Discussion in 'Star Trek: Picard' started by Anters, Feb 24, 2020.
Where is DSC dystopian? Not that TOS was ever utopian.
That whole thing with The Burn and many worlds seceding from the Federation (IIRC, there's only two or three dozen members left)
That's fair. I was thinking more broadly but good point.
And, of course, Trek dips into the dystopian pool with events like the alternate timeline in "Shockwave, Parts I and II(ENT)" that shows a future Earth of the 31st century devastated and cities in piles of rubble and the Federation itself having never come into existence. The Burn and DSC are hardly the first time the franchise has shown us a dark future for humanity, Earth and the Federation that had to be avoided or corrected.
I find it a very hopeful show where they're rebuilding a century following the bad stuff.
Pure nonsense. TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, and ENT are all more easily available on more platforms than ever before, and both DS9 and VOY have experienced revivals in popularity.
DIS and PIC are popular. DIS is so popular that it's been renewed three times even as it is one of the most expensive productions on television.
So do the producers of DIS, PIC, and LD. You just don't like their work. Which is fine, but it's not evidence of them magically "not respecting" TOS or Berman-era ST.
Having a different sense of aesthetics if not "disrespecting the source material."
Strongly disagree. DIS Season One depicts a major war, and the "dystopian" aspects stem from the pressures of that conflict. DIS Season Two features a Federation at peace, and it is not dystopian at all. DIS Season Three is "post-dystopian" -- parts of the galaxy are dystopian, but the major Federation and former Federation worlds, even if they're troubled, are not dystopian.
Ironically, TOS was never really utopic. Kirk and co were always flying between planets with medicines for plagues and food for colony planets facing starvation. In addition, there are several episodes regarding mining colonies in which miners are portrayed as having a *VERY* difficult life. It is only with TNG and beyond that the Federation was portrayed as some utopic place for those outside of the main planets (Earth, Vulcan, etc.). If anything, Discovery existing in an imperfect galaxy and Picard existing in a galaxy in which multiple disasters have shaken the major powers to their core is *closer* to TOS than some of the other sequels.
I would also assert that TOS humans were not some pinnacle of humanity. Kirk stated that "We're killers, but we're not going to kill today." Ie. TOS indicated that humans weren't perfect; rather they were always struggling to be better. In a sense, it was TNG that was unrealistic with the humanity perfected idea. The characters in Discovery and Picard feel more closely related to the people in TOS than later series in that they are not perfect, but constantly working to be their personal best. The hopefulness of that show, as well as of Discovery or Picard, is not that we will hit a magical end point where all our problems will be gone, but rather that we will grow into a society in which we can identify our imperfections and work to do better and be better today than we were yesterday.
Plus: Harcourt Fenton Mudd. Cyrano Jones. Dr. Tristan Adams. Dr. Roger Korby. All Earth humans who were engaged in criminal or unscrupulous activities and in some cases outwardly harming others to achieve their goals of profit and gaining a form of power and influence. Hardly the citizens of a utopia that had long since educated and bred unsavory and antisocial behavior out of humanity.
Not to mention Captain Tracy.
Arguably THE best example of the worst in humanity in Trek's time.
I'm going to this topic late. I have not read the last 54 pages so my comments go back to the op.
Picard steps outside the comfort of the Federation. Nothing in the setup to the story has not been done in Trek before. We have seen officers go bad. We have seen conspiracies. We have seen all sorts of things transpire. We have also seen glimpses into the underbelly of society - things outside the Utopia. Harry Mudd and Cyrano Jones as well as many who came after. We have had glimpses of many of these things. Picard takes us out of the comfort zone of the Federation and drags us through that underbelly and through a conspiracy. The ideals of Roddenberry's Utopia remain intact, we have just stepped into an area where they don't reach.
I consider this to be far more acceptable than what Discovery has done, which is throw out established canon and rewrite areas of canon that seem to be lacking Roddenberry's Utopia at the heart of Starfleet. Although to be fair, Discovery does entirely take place on ships that do not rate the TOS term Starship (only given to the Queens of the fleet, the Constitution Class). But still, the Starfleet ideals should be found in every crew and largely aren't in favor of a modern angst driven set of characters.
Pure nonsense. DIS is all about that Roddenberrian ideal at the heart of Starfleet, and about how hard yet necessary it is to hold onto that ideal when times get tough.
There is no contradiction between Roddenberrian ideals and psychologically realistic characters, and the fact DIS does not throw out psychological realism the way TNG did is not a flaw.
Cannot rewrite what wasn't there.
At no point was Roddenberry's Starfleet a utopia. Not with the behavior seen in TOS and TNG.
I can't tell if this thread is naturally lasting this long or if someone keeps trying to artificially revive it after it died down.
I'm pretty sure everything I wanted to say is already somewhere in this thread. Along with multiple sources I provided directly from Gene Roddenberry's very own words. Which no one else has done.
It seriously looks overly-repetitive now.
I avoided defining what I meant. I said Roddenberry's Utopia. That is a Federation where humanity has matured, dumped fascism, totalitarianism, racism, bigotry, and learned to get along, not only with other species, but with itself. This is there in TOS, It permeates the series (I just finished rewatching it and saw it in episode after episode). The stories are full of situations where common modern human failings lead to the problem and Roddenberry's Utopian ideas solve the day.
It isn't the classic Utopia, it is Roddenberry's 23rd or 24th century take on it. Hence Roddenberry's Utopia. He created it for TOS and expanded it for TMP and TNG, but it was there from the beginning. You can see it in The Cage, WHMHGB, and on. If you don't think it is there, you haven't really watched TOS.
I think it comes down to simply that the escapism is not as present as people's comfort would prefer. And there's no changing minds on it.
If we cut off this head, two more will take its place.
Pretty sure STAR TREK began with a Starfleet captain wallowing in angst, and contemplating quitting, because his landing party had just been slaughtered in a massacre. And the very first episode ended with a disfigured woman being left alone on an alien world.
And the second-ever episode involved the captain being forced to kill his best friend . . . .
Angst, along with extreme emotional drama, has always been part of STAR TREK.
There's not an angst-free episode in the first season. Even "The Return of the Archons" has Landru's people agonizing over the truth about their planetary ruler and whether or not they should continue obeying.
Separate names with a comma.