Trek's shortcomings

[Penta]

Nothing's perfect, not even Trek.

A lot of Trek's issues can be chalked up to being long in the tooth, having gone through dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of different directors/writers over 44-ish years, through 5 different TV series plus all the movies.

Some, though, can't be explained away so easily. Some are just plain shortcomings, things that tend to stick in the craw, so to speak.

What do you see as Trek's shortcomings, regardless of series?
---

My list, in no particular order:

1. Trek and religion: Oh my. GR's anti-religious stance is uncomfortable to watch when it appears in TOS and (more prominently) TNG, and the way it's gotten dragged through most of Trek has not been fun. For a universe that preaches (more on that later) IDIC, the lack of, well, tolerance shown to religion, particularly human religion, is a deep turn-off. Not saying Trek ships need chaplains, but...Not being implicitly or explicitly insulted for being religious would be a nice start. ("Who watches the watchers", I'm looking at you, and I'm not smiling.)

2. The importance of continuity was really something recognized by sci-fi even back in the 1950s. If you're going to do sci-fi in a series format, even if it's a Monster of the Week/Alien of the Week/Planet of the Week format, you absolutely need to create a continuity and stick to it, at least within a series. This may be looking on the 1960s with 2010 eyes, but if one were doing Trek all over again, it wouldn't be too much to ask to take a secretarial type, post them to keep track of episodes, and compile a running continuity bible. Don't get tripped up by canon, but at least pay heed to obvious contradictions between episodes.

3. Decide the parameters and stick to em: Is Starfleet the military? Is it not? (A middle ground is probably a bad idea. The average TV viewer is savvy enough to recognize it makes no sense, usually.) That's a good example. If there's a foundational tech in the setting, decide in the first few appearances what it can and cannot do, for the writer's bible - then stick to it. (Major offenders here, in Trek as we know it? The replicator. The transporter.) The same principle for politics, or structural social things.

4. The tech overwhelms the stories: Simply put, sometimes it's better not to introduce tech if it makes stories into wallbangers. The replicator is one of those pieces of tech I honestly think, upon reflection, I wouldn't have created. It sounds like a great idea, but it takes a lot of the drama out of all sorts of stories.

 

[The Wormhole]

Aliens. A lot of Star Trek's aliens are just humans with a funny forehead.

 

[thew40]

I echo the religious views. It's quite blunt at times and becomes waaay too preachy about it, ironically. I'd also call out the 60s sexism. For a show that's touted as being progressive, it certainly doesn't see a bright future for females.

I'd also like to point out the lack of dramatic weight in the original series. I just watched "The Ultimate Computer" and even though an entire crew has been killed, Kirk and McCoy crack a few jokes at the end. The same with "The Changeling." An entire planet wiped out and there's almost no reaction. The scale of these tragedies are almost too much for the episode to bare.

I'd also like to point out the lack clarity on some issues. The lack of a real Starfleet economy and a proper explanation as how exactly we went from where we are now to what we become on "Enterprise." What is the actual relationship the Federation has with an alien world? Etc, etc.

Also, and I know it was budgetary, but why so many humans on board these starships? We needed more aliens!

 

[Xerxes1979]

Religion is a sham, Trek shouldn't apologize for that. I have have come to the sad conclusion that belief in the supernatural is most likely hardwired into the human brain and no amount of education will alter the structure of those so born.

Sagan elogantly explored these issues over 30 years ago and Amerika is still dumber than ever.

Can't secular humanism exist apart from all the other crap on the air?

 

[scotpens]

Aliens. A lot of Star Trek's aliens are just humans with a funny forehead.

Well, they do have to be played by human actors, you know! There's only so much you can do with costumes, makeup, and prosthetics. When Trek TOS was on the air, animatronics was in its infancy and CGI was years in the future. Creating truly “alien” beings would have required the use of puppetry, stop-motion, and other effects beyond the budget and time constraints of a weekly TV series.

So we got blue people with antennae, pig-faced people, lizard people, and lots of weird skin conditions.

