It's one thing to have a little passion, quite a different thing to misrepresent how important Star Trek is to the world.
I'm quite passionate about Star Trek, but I don't misread what it is so completely.
Justin Lin is directing Star Trek XIII
- Thread starter Hythlodeus
- Start date
It's one thing to have a little passion, quite a different thing to misrepresent how important Star Trek is to the world.
I'm quite passionate about Star Trek, but I don't misread what it is so completely.
My feelings and opinion, I believe, have a place here. My belief in the Influence on Star Trek do, also. What I do not understand, however, is the seeming ridicule and bitterness and almost mean reaction some of you have. But that is ok, because I would continue to "...defend to the death your right to say it."
Well, maybe not to the death.
They were correct, the TNZ is NOT for the faint of heart, but I will continue to try to post well!
I don't think anyone is being mean. Strong declarative statements are going to get attention, and incite scrutiny.
That's all that's been happening. Scrutiny.
HiJol, you are welcome to form whatever view you may wish to hold, but some views will not be immediately accepted, and some may not be accepted at all.
My feelings and opinion, I believe, have a place here. My belief in the Influence on Star Trek do, also. What I do not understand, however, is the seeming ridicule and bitterness and almost mean reaction some of you have. But that is ok, because I would continue to "...defend to the death your right to say it."
Well, maybe not to the death.
They were correct, the TNZ is NOT for the faint of heart, but I will continue to try to post well!
I don't think anyone is being mean. Strong declarative statements are going to get attention, and incite scrutiny.
That's all that's been happening. Scrutiny.
HiJol, you are welcome to form whatever view you may wish to hold, but some views will not be immediately accepted, and some may not be accepted at all.
Thank you, Jedi_Master. In no way did I imagine my views would or should be immediately accepted, if at all, but I was surprised by some of the reaction and comment.
I offer the below NOT as any kind of proof or rebuttal, but rather as some interesting reading. And, by the way, Makarov is right. What happened to you guys and your love for and wonder at the Franchise?
plaza.ufl.edu/joec/startrek_usculture_st_term_paper.htm
“The fact is, never in the history of any entertainment medium has there ever been a story, an idea, a situation, a set of characters, or a theme that has approached the magnitude or impact of Star Trek. ”
—A Vision of the Future (1998)
Poe, Stephen Edward (1998). A Vision of the Future. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-671-53481-5.:56
"The opening fanfare of Star Trek: The Original Series, written by Alexander Courage, is one of the most culturally-recognized musical memes in existence."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_influence_of_Star_Trek
May the force be with you, Jedi.
My feelings and opinion, I believe, have a place here. My belief in the Influence on Star Trek do, also. What I do not understand, however, is the seeming ridicule and bitterness and almost mean reaction some of you have. But that is ok, because I would continue to "...defend to the death your right to say it."
Well, maybe not to the death.
They were correct, the TNZ is NOT for the faint of heart, but I will continue to try to post well!
I don't think anyone is being mean. Strong declarative statements are going to get attention, and incite scrutiny.
That's all that's been happening. Scrutiny.
HiJol, you are welcome to form whatever view you may wish to hold, but some views will not be immediately accepted, and some may not be accepted at all.
Thank you, Jedi_Master. In no way did I imagine my views would or should be immediately accepted, if at all, but I was surprised by some of the reaction and comment.
I offer the below NOT as any kind of proof or rebuttal, but rather as some interesting reading. And, by the way, Makarov is right. What happened to you guys and your love for and wonder at the Franchise?
plaza.ufl.edu/joec/startrek_usculture_st_term_paper.htm
“The fact is, never in the history of any entertainment medium has there ever been a story, an idea, a situation, a set of characters, or a theme that has approached the magnitude or impact of Star Trek. ”
—A Vision of the Future (1998)
Poe, Stephen Edward (1998). A Vision of the Future. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 0-671-53481-5.:56
"The opening fanfare of Star Trek: The Original Series, written by Alexander Courage, is one of the most culturally-recognized musical memes in existence."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_influence_of_Star_Trek
It's not ridicule of TOS. I'd call it a more tempered and clinical view: the difference between looking at your children as a parent and looking at them as the rest of the world sees them.
