Spoilers Star Trek: Starfleet Academy and the Novels

[Detached Nacelle]

Are we not at a point where we can look past race and see the tragedy of a man who has given everything to save the entire universe from a warmongering empire and evil godlike beings? He was told he would pay a penance and chose to put the needs of the many first. It's a far more beautiful story if Sisko never returns, it is cheapened by his return and no one has ever been able to write it well.

Sisko was never presented as a character that adhered to 90s stereotypes and his tragedy shouldn't be beholden to them either.

 

[Christopher]

Are we not at a point where we can look past race

With white supremacists literally running the country? Hell, no.

and see the tragedy of a man who has given everything to save the entire universe from a warmongering empire and evil godlike beings? He was told he would pay a penance and chose to put the needs of the many first. It's a far more beautiful story if Sisko never returns, it is cheapened by his return and no one has ever been able to write it well.

Which might be true (I'm not sure I agree) if not for the real-world stereotypes it reflects. It's disingenuous to say that fiction can be divorced from the real-world issues its reflects and resonates with. Fiction is the creation of writers who exist in the real world, and it's not wrong to call those writers out when they make problematical choices. Criticism is how writers learn to do better.

Sisko was never presented as a character that adhered to 90s stereotypes and his tragedy shouldn't be beholden to them either.

Which is why Avery Brooks convinced DS9's writers that it would be wrong for Sisko not to return!! They agreed with him, and inserted his promise to Kasidy that he would return! This was settled back in 1999, and recent stories suggesting he broke his promise are undoing the choice made by DS9's writers, not honoring it. Claiming otherwise is rewriting history.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

With white supremacists literally running the country? Hell, no.

Not my country but fair point.

Which might be true (I'm not sure I agree) if not for the real-world stereotypes it reflects. It's disingenuous to say that fiction can be divorced from the real-world issues its reflects and resonates with. Fiction is the creation of writers who exist in the real world, and it's not wrong to call those writers out when they make problematical choices. Criticism is how writers learn to do better.

Can we not detach from things that hamper storylines and deny us certain plotlines and characters and force plot armours? Can it not be argued sometimes (not always of course) that fiction should remove the cares of the real world?

Which is why Avery Brooks convinced DS9's writers that it would be wrong for Sisko not to return!! They agreed with him, and inserted his promise to Kasidy that he would return! This was settled back in 1999, and recent stories suggesting he broke his promise are undoing the choice made by DS9's writers, not honoring it. Claiming otherwise is rewriting history.

And while it's very organic for him to make this promise the story is better with it unfulfilled. Making a promise isn't a guarantee it would happen anyway. And as we all know actors forcing storylines doesn't always work out for the best.

 

[Christopher]

Can we not detach from things that hamper storylines and deny us certain plotlines and characters and force plot armours? Can it not be argued sometimes (not always of course) that fiction should remove the cares of the real world?

In some cases, but I'm uncomfortable with the implications when someone says that an issue of racial stereotyping should be ignored.

And while it's very organic for him to make this promise the story is better with it unfulfilled.

I don't agree. I think it's cruel that way. Ben Sisko has always been defined as a family man. I think it serves him better to show that he would move heaven and earth to make sure his family didn't have to be without him.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

In some cases, but I'm uncomfortable with the implications when someone says that an issue of racial stereotyping should be ignored.

I don't disagree but I don't really see this as such a case. Sisko isn't choosing to abandon his family, he sacrificed everything for the sake of the whole universe.

Should worrying about interpretations dictate a story or should we trust the audience to see the intention behind it.

I don't agree. I think it's cruel that way. Ben Sisko has always been defined as a family man. I think it serves him better to show that he would move heaven and earth to make sure his family didn't have to be without him.

We shall have to agree to disagree, I see Sisko as a destined hero and a tragic one at that.

It is ultimately a moot point as neither of us are in charge of the property and we are at the mercy of wherever it is taken.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Which is why Avery Brooks convinced DS9's writers that it would be wrong for Sisko not to return!! They agreed with him, and inserted his promise to Kasidy that he would return! This was settled back in 1999, and recent stories suggesting he broke his promise are undoing the choice made by DS9's writers, not honoring it. Claiming otherwise is rewriting history.

Honestly, I never interpreted Kas seeing Ben and him promising to return as real. I always thought it was a wish on her part, a way of coping with her grief. I have always thought Ben died in the Fire Caves.

I understand Brooks' POV. Truly, I do. And I think Brooks got what he wanted, but Behr also got the ending he wanted.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Honestly, I never interpreted Kas seeing Ben and him promising to return as real. I always thought it was a wish on her part, a way of coping with her grief. I have always thought Ben died in the Fire Caves.

I understand Brooks' POV. Truly, I do. And I think Brooks got what he wanted, but Behr also got the ending he wanted.

Can it not be both? I think it was real but yeah I think it's very likely Sisko's physical body was destroyed in the fire cave and he ascended to a non corporeal form. Same with Dukat but he's in hell.

 

[Christopher]

I don't disagree but I don't really see this as such a case. Sisko isn't choosing to abandon his family, he sacrificed everything for the sake of the whole universe.

Seriously, I have to point this out yet again? This is not a criticism of Sisko' choice. Sisko cannot make a choice, because he doesn't exist. It's a criticism of the writers' choice. It's saying that Avery Brooks talked DS9's writers out of making a racially insensitive choice 26 years ago, and now new writers are making the same mistake their predecessors wisely avoided.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

Seriously, I have to point this out yet again? This is not a criticism of Sisko' choice. Sisko cannot make a choice, because he doesn't exist. It's a criticism of the writers' choice. It's saying that Avery Brooks talked DS9's writers out of making a racially insensitive choice 26 years ago, and now new writers are making the same mistake their predecessors wisely avoided.

Arguing the intention behind the writing is important too.

Another example, the character of Jax in Legends of Tomorrow is a young black man without a father because his dad died while serving in the army. He tries to go back in time to change his dad's fate but his dad believes that his son growing up in a safer world is worth his life.

Nowhere in either of these examples is any kind of racial insensitivity evident, I submit to you interpreting either as insensitive is a misinterpretation based on the most basic of surface level optics with no analysis.

Should we deny ourselves as audiences and the writers these kinds of stories because some people might make snap judgements?

Now I'm not black so of course I have no personal connection to this debate, but if we accuse writers of racial insensitivity for writing black characters as heroes who make the ultimate sacrifice is that not worse? To what end does that go must every black man with a child have plot armour and never be in any real peril? Why bother even writing them at all at that point?

I understand Avery Brooks was very sensitive to this issue but he also grew up in a different time and was worried other people would view Sisko as a stereotype and cheapen his story but we have to trust the majority of audiences have the ability to see a character's tragedy and absorb the full extent of a story in this day and age.

 

[Christopher]

I understand Avery Brooks was very sensitive to this issue but he also grew up in a different time and was worried other people would view Sisko as a stereotype and cheapen his story but we have to trust the majority of audiences have the ability to see a character's tragedy and absorb the full extent of a story in this day and age.

You're being incredibly naive if you think racism is less of a problem in America today than it was a quarter-century ago.

 

[Detached Nacelle]

You're being incredibly naive if you think racism is less of a problem in America today than it was a quarter-century ago.

I did say previously I'm not American. One can't judge the whole world through the lens of just one country.