. . . I'd also call out the 60s sexism. For a show that's touted as being progressive, it certainly doesn't see a bright future for females.

Remember that Gene Roddenberry wanted the Enterprise to have a woman First Officer. It wasn't just the network executives who nixed that idea -- preview audiences, including female viewers, didn't like the character either. Trek TOS may have been set in the 23rd century, but it couldn't push too far beyond 1960s sensibilities or it would never have gotten on the air.

That being said, the show did manage to depict a future with all races and nationalities working together, and a starship crew that was 33 percent female -- a radical idea at the time, even if they did wear those silly minidresses.

 

[scotpens]

. . . The importance of continuity was really something recognized by sci-fi even back in the 1950s. If you're going to do sci-fi in a series format, even if it's a Monster of the Week/Alien of the Week/Planet of the Week format, you absolutely need to create a continuity and stick to it, at least within a series. . . . Don't get tripped up by canon, but at least pay heed to obvious contradictions between episodes.

The lack of continuity was and is a major problem with Star Trek. Much of the backstory and background info developed piecemeal, episode by episode. It's the sort of thing that's bound to happen when you're creating not just a few characters or a fictional corporation or a fictional government agency, but a whole fictional universe.

But if Trek had a solid, logical continuity, what would us geeks have to nitpick?

 

[Unicron]

Nothing's perfect, not even Trek.

A lot of Trek's issues can be chalked up to being long in the tooth, having gone through dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of different directors/writers over 44-ish years, through 5 different TV series plus all the movies.

Some, though, can't be explained away so easily. Some are just plain shortcomings, things that tend to stick in the craw, so to speak.

What do you see as Trek's shortcomings, regardless of series?
---

My list, in no particular order:

1. Trek and religion: Oh my. GR's anti-religious stance is uncomfortable to watch when it appears in TOS and (more prominently) TNG, and the way it's gotten dragged through most of Trek has not been fun. For a universe that preaches (more on that later) IDIC, the lack of, well, tolerance shown to religion, particularly human religion, is a deep turn-off. Not saying Trek ships need chaplains, but...Not being implicitly or explicitly insulted for being religious would be a nice start. ("Who watches the watchers", I'm looking at you, and I'm not smiling.)

You know, a lot of people point out "Who Watches The Watchers?" when they criticize Trek's approach to religion (TNG's in particular, which was certainly preachy at times), but the last time I rewatched it, I didn't see Picard badmouthing religion as a societal concept. What he does criticize in the ep is the suggestion that because the Prime Directive was unintentionally violated by the failure of the "duck blind," and because the most likely result is the alteration of the Mintakan religion into one that somewhat deifies the Feds (and Picard to an extent), he should just accept that because the damage has already occurred. That is exactly what the chief scientist suggests to Picard, and he rejects it. I agree with him, because it's not the same thing as criticizing the Mintakans for being religious. Picard doesn't want them to see him or the Federation as something that isn't real.

I'd also like to point out the lack of dramatic weight in the original series. I just watched "The Ultimate Computer" and even though an entire crew has been killed, Kirk and McCoy crack a few jokes at the end. The same with "The Changeling." An entire planet wiped out and there's almost no reaction. The scale of these tragedies are almost too much for the episode to bare.

True, but then this is the same ship that seems to lose redshirts at such an alarming rate, and Kirk doesn't seem to mind.

 

[Admiral Shran]

1.) The almost complete lack of focus on the society of the Federation. I think this mostly comes from the fact that Trek is "supposed" to be about a space-aged Age of Exploration. I'll grant that it's hard to show things like life on Earth or Vulcan if the show, by necessity, isn't set on Earth or Vulcan. However, I always thought the best episodes were ones where the "exploring unknown space" theme wasn't central ("Journey to Babel" "Amok Time"). We needed less "seeking out new civilizations" and more universe-building.