I don't think anyone is saying Trek wasn't culturally important, just that the general case can be easily overstated. For example, the opening fanfare for "Star Trek" gives me goosepimples. Always has. Always will. But to be fair, I think if one played "name that tune" with a group of average people in Times Square or along Navy Pier in Chicago, more would recognize the opening notes of the "Star Wars" theme than the fanfare from TOS. At best, it would be a wash.
That's the point I was making earlier. If Trek was indeed that important to our culture, then what the hell has "Star Wars" done? Compared to Trek, SW is ubiquitous in our culture. It's all over the place and has never really stopped being relevant since the original movie 37 years ago. God knows how much more it will be elevated in years to come now that Disney has it.
Disney. Now there's not just an influencer of culture, but a creator of it.
Just a tiny morsel of food for thought: would the vast majority of us BE on this rather sparsely populated website, spending portions of our day talking and arguing about Trek, if we didn't at least have an affection for the franchise?
Exactly. There's enthusiasm . . . and there's losing all sense of perspective.
Star Trek is wonderful. Star Trek is a big part of my life. I can talk about Star Trek for hours at a time. (Just ask my girlfriend and relatives.)
But . . . reality check. It's not the biggest thing in the world for everyone in the world. And as for Trek being a bigger deal than Shakespeare and the Bible? Okay, that's hyperbole dialed up way past eleven. We're so far past the warp barrier there that it's a miracle we haven't all turned into newts!
Bottom line: it's possible to appreciate Star Trek and be a lifelong Trekkie without insisting that it's greater than everything else.
Last edited:
Seriously? No.
A quote from a licensed Trek book and another one from Wikipedia. Certainly authoritative.
Everything Franklin said was spot-on. But I'll add to it and try my best to muck it up.
As far as language goes, throwing out random Bible verses or Shakespeare quotes misses the point. Their effect isn't measured on how familiar the verse is, but how they effected everyday English conversation. The way you speak is totally influenced by both texts everyday and you probably don't realize it.
The 1662 edition of KJV basically overhauled the entire English language. It was the bridge between Chaucerian English to something closely resembling what we speak today.
Shakespeare changed the definitions of a lot of words. He took plain, everyday words and used them figuratively--apart from their accepted definitions of the time. Thing is, now we use his figurative language as the literal definitions.
But even limited to "pop culture" shows a lack of historic perspective on the author's part. While some of the great musical pieces, works of art, and fiction of history may not be so influential now, they certainly were the time they were produced. They told people what to wear, what to eat, dictated the popular vernacular, and even effected politics and persuaded social change--much like Star Trek. So, while he may have made a point had he limited his scope to contemporary pop culture, he may have had a point. But even then it's relative at best. But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since it was 1998 and The Philosopher's Stone probably hadn't reached the States yet.
And if he was speaking in part to Trek's technological impact, well I've already turned the tables on that little nugget of hyperbole in another thread.
Again, even if we limit it to contemporary pop culture, it's unclear and impossible to distinguish. The Star Wars theme was already mentioned, but you could throw "The Imperial March" right in with it--hell, why not John William's entire portfolio? There's the James Bond theme. "Whish Upon A Star" and countless other Disney songs. Heck, I bet kids will still be humming "Let it Go" a century from now.
Where do things like "Love Me Do" or "Hound Dog" fit in?
But once we start getting into the whole existence of music, the whole thing falls apart. There are things like "Ah vous dirais-je, Maman" melody, "Frère Jacques," and just about every Christmas carol. If I worked at it, the list could get pretty long.
I suppose, relative to the whole collection of music of all time, the Courage theme ranks fairly high up the ladder, but it's still kind of a ridiculous thing to suggest.
