I have been busy with other matters, but finally have some time to sit down and respond to a few issues which arouse here.
Earlier on this thread I posted my review of the episode “The Royale” in its entirety, as it was originally posted as part of my TNG review thread currently running on other websites. I was a bit surprised at some of the responses I received, responses which led me to say this in post number 45:
“I have learned much about this website from this little thread. Thanks, all.”
And I stand by that comment, one-hundred percent. Here is why.
Theodore Sturgeon is rightfully cited with crafting what is now commonly referred to as “Sturgeon’s Law”, which simply states that “90 percent of Science Fiction is crap.” But then he went on to clarify that since SF conforms to the “same trends of quality” as all other forms of entertainment, ninety percent of everything is crap. And he is/was correct.
I am a Star Trek fan, and have been for most of my life. But I recognize that whatever else Star Trek is, it was first and foremost a television show. Television shows are chosen to be aired in order to provide a productive platform from which to market products to people who have money to buy them. That they are entertaining or enlightening is largely a function of achieving that goal, so that the show can remain on television.
90 percent of what is being and has been aired on television for many years now is and has been crap. That Star Trek was always in the other 10 percent is a credit to the vision of Gene Roddenberry and those who helped put the show on the air. Viewed in that context, Star Trek is and always has been a shining star rising above the muck which is the history of episodic television. I acknowledge that, and it is one of the reasons I have always been a Star Trek fan.
But my reviews are not written in that context. My reviews are written in the limited context of Star Trek the Original Series and Star Trek the Next Generation. Within that context, Sturgeon’s Law still applies. I do believe that within the context of Star Trek, as the episodes were written and aired, as an episodic television show it rose above even Sturgeon’s Law, in that the percentage of the episodes which were crap was far below 90 percent. But some of them were still crap and richly deserving of being vilified.
Note that the title of my thread is “the Best and Worst of”, and when starting the effort I knew few people would read it if it was simply a worshipful “fan-boy” treatment of all things Trek and TNG. Therefore, especially in reviewing my choices for the “worst of”, I first and foremost wanted to be entertaining, regardless of whether anyone would agree with my choices. That I used sarcasm, parody, and ridicule it discussing the “worst of” is a reflection of the fact I wanted my reviews to rise above the level of simply stating “this episode sucked”.
To gain a more accurate understanding of or appreciation of my overall treatment of TNG, one would have to read the thread and identify the theme. I did not link to my thread here simply because I don’t take it that seriously. Anyone who really wants to read it can find it with a simple Google search. However, one response posted here I do want to address.
Posted by Sho:
“And in the spirit of that: If you want to be successful at publishing your own words, you have to learn to be gracious in the face of criticism.”
I don’t see that I was ingracious. I targeted no one specifically, although admittedly those who responded here in general. But when I said “thanks all” I really meant it. What I learned about this website in reading the responses was that some portion of the membership, exemplified by those who actually post, are not simply Trek fans, but zealous and protective ones.
Star Trek as a television show is deserving of criticism just as anything else, but there is little of that here (at least that I have seen). As I write this there is a current thread going here on the episode “Justice”. “Justice” was my number one selection for the Worst of Season One, and with good reason. “Justice” has often been cited as one of the worst TNG episodes ever, and with good reason. The fact that some fans of TNG liked it is fine, I don’t fault anyone for liking any particular episode of TNG. But the fact that some TNG fans liked it does not change the fact it is was a bad episode. The same is true for “The Royale”. One member here referred to “The Royale” as a “guilty pleasure”. The term “guilty pleasure” is an admission that yes, the episode was bad, but I liked it anyway. Again, that is fine. But “The Royale” was my number one selection for the Worst of Season Two, and regardless of what one member here stated, I made my case for why I thought so.
But seriously and with all due respect to the members here, if you liked either “The Royale” or “Justice”, that is great. I do not think you are stupid or misguided or any of that. I simply disagree. And in writing about those episodes of TNG or TOS which were bad episodes, I do so in a manner meant to be both informative as to why I thought so and to be entertaining to those who would read the review. To do otherwise would be a waste of time.
Posted by Sho:
“Take it with stride, and either tell yourself you cannot please everyone”
Which was never my intention.
“or see what you can pull in to reach your audience better next time”
When I write a review which includes comedic elements, I do not think about “who” will get this joke, but rather that “someone” will get this joke. Consequently, or, by default I guess you could say, the jokes are not meant for everyone. I don’t see that changing my style in the hopes of appealing to a few more readers would serve a productive purpose, especially when you consider the original website my thread was started on. And, as has been said, humor is a difficult concept, it is not logical.
“Instead, a passive-aggressive jab at your audience is pretty immature and amateurish.”
I have already addressed this, but again, what you took as “passive-aggressive” was actually sincere. The responses here told me who the audience was, overall, and for that I was grateful.
“If you take your writing that seriously, and by all means do, act like a pro.”
In post number 34 Mike S said this, quote:
“Entertaining review, even if I do disagree.”
And that is all I go for. I do take my writing seriously, but then I take writing seriously. That someone got paid good money for writing a few particular episodes of Star Trek I do find amazing, but no more so than the notion that people get paid good money for writing the 90 percent crap which is network television.
(Applauding hands smile here).
