what he wanted vs what the network wanted', etc. (ie GR taking credit for Star Treks 'interracial cast' - when said cast in the original pilot (The Cage) is hardly interracial; and the NBC memo that asked ALL NBC show producers to make an effort to include other ethnicities); or GR claiming that NBC 'didn't want a woman as second in command'; when instaed it was 'NBC didn't want the girlfriend of the executive producer as co-star because, a) What happens if they have a bad breakuo during the show's run; and b) She honestly wasn't that good of an actress to carry it as a co-star; I think again, that while it WAS/IS a good show, it is in the end, just another TV show.

YMMV.

 

[Chrisisall]

cast in the original pilot (The Cage) is hardly interracial; and the NBC memo that asked ALL NBC show producers to make an effort to include other ethnicities); or GR claiming that NBC 'didn't want a woman as second in command'; when instaed it was 'NBC didn't want the girlfriend of the executive producer as co-star because, a) What happens if they have a bad breakuo during the show's run; and b) She honestly wasn't that good of an actress to carry it as a co-star; I think again, that while it WAS/IS a good show, it is in the end, just another TV show.

I hate the show now.

Hey- whatever! It was good for all manner of reasons, not because of just one person (Although, without Matt Jefferies, I think the series would never have seen a first season).

 

[xortex]

In the end, we're just a pile of dust and a Mozart symphony is just alot of noise etc., etc..

 

[Shatnertage]

In the end, we're just a pile of dust and a Mozart symphony is just alot of noise etc., etc..

No, we're human beings and a Mozart symphony is a musical composition.

No one's saying that TOS is just a bunch of random footage spliced together; they're saying it's just a television show that most of us happen to like a great deal. I'm still not exactly sure what the other option is.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

No one's saying that TOS is just a bunch of random footage spliced together; they're saying it's just a television show that most of us happen to like a great deal. I'm still not exactly sure what the other option is.

Exactly so.

 

[xortex]

In the end we are a pile of dust. What about that don't you understand? To some people a Mozart symphony might as well be a Salieri symphony.

 

[xortex]

I just don't think anyone has created a multi-dimensional piece of art before as powerful as this.

 

[Chrisisall]

I just don't think anyone has created a multi-dimensional piece of art before as powerful as this.

Please see The Way To Eden.

 

[xortex]

'Hey, out there, Hey out there. I see you. I see you. Let's get together and have some fun. I don't know how to do it but it's got to be done.'
You're too young to enjoy that episode, Chrisisall, I'm guessing. It's high camp and a cautionary tale of how technology can rob our freedom.

 

[xortex]

No, not freedom, Humanity. I'm tired. I think I'll stop double posting now.

 

[Chrisisall]

You're too young to enjoy that episode, Chrisisall, I'm guessing.

I was 6 in '66 my man
I was in on the plan
To poke at extreme left & right
& hopefully impose on stupidity a ban.

 

[xortex]

And so you are. Happy birthday.

 

[Kirk1980]

It may JUST be a television show but I know that for me, growing up in the 80's without a father or brothers or much in the way of male role models, Kirk (at the very least) provided me with a template of how I wanted to be as a man. Strong, unafraid of my feelings, decisive, compassionate, educated... so you're damn right if you think I'm biased towards classic Trek.

It shaped my young self very much without much in the way of family around as a kid. My mom was around but very busy as a single parent and so, I had the electronic babysitter.

I very much doubt that with today's programming I'd have turned out the way I have today. And I like me

 

[Captain Robert April]

 

[I am not Spock]

This is one of those Zen things.

I mean, if 79 episodes of a network television series isn't a TV show, what is it instead?

There are actually three TV shows that I miss in the sense that "gee I feel cheated that there will never be more of them." All have had sequels or spinoffs, none of which are the same as having more of the original. Those shows would be the original Twilight Zone, the original Star Trek, and - laugh all you like - Buffy The Vampire Slayer. All of them have been influential in their way, mainly on other TV shows rather than (ahem) "society," and while Trek is the one that continues to be revived most frequently I'm not sure that its influence is much more keenly felt than Twilight Zone - for one thing because TZ's influence is seen to some degree in Trek TOS itself..

Kudos to you, sir. No laughing here. The original Trek, The Twilight Zone, and BTVS were, and remain, brilliant shows that had a massive influence on subsequent TV programmes. Yeah, both Trek and Buffy were influenced by Serling's show, but your point is very well said.