Comment Stream
Search and bookmark options
Total Found: 71 (Showing 1-25)
Next ►Page 1 of 3
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
Clearing the backlog:
@wolfstar (Sat, Feb 16, 2019, 6:23pm)
Re: de Boer
Like every other useful idiot on the nominal left, concern troll at the wishy-washy “centre,” or screech hawk on the cursory right, de Boer’s broadside against that purported political monolith “the left” undermines the caustic kernel of truth he was aiming to call out in the first place, namely: selection bias—and how, yes, “consumerist identitarianism” is actively encouraged to serve as a bulwark against criticism of the real rogue elephant in the room: the amoral capitalist system.
Clearing the backlog:
@wolfstar (Sat, Feb 16, 2019, 6:23pm)
Re: de Boer
Like every other useful idiot on the nominal left, concern troll at the wishy-washy “centre,” or screech hawk on the cursory right, de Boer’s broadside against that purported political monolith “the left” undermines the caustic kernel of truth he was aiming to call out in the first place, namely: selection bias—and how, yes, “consumerist identitarianism” is actively encouraged to serve as a bulwark against criticism of the real rogue elephant in the room: the amoral capitalist system.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Tim C
Oh, sure, I weighed the possibility that Section 31 might possess these super mad computer skills to hide their tracks over the span of centuries, and everybody else in the Alpha Quadrant, including their A.I.s, are basically just a bunch of "utopian" dimwits, but then we're going down the road of the Illuminati and every other ancient secret society that's supposedly thrived(s) undetected under the noses of the prevailing social order—and so naturally Occam's Razor cut in and I dismissed the notion on all counts for lack of credibility.
@Tim C
Oh, sure, I weighed the possibility that Section 31 might possess these super mad computer skills to hide their tracks over the span of centuries, and everybody else in the Alpha Quadrant, including their A.I.s, are basically just a bunch of "utopian" dimwits, but then we're going down the road of the Illuminati and every other ancient secret society that's supposedly thrived(s) undetected under the noses of the prevailing social order—and so naturally Occam's Razor cut in and I dismissed the notion on all counts for lack of credibility.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
“…I don't see any point in turning this into an argument on semantics.”
Huh? I quite clearly flagged my own remark as being pedantic to begin with. The obvious conclusion would be that I was well aware of the minefield I was stepping into. No further step on your part was required.
But then you had to step into it anyway…
Logical fallacy: appeal to common practice.
Who gets to decide “common usage” and its validity anyway?
You? You and a couple of drinking buds? You and a couple of drinking buds and the Ladies Cheerleading Squad? You, a couple of drinking buds, the Ladies Cheerleading Squad and your clearly unimpressed mom—who’s been waiting for over an hour for you to drive her to Walgreens like you said you would?
I’m not telling you that you’re wrong necessarily, only pointing out the essential flaw in your argument, because no one is obliged to adopt your “common usage” or any other group or groups “common usage,” particularly if they belong to another group or groups with their own “common usage.”
Which brings us back to dictionaries and utopia, which, whether you like it or not, does have a lexical meaning.
Unless you’re going to suggest dictionaries be amended to accommodate EVERY “common usage” and applicable frame of reference out there, including one specifically for Star Trek… or, because it’s all such a bleeding headache, you just want to see each and every last one of the bloody things tossed into a river, I’d suggest just using scare quotes: “Utopia.”
Cut! Print!
@John Harmon
Re: usage of “utopia” in-universe
Ya, maybe. I certainly entertained the possibility. But I don’t think anyone here, including myself, is going to marathon over 300 episodes to test that theory.
@Trent
Re: your reactionary list
I don’t recognize STD, J.J. Trek or Enterprise as canon, and DS9, as I’ve gone on and on about to the dismay of some, crossed that fine line when Section 31 entered the picture, so I can only respond to concerns as regard TOS, TNG, DS9 pre Sec. 31 and VOY.
A) “Yeoman Rand enjoying being sexually harassed/raped by evil Kirk, moments of sexism, the dropping of Number 1 from TOS.”
That’s would be a misreading of events. By the end of the episode Rand knows it was Evil Kirk who assaulted her. At the same time, however, she’s also cognizant of the fact that Good Kirk desires her, and for very obvious reasons. When she is just about to address the issue Kirk gently and professionally saves both of them any further embarrassment with a simple “thank you, yeoman.”
But that civil exchange goes right out the window with Spock’s closing line: ”the, uh, imposter had some interesting qualities, wouldn't you say, yeoman?”, which is an objectively deplorable attempt by the writer to inject levity at the end of the episode given her experience. Note Spock’s smile and Rand’s unspoken, turn heel “Men!” Pure comedy gold, amiright?
