Michael Chabon vs Trekkies

[Racefuel]

I mean, I'm sure someone will make that argument that these don't fall under "good Trek."

Personally, Trek is Trek, good, bad and indifferent. Abrams, in my opinion, is good Trek, but it is vastly different from Berman era Trek. As the old saying goes, different does not mean bad.

All series have Good Trek and Bad Trek

Hell TNG, Voyager, DS9, Enterprise and Discovery have some legitimately awful Trek..doesn't mean I'm throwing the baby out with the bath water

 

[The Old Mixer]

You're either a troll, an idiot or

...or you've earned a Warning for Flaming. The post, not the poster. Comments to PM.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Well, I'm at a loss for why people are happy about these answers. Here are my thoughts:

1.) Sunglasses
This is probably the best of the QA. It's a subtle answer challenging the viewer to think harder about something he clearly is not wanting to reveal plainly. It's sort of a non-answer, but the best kind.

2.) Raffi Vaping
Uhhh.. What? He spins a paragraph of made up crap that can be immediately translated to, "Yes she is vaping, but we don't want to call it that.". If you wanted it to be different, you would have given her a "snake leaf" device that doesn't look exactly like a vape pen you can buy on every corner store in the U.S.A... Lazy on multiple levels.

3.) Why isn't the future more futuristic?
Another copout of an answer.. How myopic, to assume everything from the year in 2020 is "so great" that it has become timeless and no longer be improved upon.. There is no historical basis for this assertion, yes there are common devices between 1500 and 2000, but you know what? They look VERY different, while performing the same basic function. Shoes, utensils, knives, houses, etc... Yes they are "timeless", and yes they also change a crap ton in appearance each century. Stop insulting our intelligence.

4.) Rios smoking Cigars
"He's Pablo Escobar's great, great, great, great, great, great great, great, great, great, grandson" Uh, okay.. Isn't it a bit weird to assign cigar smoking to Latin Americans when it's practiced fairly commonly across the entire planet? How many people have you met in real life that obsessed with the culture of their people circa 500 years earlier, to the point where they are practicing their archaic rituals? There were better ways to deal with this.. How about, "Uh we cured cancer like 400 years ago, this crap is harmless in the future"? Doesn't that sound a tad more.. Believable?

5.) Sex, Drugs and Rock'N'Roll! This isn't star trek, is it?
I find this answer to be the most egregious. So first it's, "no society is perfect, we're all crappy humans, blah blah blah". Okay? So, everything Gene said.. Everything he created.. TOS, TAS, TNG.. 10 movies.. It's all null and void because Michael Chabon says so? The hubris of this statement.. The entire basic concept of star trek was that we made it as a species.. We figured it out, we became the potential of humanity; not the struggle. It's all a lie, because.. Apparently it was only like that because of the FCC? I'm not sure how you can be an original fan of Star Trek and not be offended by this statement.

6.) Why do the romulans want Data, if they hate androids?
Okay, this was a dumb question and got a dumb answer.. Not much to say, other than.. How did anyone not get the context that romulan scientists wanted to get their hands on Data for sinister purposes, rather than altruistic ones..? *Double Facepalm*

7.) Who's genius idea was it to have Raffi call Picard, "JL"?
"He's different".. "He welcomed the refugees".. "He's great grampa picard now, soft and fuzzy". *Sigh*, no.. That makes no sense.. If he was going to soften up, it would have happened at the end of TNG or in the TNG movies.. Not as a 100 year old retiree. This was just a bad writing decision, plain and simple. You could have Riker say it, Geordi say it, Worf say it.. Doesn't matter, it's cringe and it doesn't work; but when you decide to have a new character say it.. Nope, not buying it. 4th wall is now broken.

With the exception of 1, 4, and 6, I think these were some pretty atrocious and insulting answers. I have less faith now for the rest of the show, and in Michael Chabon as a custodian of the TNG legacy.

