The moral and ethical paradox of Star Trek storytelling

[Darth_Pazuzu]

One thing that recently struck me about the nature of the usual form of Star Trek storytelling, that of a starship exploring strange new worlds, was that there was a weird sort of moral and ethical paradox inherent in the very nature of the format.

Now, Star Trek is meant to be a morality tale about how people relate to one another, basically a metaphor for what all of us go through down here on Earth. Star Trek holds itself up as being about an optimistic vision of the future, where mankind has learned to resolve its problems with greed, bigotry, hunger and war, etc., etc. And that's wonderful in and of itself.

But while the Prime Directive tends to be held up as the way we should treat other people, not interfering with their way of life, so many of Star Trek's storylines deal with situations in which the Enterprise(s) - or Voyager - and their crews are put in jeopardy and have their backs to the wall. Thus they are forced into a position by which they are forced to fight back - thus interfering - and then the Captain makes some sort of impassioned speech to the leaders about justice or fairness.

In other words, far too often alien cultures are used as a kind of "strawman" antagonist which we can look down upon as being somehow cold or barbaric in some way. Yes, I understand that this is meant to be a metaphor for our own problems as a human race, and the sort of conflicts we have not only between nations, religions and cultures, but among people within the same border. However, the United Federation of Planets and Starfleet largely represent "truth, justice, and the American way," and there are far too many times when Star Trek lets us off the hook far too easily and doesn't really go far enough in calling into question so many of the values and things we take for granted.

This is actually one of the reasons why Deep Space Nine is my favorite Star Trek show, because it's all about building and cultivating relationships with another culture. It's about a situation in which we're the aliens in someone else's backyard and we can't afford to take too much for granted. And needless to say, people writing for the show couldn't rely on the old device of the Enterprise serving as the meddling moral voice.

You might think that's just a lot of PC, multiculturalist BS on my part, but hey! I actually believe in "truth, justice, and the American way"! I just think that we ought to start walking it as good as we talk it.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The Prime Directive is about not interfering in pre-warp civilizations. Most of the time, Star Trek folks avoid primitive societies and interact with advanced civilizations where interfering is okay.

The Prime Directive does not mean Starfleet is obligated to consider, say, the Cardassian way of life as equal to their own. In fact, Starfleet and the Federation definitely look down their noses at societies that run on rules different from their own. And in the stupider sorts of stories, the alien cultures are presented as obviously-wrong strawmen so that Picard, Janeway or Archer can swoop in, give them a lecture and fly away.

To its credit, DS9 didn't do this type of story very often. TNG did it some, and then VOY and ENT went hog-wild with it.

This isn't a moral problem so much as just an example of poor storytelling. A good storyteller doesn't have to stack the deck like that.

This is actually one of the reasons why Deep Space Nine is my favorite Star Trek show, because it's all about building and cultivating relationships with another culture.

It is? Starfleet was quite capable of being antagonistic with Cardies, Rommies and the Dominion. DS9 is good because the alien cultures were presented as complex and complete - functional societies that simply ran on different rules, and should be respected at some level, even if the Federation is of course "superior" because that's the perspective of the storytellers, and there's no reason for Starfleet to bow down to them.

This attitude is okay, as long as you don't cheat by taking strawmen shortcuts. What saved DS9 was the story-arc format. If you stick to episodic format, there's no time to present alien cultures as anything but shallow.

 

[Sector 7]

It's well-known that I do NOT love DS9. However, the one thing I respect is that the writers presented the Bajorans' faith with dignity. They did not mock the religious beliefs of most Bajorans.
It is a shame so many on this board did not learn from that lesson.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Darth Pazuzu, I suggest you take a look at TOS. A lot of the simplistic moralizing you dislike was not present there. Rather, TOS was willing on many occassions to say "this is the situation, it sucks, and we don't know what to do about it."

 

[Danoz]

It's well-known that I do NOT love DS9. However, the one thing I respect is that the writers presented the Bajorans' faith with dignity. They did not mock the religious beliefs of most Bajorans.
It is a shame so many on this board did not learn from that lesson.

Right, but the anthropological roots of the faith are also consistently validated by the existence of mysterious, timeless "aliens" and the inventors of a stable portal through space. I always liked Sisko's understanding that their "religious" perspective was simply viewing the same thing through a different lens-- where StarFleet's analysis often could come off as cold and detached.

Really, there's no difference between "prophets" and "alien species who exist in non-linear time" because they are essentially prophetic aliens-- not to mention prophetic aliens who actively interfered in the Bajoran timeline.

