I definitely won't try to change his mind because that's what he likes and that's fine with me but tbh I've grown annoyed by the nostalgia obsessed "new stuff sucks" attitude of online fandoms nowadays
Kirk drift—misremembering a character…
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
- Status
I definitely won't try to change his mind because that's what he likes and that's fine with me but tbh I've grown annoyed by the nostalgia obsessed "new stuff sucks" attitude of online fandoms nowadays
I like plenty of new stuff. I object only to new stuff thats crap. Things aren’t automatically crap just because they’re new. They’re crap because they’re crap.
And news flash: there was plenty of stuff in “the good ol’ days” that was crap, too.
And I don’t find TOS at all limiting.
Well I wasn't directing it at you. Sorry if it came off that way. But a lot of post TOS ST is good, and in that respect TOS is limiting. Because I'd rather see a series evolve than be stagnant
TOS wasn’t stagnant. It was just only three seasons long. And series that directly seek to rewrite or retcon continuity is only fleshing out itself and not the original source materiel. Contemporary Trek is only putting their own stamp on the franchise and not “evolving” TOS in any way.
Last edited:
Except not all of TOS is being rewritten, and tbh TOS could be inconsistent so some rewrites aren't even bad. Idk what you count as not evolving. TNG did evolve the franchise and so did DS9. Even DSC did despite my issues with it
Believe what you want. I don’t automatically buy into something just because the current powers-that-be put a familiar stamp on their stuff. The current writers and creators of Trek couldn’t hold a candle to those back in the day. Their perspectives are too limited and it shows.
Indeed. And as much as I love TOS I will not be bound to the past.
Wait, what are you defining as limited? You just said anything after TMP sucks, but they're limited?
TOS is great but suffers from outdated sexism, inconsistent writing, limited technology, poorly choreographed fight scenes, lack of developed supporting characters and alien races. Nothing about DS9 goes that far so what counts as lilting to you?
Unusual to quote oneself, but this succinctly states exactly what I think about contemporary Trek writers and creators and their juvenile mindsets.
If you find that directness offensive at least there is no misunderstanding.
And if you think blatant sexism doesn’t exist in contemporary Trek then you’re mistaken. It’s right there for anyone to see.
Last edited:
What have you noticed?
I'm sure there are exceptions, but Holywood has raised a generation or two of writers that only know Hollywood. They grew up around movies and all of their families grew up around movies.
I was watching a documentary about Israel's first air force (the American Jews who ran over to Israel and flew for them at its founding). There was one pilot who was being interviewed that I kept thinking "I know that guy! And I know that name! Who IS he?"
Harold Livingston, screenwriter for Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
I was watching a documentary about Israel's first air force (the American Jews who ran over to Israel and flew for them at its founding). There was one pilot who was being interviewed that I kept thinking "I know that guy! And I know that name! Who IS he?"
Harold Livingston, screenwriter for Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
As much as TOS? No. TOS said there couldn't be female captains, and their outfits were sexist.
And that displays your ignorance of context. It also displays limited perspective.
Also TOS said no such thing that women could not be starship captains.
What ignorance? No offense but you haven't explained anything to justifyvyour viewpoints so your condescension is unearned
Interesting if you cannot see it. It’s right in front of you. Or do you think sexism can run only one way.
Miniskirts were not considered sexist in the 1960s. They were considered a symbol of female empowerment. They were championed by Nichelle Nichols and Grace Lee Whitney who disliked the trousers and tunics women wore in the first two pilots. Your charge miniskirts are sexist is based solely on a contemporary perspective and ignores the context of when TOS was produced.
And TOS never said women could not be starship captains. A delusional and bitter woman, Janice Lester, rejected by Kirk years earlier because he chose his career over her makes the accusation that his “world of starship captains has no room for women.” She is bitter and angry Kirk’s life had no room for her.
And later in the episode Kirk even says she did not have the temperament to be a starship captain. Starfleet, as well, as Kirk, rejected her because she was unstable, not because she was a women. And yet she conflated that to mean she couldn’t be a starship captain simply because she was a woman.
And Lester’s thinking certainly runs counter to Number One’s position in “The Cage” as well what Kirk tells Lenore Karidian in “The Conscience Of The King” that men and women are essentially the same aboard ship and in extent in Starfleet.
Nowhere in TOS does it explicitly say a woman cannot command.
Last edited:
What other way is there?
You're right about remembering that incorrectly, but empowering then isn't empowering now. Actually having female characters be the focus of the shows and not just side characters who are often underutilized and sexualized is empowerment, and TOS lags behind DS9 and despite my issues with it, DSC. Sexy outfits are frankly idiotic and even women back then could have outdated opinions while being progressive for their time.
Oh, brother! Forget it—it’s pointless. This discussion is over.
Back to the thread subject at hand.
Have you *watched* TOS? There was plenty of juvenile humor.
It never descended to the kaa-kaa/poopie you smell three year old brand of humor. And Star Trek was one of the most intellectual properties of its day on TV. Even when they were forced to deliver lines like "the monster attacked me". I started watching it when I was ten, during it's first run. And after god knows how many decades I couldn't believe I tuned into a new iteration of it only to have one character complaining that humans smell. Like I said, the writing was at a three year old level.
NONSENSE. Trek WAS empowering THEN and NOW. I was a ten year old girl when TOS premiered and I grew up to run an IT department at two major national institutions when there were practically NO women in the field. Back then women couldn't be pilots. Now they get special preference. When I did graduate work in brain research, the neurology department was controlled by a few old men, and I STILL did graduate work in that department. How ridiculous it is for me today to hear people whining about sexism in 60s-70s, early 80s who never really experienced breaking into a new field as a women with practically no other women in the field. And then, for god's sake, to whine about miniskirts on Star Trek being sexist. What shallow petty criticism. Nichelle was groundbreaking in her position. It didn't matter if she was wearing a miniskirt or not. Nothing wrong with women being feminine and men being masculine. Trek inspired a horde of children, men and women, to go on to careers in science and technology. I'm so sick of babies whining about "micro aggressions" and perceived sexism in Star Trek TOS and other "period" productions, books, whatever, when they are just mouthing things someone TOLD them were sexist. Oh, those mini skirts. Oh, Uhura just said "hailing frequencies open". Oh, Kirk was a womanizer. Kirk was a classic hero character and a far better icon than the juvenile Mary Sues being written as leads by today's pathetic writers - characters that would have been laughed out of well produced FANZINES of the late sixties, seventies, edited by real women for the most part, for the very reason they had no character arc, the fatal flaw of a Mary Sue. Mary Sues would have been rejected by those editors or only included as a satire. And if a professional officer doing the equivalent of a Kaa-kaa poopie complaint about her fellow officers was written into some story submitted to that kind of fanzine, it would have been rejected as well, because good editors then were serious about what they produced. Zines were expensive to produce, postage was expensive too and people paid for quality that mirrored the original series, which was also quality. If all you have to say against TOS is that it was sexist compared to how wonderfully non sexist (read sarcasm) later series were, you have no idea what sexism really was, and probably would have folded into a toddler tantrum if you encountered real adversity in that situation or you wouldn't point to miniskirts as sexism. I for one was forever grateful for the opportunities I had, that I had a career I wanted to do, get a mortgage on my own as a single woman, and I never filed a sexist complaint in my life. And I wish writers would go back to classic character arcs because Mary Sue doesn't cut it.
- Status