“PAST TENSE” (PARTS I & II)
Don’t be a Herbert, just take the flower...
I remember being blown away by this two-parter the first time I saw it. It truly had a blockbuster feel and the excellent use of the Paramount backlot set made this one of 90’s Trek’s most lavish, big-budget looking spectacles. Admittedly, the basic plot is hardly new and is, in fact, almost a re-make of the TOS classic “City on the Edge of Forever” with a simple twist: instead of having to make sure that a historical figure died, here we must ensure the person, if not lives, at least maintains their part in history. It’s nothing revolutionary plot-wise, and, in fact, had been done a decade before in one of my favourite childhood films, “Back to the Future”. Fortunately, “Past Tense” has more than enough going for it and the execution is sublime: from the daring, bleak and prophetic depiction of social entropy to the well-drawn characters and superb performances and directing, this is a gripping, tense and emotional two-parter and one of DS9’s strongest outings at this point.
Trek was, of course, no stranger to travel, but it was almost always confined to either the “present day” (i.e., the time of filming) or the years or centuries prior to that. It was exceptionally rare for us to visit the time between our present day and the 23rd/24th century (although the film “First Contact” would notably do just that). It’s fascinating watching this now that we’re rapidly approaching 2024, as we get a glimpse of how the producers saw things two decades hence. Leaving the social issues aside for a second, some of it holds up pretty well—the prevalence of the internet, for one (back in 1995, many people still didn’t have the internet, myself included, but the producers reasonably assumed that the net would become a big part of our lives). Mercifully, early 21st century fashion as envisaged here did not come to pass, including those horrible neckties and Jadzia’s awkward, 1930’s-esque hairstyle. The technology also looks a little clunky, but, as with a few other things in these episodes seems to have a BLADE RUNNER influence, which I approve of.
These episodes, I recall, got some attention last year as being somewhat prophetic in predicting the early 2020’s as a time of social and political unrest. Now, in spite of how certain fans like to play up Trek’s philosophical content, generally the writers are neither philosophers or social scientists (I am the latter, by the way, with a degree in social psychology). They just did their best to write good stories and deal with certain themes in a thoughtful, accessible way, although Trek rarely got particularly DEEP into its themes—i.e, there are no episodes that require a phD in philosophy in order to decode them.
This, for me, is a remarkable story for a number of reasons. First of all, it’s one of the few Trek outings that actually SHOW us the pain involved in social change. TNG was generally content to wax lyrical about how Trek’s utopian society was so advanced and humanity had surmounted all its problems. It never told us how. DS9 is a bolder and gutsier show, unafraid to deconstruct this futuristic utopia and examine the cracks, and, in this case, to show that getting there was no picnic. One of the weakness of Trek’s philosophy is its vagueness; it never lays out how mankind overcame division, hatred and greed, and how we learned to come together and work for the good of all, and how we evolved beyond a monetary system. The writers didn’t know, bless them, for they weren’t social commentators, philosophers or economists.
Rewatching this I’m stunned at just what an apt examination “Past Tense” is of the perils of Neoliberalism, which has been the dominant political and economic ideology in the US, UK and many parts of the world since the early ‘80’s. This is what happens when society adopts a socio-economic system that fosters cut-throat competition, narcissistic levels of self-interest and psychopathic behaviour, while vilifying and casting aside anyone who doesn’t meet the societal definition of “success”. As we see here, Neoliberalism kills compassion and empathy. Society’s “losers” are seen as responsible for their own failings and should be scraped off society’s shoe like shit.
Social psychologist Paul Verhaeghe sums it up beautifully in an article I saved years back:
“Our society constantly proclaims that anyone can make it if they just try hard enough, all the while reinforcing privilege and putting increasing pressure on its overstretched and exhausted citizens. An increasing number of people fail, feeling humiliated, guilty and ashamed. We are forever told we are freer to choose the course of our lives than ever before, but the freedom to choose outside the success narrative is limited. Furthermore, those who fail are deemed to be losers or scrounges, taking advantage of our social security system.”
