"Stigma": A Harbinger of the Death of Trek

[Captain X]

The problem is, that AIDS isn't just a gay issue anymore, it's an everyone issue. If this had aired back in the '80s when the policy was to ignore AIDS because only gay people got it, and the official policy was that gays "deserved" AIDS, then yeah, this would've had more meaning. But it doesn't have that meaning anymore. The kind of people who this old message would be aimed at don't watch the show, and even if they did, they'd probably laugh at it.

No, the modern issue with AIDS is that people need to be careful when it comes to other peoples' fluids, and that applies to sex as well as handling blood, or contamination from waste, stuff like that. In fact, the very promiscuity that turned Trip into the butt of the joke with his "silly" morality is exactly the wrong kind of message to send, because that's how AIDS can spread. It isn't about gays or their lifestyle anymore.

 

[galleywest]

^^ I think that's a good point. Yeah, the more I read this thread the more I say (and I don't use the term often) "meh" to this episode.

 

[Hopeful Romantic]

LadyNRA said:
Since even the worst of Trek was 1,000 better than the average "sitcom"...

Bingo. I'd happily watch "Spock's Brain" or "Threshold" or "Extinction" or whichever episode of any Trek show that regularly shows up on all the "worst" lists, rather than sit through most of what TV or the movies have to offer. I realized umpteen years ago, about the 30th time I was watching some re-run of a TOS show, that there isn't one episode that I don't enjoy to some extent. Not too many other shows over the last few decades I can say that about.

 

[galleywest]

HopefulRomantic said:
Bingo. I'd happily watch "Spock's Brain" or "Threshold" or "Extinction"...

Hey, the lizard babies in Threshold alone are worth the price of admission...

I don't think any episode could be the "death" of Trek for me. TNG was and will always be my favorite--I grew up with it, you know?--and ever since it ended I've known there just won't be anything to take its place in my heart. Stigma was just...there. It's "meh-ness" is far overshadowed by my favorite episodes out of season 3 (my favorite season of ENT). If I have to have one Threshold for every Year of Hell, I'll take it. If I have to have one Shades of Grey for every Parallels, I'll take it. And if I have to have one Stigma for every Similitude, I'll take that too.

 

[Captain X]

I'd say that cumulatively Season 2 was the death of ENT at least.

 

[kalysto]

Season one and two aren't really as bad as everyone makes out. Yeah, there are some real snoozers in there, but every other Trek franchise has had them too, just like any other show, there are hits and misses. (And then there is schlock like ANIS, but that's another tale of dread ! )

Anywho, on the topic of Stigma, I wonder if a reason it was never brought up again, was the fact it was a studio mandated topic, a lot like the TCW, the writers just weren't happy being told what to write.

Honestly, I remember more of the hilarity between Trip and Mrs. Phlox than I do the main story, but I do tend to zone out when up against the scintillating juggernaut that is Archer and T'Pol.

 

[Kegek]

kalysto said:
Season one and two aren't really as bad as everyone makes out. Yeah, there are some real snoozers in there, but every other Trek franchise has had them too, just like any other show, there are hits and misses. (And then there is schlock like ANIS, but that's another tale of dread ! )

No doubt. But there weren't any really impressive hits. Now, nothing in ENT S2 - or all of ENT, for that matter - compares to "Up the Long Ladder" from TNG S2, the racist, stupid, dreadful episode that is in my view the very worst episode of the entire franchise.

But that very same season - and, bizarrely enough, from the very same author - came "The Measure of a Man", in my view still one of the best episodes of the franchise.

Or let's take DS9, which was really coming into its own when S2 hit. It had ended S1 with a double-whammy - "Duet" and "In the Hands of the Prophets" - after meandering about most of the season. In S2 we got "Cardassians", "Necessary Evil" and the brilliant "The Wire".

TOS produced almost all of its best episodes in the first two seasons.

Hell, even Voyager by this point had given us the respectable "Jetrel" and the entertaining "Projections." And when all else failed, Robert Picardo's Doctor was always engaging.

ENT was giving me mediocre episodes, bottom-of-the-barrel episodes, and once in a blue moon episodes that were okay. And it didn't even have anyone I liked as much as the Doctor.

 

[pookha]

season one and two for me of enterprise still had really good stories that took the pain away from the bad.
and as far as an episode killing a series it is remarkable tos survived some of those third season ones like the children shall lead and turn about intruder.

oddly enough if you have good episodes mixed in with bad ones syndication seems to help.

even with tos when it was an episode each afternoon if you got a bad one even in the third season you might have tholian web the next day and it helps enterprise even more
that there will be a decent to good episode each block.

 

[commodore64]

But a good message does not a good episode make, and the writing and acting is simply far too sloppy for my tastes.

I'm not a huge fan of Let That Be Your Last Battlefield, nor did I like Chosen Realm (both preachy to me). I still stand by Stigma is a good episode for multiple reasons the least of which is a "good and timely message."

It's about people caring about people, has continuity from other episodes (something difficult to achieve on Enterprise, especially in season 4) and is interesting.

The Phlox/Trip/Feezal plot and think that was cute and funny. And the fight to keep T'Pol on board reminds me of any number of TOS plots where Kirk tries to help Spock and keep him on board ... probably why I like it so much.

Besides, the contrivances are small, don't involve characters acting outside how they usually act and isn't ramming TOS (though is reminiscent - the best kind) down my throat.

 

[indranee]

Captain X said:
The problem is, that AIDS isn't just a gay issue anymore, it's an everyone issue. If this had aired back in the '80s when the policy was to ignore AIDS because only gay people got it, and the official policy was that gays "deserved" AIDS, then yeah, this would've had more meaning. But it doesn't have that meaning anymore. The kind of people who this old message would be aimed at don't watch the show, and even if they did, they'd probably laugh at it.

No, the modern issue with AIDS is that people need to be careful when it comes to other peoples' fluids, and that applies to sex as well as handling blood, or contamination from waste, stuff like that. In fact, the very promiscuity that turned Trip into the butt of the joke with his "silly" morality is exactly the wrong kind of message to send, because that's how AIDS can spread. It isn't about gays or their lifestyle anymore.

I thought the whole point of Trek (and one of the points of this episode) was that certain issues/lifestyles/problems had been dealt with and are no longer serving the purpose.

i.e., AIDS was no longer an issue (at least on earth and possible Denobula) and so people were free to love and be with whom they chose.

the same goes for what Archer was trying to communicate to the Vulcan scientists regarding T'Pol.

to me, the point of the title "Stigma" was that it needs to be put to bed.

this was what stood out for me in this episode. and yes, I still consider it one of ENT's best episodes.

 

[Captain X]

We don't know what ever become of AIDS in the Trek-verse, the franchise has avoided the topic like a plague (pun intended).

The only point about Stigma is that it had a message 20 years out of date.

Another anoying thing about that episode is that it completely ignores what actually happened in Fusion, which while it was appalling to see T'Pol lose all those IQ points to set her up to get mind-raped by that Tolaris creep, still has T'Pol concenting to the mind meld intitially. That doesn't make it any less of a rape, but it shows how flawed the set-up for Stigma is, as it would make T'Pol a melder.

Season 2 had a lot of stinkers like that. Either they were out and out silly, missed the point, beat us over the head with the wrong message, or destroyed characters. After all, The Seventh made T'Pol an unfit officer because it showed that she had a history of cracking under pressure, and then had her crack under pressure again, and A Night in Sickbay made Archer into an even more immature, unfit commanding officer than he already was by that point. The Seventh also made Trip an incompetant, despite showing us that he was more than capable of being in command prior to that. And there's a lot more than that, too much to even really go into unless you want a 2 page long post.

 

[Anna Yolei]

Captain X said:
I'd say that cumulatively Season 2 was the death of ENT at least.

ENT was killed in utero, coming off the heels of Voyager and dealing with changing network politics, but overall uneven writing from the first two season didn't help anything, either.

 

[indranee]

yes, I do agree about the Fusion bit. (see, we agree again!!).

there's nothing wrong with showing flawed characters. the point that many of you do not get about drama is that it is BUILT on flawed characters. many of you love T'Pol's drug storyline. that was continuity from, as you mentioned, her MAJOR flaw of cracking (no pun intended) under pressure. Trip's main flaw was a certain je ne sais quoi'd arrogance about his own moral center. it landed him in trouble over and over again with various different people and situations. archer's was his inability to leave his (and his father's) past behind. it got him into hot water plenty.

character flaws are what make a story great and enduring. stop thinking about how perfect everybody in a story (be it trek or else) has to be and start concentrating on how mistakes, conflict, and character issues are dealt with to surmount specific situations and create cohesion. that's what makes a story. whether or not ENT did it is beside the point. but it did try. and for that I commend it and hence like it.

 

[Captain X]

I liked the potential too, which is why I'm so driven to make use of it with my Foundations series. My main gripe with ENT is the execution, and how the potential was often wasted. Characters with flaws are more interesting, and they make for more drama, but those flaws can only be taken so far before believibility is lost.

 

[indranee]

hmm! interesting stuff! (Foundations)... skimmed it. will read more tomorrow.

 

[angie]

indranee

I agree about the flawed characters but will take it one step further.Flawed characters dealing with and facing the consequences of their flaw adds dimension to drama.Cogenitor works well because Trip is forced to examine his actions and deal with the fact it affected his friendship with Archer as well as resulted in the death of the cogenitor. Damage or a subsequent ep would have been enriched by T'Pol coming clean with Archer.

 

[commodore64]

Damage or a subsequent ep would have been enriched by T'Pol coming clean with Archer.

Agreed! I hate to be a drama wonk, but otherwise -- WHY DO IT?! Seriously, you put your characters through hell to help them learn from their mistakes and overcome or learn from their flaws. That's kind of basic story telling 101.

I think not having Braga in the mix during season 4 hurt those pieces of continuity. I contend (gosh, maybe it's more hope) that he was going somewhere with that like having T'Pol learn the balance between logic and emotion.

 

[LadyNRA]

Still, no matter how 'bad' you may think the stories are, it's still better writing that is what may be out there on most sitcoms and many drama shows. What carries most of those dramas/police/medical stories are the characters. True some of those shows do a great job (CSI:LAS VEGAS) and present interesting plot ideas a good bit of the time, and some of the medical dramas can be fun to watch, but what makes them wonderful viewing isn't the illness of the week story, it's the people who are ill and the doctors who treat them that make the stories worthwhile for me.

So with Trek, it is not a big deal to me whether the stories are well written, or occasionally a bit lame, it's how the characters deal with the dilemmas that make all the difference. The cast of ENT was talented (though I know some would argue the point), and I got to like all the characters eventually, and to care about what happened to them, to find it interesting to see how they overcame various trials, and so I just sat back and enjoyed each and ever episode for one reason or another.

So in essence I agree with Indranee. Humans are flawed though as Phlox would probaby tell us, it's what also makes us delightful to observe.

Someone also mentioned that in the future stuff like AIDS would probably not be an issue, but I'm not sure about it. Just as people change, so do the illness we carry. The fact that AIDS may be killed off by 2150 doesn't mean that something new doesn't crop up. Even now, bacterium are becoming drug resistant and we are constantly working to preserve the use of the existing drugs we have while struggling to find more. I suspect that bug-fighting is going to be an ongoing issue even in the future. At least for another couple of hundred years. And if you will recall, there were still a decent number of illnesses that couldn't be cured.

Finally, 150 years isn't going to change human nature. I doubt we will have erased racism/prejudices by then because there will always be some individuals, for whatever reason, that doesn't want to accept that we're equals from a racial perspective. But even, for the sake of argument, we were to eradicate such problems, just watching ENT would show that we'd transfer our biases onto 'aliens' and some folks would become xenophobic (is that the right phrase?). And could you really blame them...before you got upset at this statement...think about the trek universe. There are a large number of other species that would love to kill or assimilate us. So fear leading to xenophobia (in some people) is going to be around, probably forever (or until the whole galaxy no longer presents a threat to us...which logically might never happen). So stories like Stigma aren't 20 years too late, I suspect they will always be timely because they illustrate that we can still slip into prejudices (of whatever kind are pertinent to that time period).

 

[Nebusj]

LadyNRA said:
Finally, 150 years isn't going to change human nature.

I was just thinking that earlier, while setting out to beat my slave before the meeting on how to temper French militarism and authoritarianism with the gentle and refined German culture.

 

[Anna Yolei]

Nebusj said:

LadyNRA said:
Finally, 150 years isn't going to change human nature.

I was just thinking that earlier, while setting out to beat my slave before the meeting on how to temper French militarism and authoritarianism with the gentle and refined German culture.

But I think she may have a point. If we're not going to be discriminating of other humans for their gender or race of (I hope) sexuality, humans are gonna be a bit leery of other aliens. Probably not all or even most of them, but a lot.