A more disturbing scene, however, is when Rand—and in her own words—struggles to rationalize her defence, literally going as far as to tacitly condone a captain’s prerogative to objectify and take liberties with his staff. It’s classic Stockholm syndrome.
As for Number One, I believe her dismissal was a network directive. The very fact the character was created and filmed at all rather contradicts her mention on your list.
So, yes, TOS’ blatant sexism does undeniably make for discouraging and uncomfortable viewing some times. No argument here. But in the political sense, the status quo doesn’t react upon itself, it only perpetuates itself. The Women’s Liberation Movement’s rejection of the status quo, however, kicked off a reaction and reactionary movements intent on preserving and/or restoring the status quo.
B) “the early portrayal of the Klingon's as a "yellow menace", the franchise's uncritical endorsing of a Cold War narrative (west good, eastern aliens bad).”
The Klingons have for the longest time been associated with Soviet era Russians, whereas the Romulans were the “yellow peril,” but given Klingon naming conventions it’s kind of hard to ignore the obvious Asian influence. No matter, I think the introduction of the Organians in “Errand of Mercy” and the critique of the conflict that unfolds rather punctures that interpretation of yours.
C) “Hippie bashing.” I don’t think so. Yes, Kirk, as the authority figure and spokesman for the status quo in the room, regards Sevrin as a possible threat to life and property, but not because Sevrin and his troupe are members of a counter-culture. No, I think instead it’s because Sevrin, as we discover, is clinically unstable, and his condition WILL probably lead him to be a threat to life and property. Besides, Spock literally endorses the troupes search for a place other than the UFP to find their happiness.
So, no, “The Way to Eden” is not Ward Cleaver pointing a dismissive finger at the counter-culture movement at large, but rather it’s a direct warning from the writer and producers to all the young viewers out there in the audience to beware charismatic crackpots clamouring for Paradise.
And if anything, the mental instability angle is an anti-drug message.
Trivia: “The Way to Eden” was broadcast in Feb. 21, 1969. The Manson Family stepped onto the national stage and into televisions just 6 months later.
The remaining mentions on your list aren’t specific enough for me to address.
@Quincy
Re: moustache-twirling
Personally, “Mirror, Mirror” was the only episode not played self-consciously for its camp value.
@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
“…I don't see any point in turning this into an argument on semantics.”
Huh? I quite clearly flagged my own remark as being pedantic to begin with. The obvious conclusion would be that I was well aware of the minefield I was stepping into. No further step on your part was required.
But then you had to step into it anyway…
Logical fallacy: appeal to common practice.
Who gets to decide “common usage” and its validity anyway?
You? You and a couple of drinking buds? You and a couple of drinking buds and the Ladies Cheerleading Squad? You, a couple of drinking buds, the Ladies Cheerleading Squad and your clearly unimpressed mom—who’s been waiting for over an hour for you to drive her to Walgreens like you said you would?
I’m not telling you that you’re wrong necessarily, only pointing out the essential flaw in your argument, because no one is obliged to adopt your “common usage” or any other group or groups “common usage,” particularly if they belong to another group or groups with their own “common usage.”
Which brings us back to dictionaries and utopia, which, whether you like it or not, does have a lexical meaning.
Unless you’re going to suggest dictionaries be amended to accommodate EVERY “common usage” and applicable frame of reference out there, including one specifically for Star Trek… or, because it’s all such a bleeding headache, you just want to see each and every last one of the bloody things tossed into a river, I’d suggest just using scare quotes: “Utopia.”
Cut! Print!
@John Harmon
Re: usage of “utopia” in-universe
Ya, maybe. I certainly entertained the possibility. But I don’t think anyone here, including myself, is going to marathon over 300 episodes to test that theory.
@Trent
Re: your reactionary list
I don’t recognize STD, J.J. Trek or Enterprise as canon, and DS9, as I’ve gone on and on about to the dismay of some, crossed that fine line when Section 31 entered the picture, so I can only respond to concerns as regard TOS, TNG, DS9 pre Sec. 31 and VOY.
A) “Yeoman Rand enjoying being sexually harassed/raped by evil Kirk, moments of sexism, the dropping of Number 1 from TOS.”
That’s would be a misreading of events. By the end of the episode Rand knows it was Evil Kirk who assaulted her. At the same time, however, she’s also cognizant of the fact that Good Kirk desires her, and for very obvious reasons. When she is just about to address the issue Kirk gently and professionally saves both of them any further embarrassment with a simple “thank you, yeoman.”