2.) The almost complete lack of focus on the government of the Federation. I'm not saying the franchise should have been turned into "Star Trek meets The West Wing," but it would have been nice to see the inner workings of the government our heros work for. A few more appearances by a Federation President would have been nice. Maybe some appearances by Federation Council Members. A perfect example of this shortcoming are the DS9 episodes "Homefront" and "Paradise Lost." Here we had a threat to Earth from Changling infiltrators and a possible coup against the UFP government by Starfleet officers. We should have seen multiple political players in this story (the UFP President, the Federation Council, and various sub-national players like Earth's Prime Minister).

 

[RyuRoots]

Religion is a sham, Trek shouldn't apologize for that. I have have come to the sad conclusion that belief in the supernatural is most likely hardwired into the human brain and no amount of education will alter the structure of those so born.

Sagan elogantly explored these issues over 30 years ago and Amerika is still dumber than ever.

Can't secular humanism exist apart from all the other crap on the air?

I'm all with you.

Personally, it has always bothered me how we practically see nothing of Earth beyond "Federation HQ is there." It'd be nice if we had an episode where the life of a typical 24th-century citizen is explored.

 

[RegFan]

1) The occasional "science is bad" stories (hostile computers, genetic engineering etc). Why is it bad? True, there are risks involved in using technology, but generally it's a good thing in real life.
2) Why are humans and Earth so important? Trek is made for humans, so humans have to be important in stories, but couldn't the Starfleet Headquarters be on Vulcan or something similar that would make humans seem less important? There should also be a canonical explanation for the fact that nearly all Starfleet personnel are humans (I do have a theory about that but a canonical explanation would be even better).
3) I have nothing against the atheistic view of the future, since I'm an atheist myself, but it's not a good thing that especially TNG is actually anti-religious.

 

[Marten]

I'd also like to point out the lack of dramatic weight in the original series. I just watched "The Ultimate Computer" and even though an entire crew has been killed, Kirk and McCoy crack a few jokes at the end. The same with "The Changeling." An entire planet wiped out and there's almost no reaction. The scale of these tragedies are almost too much for the episode to bare.

I found their lack of respect for human lives disturbing. And it's just not entire crews or populations, they didn't even blink when their fellow crewmen died which happened quite frequently.

 

[neozeks]

I think Trek's anti-religious stance is a bit exaggerated. I don't know exactly about TOS (I know there's a number of 'false god' episodes), but in TNG I can remember a grand total of three episodes that could be interpreted that way - the aforementioned 'Who Watches the Watchers?' and 'Justice' and 'Devil's Due'. And only 'Who Watches...' is openly anti-religious. So, that's three episodes out of what, almost 200? And the later series, DS9, VOY, ENT were much more respectful towards religion. Unless you count the fact that most characters aren't religious as 'anti-religion'. I rather think that's understandable, given the high level of technological and scientific advancement. It simply the culmination of a long-existing trend.

As for shortcomings - I'd agree with some of the aforementioned, like way too much technobabble and a lack of continuity. I'd also add: music. Most of the time it was servicable and the stories were good enough on their own that it didn't matter, but better music and a bit more freedom of expression could have made those good stories even better.

 

[Penta]

I will agree, neozeks: It got much better after Roddenberry died. Still, the enforced absence of religion among humans (but not among aliens!) during TOS and TNG...Hard to explain, but even though I myself am not religious at all (I am at best a very-lapsed Catholic, either that or a weak agnostic), it doesn't feel right. (In part because that trend you speak of is so hotly disputed, and contradicted in some very telling ways (explain America?...Actually, don't, let's not get too off-topic...)....that it doesn't wash to me that religion would be dead among humans by the time of Trek. It may not be in the majority, but even at my most secular, something tells that the (aprocryphal?) Cicero quote of "Nature has imprinted upon all mankind the idea of God" has a grain of truth to it. It'd be a significant minority at the very least.)

I'd also submit that, especially in later series (TNG and VOY were equally-horrible offenders here), it's more than just technobabble that causes trouble, it's that there was, weird enough as it sounds for a sci-fi series, too much technology, period.

