Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by S'kai, Mar 13, 2008.
I want to know why no thighs in Star Trek?
I think you might posted this by occident...
He was a little disOriented at the time. . .
You need to watch more TOS. A whole lot of thighs.
Darn, I was too late.
Harry Kim is most likely korean because Kim is a super normal last name for koreans, it's like cohen for jews
Or pehaps he got a little Confuciused.
Not so much, in an acting sense, but the differences between East Asian ethnic types are quite a bit more distinct than -- to use your examples -- between an Englishman and a Frenchman or between an Englishman and an Irishman. For Asians, it's kind of a big deal to them not to be all lumped together into a single, generic "Asian person" category, because they are so much more different, ethnically, culturally and linguistically than most Europeans are from each other.
Kim is the common Korean name. The common Chinese equivalent is Jing.
Englishmen and frenchmen didn't go to war with each other 50 years ago. That's the difference. I hate it when people use this analogy. There is still tension between the Asian countries, so they still take offensive. I'm sure if Linda Park mention her role as a Japanese character to the older generation Koreans, she would get some pretty angry comments.
Ok, if the time of the most recent "conflict" makes a difference: a Frenchman and a German then. Or a German and Russian.
Gene did much to bring about equality. When Gerrold wrote that there was one Trek series. One set of actors. To expect Gene to put every race in the show is a bit silly and naive. He had an Asian already in Sulu. And has been pointed out Harry Kim is Chinese. So I have no idea what you are getting on about.
The raw hatred of many Chinese towards Japanese for WWII is fresh as today's newspaper. Time is not a factor in hate.
And that's Star Trek's problem, how?
^ The discussion was regarding actors' nationalities and whether it had any significance on the roles they play. I'm saying that members of the cultures in question may have to deal with these issues far more often than we enlightened, diverse lot may appreciate.
Then go with Irish and English. England's occupation of Ireland is still a sore subject for many, many Irishmen and I'm sure the actions of the IRA are a sore subject for plenty of citizens of the United Kingdom, but Brosnan can play James Bond and it isn't a major insult. It's just acting. Race shouldn't matter.
As I quoted above, this was not Gene's selection, but a decision by "the Network." And for the third time, I am not "getting on" about anything. I am trying to understand.
It is b/c of ratings. Like every show if whoever is in charge thinks by having this person or that person on board will bring in more viewers then they will be hired. Minorities are definitly gaining more exposure on TV and are part of the money making equation for networks however I dont think they split the hairs when comes to "we had a Japanese person, we need a Korean person right now and in exactly three years we will bring in a Chinese and Thai and have a ho-down." Of course, this brings out other problems, but not everyone can be pleased.
Maybe if trek continued after voy we would have had a Chinese chief engineer with a thick accent.
I would have liked to see Harry Cheng but dont think it would have made the show any better or worse. Although if Harry was suppose to be Chinese it would be nice for a little cultural accuracy; there is no Kim in Chinese, not even if someone occidently spoke broken english while disoriented.
And comparing one people's suffering with another always p***es people off no matter what point is being made. We should discuss which people had it the worst and declare a winner.
Why would I want to leave America just to go to America jr.?
I think Trek skirted a lot of things. Such as Chakotay's tribal origins. Was it racial ignorance or laziness? Or just keeping storylines open, by implying the future cultures may not have the same delineations as the present? I think they deliberately avoided pinning his culture down.
Indeed, with over 100 countries on Earth and -thousands? - of cultures, a good many are just going to have to be implied by the series. Nor should networks apologize for appealing to their market majority culture, for example US Americans of western European descent. It is not a crime being part of a majority culture. It goes with the territory of humanity--everyone is part of a minority in other parts of the world, and no one is above being targeted for racism and discrimination. It's only ignorant when races/cultures blindly refer to all other cultures as... "Gaharay"; a practice which Trek obviously does not subscribe to.
I tend to agree with the opinions here regarding that ultimately the producers and network were simply trying to get the most market, as well as resonate with popular culture of the 60's, which let's face it, ain't the 00's.
You know there was a Somalian on Star Trek the Undiscovered Country. All though she was playing the part of an Alien women (the chamelon who kissed Kirk). Does that count?
Separate names with a comma.