Losing Voyager

[Lynx]

And only 5 episodes.

I dont care thatits inevitable. Show me the process of reconciling differences. Or dont bother with a combined crew.

In that case, they should show how problems could be solved.
And it wouldn't be necessary to have a whole season of doing it, like in the hopeless Stargate Universe.

Not a problem..it's just a dramatic set piece.

And it's not Esrth in BSG.

I see dystopian scenarios as a problem because it makes me turn of the TV.
No, it wasn't Earth but still the same scenario as we see in too many space-oriented series today with Earth highly involved.

 

[fireproof78]

In that case, they should show how problems could be solved.
And it wouldn't be necessary to have a whole season of doing it, like in the hopeless Stargate Universe.

Be nice to see how.

And Universe is not relevant since I'm not advocating for it in Voyager at all.

I see dystopian scenarios as a problem because it makes me turn of the TV.

Not a problem for me. TV can go off.

No, it wasn't Earth but still the same scenario as we see in too many space-oriented series today with Earth highly involved.

Including Trek.

 

[DonIago]

Good question especially because a luxurious life by Kazon starndards is probably much less luxurious than living a regular life on Voyager. Neelix acted like he lived like he king when he got to sit in a bathtub, what could the Kazon offer that would make Jonas want to leave Voyager?

IIRC I got the sense that Jonas was a bit infatuated with Seska, and I'm sure she was happy to manipulate him, but in the end, from her side, I suspect he was little more than a pawn. It would have been nice to have him articulate his reasons for wanting off Voyager though, and I wonder whether one reason why TPTB didn't do that...assuming they even considered doing it...was because they were worried that the audience might find Jonas's reasons compelling.

 

[Lynx]

Be nice to see how.

And Universe is not relevant since I'm not advocating for it in Voyager at all.

Good writers is what Trek need. It worked on DS9.
And Stargate Universe is relevant since it had the same premise as Voyager, a lost ship with two possible hostile factions on the ship.
And look what we got on it.

Not a problem for me. TV can go off.

I can live without TV.

But I miss the days when we had three good Star Trek series plus series like NCIS, the CSI series, The X-Files, Without A Trace and some other stuff.

Today we have only crap.

Including Trek.

No, Trek used to have a positive concept. No "humans leave destroyed Earth to find other worlds to destroy since they are the same losers who destroyed Earth" premise.

But it's the 2020's now so that might affect Trek as well. Current so-called Trek movies and series have had their fair share of destroyed worlds and messing up established Trek history and even the books are becoming the same.

That's why I avoid all of it.

 

[fireproof78]

And Stargate Universe is relevant since it had the same premise as Voyager, a lost ship with two possible hostile factions on the ship.
And look what we got on it.

No clue. Never watched it, not relevant.

I can live without TV.

Good. So can I. Don't care about the past.

But it's the 2020's now so that might affect Trek as well. Current so-called Trek movies and series have had their fair share of destroyed worlds and messing up established Trek history and even the books are becoming the same.

Well, you and I are definitely watching different Trek shows.

Trek's positivity use to be humanity didn't destroy itself. Earth was at risk multiple times. There was a WW3 that wiped out entire populations. The post atomic horror impacted millions.

Star Trek just snaps its fingers and says "Yeah, but it's fine now." It's a fantasy.

 

[Lynx]

Star Trek just snaps its fingers and says "Yeah, but it's fine now." It's a fantasy.

Which is great as I see it!

I mean, if I want to, I can totally wipe out that WW3 scenario in all my stories by stating that Henry Starlings dabbling with time erased it and no one would care.

Which seems to be true since the Eugenics War didn't happen, at least I have no memory of it.

 

[fireproof78]

Which is great as I see it!

Which does nothing for me.

I mean, if I want to, I can totally wipe out that WW3 scenario in all my stories by stating that Henry Starlings dabbling with time erased it and no one would care.

Fine, but then you undo TOS by and large.

 

[Lynx]

Fine, but then you undo TOS by and large.

Actually not, since Starling's final dabbling with time took place in 2373.
Stardate 50312.5 Wednesday 25 April 2373
Before that,WW3 existed but after that it didn't.

Or let us explain it in a way which is more easy to understand.

Let us assume that Captain Picard spends some uneventful days on the Enterprise reading history.

On the evening of Tuesday 24 April 2373, Picard is reading a biography about Khan Noonien Singh who was responsible for the Eugenic Wars.