Which is why I bring up the replicator so damn often - it's the perfect example of too much tech. Practically every problem which makes space travel interesting can be and usually is solved by the replicator. The replicator breaking is overdone by now.

(Similarly, even if you're an atheist...The metaphysical complications of the transporter have never been explored. There are some deep "Is the transported you really you" sort of questions that practically demand an answer.)

 

[neozeks]

I will agree, neozeks: It got much better after Roddenberry died. Still, the enforced absence of religion among humans (but not among aliens!) during TOS and TNG...Hard to explain, but even though I myself am not religious at all (I am at best a very-lapsed Catholic, either that or a weak agnostic), it doesn't feel right. (In part because that trend you speak of is so hotly disputed, and contradicted in some very telling ways (explain America?...Actually, don't, let's not get too off-topic...)....that it doesn't wash to me that religion would be dead among humans by the time of Trek. It may not be in the majority, but even at my most secular, something tells that the (aprocryphal?) Cicero quote of "Nature has imprinted upon all mankind the idea of God" has a grain of truth to it. It'd be a significant minority at the very least.)

You can't really compare today's and Trek's Earth. In Trek's future, I assume, people are much more educated (not to say that religious people are uneducated, just that I'm pretty sure it's been proven that there is a corelation between the two). Most of society's problems have been solved (people are often most religious when living in difficult times). People in general are less hipocritical and status-oriented (cause, let's face it, how many religious people are truly religious and not just 'formally' religious?). But even then, I don't think humans of the future have completely lost their spirituality. Remember, even Picard said in 'Where Silence Has Lease' - and that's a S2 episode:

Considering the marvelous complexity of our universe, its clockwork perfection, its balances of this against that... matter, energy, gravitation, time, dimension, pattern, I believe our existence must mean more than a meaningless illusion. I prefer to believe that my and your existence goes beyond Euclidian and other "practical" measuring systems... and that, in ways we cannot yet fathom, our existence is part of a reality beyond what we understand now as reality.

That sounds very much like something a religious person would say. Future people still think about these things, then. It seems to me they've just mostly abandoned organized, dogmatic religion.

 

[C.E. Evans]

IMO, Trek stumbles when it tries to be too serious and preachy. The less is more approach or a light approach is sometimes far more effective than a heavy-handed one...

 

[maneth]

Indeed it is.

I've never seen Trek as an anti-religion show (certainly in one Trek ep Kirk seemed to imply that the pre-electricity inhabitants of the planet were waiting for their messiah, can't remember the name of the ep though), but that may only be because I'm a non-believer myself. In any case, we can't assume that religion has completely disappeared just because we don't often see any people (apart from Bajorans and Klingons) practicing religion. Just because they don't show anyone celebrating Christmas or Eid-al-Fitr doesn't mean that there aren't any Christians or Muslims in Starfleet. It's like saying that people in the future don't go to the bathroom because they're never shown doing so.

That said, I certainly hope that religious fervor will become a thing of the past, replaced by some kind of secular humanism.

 

[Penta]

IMO, Trek stumbles when it tries to be too serious and preachy. The less is more approach or a light approach is sometimes far more effective than a heavy-handed one...

Ding ding ding. Total agreement.

TOS came about at just the right time in history to be socially-aware and socially-activist and actually not sound stupid. You could get away with preaching, it was the tenor of the times.

For every series since then, the social activism and morals approach has felt...Well, like it was done because it was felt that a Star Trek series had to be "socially relevant" and such to count as Trek.

Actually, no. I think it's not the worst thing in the world to evoke similarities...Then let the similarity sit, and don't say anything more. Don't preach. It's a TV show, it's entertainment, it's not supposed to be socially anything. When it can, it's a bonus, not something you'll ever hit by aiming at it. When you can make a point, do it *gently*. (A brief hint: If the average viewer can accurately peg your sensibilities as liberal or conservative, you're doing it badly. There are any number of TV shows that prove that.)

