I don't agree with them, but there is a case to be made for that kind of idea. Especially seeing as at times it was Roddenberry throwing that notion around.
Will TOS maintain its legendary status as Trek fandom gets younger?
- Thread starter BlueStuff
- Start date
I don't agree with them, but there is a case to be made for that kind of idea. Especially seeing as at times it was Roddenberry throwing that notion around.
Substitute TMP for TNG and you have Roddenberry's view.
So, if it is silly it started high up.
An alternate persecutive from a TNG/DS9 first fan / child of the 90s...
When I got into Star Trek, TNG was in daily syndication and DS9 airing once a week. TOS was rarely on TV. When it was, they'd air the same popular episodes again and again. My main exposure to TOS were the films, novels, and reference books. Not everything can be reduced to a simple binary conflict.
TOS has some amazing episodes. Season 1 is probably the strongest season of Star Trek ever produced. But, I and many others just don't have the childhood attachment to it we do with TNG etc. It's not like now where you have easy streaming access to an entire back catalog. TOS is my third favorite Star Trek series. So again, there's more nuance here than some may expect.
When I got into Star Trek, TNG was in daily syndication and DS9 airing once a week. TOS was rarely on TV. When it was, they'd air the same popular episodes again and again. My main exposure to TOS were the films, novels, and reference books. Not everything can be reduced to a simple binary conflict.
TOS has some amazing episodes. Season 1 is probably the strongest season of Star Trek ever produced. But, I and many others just don't have the childhood attachment to it we do with TNG etc. It's not like now where you have easy streaming access to an entire back catalog. TOS is my third favorite Star Trek series. So again, there's more nuance here than some may expect.
That can be answered with just two words: It should
Unless you are a Bynar!
In all seriousness, I get it! I was 9 when TOS premiered. I Wes HOOKED!
I absolutely have a childhood connection, and I appreciate your post and believe I understand your point and perspective!
I was 8 and watched TOS on VHS my dad had recorded.
Despite being the right age for TNG it never clicked for me. The childhood fascination began and ended with the toys.
Despite being the right age for TNG it never clicked for me. The childhood fascination began and ended with the toys.
Original Series should be recognized by all who watch Star Trek in its many forms because without TOS there wouldn't be....
well, Star Trek in any form.
TOS is necessary to have Star Trek at all.
TNG is necessary to show Star Trek doesn't have to be about Kirk and Spock.
DS9 is necessary to show Star Trek can be done without the Enterprise.
TNG is necessary to show Star Trek doesn't have to be about Kirk and Spock.
DS9 is necessary to show Star Trek can be done without the Enterprise.
I have a similar background with Trek.
I remember being about 5 years old and finding a set of Star Trek trading cards at a flea market. Being a kid who loved spaceships, I was immediately interested when I saw the classic image of The Enterprise next to to Botany Bay. I asked my mother what it was and she simply said "it's an old TV show."
I bought the set of cards with my allowance and immediately set out to find this old show. TNG was probably in its second season around then, and I found that on TV, but it wasn't what was on my trading cards!
I finally found TOS being rerun at 1 or 2 in the morning and made the grand bargain with my parents that I'd go to bed super early if I could set an alarm and watch this "Star Trek" that I had been searching for.
They agreed, and probably probably a year waking up 5 nights a week to watch TOS. It wasn't until one of my uncles started getting me the tapes, through Columbia House, that I finally started sleeping through the night.
It wasn't until TNG was probably in it's 4th or 5th season that I finally gave it a shot. It was fine. But TOS was, and mostly still is, my favorite Star Trek.
That it was the first does not make it a legend.
It just makes it the first.
I'm not saying it doesn't have importance to me, but the larger reality is that older media will not always be regarded by youngers as legends as such.
Even Star Wars is considered less and less interesting by younger audiences in terms of the original films.
I mean, art is something that is inherently subjective and can find value in different ways. Wouldn't it be more positive to engage them with the material first, rather than expect them to be respectful of the origin?
Similar story, but my parents would NEVER let me stay up late. Forget about 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning. Not that it would've worked anyway. One time, when I was 10, on New Year's Eve, I wanted stay up until 1990. Ring in the New Year! It was one of the few times my parents let me stay up later than usual, before I was a teenager. I was going to make it to Midnight! Or so I thought. I fell asleep long before then. I wasn't even close. Ironically, now I'm an insomniac and a night owl. Have been since my late-teens.
The way I got to see all of TOS was by programming the VCR to record it every night until I had every episode.
Fans of that ilk need to ask themselves why TOS--out of every version of ST produced to the this date--is the far and away face of the franchise, often considered the only landmark ST series, fully ingrained in pop culture, is referenced in general senses (either by recognized characters, phrases, the version of the 1701, etc.), while the others are not (even TNG--as series now some 36 years old. Next to no one in general pop culture awareness says that about the Berman era, JJ movies and certainly not the new series.
To acknowledge any of that requires a level of honesty that does not place the other ST under a flattering light.
I don't know. =)
This made me think of music.
If one likes earlier material of some artist, it's not necessary to like everything that artist has done since or the other way around.
No. Your entire premise is woefully ignorant of why TOS resonated--tapped into viewers of numerous racial/ethnic backgrounds, and their desires or dreams about a proposed future, as opposed to pre-TOS sci-fi, the majority being populated by all white characters (e.g. Lost in Space) in an all-white future.
One of the key points of TOS was to challenge the notion of the aforementioned all-white future with characters that projected--provided a hint of the kind of future being fought for on the streets during its production era. TOS resonated deeply and quickly became a pop culture phenomenon in part for its recognition of The Other as an essential part of everything--the fabric of life. That was a message that played a significant role in TOS earning a legendary status, which grew exponentially with each passing year.
A side of my family were certainly not among "those in power", yet many became lifelong TOS fans from those watching it on NBC, to younger members discovering in the decades to follow.
So, your idea of "those in power" returning to TOS (as an "explanation" for its success / status over the decades) is about as historically dishonest as saying "Bull" Connor was one of the staunchest supporters of the American Civil Rights Movement.
Perhaps the other series would not receive the level of criticism seen if certain series--such as Berman Trek were not so decidedly heartless, and more about New Agey finger-wagging than the core creative strengths pioneered by TOS.
VOYAGER is necessary to soothe Tuvok through operettas.
Similar threads
