News Starfleet Academy Coming to P+

[fireproof78]

How was Discovery not optimistic?

It was goofily so, at times.

"Something...something...the Burn. Something something Klingon War."

Or something like that

 

[Rahul]

Kurtzman literally says in the interview in the article that I linked that it will be an optimistic show.

"It’s an incredibly optimistic show, an incredibly fun show; it’s a very funny show, and it’s a very emotional show. I think these kids, in different ways, are going to represent what a lot of kids are feeling now.”

DId you actually read the whole thing?

Maybe reread the article?

You really need to read and comprehend articles before getting your jock in a twist about it. Kurtzman says in various ways that SFA is about being hopeful for the future.

I mean, yes, in the same way "Mad Max" or "The Postman" are also absolutely optimistic, as they represent a rise and rebuilt from the ashes and an outlook full of hope and potential for a better future (and are also incredibly "funny and emotional" at times).

That's is still a very different kind of promising future than what Star Trek at it's core is famous for.

For a bunch of guys complaining about reading comprehension you sure do not show a lot of media literacy comprehending what "optimistic" means on the context of what Kurtzman said there.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I mean, yes, in the same way "Mad Max" or "The Postman" are also absolutely optimistic, as they represent a rise and rebuilt from the ashes and an outlook full of hope and potential for a better future.

That's is still a very different kind of promising future than what Star Trek at it's core is famous for.

For a bunch of guys complaining about reading comprehension you sure do not show a lot of media literacy comprehending what "optimistic" means on the context of what Kurtzman said there.

What are you on about? The Federation seen in DISCO 3 to 5 has been pretty much Star Trek as usual. Optimism included. Not seeing the real difference in having the "ashes" being a few years in the past like on DISCO and SFA or a century or two like ENT and TOS.
Tell me, what does "optimism" mean in this "Kurtzman context" you speak of? You seem to be manufacturing a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[cooleddie74]

Meeting Species 10-C, making peace with them and opening an avenue of dialogue with one of the most exotic alien species ever seen in Trek is some pretty optimistic storytelling. DSC did go through some scary, destructive plot beats to get there, but then that's life in any century. For the most part DSC is about rebuilding from the rubble and trying to make the new thing better and less easy to destroy.

And I've been a DSC critic from the beginning!

 

[Nerys Myk]

DSC did go through some scary, destructive plot beats to get there, but then that's life in any century.

True, most stories don't start with rainbows and unicorns and then just do rainbows unicorns all the way through. Even in stories about rainbows and unicorns.

 

[cooleddie74]

The joyous parades and street parties of V-E Day were bought with millions of lives and thousands of destroyed towns and cities. The optimism and happier days of the late 1940s were purchased by the carnage of the early-to-mid '40s. Fiction is no different in narrative structure nor should it be.

 

[The Wormhole]

I mean, yes, in the same way "Mad Max" or "The Postman" are also absolutely optimistic, as they represent a rise and rebuilt from the ashes and an outlook full of hope and potential for a better future (and are also incredibly "funny and emotional" at times).

That's apples and sofas. The Academy series will have nothing in common with Mad Max or The Postman.

That's is still a very different kind of promising future than what Star Trek at it's core is famous for.

For a bunch of guys complaining about reading comprehension you sure do not show a lot of media literacy comprehending what "optimistic" means on the context of what Kurtzman said there.

And at this point I remember you saying over a year ago that you hadn't watched the 32nd century seasons of Disco and from the sounds of it you still haven't since you really don't seem to know what you're talking about at all.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

I mean, yes, in the same way "Mad Max" or "The Postman" are also absolutely optimistic, as they represent a rise and rebuilt from the ashes and an outlook full of hope and potential for a better future (and are also incredibly "funny and emotional" at times).

That's is still a very different kind of promising future than what Star Trek at it's core is famous for.

For a bunch of guys complaining about reading comprehension you sure do not show a lot of media literacy comprehending what "optimistic" means on the context of what Kurtzman said there.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and making a problem out of assumptions on your part.