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

 

[Midquest]

An insightful (and, I think, rather magnificent) quote from Chabon is a new round of questions:

First of all, I think that the phrase (or a version of it) “Star Trek has always reflected its time” is open to multiple, potentially conflicting interpretations. It can mean, “Individual Star Trek series have always (consciously) reflected thematically many of the most pressing issues of the time when they were made.” I think that’s the sense intended by people involved with making the two current series, and it’s pretty obviously true—starting with persistent themes of nuclear annihilation, racial prejudice, mechanization, totalitarianism vs liberal democracy, on TOS, through DS9 with its themes of individual vs group identity, chosen family, reason vs faith, and the inevitable moral compromises of war. (That’s only the *conscious* ways in which Trek has reflected the times in which it was made.) But the phrase could also be taken the way (I think) you take it: that the world, the milieu depicted by Star Trek—the characters and their interactions, their capabilities and limitations as individuals, the social institutions and mores and technologies and economics and culture—reflects the world and era in which it was made. I think you’re saying that this is wrong, that here is exactly where Trek doesn’t, hasn’t. and *shouldn’t* reflect the world and times. That it has always presented its crews, Starfleet, and the Federation as improvements, as realizations of our best potential, as aspirational. If Trek has reflected our world, it’s in a kind of utopian funhouse mirror, where everything looks better. I would say that by and large that has been true, though possibly not as to the degree that many Trek fans claim, or feel. But there’s another side to the world—the people and society—depicted in Star Trek, which is all the characters, planets, cultures, mores and interactions that take place outside of Starfleet, the Federation. Many of these “outside” cultures and characters—the empires and alliances and unions— *have* deliberately reflected aspects of our world, with its all imperfection, intolerance, brutality, its humiliations and injustices, its evils. I don’t mean just in a thematic sense, but in the behavior of individual non-Federation, non-Starfleet characters, in the construction of societies around prejudices and inequalities, violence, lust for power, etc.

That brings us to Picard. In the one, long, ten-part story we’re telling, we’re asking two questions about the greater world of Star Trek (i.e, the Federation *and* everything outside the Federation). One—a venerable Star Trek question, with a long pedigree in previous series and films: What happens when the Federation, the Roddenberry Federation with all its enlightened and noble intentions, free from want, disease, (internal) war, greed, capitalism, intolerance, etc., is tested by forces inimical to its values? What happens when two of its essential principles; (security and liberty, say) come into conflict? The answer has to be—at first, it buckles. It wobbles. It may, to some extent, compromise or even betray its values, or at the very least be sorely tempted to do so. If not, there’s no point asking the question, though it’s a question that any society with aspirations like ours or the Federation’s needs to ask. If nothing can ever truly test the Federation, if nothing can rock its perfection, then it’s just a magical land. It’s Lothlorien, in its enchanted bubble, untouchable by the Shadow. And, also, profoundly *inhuman*. To me it’s the humanity of the Federation—which means among many admirable things, its imperfection, its vulnerability and the constant need to defend it from our own worst natures—that makes it truly inspiring. The other, related question we’re asking is: What about the people who live outside, at the edges (or even within) the Federation but who, for various reasons, aren’t quite *of* it. Ex-Starfleet officers, refugees, people like Seven who served on a Starfleet ship but was never actually in Starfleet. People who have fallen through the cracks, or fallen victim to their own weaknesses. What is life like for people who, for whatever reason, live beyond the benevolent boundaries of the Federation—where, for example, post-scarcity is a dream, and there is a monetary economy? Again, there is precedent for this kind of story on Trek, but the fact that our story only resolves over ten episodes, not one, or two, or four out of a season of 23, might make it feel, sometimes, that there is more darkness, more trauma in our characters’ lives. More *struggle.* This show unquestionably has darker tonalities than some others (DS9 is the standout exception). It lives more in the shadows, where the Federation’s light can’t always reach. That isn’t to condemn, criticize, undo, break or, god knows, betray the Federation or Gene Roddenberry’s vision. Shadow defines light.