But that civil exchange goes right out the window with Spock’s closing line: ”the, uh, imposter had some interesting qualities, wouldn't you say, yeoman?”, which is an objectively deplorable attempt by the writer to inject levity at the end of the episode given her experience. Note Spock’s smile and Rand’s unspoken, turn heel “Men!” Pure comedy gold, amiright?
A more disturbing scene, however, is when Rand—and in her own words—struggles to rationalize her defence, literally going as far as to tacitly condone a captain’s prerogative to objectify and take liberties with his staff. It’s classic Stockholm syndrome.
As for Number One, I believe her dismissal was a network directive. The very fact the character was created and filmed at all rather contradicts her mention on your list.
So, yes, TOS’ blatant sexism does undeniably make for discouraging and uncomfortable viewing some times. No argument here. But in the political sense, the status quo doesn’t react upon itself, it only perpetuates itself. The Women’s Liberation Movement’s rejection of the status quo, however, kicked off a reaction and reactionary movements intent on preserving and/or restoring the status quo.
B) “the early portrayal of the Klingon's as a "yellow menace", the franchise's uncritical endorsing of a Cold War narrative (west good, eastern aliens bad).”
The Klingons have for the longest time been associated with Soviet era Russians, whereas the Romulans were the “yellow peril,” but given Klingon naming conventions it’s kind of hard to ignore the obvious Asian influence. No matter, I think the introduction of the Organians in “Errand of Mercy” and the critique of the conflict that unfolds rather punctures that interpretation of yours.
C) “Hippie bashing.” I don’t think so. Yes, Kirk, as the authority figure and spokesman for the status quo in the room, regards Sevrin as a possible threat to life and property, but not because Sevrin and his troupe are members of a counter-culture. No, I think instead it’s because Sevrin, as we discover, is clinically unstable, and his condition WILL probably lead him to be a threat to life and property. Besides, Spock literally endorses the troupes search for a place other than the UFP to find their happiness.
So, no, “The Way to Eden” is not Ward Cleaver pointing a dismissive finger at the counter-culture movement at large, but rather it’s a direct warning from the writer and producers to all the young viewers out there in the audience to beware charismatic crackpots clamouring for Paradise.
And if anything, the mental instability angle is an anti-drug message.
Trivia: “The Way to Eden” was broadcast in Feb. 21, 1969. The Manson Family stepped onto the national stage and into televisions just 6 months later.
The remaining mentions on your list aren’t specific enough for me to address.
@Quincy
Re: moustache-twirling
Personally, “Mirror, Mirror” was the only episode not played self-consciously for its camp value.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Tim C
Of course it’s all about the tech.
I sit here in 2019 observing the impact of technology, the good and the very bad, the debates surrounding its impacts, the good and the very bad, and the laws instituted and parties prosecuted, and I scale up. Add a variable like an honest broker and trends skews one way. Add a variable like a dishonest broker and they go another. A benevolent politician, one way, a dictator, another, and so on.
So it’s obviously all about technology and the way it will impact and shape law, education, production, internal governance, foreign policy and, of course, the private sphere. How it will be incorporated and deployed on the institutional and operational levels to keep that "utopia" everyone keeps going on about up and running 24/7, and it’s certainly about the technological infrastructure that will keep it safe and secure from internal or external malfeasance (and it won’t be put together with duct tape and elbow grease either).
Everything will be recorded and everything will be stored. Everyone who’s a player in the game will be tracked. Their lives an open book. History won’t go missing. Because there’ll be backups upon backups upon backups upon backups. And redundancies upon redundancies upon redundancies. There has to be for dynamic systems as large and complex as Starfleet or the UFP to maintain peace, security, stability and good governance.
And, of course, Earthers won't be the only players at the table either, there’ll be countless others like the Vulcans keeping as watchful and wary an eye using their own resources.
What a low man on the totem pole on a distant space station knows or doesn't know is not at issue here, but rather what the A.I.s, the redundant A.I.s, the historians, the academics and the executive and managerial classes running the Big Show all know.
So as I’ve stated before, unless everyone’s all in on one big conspiracy, Behr’s Section 31 simply could not exist on any functional level.
@Tim C
Of course it’s all about the tech.
I sit here in 2019 observing the impact of technology, the good and the very bad, the debates surrounding its impacts, the good and the very bad, and the laws instituted and parties prosecuted, and I scale up. Add a variable like an honest broker and trends skews one way. Add a variable like a dishonest broker and they go another. A benevolent politician, one way, a dictator, another, and so on.