We may not have Sanctuary Districts yet, but we’re still prisoners of a socio-economic system which dehumanises and, through austerity, penalises society’s most marginalised. It’s been shown that not only has homelessness increased under Neoliberalism, but unemployment too (with many who are employed now a part of the so-called “gig economy” with very little in the way of security), and mental health problems have skyrocketed. Neoliberalism has changed human values and behaviour, and not for the best.
One of the failings of this episode is the fact Sisko has no idea how things got so bad. That isn’t a mystery; any historian or economic or social analyst could tell you the answer, even if they’re not all in agreement. But, really, there’s only so far I’d expect a Star Trek episode to go. I’m glad at least the problem was addressed and detailed in such a stunningly vivid way. Star Trek’s wonderful future won’t just magically appear; we first have to dig and claw our way out of this hellscape we’ve created, and that will not be easy. There are no easy answers, either, and the episode does acknowledge that: “You want jobs? What will you do when there ARE NO jobs?”
Both episodes are excellently produced, with part one being mostly set-up, although thoroughly engaging set-up. If anything, the second part is the strongest of the two, even though there’s not a huge amount of plot there. It’s basically one long hostage drama, but thankfully it’s just as tense and emotionally involving as it needs to be.
Apparently this was originally conceived as a single episode, but the writers realised there was too much to cram into a single hour, and they were right. As a two-parter, we have much greater time to build the characters, and the guest characters and actors are uniformly excellent. Each is well-drawn and I found myself genuinely caring for most of them. The least likeable is Frank Military’s “B.C.”, who is the prime agitator and a clear sociopath, just itching to kill or injure others. Much of Sisko’s task, posing as Bell, is to keep B.C. in line and stop him from injuring any of the hostages. The character is interesting to watch: he’s a killer, and not a nice guy, but he’s not a one-dimensional character and you do wonder how much of what he’s become is the result of a lifetime of being considered a “loser” and fuck-up. His ultimate goal, for instance, is simply to live a simply to live a peaceful, contented life in Tasmania.
Bill Smitrovrich does a great job as the earnest family man Webb, and I have to say his eventual death packed a genuine emotional wallop. Dick Miller is perfect as Vin, a world-weary older guy who simply wants to get to the end of his shift and has lost the ability to care about the injustices that are part of his daily work. Tina Lifford also deserves a special mention for a particularly affecting, open-hearted turn as an office worker who hates the system she’s a part of, but simply has to find ways to get on with it. As the old quote goes, “all that’s necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing”. We see that the people involved in this system aren’t bad people; they’re just tired, dispirited and feel powerless to change things. Change, sadly, often necessitates chaos and destruction, as we see here.
The real glue in the episode, however, are Sisko and Bashir. It’s wonderful to see how far the naive and previously obnoxious young Doctor has come. His maturity here, and inherent compassion, is a joy to watch, and he works well with Sisko, which also shows great development given that Sisko could barely seem to stand his CMO in early episodes. Avery Brooks is on top form throughout, filled with passion, determination and genuinely aggrieved by the injustices he’s witnessing. The parallels to the way African Americans have been treated for centuries perhaps influence Brooks’ heartfelt performance, and the scene where he tears into Vin for failing to recognise what’s going on is a powerfully gut-punching piece of acting by Brooks. Meanwhile, Jadzia gets to display her resourcefulness, and we have a slightly awkward, misjudged cameo by Balok himself, Clint Howard. This scene teeters a little to close to mocking mental health issues for my liking, but it’s still a nice to see Howard. Oh, and I personally loved Kira and O’Brien’s trips through time to locate their missing comrades—it provides a little light relief and the hippie sequence alone is an absolute scream. Nana Visitor is surprisingly adept at comedy.
It all ends in a suitably grim shoot-out and, such was the power of the storytelling and performances, I genuinely felt I’d been pulled through the emotional wringer by the end of the episode. I’ve said enough and don’t have much more to say; this is one of my favourite two-parters. In some respects it’s not an easy watch, but it’s a tale that Star Trek had to tell. Powerful, thrilling and provocative television; DS9 at its best.
Rating: 10