Then he goes to bed and fall asleep.

the next day, Picard wake up and continues to read about Khan Noonien Singh, who had been created by a group of scientists who wanted to create super humans. However, the projects was crushed and those scientists arrested and convicted. But 90 of those super-humans fled in a "sleeper ship" the Bothany Bay which was discovered by the Enterprise in 2267.

But the book says nothing about the Eugenic Wars

The same with WW3.

 

[fireproof78]

Actually not, since Starling's final dabbling with time took place in 2373.
Stardate 50312.5 Wednesday 25 April 2373
Before that,WW3 existed but after that it didn't.

Or let us explain it in a way which is more easy to understand.

Let us assume that Captain Picard spends some uneventful days on the Enterprise reading history.

On the evening of Tuesday 24 April 2373, Picard is reading a biography about Khan Noonien Singh who was responsible for the Eugenic Wars.

Then he goes to bed and fall asleep.

the next day, Picard wake up and continues to read about Khan Noonien Singh, who had been created by a group of scientists who wanted to create super humans. However, the projects was crushed and those scientists arrested and convicted. But 90 of those super-humans fled in a "sleeper ship" the Bothany Bay which was discovered by the Enterprise in 2267.

But the book says nothing about the Eugenic Wars

The same with WW3.

Well, that all sounds like lovely fan fiction that I do not follow for anything. Since WW3 is considered a major event, with figures like Singh, Colonel Green, etc. being challenges to overcome, as well as the efforts to unite Earth and become better, I think that TOS would loose something of its coherence by removing WW3.

 

[Ragitsu]

I do not believe I have ever seen a strikethrough on her name.

 

[Lynx]

Well, that all sounds like lovely fan fiction that I do not follow for anything. Since WW3 is considered a major event, with figures like Singh, Colonel Green, etc. being challenges to overcome, as well as the efforts to unite Earth and become better, I think that TOS would loose something of its coherence by removing WW3.

I just find the whole WW3 scenario unnecessary and dystopian.

In reality, the world would have been so devastated after such a war that it would have been reverted back to the stone age. The progress to a society with space travel and such as we see in Star trek would have been impossible.

I see no problem with removing both the Eugenics Wars and WW3, especially since the Eugenics Wars obviously never happened in the 1990s. Using Starling's time escapades would be a good and easy way to do so.

It would probably be possible to save something of Khan's legacy. He was a great villain.

 

[fireproof78]

I just find the whole WW3 scenario unnecessary and dystopian.

In reality, the world would have been so devastated after such a war that it would have been reverted back to the stone age. The progress to a society with space travel and such as we see in Star trek would have been impossible.

I see no problem with removing both the Eugenics Wars and WW3, especially since the Eugenics Wars obviously never happened in the 1990s. Using Starling's time escapades would be a good and easy way to do so.

It would probably be possible to save something of Khan's legacy. He was a great villain.

No, thanks, to all of the above. Khan is a terrible villain, buoyed up only by good performances by the actors.

WW3 is necessary to for Star Trek and is part of the mythos. Eliminating it might be more comfortable but ignores the lessons woven throughout Trek.

 

[Farscape One]

No, thanks, to all of the above. Khan is a terrible villain, buoyed up only by good performances by the actors.

WW3 is necessary to for Star Trek and is part of the mythos. Eliminating it might be more comfortable but ignores the lessons woven throughout Trek.

Agreed with your first sentence. Disagree about Khan... he was a great villain.

And completely agreed about the second paragraph.

2 out of 3 points in agreement... earned a like.

 

[fireproof78]

Agreed with your first sentence. Disagree about Khan... he was a great villain.

And completely agreed about the second paragraph.

2 out of 3 points in agreement... earned a like.

Well, my comment about Khan perhaps was a bit hyperbolic, as I think he is more overrated, rather than terrible.

But, my larger point is that Khan's legacy is tied straight to the Eugenics Wars/WW3, especially in TOS, but felt throughout the whole franchise, especially with a lot of Kirk's speeches revolving around the nature of humanity reflected in that destruction but also the capacity for choice.

In my opinion, one of Star Trek's best features is acknowledging the dual nature of humanity in terms of the capacity for great good and great evil and showing that they can make choices outside of it, and learn from past mistakes. TNG's opening episode does a similar thing with "Encounter at Farpoint" noting how far humanity has come despite past problems.

I think eliminating such touchpoints due to a fear of a "dystopian" outlook basically says to ignore past problems for the sake of comfort.

 

[Farscape One]

Well, my comment about Khan perhaps was a bit hyperbolic, as I think he is more overrated, rather than terrible.