 

[Danoz]

One thing that recently struck me about the nature of the usual form of Star Trek storytelling, that of a starship exploring strange new worlds, was that there was a weird sort of moral and ethical paradox inherent in the very nature of the format.

Now, Star Trek is meant to be a morality tale about how people relate to one another, basically a metaphor for what all of us go through down here on Earth. Star Trek holds itself up as being about an optimistic vision of the future, where mankind has learned to resolve its problems with greed, bigotry, hunger and war, etc., etc. And that's wonderful in and of itself.

But while the Prime Directive tends to be held up as the way we should treat other people, not interfering with their way of life, so many of Star Trek's storylines deal with situations in which the Enterprise(s) - or Voyager - and their crews are put in jeopardy and have their backs to the wall. Thus they are forced into a position by which they are forced to fight back - thus interfering - and then the Captain makes some sort of impassioned speech to the leaders about justice or fairness.

In other words, far too often alien cultures are used as a kind of "strawman" antagonist which we can look down upon as being somehow cold or barbaric in some way. Yes, I understand that this is meant to be a metaphor for our own problems as a human race, and the sort of conflicts we have not only between nations, religions and cultures, but among people within the same border. However, the United Federation of Planets and Starfleet largely represent "truth, justice, and the American way," and there are far too many times when Star Trek lets us off the hook far too easily and doesn't really go far enough in calling into question so many of the values and things we take for granted.

This is actually one of the reasons why Deep Space Nine is my favorite Star Trek show, because it's all about building and cultivating relationships with another culture. It's about a situation in which we're the aliens in someone else's backyard and we can't afford to take too much for granted. And needless to say, people writing for the show couldn't rely on the old device of the Enterprise serving as the meddling moral voice.

You might think that's just a lot of PC, multiculturalist BS on my part, but hey! I actually believe in "truth, justice, and the American way"! I just think that we ought to start walking it as good as we talk it.

I'm more interested in specifics.

I would actually agree, especially with Voyager. The idea that Voyager was such a moral compass, this ship of half-Maquis and half-humans that drops off all internal conflict after season 1...

I have a lot of trouble with Voyager as a series.

The only species that was used for steretypical/humorous purposes in DS9 were the Ferengi-- and even they tried to rectify a lot of this through unionization and women's rights episodes (not the best DS9, but entertaining nevertheless).

 

[Triskelion]

I think the OP reflects the progressing aesthetic needs of a commercial audience. The old stuff just doesn't hold up completely with the refinement of human understanding and expression. Also, new shows raise the bar. There is a self-social critical perspective that more people would like from their contemporary entertainment. The more shows they make, the more we can explore.

As for Prime Directive, I kind of look at it like customer service. You do everything you can to satisfy customers; but when they start being abusive or thieving, they really cease to be customers at that point. The contract doesn't hold. Fed policies of IDIC can only be held to the point where it doesn't threaten the Fed's existence. At which point, all bets are off? I don't know, I've been thinking about this lately--the lengths of morality in civil society. I mean, should it be carried to the point where it's enemies can destroy it, when they themselves do not subscribe to those values?

As for Bajoran religion, in a way I think its depiction trivializes religion as being an incomplete perception of physical phenomena. Saying more about people's cultural needs than metaphysical matters. I mean, this is one possible interpretation.

In one of DS9's DVDs feature interviews, producer Ira Steven Behr discusses how he thought it would be cool to have a Trek icon become a god, as a sort of tribute to how fans elevate the captains. I'm not sure if this is an earnest depiction of spirituality, or a tongue-in-cheek trivialization of religion. But I'll give the old boy the benefit of the doubt, after all I think he did just fine, and if nothing else, gave this fan something to think about.

By the way, shows that are all grit and drama try my patience too.

 

[Darth_Pazuzu]

Darth Pazuzu, I suggest you take a look at TOS. A lot of the simplistic moralizing you dislike was not present there. Rather, TOS was willing on many occassions to say "this is the situation, it sucks, and we don't know what to do about it."

I didn't say that simplistic moralizing was present all the time on the original Star Trek series. A good example of the kind of story you're talking about is A Private Little War. But it was certainly present enough of the time.

Have you read David Gerrold's hilarious parody of Trek cliches entitled Green Priestesses Of The Cosmic Computer, which is featured in a chapter of his non-fiction book The World Of Star Trek? Check it out! And in that particular chapter, Star Trek: The Unfulfilled Potential, Gerrold does a much better job of delving into some of these issues I've been raising (and doing it much more articulately!).

