With humans like us, who needs aliens?

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

This was mentioned on a another thread; that we can explore all these human problems in Star Trek with human characters of other cultures and groups now, as opposed to aliens.

Now aside from the obvious, "This is sci-fi in a future where aliens exist", why do we need aliens if we can probably get the same messages across (successfully, in other non-sci fi genres) using only human cultures and situations?

 

[F. King Daniel]

This was mentioned on a another thread; that we can explore all these human problems in Star Trek with human characters of other cultures and groups now, as opposed to aliens.

Now aside from the obvious, "This is sci-fi in a future where aliens exist", why do we need aliens if we can probably get the same messages across (successfully, in other non-sci fi genres) using only human cultures and situations?

That's commonly called, TV shows other than Star Trek.

 

[The Wormhole]

Window dressing, mostly.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

I suppose quirks of alien biology is one reason, at least; (side from individuals with rare genetic conditions) there's no copper-based blood humans, for instance. Or humans who share their bodies with sentient symbionts that change their personality/memories and offer pseudo re-birth reincarnation.

 

[Timofnine]

I paraphrase; Star Trek has always been about exploring the human condition.

 

[at Quark's]

Suppose they hadn't used aliens. Could they have tackled subjects such as racial prejudices during the sixties directly without getting into trouble one way or the other? (open question, as I was neither alive during the sixties, nor have I ever lived in the US).

 

[UssGlenn]

why do we need aliens if we can probably get the same messages across (successfully, in other non-sci fi genres) using only human cultures and situations?

Because we still can't get the same message across. It was necessity in the 60s if you wanted to talk about certain subjects. You are allowed to talk about them openly now, but its much more effective to use an allegory. You have to remove the emotional and historical baggage if you want to have any chance of making someone think critically about a subject. If you are a good writer, and have a little luck, someone will take the lesson they learned from your story and apply it to a real world issue later, perhaps even subconsciously. They will just reject it out of hand if you hit them in the face with it.

 

[C.E. Evans]

"Do you want to know something? Everybody's human."
--Captain Kirk to Captain Spock (2293)

To me, that really sums things up perfectly. Despite our differences, we're all fundamentally the same in the ways that truly matter. We all have similar hopes and desires, and that regardless of our cultures, we're all motivated by the same things at a basic level. There's more that connects us than separates us, and in Trek, the trick is to see that beyond the pointed ears or ridged foreheads. As mentioned above, aliens are an allegory for different kinds of people and when some aren't holding a mirror to see how we are, their inclusion is to show how different people of different walks of life and appearances can come and work together...IMO.

 

[The Wormhole]

Could they have tackled subjects such as racial prejudices during the sixties directly without getting into trouble one way or the other?

Not likely. Roddenberry's other series, The Lieutenant, was cancelled essentially because it did an episode about racism in the contemporary US military. That is, the actual US military did not like how they were depicted in that episode and withdrew their support of the show. Without support of the military show, the show's expenses skyrocketed, making cancellation the only practical option.

 

[Ragitsu]

I for one am happy to see significant sentient cloud representation in a television series.

 

[Ragitsu]

Not likely. Roddenberry's other series, The Lieutenant, was cancelled essentially because it did an episode about racism in the contemporary US military. That is, the actual US military did not like how they were depicted in that episode and withdrew their support of the show. Without support of the military show, the show's expenses skyrocketed, making cancellation the only practical option.

That reminds me of Stargate SG-1; I love the show, but it's blatant military propaganda that got the US Air Force's seal of approval (and, therefore, occasional official assets).

 

[Timofnine]

"Do you want to know something? Everybody's human."
--Captain Kirk to Captain Spock (2293)

Chekov - We do believe all planets have a sovereign claim to inalienable human rights.

Azetbur - Inalien? If you could only hear yourselves. Human rights. Why, the very name is racist. The Federation is no more than a "homo sapiens only" club.

General Chang - Present company excepted, of course.

To avoid future misunderstandings such as in the exchange above, what should be used instead of ‘Human’ when referring to other species using an ‘umbrella’ term? Perhaps ‘Human’ *does* fit the purpose if used innocently, but what about species offended by the comparison who may not agree with human visions, values and ethos, such as in this example with the Klingons? What is the actual definition of *being* human? Humans and humanity have not always shone the best examples of compassion, fairness and integrity.