But, my larger point is that Khan's legacy is tied straight to the Eugenics Wars/WW3, especially in TOS, but felt throughout the whole franchise, especially with a lot of Kirk's speeches revolving around the nature of humanity reflected in that destruction but also the capacity for choice.

In my opinion, one of Star Trek's best features is acknowledging the dual nature of humanity in terms of the capacity for great good and great evil and showing that they can make choices outside of it, and learn from past mistakes. TNG's opening episode does a similar thing with "Encounter at Farpoint" noting how far humanity has come despite past problems.

I think eliminating such touchpoints due to a fear of a "dystopian" outlook basically says to ignore past problems for the sake of comfort.

Completely agreed. We can't learn from past mistakes if there are no mistakes to learn from.

 

[Lynx]

Well, that all sounds like lovely fan fiction that I do not follow for anything. Since WW3 is considered a major event, with figures like Singh, Colonel Green, etc. being challenges to overcome, as well as the efforts to unite Earth and become better, I think that TOS would loose something of its coherence by removing WW3.

Honestly, I think that we can live without WW3. To dystopian for a great series like Star Trek with its hope for a better world in the future.

But there should be some way to keep Khan and don't ruin the established Trek history too much.

I'm Star Trek's Fix-Master, you know.

When something isn't right and can be fixed, I fix it.

So far I have:
1. Restored Kes and eliminated the damage done to the character in the episodes The Gift and that horribole episode in season 6.

2. Done away with the "nine-year lifespan" stupidity for the same character.

3. Found a perfect solution to explain the problems with shuttles and torpedoes in Voyager by coming up with The Shuttle and Torpedo Building Team.

4. Found a way to bring Neelix to the Alpha Quadrant.

5. Restored Gowron by stating that the "Gowron" who was killed by Worf was a cardassian agent who had had his appearance altered to create conflict in the alliance against The Dominion.

6. Came up with a lot of solutions for certain problems in the Trek series, like in Threshold, The Kazon-Ogla water problem, the Ocampa one-child problem, the Tom Paris-Nick Locarno problem, Two Admiral Paris and so much more. Most of this can be found at The Kes Website and there will be more to come.

Just go to The Kes Website and click the link: Voyager Mysteries-and how to solve them.

Personally I think that my efforts in those cases are more positive and constructive than what certain Trek producers and authors have done in recent years by blowing up planets, killed off and destroyed good characters.

 

[at Quark's]

We can't learn from past mistakes if there are no mistakes to learn from.

Ouch! You just made me face a brutal truth.

Which is that I'll never be able to learn from my own behavior in the past

 

[fireproof78]

Honestly, I think that we can live without WW3. To dystopian for a great series like Star Trek with its hope for a better world in the future.

Nope.

Trek is about our humanity. Sanitizing it makes it lesser in how we learn. Might as well be a fantasy world separate from our humanity and better able to ignore our ills.

Personally I tyhink that my efforts in those cases are more positice and constructive than what certain Trek producers and authors have done in recent years by blowing up planets, killed off and destroyed good characters.

Positive, maybe. Buy ignores fundamental truths about humanity and the dangers out in the galaxy. It's a security blanket vs challenging.

 

[Lynx]

Nope.

Trek is about our humanity. Sanitizing it makes it lesser in how we learn. Might as well be a fantasy world separate from our humanity and better able to ignore our ills.

Positive, maybe. Buy ignores fundamental truths about humanity and the dangers out in the galaxy. It's a security blanket vs challenging.

Your loss if you prefer dystopia instead of a positive view.

And I still think that you would like my corrections and explanations on The Kes Webite and the page Voyager Mysteries-and how to solve them!

 

[fireproof78]

Your loss if you prefer dystopia instead of a positive view.

That's not dystopian to acknowledge our dark side. That's ridiculous.

Definition of dystopian: of, relating to, or being an imagined world or society in which people lead dehumanized, fearful lives.

So, all of human history is dystopian? O_o

Sorry, but I like my Star Trek were the negative is acknowledged and humanity is shown to have choice:

ANAN: There can be no peace. Don't you see? We've admitted it to ourselves. We're a killer species. It's instinctive. It's the same with you. Your General Order Twenty Four.
KIRK: All right. It's instinctive. But the instinct can be fought. We're human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands, but we can stop it. We can admit that we're killers, but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes. Knowing that we won't kill today. Contact Vendikar. I think you'll find that they're just as terrified, appalled, horrified as you are, that they'll do anything to avoid the alternative I've given you. Peace or utter destruction. It's up to you. (emphasis added).

ETA: One of my favorite ways to illustrate this is via a song:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies