The dedicated Disco crying thread

[Saul]

We need a separate, dedicated thread so people can contribute their thoughts on crying and emotionality here and keep it out of other threads that are not specifically about this heavily discussed issue.

Everyone who doesn't care can simply unwatch this thread, everyone else can debate here all day long, and other threads can stay on their topics - simply refer all future crying discussions to this thread instead.

Maybe we should have threads dedicated to each different emotion and opinion. Definitely we need solo threads where only one member can post and all other people's opinions are kept out.

 

[NCC-73515]

Maybe we should have threads dedicated to each different emotion and opinion. Definitely we need solo threads where only one member can post and all other people's opinions are kept out.

read through the unification iii thread and see what I mean.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

If men were crying as often, people would notice it as well and wonder why. Tilly cries too sometimes, but people complain about Burnham. Both are women, but one cries a lot more than the other. If Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Archer, Pike had cried as much, they would get the same comments.

I think this is true only in the sense that the audience's memory of what these series leads is fuzzy at best. Of course, Stewart and Brooks were called upon to bawl several times quite prominently. Conversely, I cannot remember Janeway or Archer shedding any tears (not that I can't be wrong). Overall, I think it is difficult to compare how emotion is portrayed in these three eras of Star Trek. Classic Trek and Berman Trek were products of eras in which both men and women confronted different expectations about how they should behave in a professional environment. Whereas Rand would be expected to cry, revealing her feminine weakness, Janeway must not cry, because it would undermine her professionalism and her authority. I believe that we have come around to an era in which both men and women can be more open and honest about their feelings, both in real life and in media. In the broader sense, I think it is positive that one can reveal feelings without it impugning their professionalism. And this current season, with its story about dislocation and loss, more emotionalism should be de rigueur.

Which comes back to the point that I started with: the people who are complaining seem to have forgotten how emotional the individual characters could be, as well as the varied emotional termperatures of each series. People complained about Picard's emotionalism in the new series, and in some cases, they interpreted it as a loss of masculinity. Moreover, the notion that Picard is stoic betrays the reality that Stewart was often telegraphed the characters emotions through gestures and facial expressions. Yes, people noticed the changes to Picard's character, but they also intepreted the changes in gendered terms. I don't think that noticing Picard's emotions saves those of criticize Burnham's crying from the charge of misogyny (not that there are not legit critiques of the emotions of the stories).

 

[TimeIsAPredator]

Whereas Rand would be expected to cry, revealing her feminine weakness,

I have been rewatching TOS and the amount of this is shocking. Maybe it was just the episodes I watched but women completely compromise the ship for both Khan and at first it seems Mitchell because they were smitten with these strong men and there were other smaller moments I can't remember specifically. The Khan one is completely shocking

Edit: I didn't mean that Rand crying was shocking that was fine I was talking about the "feminine weakness" moments

 

[fireproof78]

If fans have issues with the writing or acting that's understandable. But, if the comment goes 'Burnham cried again" then I'm calling BS.

 

[TimeIsAPredator]

If episode 8 has loads of crying this site is gonna explode

 

[SJGardner]

This thread made me cry.

.......ahem. I still think that if one wanted to criticize something about the crying, they should rather criticize the story itself for thrusting Burnham into a constant stream of situations that make her cry. Other than Nhan's grand exit which fell completely flat for me, I don't remember any instances where her crying would've been inappropriate for the situation. Seriously, with all the stuff she's been through since the Binary Stars, I'd actually find it more concerning if she didn't cry.

I also find it quite frustrating that many keep describing her crying as full-blown "meltdowns", "emotional breakdowns" and other similar terms, when we usually see her weep silently at most, sometimes even shedding only a single tear. It's not like she's bawling loudly with puffy red eyes because someone ate her burrito while she was getting herself a glass of water.

 

[cultcross]

Of course, Stewart and Brooks were called upon to bawl several times quite prominently

Picard cried, or demonstrated an overspill of emotion, sometimes. It added an emphasis to situations where Picard was particularly affected or the stakes were especially high. The power of that was really something. The breakdown at the end of Family simply wouldn't be as extraordinarily powerful if Patrick Stewart had been crying every week, and I don't think it's remotely sexist to say so. Discovery lays the melodrama on so thick that it loses impact - the old adage 'if you emphasise everything you, in effect, emphasise nothing' applies.

 

[fireproof78]

This thread made me cry.

.......ahem. I still think that if one wanted to criticize something about the crying, they should rather criticize the story itself for thrusting Burnham into a constant stream of situations that make her cry. Other than Nhan's grand exit which fell completely flat for me, I don't remember any instances where her crying would've been inappropriate for the situation. Seriously, with all the stuff she's been through since the Binary Stars, I'd actually find it more concerning if she didn't cry.

