Spoilers What do you think of the social commentary in Discovery so far?

[Jayson1]

The commentary is not only good, but needed.

Well I agree with the second part. Social commentary is a key part of what Trek is about though I always liked the term of exploring the human condition much better. That to me means your not just exploring society but also the everyday nature of human beings. Plus you don't just talk about current events but stuff that has happened throughout our history as well. You could do a whole season about the Black Plague for example even though that isn't really a modern issue.

Jason

 

[Mudd]

There is none to speak of beyond the kind of glib declarations to be found in comic books aimed at 8 year-olds...circa 1964.

The result being that the most thoughtful and socially conscious Trek production of the past decade has been a big budget shoot-em-up released in 2013 that's dismissed as brainless by a lot of trufans.

 

[ISS-Magnum]

And, next year, they plan to examine the role of science and faith in our society.

“We are very interested in tackling themes of faith next year, science vs. faith,” Harberts said. “We’re interested in different points of view on that and we’re still hashing out what we want to tell. The second season is not a war season.

So, more Trek technobabble (99.9 percent of the time ZERO respect to the real-world physics, astronomy, chemistry. biology) vs. some anti-religious caricature.

OK.
/s

Angels and Ministers of Grace, defend us.

Exactly.

Personally, I prefer second season of stupid Klingon war.

 

[Mark 2000]

The result being that the most thoughtful and socially conscious Trek production of the past decade has been a big budget shoot-em-up released in 2013 that's dismissed as brainless by a lot of trufans.

Into Darkness is probably the most forthcoming political analogy Trek has done since TOS. There’s a lot there that *is* smart. I think everything between Kirk and Scotty is pretty marvelous. But the rest of the execution is utterly dreadful and dumb. I appreciate that they made an attempt, and a much better one than Beyond, which, like Discovery, over promised and delivered nothing. But that doesn’t mean it was a good movie as a whole.

 

[Vger23]

I'd say it's on par with the rest of the franchise, if you average it out. Some elements of the franchise have done it much better, others have really struggled to get beyond the After School Special level.

DSC is about in the middle.

Which is ok, because I don't need to be beaten senselessly over the head with social commentary. Give me a story. Excite me. I don't need to ponder the meaning of it all for me to consider it "quality programming"

 

[Mudd]

Oh, I think all the NuTrek movies are pretty marvelous.

I'm disappointed that they never did much with those Klingons, who visually were everything that the STD folks bungled.

Same makeup designer, too.

 

[Cyrus]

I don't watch Trek for social commentary, just for entertainment. That said, love all the digs at trump and his ilk.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

Star Trek has been pretty sketchy when it comes to social commentary post TOS. TNG the apparent bastion of social commentary blatantly ignored the AIDS crisis, the gulf war and the Los Angeles Riots. DS9 did a much better job of exploring real world issues than TNG ever did. Voyager and Enterprise barely rate when it comes to social commentary in my opinion.

In terms of social commentary in Discovery I think its there but pretty unfocused at the moment. I can see elements of what they are trying to do and my theory is that the season will end with some social commentary but i'll wait and see. I'd love for season 2 to have some social commentary, but it has to feel right and not forced.

 

[Demograph]

...I don't need to be beaten senselessly over the head with social commentary. Give me a story. Excite me. I don't need to ponder the meaning of it all for me to consider it "quality programming"

While I don't disagree with that statement in general. I'd hesitate before applying it Star Trek. There is a fair amount of good programming around that entertains without demanding much of the viewer, and there's nothing rong with that. It isn't how I think of Star Trek though. I feel like moralising and examination of humanity are in its remit. Star Trek without the moralising is a bit like Star Wars without the lightsabers.

It has been done with varying degrees of success. I agree it isn't fun to be preached at. There has to a be balance between a more didactic approach and just disengaging from the discussion altogether. Trek at its best, in my opinion, isn't necessarily about providing answers but about exploring a topic even handedly and prompting viewers to ask questions. The really great episodes are the rarer ones, unfortunately.

 

[Butters]

Really. Star Trek was a convenient means to challenge certain norms in the sixties. Mixing up the sexes, races and nationalities. Painting a picture of diversity and delivering a few morality tales of right and wrong, but I’d challenge the claim that moralising was part of its remit.

I’ve often seen this assertion that Star Trek exists above lesser shows and should be held to a higher standard. Yes, Star Trek did do some of those things, but it’s not unique. The Munsters, to name one, showed points beyond the viewers’ nose, even Lost in Space ran with pretty deep themes.

I know this a Trek Forum, so obviously it’s gonna feel the love, but it’s never done anything you won’t find in any number of popular contemporary TV shows.

The praise isn’t limited to the moralising, trek is often credited for inspiring inventions like the mobile phone or the iPad. Necessity is the mother of invention, people need mobile coms, and they came when the tech was ready.

 

[cultcross]

Really. Star Trek was a convenient means to challenge certain norms in the sixties. Mixing up the sexes, races and nationalities. Painting a picture of diversity and delivering a few morality tales of right and wrong, but I’d challenge the claim that moralising was part of its remit.