As far as language goes, throwing out random Bible verses or Shakespeare quotes misses the point. Their effect isn't measured on how familiar the verse is, but how they effected everyday English conversation. The way you speak is totally influenced by both texts everyday and you probably don't realize it.
The 1662 edition of KJV basically overhauled the entire English language. It was the bridge between Chaucerian English to something closely resembling what we speak today.
Shakespeare changed the definitions of a lot of words. He took plain, everyday words and used them figuratively--apart from their accepted definitions of the time. Thing is, now we use his figurative language as the literal definitions.
This is biased opinion stated as fact. How does he define "entertainment media"? I think any writing or work of art can be entertainment. From my perspective, the aforementioned Bible is entertainment--as is any mythological text. Those have dictated the agendas of entire civilizations. I'd also say that any philosophical or political writing, from Plato's Republic to the freaking Declaration of Independence, provides entertainment value. Never mind the countless fables that have been passed down through the millennia.
But even limited to "pop culture" shows a lack of historic perspective on the author's part. While some of the great musical pieces, works of art, and fiction of history may not be so influential now, they certainly were the time they were produced. They told people what to wear, what to eat, dictated the popular vernacular, and even effected politics and persuaded social change--much like Star Trek. So, while he may have made a point had he limited his scope to contemporary pop culture, he may have had a point. But even then it's relative at best. But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt since it was 1998 and The Philosopher's Stone probably hadn't reached the States yet.
And if he was speaking in part to Trek's technological impact, well I've already turned the tables on that little nugget of hyperbole in another thread.
Another opinion as fact and void of perspective.
Again, even if we limit it to contemporary pop culture, it's unclear and impossible to distinguish. The Star Wars theme was already mentioned, but you could throw "The Imperial March" right in with it--hell, why not John William's entire portfolio? There's the James Bond theme. "Whish Upon A Star" and countless other Disney songs. Heck, I bet kids will still be humming "Let it Go" a century from now.
Where do things like "Love Me Do" or "Hound Dog" fit in?
But once we start getting into the whole existence of music, the whole thing falls apart. There are things like "Ah vous dirais-je, Maman" melody, "Frère Jacques," and just about every Christmas carol. If I worked at it, the list could get pretty long.
I suppose, relative to the whole collection of music of all time, the Courage theme ranks fairly high up the ladder, but it's still kind of a ridiculous thing to suggest.
Sometimes it helps to step outside of fandom to get a little perspective.
Look at it this way. Suppose somebody went on-line and insisted that Spider-Man was the single greatest character in American literature, surpassing all others? Chances are, even the most enthusiastic Spider-Man fans might roll their eyes a little, no matter how much they enjoyed the comics and movies.
Doesn't mean people are ridiculing and denigrating Spider-Man. Just means they can see the forest for the trees.
Look at it this way. Suppose somebody went on-line and insisted that Spider-Man was the single greatest character in American literature, surpassing all others? Chances are, even the most enthusiastic Spider-Man fans might roll their eyes a little, no matter how much they enjoyed the comics and movies.
Doesn't mean people are ridiculing and denigrating Spider-Man. Just means they can see the forest for the trees.
Works for me! In the end, we're all just Trekkies here.
A "little" passion is one thing. We all have at least a little passion for Trek. Our post histories and its contents are proof of that. But that post was definitely more than a "little."
Sorry, just wanted to clarify...
You mean TIm Burton? Uh huh.
Or Matt Reeves? The guy who directed Cloverfield? COs that wasn't a big dumb actiony movie at all.
Do pay attention.
He could've also meant the other guy. But he's dead.
Besides, who wants to see Kirk walking around with a swagger stick?
Besides, who wants to see Kirk walking around with a swagger stick?
But some of them are just as fanatical.
Yes. Star Wars perhaps even more.
A bit ?
As opposed to the number of people inspired by baby Jesus ?
No, you do I have no problem believing that Anakin's motivations was his visions of Padme's aparent death, there's really no other evidience onscreen.