 

[Rahul]

That's apples and sofas. The Academy series will have nothing in common with Mad Max or The Postman.

And at this point I remember you saying over a year ago that you hadn't watched the 32nd century seasons of Disco and from the sounds of it you still haven't since you really don't seem to know what you're talking about at all.

Damn, nice Stalker move. Somehow missed though that since then I have been pretty active in the "new episodes" threads and even started a "watching DIS years later" thread.

Directly from the source:
https://blog.trekcore.com/2024/05/alex-kurtzman-star-trek-starfleet-academy-32nd-century-setting/

they are coming into a world that is only beginning to recover from a cataclysm — which was the Burn, as established on “Star Trek: Discovery,” where the Federation was greatly diminished.

So they’re the first who’ll inherit, who’ll re-inherit, the task of exploration as a primary goal, because there just wasn’t room for that during the Burn — everybody was playing defense. It’s an incredibly optimistic show,

Tell me how this isn't exactly:

I mean, yes, in the same way "Mad Max" or "The Postman" are also absolutely optimistic, as they represent a rise and rebuilt from the ashes and an outlook full of hope and potential for a better future (and are also incredibly "funny and emotional" at times).

That's is still a very different kind of promising future than what Star Trek at it's core is famous for.

For a bunch of guys complaining about reading comprehension you sure do not show a lot of media literacy comprehending what "optimistic" means on the context of what Kurtzman said there.

This is not "apples and sofas". This is "red apples vs green apples".

Like - seriously - please explain me difference?

 

[Danja]

True, most stories don't start with rainbows and unicorns and then just do rainbows unicorns all the way through. Even in stories about rainbows and unicorns.

My Little Pony had its dark moments (And they're about as rainbows and unicorns as they come! )

 

[F. King Daniel]

New Star Trek must have all characters in paradise, in a state of permanent orgasmic bliss at ALL TIMES, like in that headset game thingie from TNG, otherwise it's bleak, dystopian and ruined Vene's Gision.

 

[The Wormhole]

Like - seriously - please explain me difference?

If you really can't see the difference between Disco seasons 3-5 and something like Mad Max or The Postman, than I don't even know where to begin.

 

[Danja]

Disco has better hair.

 

[1001001]

 

[fireproof78]

That's is still a very different kind of promising future than what Star Trek at it's core is famous for.

In TOS it was just that humanity survived WW3.

 

[Rahul]

If you really can't see the difference between Disco seasons 3-5 and something like Mad Max or The Postman, than I don't even know where to begin.

Well, Kevin Costner & Tom Hardy weren't wearing pyjamas for one.

No but seriously - we were talking about Kurtzman's definition of "optimistic" - and how in his case he means the optimism of a post-apocalyptic setting that is rebuilding itself.

Whereas Star Trek traditionally is the only mainstream IP based on a belief of humankinds progression, into a better society than what we have right now. In direct contrast to the belief that - even if things go apocalyptic - humanity is able to bounce back to a society similar to our current one (Western, present day).

Doesn't help that both beliefs can legitimately be called "optimistic", even though these are quite different concepts, and Kurtzman certainly means the latter, and "old" Trek the former.

It also doesn't help that DIS season 3 is actually the only one that truly felt post apocalyptic, whereas immediately afterwards the worldbuilding went right back to zero (the evil Breen must have conveniently found a similar dilithium crystal planet like the one the Federation has a monopoly on our something
..)

(Purely preventive: This does NOT mean everything has to be sparkling sunshine all the time - TNG went dark at times. Merely an observation about the ideology at the foundation of the franchise)

 

[eschaton]

IMHO the real reason is some combination of:

• They want a largely blank canvas to build whatever races/cultural backgrounds they think will make for an interesting cast of characters.
• They want Starfleet Academy to be this rickety, near-failing thing to allow for it to be more believable that the students (and the instructors) are flawed. This isn't the best and brightest - not yet. A well-oiled machine which has operated for 200+ years uninterrupted just doesn't offer as much (unless you want to focus on the status quo being upset, and we've had way too much of that in DIS and PIC).

