That's STILL the way I look at it.
The Federation uses credits; we've all seen it. But it's all electronic, as it were. No physical currency changes hands. That's it.
Roddenberry's Worst Ideas
- Thread starter ZapBrannigan
- Start date
That's STILL the way I look at it.
The Federation uses credits; we've all seen it. But it's all electronic, as it were. No physical currency changes hands. That's it.
Arthur C. Clarke was a believer that advancing technology would destroy the utility of money, our current notions of economics and the entire concept of work for pay.
Of course, he was a science fiction writer rather than a Star Trek fan, so "his words are unimportant and we do not hear them."
Of course, he was a science fiction writer rather than a Star Trek fan, so "his words are unimportant and we do not hear them."
Me, too. It's certainly the most sensible way to interpret it, and I feel pretty certain that's the way the filmmakers meant it, as well.
Now...if Roddenberry had been calling the shots for TVH, I wouldn't be nearly so certain of that, but I believe by that time he had been "kicked upstairs" and had basically become the guy whose memos everybody still had to initial, but not necessarily read.
Didn't Roddenberry condemn the writers of [IWrath of Khan[/I] for Kirk killing the Ceti eel?
No money is maybe a stretch but I found the idea that humanity had turned away from the accumulation of wealth to the pursuit of personal enrichment to be a refreshing view of the future. That line was one of the reasons I became a huge fan of TNG as a kid.
If I never again hear about money or the lack of same in "Star Trek," I will be very happy.
Some of you have a problem with it. We get that. We got that a long time ago.
Surely there are other possible "worst ideas" to discuss. How about leaving TOS right before the third season? "Omega Glory"? Or "The Questor Tapes," "Spectre" or "Genesis II"? "Pretty Maids All in a Row"?
Heck, how about Lincoln Enterprises merchandising "Kung Fu"?
Some of you have a problem with it. We get that. We got that a long time ago.
Surely there are other possible "worst ideas" to discuss. How about leaving TOS right before the third season? "Omega Glory"? Or "The Questor Tapes," "Spectre" or "Genesis II"? "Pretty Maids All in a Row"?
Heck, how about Lincoln Enterprises merchandising "Kung Fu"?
I really liked The Questor Tapes.
We're at a point, ecologically, where we better the hell get some of that magic tech otherwise the future's gonna be more like Cormac McCarthy than Star Trek. I wish I could be as optimistic as you are--with a straight face.
To be more specific, the Galaxy Class concept is something I don't like. We did witness inter-ship romance in Trek, but I never liked the idea of institutionalizing it and turning starships into the Carnival Cruise line with families and nurseries and all that stuff. The Enterprise-D rarely seemed to be in mortal danger, and if it were, imagine how irresponsible it is to drag your whole family into harms way. The main source of conflict in TNG tended to be about how and when to exercise authority, and that's fine, but sometimes you need a cliffhanger and some "we can't take much more of this!" and TNG, by being pushed farther in the future, presented a world of "perfected" technology where the Enterprise lazily cruised from one diplomatic engagement to the next and all conflict was talked over in hushed tones in the briefing room. It was only the Borg that started to break that up.
For me, it's not so much the not liking the lack of money as it is the statements our heroes make about not having/using money, except for all the times they have, use or reference money; even in the 24th Century.
Hey, if you're gonna write it that they have no money, at least be consistent!
The Omega Glory is one of my two hated Star Trek episodes. I think it's pretty good that I only have two out of 700+
The Omega Glory is one of my two hated Star Trek episodes. I think it's pretty good that I only have two out of 700+
The Omega Glory is one of my top ten all time favorite episodes of Trek, all series.
How dare you put "Pretty Maids All In a Row" on your list? It's got Angie Dickinson nekkid!Surely there are other possible "worst ideas" to discuss. How about leaving TOS right before the third season? "Omega Glory"? Or "The Questor Tapes," "Spectre" or "Genesis II"? "Pretty Maids All in a Row"?
yeah, I didn't know "families on starships" was specifically his idea, but if so, it was another goofy one. Think of major engagements like Wolf 359 or in some Dominion War battles.
Now try to picture families on ships during WWII at the Battle of Midway or Leyte Gulf.
Just a head's up Mos6507 - double/triple posting is generally frowned upon at this board. Try to put all your thoughts and responses into one post when you can! The multi-quote button is really useful for facilitating this.
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Gene's treatment of women on the show. Short of one attempt to put Uhura in command TOS has a tendency to be fairly misogynistic and reductionist in regards to women. Surprising considering how in touch Gene was with messages of racial equality.
I don't think the comparison is apt. The Enterprise was originally envisioned to be going on a ten-year mission to unexplored space.
There aren't too many family people who are going to sign up to not see their spouses and off-spring for a full decade. If they had held to the original concept, there'd be no way to do it without families aboard.
I think he gets somewhat of a pass on that considering he did originally have a woman as XO in The Cage and Tasha Yar as security chief in TNG.
then they should have shown families being evacuated before going into battles. They only did that a few times with the separation, but really, if they were going to have that concept, they should have stuck with it. Instead, they show kids routinely dragged along into danger and occasionally they hung a lampshade on it.(like in "rascals" when the Ferengi comment on it.)
Or it should have just been understood that to be a deep-space explorer in Starfleet meant having no kids or very rarely getting to see them.
My take on this is Starfleet officers are all "officers," the same way all Police officers are "officers."
Miles O'Brien is a senior NCO, but he is also a Starfleet officer.
We do see people clearing tables in ten forward (and serving), and we rarely see machines robots. My thought is that these are paid civilian contractors working for Starfleet, likely spouses of Starfleet crewmembers.
Problem there is that isn't in the least how it works in the military, the lowest ranking enlisted clean the "latrines, and the Navy (iirc) has a janitorial career field. Once you're "made" in the service (E3 or bouts) the only time you touch a communal toilet is with your ass cheeks.
If someone refuses to perform in your supposed "post-scarcity" society what happens? Fire them? Strictly speaking they don't work for you. Psychology conditioning? Force? Penial colonies?
I think the transporters are fine, as long as they are used solely as a transportation device, move from point A to point B.
Except that wouldn't be a technological change, it would be a deliberate social and cultural one.
Clarke also wrote that in the future we would breed and slaughter whales as a major part of Humanities food supply. That wacky Clarke.
One of my favorites as well, I think it had a lot to say. Star Trek is at it's best when it has a lot to say.
Similar threads