Much more effective that way.

Neozeks: You make it sound like organized religion is totally evil or something. I beg to disagree, to say the least. For risk of turning this into something unrelated - Religion is a huge part of heritage for most people, especially on a collective level; I'm not sure it could be done away with, whether in 200 or 300 or 500 or a thousand years. (I'm not sure that the society that would result if it was somehow managed would be the better for managing it, either.) I'm not sure most sci-fi is the place to consider the issue, but I do think that when it naturally comes up, even among humans...Let it. Having a chaplain as a regular cast member may be a bit much (at least so long as there are under a thousand crew - after that, one can make the argument that one would, from an in-character POV, be a good idea to ensure free exercise rights?), but a chapel? All that takes is a mention, a throwaway line of dialogue.

Maneth: This is one of those things where I will submit that if you already agree with Roddenberry, you're less likely to see if he's picking on people with other views. Whereas if you don't agree with him (say by not being a secular humanist), there are times the "Outgrown These Silly Superstitions" vibe of TOS and TNG when it comes to religion can be...insulting as hell. It is, after all, pretty much calling religious believers idiots or gullible.
---

I will personally admit a bias here: My interaction with Trek these days largely comes from RPGs. There, any room to build on and really explore things is a godsend, because it opens up new things to play with. Hence why I squirm at utopias, doing away with religion among humans, or the like. They're often boring worlds to live in, and worse to write stories in. In my humble opinion, the smart creator would recognize that fans write fanfic, and do RPGs, and so forth...And give us room to work in. We can keep your creations alive long after you pass, if you give us half a chance.

 

[neozeks]

Neozeks: You make it sound like organized religion is totally evil or something. I beg to disagree, to say the least. For risk of turning this into something unrelated - Religion is a huge part of heritage for most people, especially on a collective level; I'm not sure it could be done away with, whether in 200 or 300 or 500 or a thousand years.

Where do you get I think it's totaly evil? Yes, I do think much of organized religion is unneccessary and authoritarian (and that it has done more bad than good) but there's obviously more to religion than rituals, priests and churches (sorry if I'm going OT).

Having a chaplain as a regular cast member may be a bit much (at least so long as there are under a thousand crew - after that, one can make the argument that one would, from an in-character POV, be a good idea to ensure free exercise rights?), but a chapel? All that takes is a mention, a throwaway line of dialogue.

There was a chapel on the Enterprise in one of the TOS episodes, wasn't there?
Kasidy Yates said to Sisko she would like to have a priest perform the wedding ceremony.
Data mentioned a Hindu Festival of Lights in "Data's day".
Phlox attented a mass at St. Peter's square.
And let's not forget what Picard's perfect life was like in the Nexus - a traditional Christmas.

 

[scotpens]

. . . The occasional “science is bad” stories (hostile computers, genetic engineering etc). Why is it bad? True, there are risks involved in using technology, but generally it's a good thing in real life.

Yes, it's funny how many times Kirk destroyed a super-computer, or talked a machine into destroying itself! At least with regard to TOS, that's probably an artifact of the times. In the 1950s and ’60s, a common theme in popular culture was the alleged “dehumanization” of society brought on by automation. Is anyone here old enough to remember “I am a human being -- do not fold, spindle, or mutilate”?

. . . I'd also add: music. Most of the time it was servicable and the stories were good enough on their own that it didn't matter, but better music and a bit more freedom of expression could have made those good stories even better.

I assume you're speaking of TNG and the shows that came after? TOS had some of the best incidental music ever written for a TV series. In fact, in the third season, sometimes the music was better than either the scripts or the acting.

TOS came about at just the right time in history to be socially-aware and socially-activist and actually not sound stupid. You could get away with preaching, it was the tenor of the times. . . When you can make a point, do it *gently*.

Hear, hear! Some of Trek TOS's best episodes conveyed the show's basic message of tolerance, understanding and empathy for others without being preachy. Some of its worst eps took the sledgehammer approach. For example, compare “The Devil in the Dark” and “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield.” Basically the same moral, BUT . . . ’Nuff said?