Every new Trek series since TNG has sought to escape what can feel like the confines of previous series, not simply of canon (which can also be a strangely liberating force) but of the kinds of stories, about the kinds of characters and societies, that have already been told. Each new series has expressed this impulse to “light out for the territories” in a different way. TNG went a century into the future of TOS. DS9 went onto a station full of aliens that was both beyond the edge of the Federation and next to a wormhole that led to the Gamma Quadrant. VOY put 70k light-years between it and its predecessors, and introduced a raft of new species and worlds. ENT went deep into the early past of the Federation. Next season’s DIS goes to the Trek universe’s far-future.

The space we found for Picard is not “dark Federation.” It’s one of people who live and work at or beyond the margins of the Federation who travel beyond its boundaries to find the truth.

Forgive me if this is an old quote I missed!
https://trekmovie.com/2020/02/24/st...n-questions-plus-frakes-interviewed-and-more/

 

[Alexander Corrino]

I really enjoy how Chabon genuinely seems to be interested in answering questions and explaining things and addressing "concerns". He wouldn't HAVE to, he could just let things stand as they are and ignore it all, but he takes the time and writes essays on why and who and what and how. I really appreciate that about him.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Ad hominems aren't an argument, and most of the good star trek out there is older than 25 years. You should check some of it out.

Some of the best is pushing 50, but nostalgia is a hell of a thing.

 

[Longinus]

I really enjoy how Chabon genuinely seems to be interested in answering questions and explaining things and addressing "concerns". He wouldn't HAVE to, he could just let things stand as they are and ignore it all, but he takes the time and writes essays on why and who and what and how. I really appreciate that about him.

Yep, he's pretty awesome. I know that he unfortunately is not the showrunner in the next season as he is too busy, but I really hope he is involved in the writing.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

Yep, he's pretty awesome. I know that he unfortunately is not the showrunner in the next season as he is too busy, but I really hope he is involved in the writing.

I read a Sir Patrick interview a little while ago in which he mentioned that Chabon, Kurtzman and others had come to see him to introduce him to the idea/general plot for PIC's season 2, so I'd say it's safe to assume Chabon is involved in at least SOME way.

 

[DEWLine]

I consider that reassuring news.

 

[Tracer Bullet]

Some of the best is pushing 50, but nostalgia is a hell of a thing.

Big fan of TAS I take it?

 

[Cyrus]

I read a Sir Patrick interview a little while ago in which he mentioned that Chabon, Kurtzman and others had come to see him to introduce him to the idea/general plot for PIC's season 2, so I'd say it's safe to assume Chabon is involved in at least SOME way.

He is:

It would be great if I could do both. I don’t want to leave Picard. I’m not leaving — I’m sticking around. It’s been renewed, so we’ve already started planning for the second season. I’m every bit as involved in that process, and I’m going to stay on as an executive producer, and I’m going to write episodes. But at some point, the focus of my time and attention and love is going to slide over to Kavalier & Clay. But exactly how and where and when, it’s not clear. This is a transitional period for me. But I’m definitely reluctant and sorry to ultimately be leaving this behind. It’s still incredibly exciting. Talking about Season Two is already fun all over again. It won’t be easy for me. Star Trek’s not going anywhere, and hopefully, I’m not going anywhere either.

 

[Alexander Corrino]

^ Glad I remembered things correctly, lol! I can't blame Chabon for eventually planning on focusing on that show based on his novel. I'd do the very same thing if I was a novel author and someone made a series out of one of my novels!

And somehow I doubt he's gonna leave PIC completely. He seems like the kind of guy who will drop by and surprise!write the series finale or something.

 

[F. King Daniel]

He's still answering fan questions on Instagram. Right now his story is choc-ful of replies to people.

 

[Arpy]

Is there a repository of all these replies?

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

At the end of the day, it adds a massive (to put it mildly) fine print on the intent of Spock's actions ("promised the Romulans I would save their planet"). Spock meant that he would save Romulus period, and Nimoy believed as much when giving the performance.