Humanities ethics and virtues have often strayed to both ends of the spectrum both good and bad; behaviours which have been displayed repeatedly even leading up to the ‘present day’ at the dawn of 25th century in nu-Trek. What exactly *would* be a good label for a ‘collective’ of souls displaying a common ‘moral compass’, an all encompassing term for many species of differing backgrounds, beliefs and moral values who might not even get along all of the time… possibly even resorting to conflict on occasion?

Let’s think of a new term for the collective of species and consciousness’ that make up our galaxy that will not offend even the Klingons.

Galaxians? Nah, too cheesy and sounds too much like Talaxians… hehe.

 

[fireproof78]

Humans and humanity have not always shone the best examples of compassion, fairness and integrity.

Who is the best?

"Of all things the measure is Man, of the things that are, that they are, and of the things that are not, that they are not." Protagarus.

 

[Ragitsu]

I paraphrase; Star Trek has always been about exploring the human condition.

For better and for worse.

 

[Silvercrest]

Fred Saberhagen's Berserker series used "human" for everyone, Earthlings and aliens. But he then differentiated among "human themes" — the Earth-descended (or ED theme), the Carmpan theme, and others.

Personally I think this is a non-issue. In Trek, we're supposed to accept that the UT is always in play, meaning you can be as precise as you want with your words — and the other guy may still hear something different. And that dinner scene doesn't play true (for a lot of reasons other than those below) whether the UT is in use or not.

• If it IS in use, the Klingons should hear "inalienable" translated as something like "sacrosanct", "inviolable", etc. The word "alien" in that use is idiomatic and has nothing to do with being from another planet, the shape of your forehead, or whatever.
• If it is NOT in use (and the Klingons really are speaking English out of courtesy), then it'd just bizarre that they'd start picking on the Starfleet people's use of their own idioms in their own language. Nitpicking, really. It's about as pedantic as a lot of people on this board ... and shouldn't be taken any more seriously than that by Kirk's crew.
  
  "If only you could hear yourselves", indeed. My rejoinder would be, "So what? Your language doesn't even contain a word for a friendly hello!"

 

[Timofnine]

This was mentioned on a another thread; that we can explore all these human problems in Star Trek with human characters of other cultures and groups now, as opposed to aliens.

Now aside from the obvious, "This is sci-fi in a future where aliens exist", why do we need aliens if we can probably get the same messages across (successfully, in other non-sci fi genres) using only human cultures and situations?

Oh, I just actually read the original posters question, not just the thread title.

Because did you know that Star Trek is often an allegory? Allegories make subjects which can sometimes prove to be controversial or offensive accessible to those with differing or opposing points of view, in a format that will not cause trouble or result in censorship. If TPTB start using *real* human drama instead of alien drama then they might as well be making a soap opera rather than a sci-fi action adventure series.

I mean, looking back, here are three of my favourite examples of allegories in Trek:

Rejoined
The Outcast
Little Green Men

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Roddenberry himself said it best.

I thought with science fiction I might do what Jonathan Swift did when he wrote Gulliver's Travels. He lived in a time when you could lose your head for making religious and political comments. I was working in a medium, television, which is heavily censored, and in contemporary show I found I couldn't talk about sex, politics, religion, and all the other thing I wanted to talk about. It seemed to me that if I had things happen to little polka dotted people on a far-off planet, I might get past the network censors, as Swift did in his day.

 

[Timofnine]

Roddenberry himself said it best.

I remember watching that interview on the 25th anniversary VHS cassette documentary when I was a child. It did not make sense to me then, but it is starting to now.

I wonder if I can find any more allegories?

 

[UssGlenn]

the exchange above, what should be used instead of ‘Human’ when referring to other species using an ‘umbrella’ term?

Sapient Rights would seem to be the obvious choice.

 

[Timofnine]

Sapient Rights would seem to be the obvious choice.

Well it would make sense as long as the Klingons agreed? Sapient could be added to all species… Klingo-sapient, Vulco-sapient, Ferangnar-sapient?