Social Commentary in this new Star Trek show

[Mudd]

Okay, but you are not addressing anything I have said, you are just relying on same fallacy, over and over again.

You haven't said anything to support the notion that your post described a story.

What you described in very general terms is a situation of sorts - it's not even a story premise. "The Federation gets involved" doesn't really move it much in that direction, either.

If you want to start to make a story out of it, you might begin with the question "what precipitating event creates a conflict between our characters and this guy you're describing?"

And BTW, how does anything about your description of this guy and his society create any dramatic problem for our people?

"A Taste Of Armageddon" isn't a story about how that planet fights its wars. It's a story about a problem created for Kirk and his people by the way that the planet fights its wars.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I thought it was about a tin pot politician standing between kirk and some broad that needed to be made out with?

Oh.

Barbara Babcock was in Dr Quinn Medicine Woman a lot?

Cool.

I remember that she was in a ridiculous love triangle when she had to pick between an ugly outlaw and really-really old guy. How sad for her.

 

[The Overlord]

You haven't said anything to support the notion that your post described a story.

What you described in very general terms is a situation of sorts - it's not even a story premise. "The Federation gets involved" doesn't really move it much in that direction, either.

If you want to start to make a story out of it, you might begin with the question "what precipitating event creates a conflict between our characters and this guy you're describing?"

And BTW, how does anything about your description of this guy and his society create any dramatic problem for our people?

"A Taste Of Armageddon" isn't a story about how that planet fights its wars. It's a story about a problem created for Kirk and his people by the way that the planet fights its wars.

I am simply arguing from conceptual stand point its not dissimilar to several episodes, but a concept is not a script or a fully fleshed out, its just a concept. A fully fleshed out story takes into consideration pacing, characterization, dialogue and a bunch of other details that I have not addressed. I would argue from a conceptual standpoint, there is nothing wrong with the idea and several Star Trek episodes started at conceptual level and ran with it, for better or worse.

I don't even think you have to follow my blue print to make an episode that is relevant to modern times, its just a basic notion and you do not need to follow that in particular to blue print to do that, but that is what separated Star Trek to Star Wars, a willingness to address modern issues, if Star Trek avoids the Elephant in the room, is Star Trek still relevant?

 

[Guy Gardener]

If this show is centring on a Star Base, which is one way to explain multiple ships, and ambassadors... Starfleet might start off building one of these things on the rim of known space, but if construction takes more than 5 years... They rim will have moved off, way-way-way off into the distance by the time the thing is usable as a port of call or a weapons platform.

Discovery is not going to keep finding savage allegory races like Picard and Kirk did if it stays so close to home, who need 3 minutes of human pop psychology to uplift their entire culture to the next level.

What we should be seeing more of is Prime Directive sanctuaries, where the regular old timey backward child race, what is kissing, stories can take place, but without the "we just found this planet and no idea what their shit smells like" malarkey.

 

[The Overlord]

If this show is centring on a Star Base, which is one way to explain multiple ships, and ambassadors... Starfleet might start off building one of these things on the rim of known space, but if construction takes more than 5 years... They rim will have moved off, way-way-way off into the distance by the time the thing is usable as a port of call or a weapons platform.

Discovery is not going to keep finding savage allegory races like Picard and Kirk did if it stays so close to home, who need 3 minutes of human pop psychology to uplift their entire culture to the next level.

What we should be seeing more of is Prime Directive sanctuaries, where the regular old timey backward child race, what is kissing, stories can take place, but without the "we just found this planet and no idea what their shit smells like" malarkey.

I can accept if people think my idea is too on the nose, but I do think Star Trek has done that a lot in the past.

There may be more subtle ways to touch on relevant social commentary about modern problems, but I think if Star Trek does not do social commentary on relevant issues, it is missing something.

But let's face it with episodes like a Taste of Armageddon and the Hunted, the writers just used a bare excuse to get the characters involved with those planets affairs, for the sake of social commentary.

 

[Guy Gardener]

It's hard to identify present social problems while you are submerged in the present.

I'm rewatching a little Sex and the City at the Moment.

I do wish Carey would all stop smoking cigarettes so much.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Okay, but you are not addressing anything I have said, you are just relying on same fallacy, over and over again.

All I did was point out that a guy who has written professionally might have a better grasp on how to construct a story than someone who hasn't. Seems like a sound idea to me.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I. Want. To. See. Parrises. Squares.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I'd. Rather. See. Hollywood. Squares.

 

[Noname Given]

What kind of social commentary would you like to see in this new Star Trek show? I wonder if we are going to see a alien version of Donald Trump or something.

I'd RATHER see a good story. Star Trek is entertainment. If hey can make a social comment while telling a good story, fine; but lets have a GOOD story first.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I want to see the Klingon Ambassador wearing a hat made from a human face at a formal ball, while all the passive aggressive humans are trying not to look at it or mention it, so they don't "accidentally" start a war.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Of course Star Trek should be about social commentary-- that's what made the original show classic Americana, and it's something that the sequel series all did to varying degrees. To be Star Trek, though, it must be allegory without hatred and present positive change, or at least the seed of positive change, rather than mere cynical aggression-- in other words, it should be a lesson for both the Right and the Left.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Is Tellerite, supposed to sound like "Tell her right" which seems like fragmented recording from a sexist rant?

 

[Nyotarules]

Well I don't think they have to be too on the nose in terms of social commentary.