As this has massive effects on Spock's character, I think we should take Spock's words at face value that his plan was to save Romulus, no fine print (buy a few months before freezing etc.) and honor Nimoy's penultimate performance as Spock as much as possible.

If that means adding in a Hobus explanation or technobabble that the black hole would somehow restore the sun (if it was Romulus's), so be it.

Here's my take:

The Hobus star system was somewhat close to Romulus, and it detonated sooner than expected for unknown reasons.

I don't think the Black Hole plan was to restore Romulus' sun, but it was to be used as a shield in between the Super Nova Blast and Romulus. Ergo the Black Hole would absorb the Super Nova Blast and prevent Romulus from getting cooked by said Blast.

There's not enough Meta Phasic Shield tech / emitters that you can scramble in time to protect your planet from being cooked if you didn't have it setup already on said planet in a multi layered Planetary Shield System. Ergo Romulus was scrambling to evacuate it's people IMO. They worked with Jean-Luc Picard and there was some promise made to help early on. Part way through the construction of the evacuation ships, the Synth Rebellion happened. And because of that attack, that cancelled the assist from StarFleet.

I agree, I think Spock "Meant to" save Romulus, but the Super Nova triggered a bit earlier than predicted for whatever reason and their construction of the JellyFish / loading of the Red Matter / flying to stop the Super Nova Blast was too slow for them to get out there in time. I think their last minute effort of constructing of this crazy Jelly Fish space craft to use a Black Hole to save Romulus wasn't planned ahead of time, ergo the bad timing because this was literally a last ditch idea that wasn't implemented simultaneously as the evacuation ship construction because they were counting on StarFleet's evacuation plan to save the Romulan people on Romulus.

Constructing a small craft at the last minute and loading in dangerous substance at the last minute like "Red Matter" wouldn't be easy, especially when you're not 100% sure of your deadline.

And the rest is what we know from the recent JJ Abrams Star Trek movies.

 

[Bollie74]

On the "JL" thing, it's worth noting that that Rafi was wearing her uniform but didn't appear to be "on duty" when she called Picard "JL" and they were having a casual conversation. It's not like we saw a scene on a ship with him saying "Commander, go secure the refugees" and her responding "sure thing JL"

In the book she said that she used JL to get his attention. One of my employees came in and was going on about how she loved "Jean-Luc" and I had to ask her to refer to him as Captain or Admiral Picard in my presence because I feel the character deserved so much esteem in my experience. I didn't even like the admirals on TNG to call him by his first name. Accepting it from Rafi had been challenging. Good thing they got a great actress to play her

 

[The Old Mixer]

All your Romulan supernova shit go here.

 

[Midquest]

I adore this response Chabon gave:

Question: Will we get any glimpses, glimmers, inklings, and or whatever of the Picard of old?

Chabon: Gently, kindly, and with all the good will in the world, my friend, I must reject the premise of your question, and suggest, even more tenderly, that your wishes and longings may be interfering with you eyes and ears.

He's a class act. That's a response worth saving for some of the sealioning happening elsewhere on the internet about this series.

Also, I'll echo the call for these to be collected somewhere. They're wonderful.

 

[SolarisOne]

He's a class act. That's a response worth saving for some of the sealioning happening elsewhere on the internet about this series.

He's a better person than me.

 

[picardjean-luc]

All series have Good Trek and Bad Trek

Hell TNG, Voyager, DS9, Enterprise and Discovery have some legitimately awful Trek..doesn't mean I'm throwing the baby out with the bath water

Most of TNG S1 episodes were bad. 'Code of Honor' was the worst. 'Haven' where Wesley was almost euthanized for falling in grass, 'Skin of Evil' where Tasha met her match in the form of a black tar creature were also very bad. Even the better ones like 'The Naked Now' were cheesy esp when you watch it on reruns.

But like many Trekkies I never gave up watching TNG. It was starting to get better by the end of season 2 and by season 3 it had grown to become the 'gold standard' series many fans are using as a model for 'Trek' done right (for better or for worse).