So it’s obviously all about technology and the way it will impact and shape law, education, production, internal governance, foreign policy and, of course, the private sphere. How it will be incorporated and deployed on the institutional and operational levels to keep that "utopia" everyone keeps going on about up and running 24/7, and it’s certainly about the technological infrastructure that will keep it safe and secure from internal or external malfeasance (and it won’t be put together with duct tape and elbow grease either).
Everything will be recorded and everything will be stored. Everyone who’s a player in the game will be tracked. Their lives an open book. History won’t go missing. Because there’ll be backups upon backups upon backups upon backups. And redundancies upon redundancies upon redundancies. There has to be for dynamic systems as large and complex as Starfleet or the UFP to maintain peace, security, stability and good governance.
And, of course, Earthers won't be the only players at the table either, there’ll be countless others like the Vulcans keeping as watchful and wary an eye using their own resources.
What a low man on the totem pole on a distant space station knows or doesn't know is not at issue here, but rather what the A.I.s, the redundant A.I.s, the historians, the academics and the executive and managerial classes running the Big Show all know.
So as I’ve stated before, unless everyone’s all in on one big conspiracy, Behr’s Section 31 simply could not exist on any functional level.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Well, there are opinions, and then there are dictionary definitions*.
From my viewings of the franchise I wouldn't be given to describe any of the iterations as utopian. Post-scarcity, certainly, but not utopian. Because by using utopia your setting a very definitive boundary line, and nothing I've seen in Star Trek would lead me to believe that either the 22nd, 23rd or the 24th centuries was anywhere near capital P perfect.
How could it possibly be with humans still around to muck things up?
* ya, ya, I'm being pedantic. But I'm not wrong. ;)
@OmicronThetaDeltaPhi
Well, there are opinions, and then there are dictionary definitions*.
From my viewings of the franchise I wouldn't be given to describe any of the iterations as utopian. Post-scarcity, certainly, but not utopian. Because by using utopia your setting a very definitive boundary line, and nothing I've seen in Star Trek would lead me to believe that either the 22nd, 23rd or the 24th centuries was anywhere near capital P perfect.
How could it possibly be with humans still around to muck things up?
* ya, ya, I'm being pedantic. But I'm not wrong. ;)
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Trent
"…Trek's always had a reactionary streak."
Progressive and reactionary have quite clear cut political definitions, so you'd have to provide some convincing examples which had permeable effect to support that statement.
And I see the word "utopia" bandied about so frequently to describe Star Trek I have to wonder what franchise people are actually watching or whether its deliberately being used as a cudgel to more easily spite it.
Seventeen century peasants transported to 2019 might very well believe we live in a utopia too, but you only have to look out your window or read the news to know we're not even close. Not. Even. Close.
@Trent
"…Trek's always had a reactionary streak."
Progressive and reactionary have quite clear cut political definitions, so you'd have to provide some convincing examples which had permeable effect to support that statement.
And I see the word "utopia" bandied about so frequently to describe Star Trek I have to wonder what franchise people are actually watching or whether its deliberately being used as a cudgel to more easily spite it.
Seventeen century peasants transported to 2019 might very well believe we live in a utopia too, but you only have to look out your window or read the news to know we're not even close. Not. Even. Close.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Tim C
“I enjoy listening to people scoff that Section 31 could not possibly have been forgotten over the course of a century. The various units that I've served in over the years have…”
…not existed in the highly technologically advanced 22nd, 23rd or 24th centuries.
And it’s really remarkable how many just sorta sweep this obvious distinction under the carpet.
Simply put, Tim C, your experience wouldn’t scale.
Although, to be fair, it’s infuriatingly common for genre series depicting a far future with extraordinary technology (and all that that would imply), to have its characters, or even the extraordinary technology itself, experience a sudden case of the dumbs for the sake of the plot.
@Booming
You found my post "weird". Fine. That's your reading. Move along.
But I'm not going to waste my time (and everyone else's) engaging with a dishonest debater who deliberately (and repeatedly) resorts to misleadingly reductive framing to concoct their rebuttal.
It amounts to no more than blatant trollery.
@Tim C
“I enjoy listening to people scoff that Section 31 could not possibly have been forgotten over the course of a century. The various units that I've served in over the years have…”
…not existed in the highly technologically advanced 22nd, 23rd or 24th centuries.
And it’s really remarkable how many just sorta sweep this obvious distinction under the carpet.
Simply put, Tim C, your experience wouldn’t scale.
Although, to be fair, it’s infuriatingly common for genre series depicting a far future with extraordinary technology (and all that that would imply), to have its characters, or even the extraordinary technology itself, experience a sudden case of the dumbs for the sake of the plot.