I also find it quite frustrating that many keep describing her crying as full-blown "meltdowns", "emotional breakdowns" and other similar terms, when we usually see her weep silently at most, sometimes even shedding only a single tear. It's not like she's bawling loudly with puffy red eyes because someone ate her burrito while she was getting herself a glass of water.

This is why I find the complaints rather disingenuous. If it's the writing, or the acting, or frustration with presentation of technology then fine. "Burnham cried again" is probably the strangest one to me.

 

[NCC-73515]

Picard cried, or demonstrated an overspill of emotion, sometimes. It added an emphasis to situations where Picard was particularly affected or the stakes were especially high. The power of that was really something. The breakdown at the end of Family simply wouldn't be as extraordinarily powerful if Patrick Stewart had been crying every week, and I don't think it's remotely sexist to say so.

It's as sexist as it is racist to criticize Sisko for poisoning a planet, or Mirror Georgiou for being snippy and vile, or anti-bald ageist to call Picard arrogant and pompous
Such allegations are just an attempt to silence those who make these points by not addressing the things that they criticize, but baselessly assigning political views on whoever says something critical.

 

[Bad Thoughts]

Picard cried, or demonstrated an overspill of emotion, sometimes. It added an emphasis to situations where Picard was particularly affected or the stakes were especially high. The power of that was really something. The breakdown at the end of Family simply wouldn't be as extraordinarily powerful if Patrick Stewart had been crying every week, and I don't think it's remotely sexist to say so. Discovery lays the melodrama on so thick that it loses impact.

Of course we can discuss the writing choices. However, you, as a moderator, are certainly aware that many criticisms that have been raised in the context of trying to say that Discovery is some sort of SJW project to undermine men, and that has been true at least from the beginning of the season when Burnham expressed her joy that life still exists. The fact is the nuance has only been clawed back when fans, like me, have pointed out the broader range of experiences within Star Trek. There are plenty of good critiques to make about Discovery--I have a few of my own--but all criticism needs to be done with cognizance of the actual misogyny directed at the series.

 

[fireproof78]

The breakdown at the end of Family simply wouldn't be as extraordinarily powerful if Patrick Stewart had been crying every week

I am thinking over this and I'm not 100% convinced of this. Yes, Picard's resolve and breakdown in Family is powerful, but I felt it was also the circumstances in which he did so, in front of his brother who was not presented as an overly sympathetic figure.

So, while you make a fair point, I'm not convinced that if Picard cried every week that someone his crying in front of his brother would not be as powerful.

 

[cultcross]

Of course we can discuss the writing choices. However, you, as a moderator, are certainly aware that many criticisms that have been raised in the context of trying to say that Discovery is some sort of SJW project to undermine men, and that has been true at least from the beginning of the season when Burnham expressed her joy that life still exists. The fact is the nuance has only been clawed back when fans, like me, have pointed out the broader range of experiences within Star Trek. There are plenty of good critiques to make about Discovery--I have a few of my own--but all criticism needs to be done with cognizance of the actual misogyny directed at the series.

Sure, when people are being misogynist about Discovery, then that deserves attention (comments about Tilly's weight, criticism of female characters for acting exactly like male ones do, etc). But I do also find it irritating that perfectly valid criticism is written off as that. Both issues can exist simultaneously.

 

[cultcross]

I am thinking over this and I'm not 100% convinced of this. Yes, Picard's resolve and breakdown in Family is powerful, but I felt it was also the circumstances in which he did so, in front of his brother who was not presented as an overly sympathetic figure.

So, while you make a fair point, I'm not convinced that if Picard cried every week that someone his crying in front of his brother would not be as powerful.

I can't say I agree - the structure of Family relied on Picard's stoicism, stiff upper lip refusal to acknowledge the impact of the Borg encounter on himself, and how powerful it was that it was his brother of all people who could bring the truth out of him. If we knew TNG and Picard for that sort of emotional melodrama every week, it wouldn't work. It's not only this example either. Imagine For the Uniform without the uniqueness of Sisko's reaction to Eddington, or Janeway's unusual show of emotion at contacting Starfleet for the first time if that happened every week.

My point is there's nothing wrong with going for the Big Emotion, but if you do it all the time, it's going to have diminishing returns and become predictable.

 

[Deks]

Good. Give me a crew with emotion. Maybe people will stop telling traumitized individuals to get over it.

Using emotional aspects where appropriate (aka if the situation calls for it) is fine... but overuse can be a bit tiresome.
At any rate, the possibility for trauma (at least when it comes to Starfleet officers) is something to be expected... exploration is dangerous and I'd imagine that people simply had to find a way to deal with it relatively 'efficiently' - not just that but they keep it in mind as a possibility (which people who might be planet or station bound for example don't necessarily do).