 

[fireproof78]

Whereas Star Trek traditionally is the only mainstream IP based on a belief of humankinds progression, into a better society than what we have right now. In direct contrast to the belief that - even if things go apocalyptic - humanity is able to bounce back to a society similar to our current one (Western, present day).

Except Star Trek literally has apocalyptic in its history! TOS has WW3/Eugenics Wars with whole populations being bombed out of existence, per Spock. In "Encounter at Farpoint" if Roddenberry didn't want such a dour outcome for humanity he wouldn't have the post-apocalyptic horror added on the WW3 and this becoming and even worse cavalcade of destruction before humanity is able to reach for the stars.

 

[eschaton]

I have heard the argument that most narratives with a positive plot arc are fundamentally conservative or progressive. This doesn't mean politics, BTW, but the status of the world at the beginning, and then at the end.

• Conservative narratives start with a status quo, and have an antagonist who attempts to disrupt things for the worse. The protagonist acts as the defender of the status quo, and seeks to restore things to where they began by the end of the story.
• Progressive narratives start out with the world as being a bit shit. The hero in this case isn't just trying to defeat the bad guy who threatens to make things worse - they're also trying to make things better.

Progressive narratives work better in Star Trek, given the optimistic theming. But lots of the big Star Trek action-adventures have been conservative in terms of their plot arc, because that's the standard blockbuster format. It's also true that given Starfleet by the 24th century is close to a utopia, trying to come up with scenarios that end up with an even better future is a bit hard. Which is why there's a desire to make things a bit shit at the start (like in Picard's first season, or Discovery's Season 1 or 3).

Given all of this, I do think that the post-Burn setting offers more options for an optimistic arc for the show. Start out flawed and a bit shit, and work towards utopia, rather than trying to conserve what's already been perfected.

 

[Rahul]

I have heard the argument that most narratives with a positive plot arc are fundamentally conservative or progressive. This doesn't mean politics, BTW, but the status of the world at the beginning, and then at the end.

• Conservative narratives start with a status quo, and have an antagonist who attempts to disrupt things for the worse. The protagonist acts as the defender of the status quo, and seeks to restore things to where they began by the end of the story.
• Progressive narratives start out with the world as being a bit shit. The hero in this case isn't just trying to defeat the bad guy who threatens to make things worse - they're also trying to make things better.

Progressive narratives work better in Star Trek, given the optimistic theming. But lots of the big Star Trek action-adventures have been conservative in terms of their plot arc, because that's the standard blockbuster format. It's also true that given Starfleet by the 24th century is close to a utopia, trying to come up with scenarios that end up with an even better future is a bit hard. Which is why there's a desire to make things a bit shit at the start (like in Picard's first season, or Discovery's Season 1 or 3).

Given all of this, I do think that the post-Burn setting offers more options for an optimistic arc for the show. Start out flawed and a bit shit, and work towards utopia, rather than trying to conserve what's already been perfected.

This might possibly be true for stories set in present day, where conservative stories = protect the status quo (and fall victim to the "just world bias") whereas progressive stories often more are about social & societal struggle.

However I don't think this works for stories with a fictional setting.

Point in case: classic Star Wars vs. Trek.
The more conservative one is the one that starts out oppressed & by the end overthrows the evil empire. Whereas the more progressive franchise usually tells little, self contained humanistic stories of people from a better society exploring the universe. Or the more conservative King Arthur (that builds a fair kingdom) vs the more progressive Robin Hood (who really doesn't change the world - only in the "conservative" movie endings were "the good King" suddenly returns and turns everything good again).

It is true that stories about stopping an external, foreign threat have a more conservative core.
But I would argue what makes them conservative - is the foreign threat part. Not the worldbuilding of the "status quo".

Could you please give any example from a supposedly "progressive" speculative fiction story according to your definition (where the world starts out kinda shit but turns better by the end)?
I really am curious, for the moment I can't think of a good example.