:/ I'm sorry, but to act like the subject of death is somehow new to fiction or is being used more than it used to be used in fiction is just... not a realistic assessment of the situation. Death has always been common in fiction because, y'know, it's kind of the fundamental fact of human life and always has been. It's the only truly universal human experience.
I wasn't referring to death in fiction in general. That's ancient. I'm referring to "stunt death", "shock death". That is new. It's started showing up in the late 90s and accelerated in 2000s. Walking Dead and Game of Thrones in the past 10 years made stunt death more common than ever to the point the motivating question in so many shows is"who dies?".
You like Stranger Things? The for the past two seasons the speculation has been on who dies (usually Hopper). For next season, it's all on Will or Hopper or Eleven. That is such a perverse thing to be normalized. Rather than speculate as to what events happen and what story is told, or why it happens the speculation is on whose story ends for good.
Not to make too much of a tanget, but I'm I'm not the first to observe there is something deeply amiss in our society with regards to life and death that is very different than how such things were regarded in the 1990s and 1980s. Particularly in the 1980s, there was much more a focus on life.
Also I disagree. There can be no death without life, and the other truly universal human experience is life. It's good this series ended on a note about life continuing on, with more life happening. Picard could have died. But now instead, he's a father. For the first time as he said, his life has something it was missing.
If anything, I'd say popular fiction doesn't really use death enough, since so often it's more "death" than death because characters get resurrected so often.
Well that's just it. They yank the death chain, then, in fiction that allows it, yanks the resurrection chain (or the cameo chain if they can't). Which makes death in fiction meaningless other than a stunt.
Strongly disagree. Star Trek: Picard has always been a series about finding meaning, purpose, and love in the face of grief and mortality. It would have been thematically appropriate for Jean-Luc Picard, having been given a reprieve at the end of "Et in Arcadia Ego, Part II," to finally pass in "The Last Generation."
Hell no. Picard Season 1 and Season 2 were about that, but who gives a shit about those anymore. Picard Season 3 dismissed it all just as Shaw dismissed Jurati's Borg as "weird shit". It would have been lousy to return to Season 1/2 themes when Season 3 started with Picard moving from Earth to enter a new stage in his life. Even there, in the first episode, no longer about grief and mortality, but about opportunity and possibilities of life.
It would have been a violation of that promise in S3E1, to end on a note any different than Picard, in the shuttle with Beverly and his son, seeing the Enterprise G. Picard's days as a Starfleet Captain and Admiral are over, but now he gets to live out his life in a new adventure: a father.
That has so much more meaning than having hime die in that cube just so we could have another crappy funeral scene.
I think I'd rather see a series that gives us happy endings and mortality. Because there's a point where having characters who never die and always get resurrected... it's just dishonest. That's not a happy ending, that's a lie.
The only way to beat that game is not play it at all. The solution is not to kill characters for good. The solution is to not kill characters and have their life take new courses. There is a choice other than ending. You can say Picard and the Enterprise-D crew here didn't get an ending, but rather an Un-Ending. And that's very fitting for TNG.
Which, y'know, whatever. "The Last Generation" was a fun episode and I enjoyed it. But I would have rather seen the salvation of the Federation, the heroes go on to live happy lives, new life in the form of the next next generation, alongside the death of Jean-Luc Picard. Because death is a part of life, no matter how much we pretend otherwise.
Why? So Picard could follow in Kirk's footsteps and die alone making a difference? That would have been a gross betrayal of the series after getting the crew back together. Maybe instead, Picard has a quiet death, 15 years from now, surrounded by loved ones, after spending the last leg of his life as a father, with the next-next generation having taken over anyway.
Just because the book is closed on Jean Luc Picard as captain of the USS Enterprise, doesn't mean the book is closed on Jean Luc Picard the man. The show did right by implying that it isn't. Because now we got a Picard who barkeeps for his friends, beats them at Poker, and (unless I misunderstood the photo in the after credits scene) marries Beverly Crusher finally.