Mind you, I have always been and remain a huge fan of all things Star Trek (and like pizza and sex, even when Trek is bad it's actually kind of good - hence my continued respect for Voyager and Enterprise in the face of all logic! ). I simply felt compelled to make an observation about an aspect of Star Trek storytelling that makes Trek's higher ideals vulnerable in the face of formulaic and cliched writing.

It's not that Star Trek's writers deliberately set out to write a story with strawman villains which exalts our way of life above others. More often than not, it's just an unfortunate side effect of formulaic writing. Actually...those stories which put the Enterprise and the forces of "humanity" against an alien adversary that work the best are those in which we can actually see some darker aspect of ourselves reflected back at us. (For example: The natives of Eminiar VII's desire to make war somehow "cleaner" or more efficient (A Taste Of Armageddon), the Borg's obsession with assimilation and perfection, or the Cardassians' borderline-xenophobic nationalism and preoccupation with security.)

But those kinds of stories and situations require a more reflective and questioning sensibility, and that's something that tends to get eroded and worn away by the sheer grind of working on a television show in which you have to come up with a new problem or dilemma every week and there's not always the creativity or will to make it different or interesting each and every single time.

Everybody around here knows how wonderful Star Trek is as a cultural force and world-wide phenomenon (otherwise would we even be on this site in the first place?). I'm just saying Trek's producers, writers and handlers could learn a thing or two from those occasions on which the formula is overturned and the cliches set aside. (The City On The Edge Of Forever, Amok Time, The Inner Light, The Visitor, In The Pale Moonlight, I could go on and on and on...The best Trek is never the stuff that corresponds to basic formulaic TV outlines.) (One thing that I find rather heartwarming about the upcoming Star Trek movie is that the writers are just as well-versed in written Star Trek fiction as they are in what's on the big and small screens!)

This is actually one of the reasons why Deep Space Nine is my favorite Star Trek show, because it's all about building and cultivating relationships with another culture.

It is? Starfleet was quite capable of being antagonistic with Cardies, Rommies and the Dominion. DS9 is good because the alien cultures were presented as complex and complete - functional societies that simply ran on different rules, and should be respected at some level, even if the Federation is of course "superior" because that's the perspective of the storytellers, and there's no reason for Starfleet to bow down to them.

This attitude is okay, as long as you don't cheat by taking strawmen shortcuts. What saved DS9 was the story-arc format. If you stick to episodic format, there's no time to present alien cultures as anything but shallow.

I completely and fully agree with your statements, Temis! The complexity and depth of the characterizations is actually probably the main reason why I like DS9.

And I'm certainly not suggesting that the Cardassians, Romulans, or Dominion did nothing to warrant the Federation and Starfleet taking an antagonistic stance toward them. What makes the DS9 antagonists in particular such wonderful adversaries is, as you said, the fact that they were presented as complex and complete, as opposed to being strawmen. In fact, the reason why they were afforded such depth of detail was the fact that they were a long-term concern, something which our main characters faced and were confronted with week after week, something that average TV writers can't always consistently do so well on a different planet every episode with your average alien culture of the week! Hence, in my opinion, one of the superior aspects of DS9 over its brethren.

 

[omnirad]

If only the success of DS9's long term creative structure had been applied more fully to VOY and ENT ! But the suits upstairs were afraid of commitment. And look serialization has taken over dramatic story telling.

Though, I do give props to ENT for featuring recurring characters like Forrest, Soval, and Shran. They developed nicely over time. We should have also gotten to know Chef, Cutler, and that helmsman too.

 

[Anwar]

Well, the Paramount suits and UPN guys breathing down the necks of the VOY and ENT staff did have a point: Serialized shows don't make tons of money. Shows like Heroes, Grey's Anatomy and such are the exceptions not the standard. DS9 didn't make a lot of money when it was on TV, which is why they ordered the VOY and ENT crew to not be totally serialized (though this lessened with ENT over time).

 

[stj]

I never bought into Data so I'm not up on TNG. But I sure can't recall too many such stories on Voyager. And not too many on Enterprise, either. Refresh my memory, please?

But for Star Trek, I remember The Enterprise Incident, Omega Glory, and the untimely end for every godlike computer James Kirk encountered. Some of them suck, but some, like A Taste of Armageddon were excellent. So I'm not sure that any of this really applies.