I’ve often seen this assertion that Star Trek exists above lesser shows and should be held to a higher standard. Yes, Star Trek did do some of those things, but it’s not unique. The Munsters, to name one, showed points beyond the viewers’ nose, even Lost in Space ran with pretty deep themes.

I know this a Trek Forum, so obviously it’s gonna feel the love, but it’s never done anything you won’t find in any number of popular contemporary TV shows.

The praise isn’t limited to the moralising, trek is often credited for inspiring inventions like the mobile phone or the iPad. Necessity is the mother of invention, people need mobile coms, and they came when the tech was ready.

I agree. I think Star Trek did have some areas where it was fairly progressive, and some messages where it stuck its head above the contemporary parapet - the one that leaps to mind is the humanist, atheist, messages about God(s). I'd also argue it was probably quite progressive on race issues for its time although not to the radical extent that is now claimed. However, other shows at the time would have had their own particular niches too. The only time Trek was really 'out there' on the social commentary was very early TNG when Roddenberry was both in full preachy mode and in good enough health to enforce it. And generally those years are thought of as pretty poor, because his message was so out there that it failed to resonate or seem relevant - such as Gene's insistence that we wouldn't grieve anymore because progress.

 

[Vger23]

While I don't disagree with that statement in general. I'd hesitate before applying it Star Trek. There is a fair amount of good programming around that entertains without demanding much of the viewer, and there's nothing rong with that. It isn't how I think of Star Trek though. I feel like moralising and examination of humanity are in its remit. Star Trek without the moralising is a bit like Star Wars without the lightsabers.

It has been done with varying degrees of success. I agree it isn't fun to be preached at. There has to a be balance between a more didactic approach and just disengaging from the discussion altogether. Trek at its best, in my opinion, isn't necessarily about providing answers but about exploring a topic even handedly and prompting viewers to ask questions. The really great episodes are the rarer ones, unfortunately.

I never gave two shits about any "message" that Star Trek wanted to send, so perhaps that element of StarTrek's appeal is simply lost on me. It's my favorite entertainment property in spite of that, though.

I look at some of Star Trek's most popular outings and don't necessarily even see social commentary. And in others, its heavy handed, high-school level allegory. And then occasionally it's brilliant.

I'd say this is just like any other TV show.

But it has nothing to do with why I love Star Trek. (Nor is there a linkage between lightsabers and my love of Star Wars)

 

[Donker]

A lot what's going on today: Me Too, Police Brutality, Trump believing environmentalism to be a myth, the rise of the Alt-Right... these are things I wouldn't expect to see in a Federation or Starfleet of 2257. They could be on other planets but I think Discovery should be discovering, not so much rehashing what's on news headlines.

How I would have done it is basically have it be backlash from the Klingon War. Have billions of refugees flood Federation Worlds, have resources stretched to their limits and clash of cultures from refugees and Federation citizens. Crime rises, resource lines collapse and basically a Xenophobic movement appears and starts to spout bigotry against non-Federation races while using the defence of "Free speech" despite their speech is limiting the freedoms of others and spreading violence.
On top of this say, like a new Tellerite leader elected who's an incompetent fool, extremely belligerent, is throwing spanners in the workings of the Federation and has possible links to Klingons.

Through this you can explore
- Rise of the Refugee Crisis and it's effects.
- The rise of the Alt-Right in a time of extreme inequality
- Exploration of the philosophy of "Free Speech" and the limits of the liberal ideals behind speech when it's used to incite violence and bigtory against others and gives power to a movement that has in reality, no respect for it or others.
- The rise of Trump and his effect on US relations with it's allies and it's place in NATO.

Discoveries "Social commentary" so far has been pretty shallow milquetoast Democrat centrism honestly. It's a let down because Star Trek is actually one of the few pieces of Utopian post-Capitalist sci-fi out there.

 

[Lord Garth]

That's an interesting approach that makes use of what's already in the Star Trek Universe.

I have to wonder when most of DSC's first season was plotted out. I don't think (and this is just a guess) they thought the Trump Movement would get as far as it did. I sure didn't. Most people I know didn't. And I used to argue all the time with people who didn't agree with me. I thought 2016 would end up Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton would win. The End. And, as a post-script, the Alt-Right would stay underground and Trump even having thought of running would be just the punchline of a bad joke.

Then it didn't happen. I remember that there was a South Park episode at the time that had to be rewritten because they expected Hillary Clinton to win. I think the DSC writers expected things to go a certain way and by the time it didn't, it would've been too late to change what they already had. This probably happened in a lot of writer's rooms across several series.

 

[Mudd]

Yeah, because that would subtle, get to the essence of problems and not at all be too "on the nose."

 

[Lord Garth]

I said I think Donker's idea is interesting, that's as far as it goes. I don't know if having someone represent Trump and have it be subtle is even possible, which is why I'd rather not have any stand-ins for Trump (other than I just can't stand him and don't want to be reminded of him constantly in everything I watch). Trump is completely over-the-top, period. Him and subtlety don't even belong in the same sentence.

How you work him into anything that's not satire, a parody, or a caricature, Star Trek or not, would be interesting to see. I would think. I'd be curious to see how anyone would do it. How good it would actually come off, I honestly have no idea.