I'm definitely not the one to tell traumatized people to 'get over it'... they need to take their time to come to terms with the trauma and work through it... and showing it in case of the crew (such as Stamets dealing with the death of Culber back in season 1, or Detmer and other crewmembers handling their emotional trauma - although realistically, they HAVE spent 3 weeks at SF HQ, and were bound to get 'some' kind of professional help such as councilors to help them deal with everything - albeit seeing that, or at least someone mentioning it would be good).

I've noticed the pace of this season is a bit slower, so episodes tend to 'follow up' on other characters every other week... it's not bad, but I'm afraid that given how short the season is, will they have enough time to cover everyone and everything like that?

 

[fireproof78]

I can't say I agree - the structure of Family relied on Picard's stoicism, stiff upper lip refusal to acknowledge the impact of the Borg encounter on himself, and how powerful it was that it was his brother of all people who could bring the truth out of him. If we knew TNG and Picard for that sort of emotional melodrama every week, it wouldn't work. It's not only this example either. Imagine For the Uniform without the uniqueness of Sisko's reaction to Eddington, or Janeway's unusual show of emotion at contacting Starfleet for the first time if that happened every week.

My point is there's nothing wrong with going for the Big Emotion, but if you do it all the time, it's going to have diminishing returns and become predictable.

Again, you have a point but I'm not 100% sold on this idea.

Nor do I think Burnham tearing up is automatically melodrama, though I may not fully understand that term. I guess, for me, it doesn't stand out as being less impactful because it happens more frequently than in other shows.

Using emotional aspects where appropriate (aka if the situation calls for it) is fine... but overuse can be a bit tiresome.
At any rate, the possibility for trauma (at least when it comes to Starfleet officers) is something to be expected... exploration is dangerous and I'd imagine that people simply had to find a way to deal with it relatively 'efficiently' - not just that but they keep it in mind as a possibility (which people who might be planet or station bound for example don't necessarily do).

I guess I don't find it tiresome. Mileage will vary. Give me tears over stoicism at this point.

As for being Starfleet officers this crew has still experienced some unique events, not just loss of crew but being moved out of time. It's going to mess people up and 3 weeks at SF HQ strikes me as a shorter time. Though, maybe Starfleet just has them pop pills and trauma is cured. I don't know. Wouldn't surprise me if that happens given the poor handling of mental health in the franchise.

 

[cultcross]

Again, you have a point but I'm not 100% sold on this idea.

Nor do I think Burnham tearing up is automatically melodrama, though I may not fully understand that term. I guess, for me, it doesn't stand out as being less impactful because it happens more frequently than in other shows.

I would clarify that I'm not just referring to Burnham crying, but the overall high emotion of the writing. Burnham obviously gets the lion's share as the lead and she has a particularly earnest streak in her dialogue, but it comes out elsewhere too - I'd just like them to dial it down for some episodes. Do some where nobody cries.

 

[fireproof78]

I would clarify that I'm not just referring to Burnham crying, but the overall high emotion of the writing. Burnham obviously gets the lion's share as the lead and she has a particularly earnest streak in her dialogue, but it comes out elsewhere too - I'd just like them to dial it down for some episodes. Do some where nobody cries.

Can we do some where someone just sniffles a bit?

Sorry, I think this is just a place where I am thoroughly enjoying this display of emotion. Obviously, mileage will vary. I don't feel like it is sensationalized for their emotions. I feel like they are just emotional.

 

[Deks]

Again, you have a point but I'm not 100% sold on this idea.

Nor do I think Burnham tearing up is automatically melodrama, though I may not fully understand that term. I guess, for me, it doesn't stand out as being less impactful because it happens more frequently than in other shows.

I think that may have been his point.
The more its done, the more you expect it to happen in future episodes which can lead to the 'big emotion' losing its 'effect'.
You may not see it as it being 'less impactful', but you did mention that this happens more frequently than in other shows and as such, you are expecting this to occur, and you have acknowledged this as part of the writing for this season - so that could be described as a diminishing return as well.

Do I think its melodrama every time Burnham tears up? Not necessarily, but I do think the writers may have gone a bit over the top on the emotions this season in regards to everyone (at least from what was shown thus far).

 

[fireproof78]

You may not see it as it being 'less impactful', but you did mention that this happens more frequently than in other shows and as such, you are expecting this to occur, and you have acknowledged this as part of the writing for this season - so that could be described as a diminishing return as well.

Actually, I'm expecting it to occur because the characters feel more human. That's more my expectation. Cry or don't but they at least feel more consistently as real people to me.