I've never seen Trek as an anti-religion show (certainly in one Trek ep Kirk seemed to imply that the pre-electricity inhabitants of the planet were waiting for their messiah, can't remember the name of the ep though) . . .

Are you thinking of “Bread and Circuses,” with the “sun” worshippers who turn out to be worshippers of the “son” of God, i.e. early Christians? But that ep had a society paralleling the Roman Empire, albeit with mid-20th-century technology.

Just because they don't show anyone celebrating Christmas or Eid-al-Fitr doesn't mean that there aren't any Christians or Muslims in Starfleet. It's like saying that people in the future don't go to the bathroom because they're never shown doing so.

People in the future go to the bathroom? Next thing, you'll be saying they have sex!

There was a chapel on the Enterprise in one of the TOS episodes, wasn't there?

Yes, in “Balance of Terror.” The episode opened with Kirk officiating at a wedding between two crew members.

 

[Penta]

The religion thing was probably a mistake of mine to include: It really is a beef I have - the whole "Outgrown these Silly Superstitions" mindset is one I find grating at best to find in something like Trek, just plain insulting at worst, and I'm not that much of a believer, which means I can only wince in sympathy at how more devout folks might well find that mindset - but it really is a TOS/TNG artifact, and one I think would not (or at least I hope would not) be repeated. I can agree with those who might say it could more profitably be dealt with by repudiating GR and establishing that humans still follow, to what extent we can leave unclear, religion...And then leaving the details for fan speculation. Sci-fi tends to have a nasty habit of trampling on important doctrine when they feature RL religions, and so I am going to be honest and say that I think establishing the principle clearly - that whatever one might think of religion, humans are unlikely to "outgrow" religion, to say nothing of spirituality - is best...Then letting religion not be something touched much, at all.

More to the point, I think my including it overshadowed everything else - which I find much more relevant. (That said, Neozeks, you do win points for reminding me of one of the most ironic scenes in all of Trek - Picard's vision of an ideal existence being a strikingly-traditional Christmas. Had the scene included a creche or something (thereby establishing Christmas as more than an excuse for presents), I would concede the point.)

Music is a funny thing to bring up: I personally have always felt music in sci-fi to either be done really well or done really badly, with little of a middle ground. The signature tune of "The Inner Light" is one of the best bits of music in TV, I feel...But beyond that, little sci-fi music is memorable. There's no disputing taste, I agree with the Romans, and this is definitely a taste issue.
---

Anyhow, to add some of my own:

The uniforms: Okay, most Trek uniforms, I have never shied away from saying, suck horribly. I could never see anyone wearing the TNG uniforms, for example, and would think them deeply impractical for actual duty usage. About the only ones I liked as duty uniforms were the ENT ones. (I will say that the TOS movies had probably the best dress uniforms, followed closely by the dress whites of the later TNG films.) With nametags. Nametags may be difficult to see on TV, but with the improved clarity of modern TV, that isn't so much an argument anymore.

This could extend to most Trek costuming, to be quite honest - I've never liked it, especially the clothes worn by humans. They just seem so...not like anything humans would ever wear, even in the future.

Oh, and another one:

This loops back to my "decide the parameters" point, but I always shook my head at Trek's depictions of internal UFP politics, or how Starfleet seems to have a role in *everything*. Basically, maybe I'm just savvier than the average TV viewer on these things, but it always struck me as having a tin ear. I don't expect (nor do I think I'd want) a "West Wing in Space", but, man. There must be any number of political science types who're Trek fans who'd give...a lot to be able to make things make sense.

Extend the principle out to any number of important world-building points, not just politics, and it still holds true. Belisario's Maxim has its place, yes, but Trek always tried to present a society people could imagine happening. It'd be nice if the facts provided could, hung together, stand up to Fridge Logic. When they do that, I can maybe imagine such a society happening.