I think getting too bogged in details like cis gender issues or white privilege can make a message less effective, making it broad and straight forward can work.

They can do an episode about populism in general and have a figure who combines aspects from various populist polticans like Trump, Hitler, Hugo Chavez, Andrew Jackson, etc.

Have a planet that is a failing democracy with a stagnant economy. A populist poltican comes to power by condemning local elites and a minority on the planet. When this person comes to power generation is far harder on the minority then he is on the elites.

Now this poltican's end game can depend on how harsh you want the episode to be. Either the poltican is a con man who wants to loot the planet's economy or he could be a monstrous psychopath who wants to commit genocide against this minority.

I would not base the poltican too much on Trump, he should not have a Trump like name or hair or mannerisms, the episode should be about the dangers of populism in general, rather then Trump in particular.

Considering how populism and nationalism are rising in the USA and Western Europe would be a good episode.
The same leader can talk against 'universalisation' of the economy. All those aliens coming to our colony to take our jobs.

 

[Eric Cheung]

I'd like to see much more of civilian life.

My three ideas for what I would have liked the new show to be were either a reconstruction series post-WWIII, a reconstruction series post-Earth/Romulan War, or a show about the boomers. I kind of thought that ENT should have been about boomers anyway. It would have made the inexperience a bit more organic, about how the crew had to learn diplomacy quickly, and sort of take on the role that Starfleet would have in the 23rd century.

But basically, I kind of thought those first two ideas could have run parallel because historians would look back at the post-WWIII world to see how they could learn from that to unify the founding members of the Federation the same way the warring nations were unified a century earlier.

To answer the question more directly, what all this means is that I'd like to see what Federation economics are like, what the structure of the government is like, and what that means for civilians. I was slightly disappointed that we got another show set in Starfleet, but it sounds like the themes will at least be Trekkian in that learning to cooperate with intractable foes will be at the forefront.

 

[Rahul]

Social commentary was, always has been, and (hopefully) will forever be a fundamental part of Star Trek!
That being said: It was at it's best when it wasn't the point of the episodes, but rather the windowdressing. Like having a black female in a position of power on the bridge: It wasn't part of any conflicts. There wasn't much ado about it. It wasn't necessary for the plots of the episodes, nor was it specifically adresses. She was just there.

i don't want preachy plots. I want sci-fi action adventures. Where the social commentary is subtle in the background. Just by having a black, female lead, the show is already making a statement. Even if the specific plots of the episodes aren't.

Discovery is not going to keep finding savage allegory races like Picard and Kirk did.

Just focussing on this little sentence of your post: I hope Discovery doesn't do that. It was a big, important part of previous Trek. But it's not contemporary any more. They should keep it to a minimum. If they do a allegory plots (and they definitely should!), they should do them with the major races, so that whatever happens has consequences and weight to it.

What about a "Brexit"-movement inside the Federation? What if Tellarites or Andorians want to leave the Federation? In a plot that is clearly set in motion by Romulan intrigants - but that has gained such traction it can't be ignored?

Considering how populism and nationalism are rising in the USA and Western Europe would be a good episode.
The same leader can talk against 'universalisation' of the economy. All those aliens coming to our colony to take our jobs.

Indeed. I don't think Discovery shoud do a 1:1 version of a space Trump. That's way too much on the nose, and Trump himself is a very specific problem that is unique and only possible in the US. But the basic motivations and reasons behind his rise, and the rise of authoritarians all over the free world, is a valid and interesting point to be examined in fiction.

Considering current political developments in the US, I'd say it's safe to assume that this is the exact right moment for TV to talk about minorities.

Preach it girl!

Both by not talking about it - simply having a female minority lead, that is never questioned in her qualifications based on gender or emphasized as "different" in any way. AND by having specifically tailored plots about how people (humans and aliens) react in encounters with beings that are "different" to them - a plot point almost laughable fitting for a science fiction show about encounters with aliens.

 

[Nyotarules]

^Would be interesting for the crew to talk about the humanoid domination of Starfleet, perhaps a Caitain, Anbdorian or Tellarite officer saying how glad there are more non humanoids joining the fleet. Or discuss the news that Starfleet Command is too dominated by Terran males, hence the Vulcans insistence on having their own ships in the fleet. Something that makes sense in-universe but is also contemporary

 

[a thousand-yard stare]

Considering how populism and nationalism are rising in the USA and Western Europe would be a good episode.
The same leader can talk against 'universalisation' of the economy. All those aliens coming to our colony to take our jobs.

Hmm.
Unless the Federation makes Transwarp Beaming freely available, logistics makes mass-migration unlikely.
You might have a leader talking against the Federation PTB "Closing our plants, taking our jobs and exporting them to other planets to buy influence with aliens" ...

:-)

 

[Nyotarules]

Hmm.
Unless the Federation makes Transwarp Beaming freely available, logistics makes mass-migration unlikely.
You might have a leader talking against the Federation PTB "Closing our plants, taking our jobs and exporting them to other planets to buy influence with aliens" ...

:-)

just as real folk can buy a plane ticket and travel, Federation folks can buy a shuttle ticket and travel especially IF the migration rules are slack. However for a successful Federation open migration would be a No No. The Vulcans would veto that lol
However the latter part of taking jobs to other planets where costs are cheaper. Definitely! However does the Federation have money, currency, isn't everything free ROFLOL??????

 

[Logopolis]

I have it on good authority that a Vulcan politician named "T'Rump" plans on grabbing Earth by the ears.