Do you agree with Trek insider David Gerrold in this excerpt from his 1973 The World of Star Trek? full selection: http://startrekdom.blogspot.com/2007/06/star-trek-20th-century-america-in-space.html Preview: The crew of the Enterprise is in no way meant to be representative of future humanity - not at all. They are representative of the American Sphere of Influence today. Their attitudes, their manner of speaking, their ways of reacting, even their ways of making love, are all contemporary. We have met the Enterprise - and they are us. The crew of the Enterprise is twentieth century America in space. And - although it takes a bit of justification - that's the way it has to be. Remember, this is drama we are talking about, as well as American television. It has to make money.
Gerrold makes an interesting point. Think about this: would people in the 1700's really be interested in watching Friends or Seinfeld ? The values, mores, and social concerns were so different it would be tough for people to relate. Conversely, try picking up some non-classic literature written in that time period. I doubt it would hold most peoples' interest. Star Trek is so engaging because it is us in a futuristic technological setting.
I agree. The same can be said for most SF, whether on TV or lit. It's always about the culture that produced it.
The same is true for TV series set in the past. In movies you can get away with it, but watching an actor week after week in period makeup and costume is a stretch. Why don't we have TV series set in the Renaissance? Because no actor will put on a puffy shirt and powdered wig week after week and the audience, frankly, doesn't want to see that. Remember "Happy Days"? When the show first came on, the kids all wore period clothing and had period haircuts, complete with Brylcreem. As the show dragged on into it's later years, suddenly they looked like 1970's kids in cardigan sweaters. A similar thing happened on "That 70's Show". Watch Kelso's hair change from 1970's to 2000's styling. Even their speech mannerisms changed. Same thing with M*A*S*H. No one (especially in the US Army) had a haircut like Hawkeye's in 1952. Or BJ's cheesy moustache and neck-length hair. And Hot Lips, for all her military gung-ho-ness rarely wore her hair "regulation". Contrast this to the movies "American Grafitti" and "MASH". The actors were in period costumes and hairstyles (except, perhaps, Elliot Gould...but Robert Altman was trying to make people think of Vietnam so it was probably intentional). I guess what I'm getting at is, the audience can suspend its disbelief for two hours, but not for six or seven years. If "Star Trek" had really attempted to make its actors look and act "futuristic" the show would have just been silly.
Maybe this is why more recent Star Trek is so crappy. 20th century Americans do so much better in space than 21st century Americans.
In a way, I still think TOS represents the future of mankind if not by the inital premise alone that we'll one day roam the stars. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Man will always have his faults and prejudices. The trick is to deal with them one day at a time and not let them rule you. The struggle of humanity. Actually, Richard Hooker (author of the novel MASH, which the movie and tv show was based on) supposedly claimed that a lot of the novel is autobiographical. In it, Hawkeye and some of the other guys did have long hair. I don't know if it was because the mobile hospitals on the front lines didn't have barbers or if things were simply too hectic to steadfastly enforce regulation, but I've heard that Hooker said in a promotional interview for the movie that he got away with being a slob on the job. If that rumor is true, he may have been lightheartedly exaggerating to look cool. I'm assuming you know something I don't. I also highly doubt they didn't have GI issued straight razors lying around for facial hair.
Trek: 20th century Americans in Space? Well duh. Like the song says... everyones a superhero, everyones a Captain Kirk... The diversity of the starship enterprise was inspired by the Civil Rights Movement. The idea being in the future all people will work together without bigotry or discrimination. Uhura being the big symbol for all that. One of my fav things about watching Trek is looking at the very diverse background characters. Funny, but the old show had far more diversity than later shows. Especially ENT, which seemed to be crewed by people from the suburbs. Star Trek (TOS) inhabited an allegorical universe, one meant to reflect American culture at the time. I think Gene Coone and Gene Roddenberry really infused a relevance to the shows that spoke to people at the time. Star Trek was never some Azimovian future vision but a mirror of America at the time.
Hey! Enterprise had Travis Mayweather, a black kid at the helm. That was probably inspired more by Galaxy Quest though. And Travis even got to go back to his ghetto once to show his family his fancy new starfleet ways! And don't forget Hoshi, who embodied all current stereotypes about young timid Asian women who are uncomfortable with their own sexuality. And Porthos was a huge step forward for the Animal Rights movement.