Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Yes.. that was most amusing.
Yes.. that was most amusing.
nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Earth!
- Thread starter SonicRanger
- Start date
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
the connies as transformers would be the cool.
the connies as transformers would be the cool.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Dare I admit that said footnote was my first exposure to the whole concept of K/S? I had no idea this was even an issue until I read that footnote!
Dare I admit that said footnote was my first exposure to the whole concept of K/S? I had no idea this was even an issue until I read that footnote!
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Ha! I love this place. The dude that wrote the Eugenics wars books is talking to me!
I first heard of K/S here on TrekBBS. If I hadn't, that dog-eared copy of TMP novelization I picked up at a book sale would be the first I'd heard of it too.
Ha! I love this place. The dude that wrote the Eugenics wars books is talking to me!
I first heard of K/S here on TrekBBS. If I hadn't, that dog-eared copy of TMP novelization I picked up at a book sale would be the first I'd heard of it too.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
You know this thread is giving me the urge to read the TMP novlization copy I picked up at a Flea market.
You know this thread is giving me the urge to read the TMP novlization copy I picked up at a Flea market.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
It's actually a good read. But it does have some weird ass shit in it.
It's actually a good read. But it does have some weird ass shit in it.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
I think a fair number caught it fairly quickly.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
I feel that the movie should have canonized the TMP tie-in novel's impression of how the Enterprise looked when Kirk was approaching in the travel pod.
I feel that the movie should have canonized the TMP tie-in novel's impression of how the Enterprise looked when Kirk was approaching in the travel pod.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
She was too, no doubt. According to the word of Roddenberry, New Humans made up a large percentange of Earth's population. They were telepathically linked into a group mind, making them more intelligent than primitive humans.
She was too, no doubt. According to the word of Roddenberry, New Humans made up a large percentange of Earth's population. They were telepathically linked into a group mind, making them more intelligent than primitive humans.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
No, I'm pretty sure this shocking humorlessness, annotated by overwrought outrage, is a pretty key component of what's wrong with this forum.
That said, Roddenberry had some great ideas and some truly terrible ones. Every writer has their own internal Sturgeon's Law at work; one must always rigorously apply the filter so that as little of the crap leaks out as possible. I think for the most part, Roddenberry's filter worked, but every once in a while we find a thing that should never have seen the light of day.
"Love instructor" tee hee hee.
No, I'm pretty sure this shocking humorlessness, annotated by overwrought outrage, is a pretty key component of what's wrong with this forum.
That said, Roddenberry had some great ideas and some truly terrible ones. Every writer has their own internal Sturgeon's Law at work; one must always rigorously apply the filter so that as little of the crap leaks out as possible. I think for the most part, Roddenberry's filter worked, but every once in a while we find a thing that should never have seen the light of day.
"Love instructor" tee hee hee.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
I'm amazed no-one has come on and said:'Roddenberry, what does HE know about it?'
Oh, someone has.
And as to TMP novelisation being weird - please pardon me while I tear out my hair. The future WILL be weird, to us, I hope. WE would be weird to people of the past. ST is SF and is about the future, so it should have elements of weirdness. The future will not be reassuringly S***, despite the attempts of Thatcher and Reagan.
I'm amazed no-one has come on and said:'Roddenberry, what does HE know about it?'
Oh, someone has.
And as to TMP novelisation being weird - please pardon me while I tear out my hair. The future WILL be weird, to us, I hope. WE would be weird to people of the past. ST is SF and is about the future, so it should have elements of weirdness. The future will not be reassuringly S***, despite the attempts of Thatcher and Reagan.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Of course it will. But a writer of science fiction is obligated to explain that weirdness in ways that aren't completely laughable to the reader. My space opera future is a lot less hung up on sex, but if I came up with a phrase to describe it like "love instructor", I would immediately relegate it to the "Ha ha ha, I don't even do drugs!" bin in my brain for terrible ideas.
When I write about something that would be Not Normal to my audience but Normal to my characters, my job is to make it as seamless as possible.
Of course it will. But a writer of science fiction is obligated to explain that weirdness in ways that aren't completely laughable to the reader. My space opera future is a lot less hung up on sex, but if I came up with a phrase to describe it like "love instructor", I would immediately relegate it to the "Ha ha ha, I don't even do drugs!" bin in my brain for terrible ideas.
When I write about something that would be Not Normal to my audience but Normal to my characters, my job is to make it as seamless as possible.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
You WRITE SF and you find the idea of a love instructor weird? Have you ever HEARD of the 1960's?? You know, this whole idea that Sex could be recreational if you wanted it to be and that women weren't just put on this Earth to have babies? Have you ever been to japan? Have you ever heard of Geisha's? Why not have a MALE geisha, for equality?
PUH-LEASE!!!
Reagan has a lot to answer for.
You WRITE SF and you find the idea of a love instructor weird? Have you ever HEARD of the 1960's?? You know, this whole idea that Sex could be recreational if you wanted it to be and that women weren't just put on this Earth to have babies? Have you ever been to japan? Have you ever heard of Geisha's? Why not have a MALE geisha, for equality?
PUH-LEASE!!!
Reagan has a lot to answer for.
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
Don't tell me... that's one of the places where the words "stirring," and "genitals" appear close together isn't it?
Don't tell me... that's one of the places where the words "stirring," and "genitals" appear close together isn't it?
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
It's Regan's fault that the phrase "love instructor" sounds laughable? Er... no. This has nothing to do with anyone's personal views on sex. It's that the phrase just sounds silly.
Re: nuTrek destroys Roddenberry’s vision of 23rd-century humans and Ea
BTW most Geishas were NOT having sex for THEIR PLEASURE. They were indeed Prostitutes having sex for money and they were not always treated well.
Japan doesn't have the best track record with treating women with equality.
But the Love instructor BS was written in 79, long after the age of free love Hippies, and moving towards the age of Give me give me Yuppies.
BTW most Geishas were NOT having sex for THEIR PLEASURE. They were indeed Prostitutes having sex for money and they were not always treated well.
Japan doesn't have the best track record with treating women with equality.
Similar threads