@Booming
You found my post "weird". Fine. That's your reading. Move along.
But I'm not going to waste my time (and everyone else's) engaging with a dishonest debater who deliberately (and repeatedly) resorts to misleadingly reductive framing to concoct their rebuttal.
It amounts to no more than blatant trollery.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
An obvious divide exits and has existed for quite a long time.
And, I would conclude, this divide speaks directly to the franchise’s ever diminishing returns.
On one side there are those who cherish and endorse Star Trek’s uniqueness and core values in the sci-fi TV pantheon, and on the other, those who don’t cherish its uniqueness or endorse its core values, and have no qualms whatsoever seeing it subverted to conform to passing trends or a prevailing zeitgeist, so that other than its surface affectations, the end product more or less resembles its crude assembly line competition.
That competition being shallow, hyperactive, sensationalistic, excessively violent, nihilistic fodder for the mass market, particularly a lucrative foreign market where generic action vehicles are easy sells. Which is J.J. Trek in a nutshell and STD by default.
And then there’s Section 31. Ah, Section 31…
From the volume “Star Trek Apocrypha, Vol. III”:
“Suddenly Behr leapt wobbly to his feet and punched the life-sized effigy of Roddenberry in the face, sneering ‘f**k off hippy,’ took a lusty gulp of Coors and then impassively returned to his game of Stratego with a satisfied belch. Buds Moore and Beimler chuckled and nodded approvingly from their seats around the desk, while off in the corner behind a mountain of scripts a heavy-browed Berman declaimed ‘would you assholes keep it down over there, I’m trying to work!’”
I mean, the UFP directly authorizing or silently condoning Section 31 would be like the Catholic church tacitly endorsing pedophilia. Uhmmm…
It’s progressive Trek vs reactionary Trek.
It’s optimistic Trek vs. pessimistic Trek.
It’s value-added Trek vs. discounted Trek.
@wolfstar: “[Discovery is] also not consistent enough to have articulated a coherent value system of its own yet.”
So how’s about an open declarative?
Nail meet coffin (otherwise known as slapping down the Boy Scouts around the camp fire):
“Section 31 may not be the shining beacon of righteous conduct you want it to be … they are a critical intelligence division … we have more pressing priorities than debating article 14 of Starfleet’s charter. Nation building is never pretty. That is the unadvertising truth and you know it.” — Adm. Cornwell
So … it’s ”nation building” now, is it?
Before Discovery:
“Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship [fill in the blank]. Its continuing mission: to explore strange new worlds. To seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before!”
After Discovery (courtesy Behr):
Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship [fill in the blank]. Its continuing mission: to co-opt strange new worlds. To plunder new resources and new technologies. To boldly go where every imperialist has gone before!
That isn’t Star Trek, unless a lot of folks didn't get the memo that 79 episodes of TOS, 366 episodes of TNG and 172 episodes of VOY had been retconned on account of 3 episodes of DS9 and Enterprise each.
An obvious divide exits and has existed for quite a long time.
And, I would conclude, this divide speaks directly to the franchise’s ever diminishing returns.
On one side there are those who cherish and endorse Star Trek’s uniqueness and core values in the sci-fi TV pantheon, and on the other, those who don’t cherish its uniqueness or endorse its core values, and have no qualms whatsoever seeing it subverted to conform to passing trends or a prevailing zeitgeist, so that other than its surface affectations, the end product more or less resembles its crude assembly line competition.
That competition being shallow, hyperactive, sensationalistic, excessively violent, nihilistic fodder for the mass market, particularly a lucrative foreign market where generic action vehicles are easy sells. Which is J.J. Trek in a nutshell and STD by default.
And then there’s Section 31. Ah, Section 31…
From the volume “Star Trek Apocrypha, Vol. III”:
“Suddenly Behr leapt wobbly to his feet and punched the life-sized effigy of Roddenberry in the face, sneering ‘f**k off hippy,’ took a lusty gulp of Coors and then impassively returned to his game of Stratego with a satisfied belch. Buds Moore and Beimler chuckled and nodded approvingly from their seats around the desk, while off in the corner behind a mountain of scripts a heavy-browed Berman declaimed ‘would you assholes keep it down over there, I’m trying to work!’”
I mean, the UFP directly authorizing or silently condoning Section 31 would be like the Catholic church tacitly endorsing pedophilia. Uhmmm…
It’s progressive Trek vs reactionary Trek.
It’s optimistic Trek vs. pessimistic Trek.
It’s value-added Trek vs. discounted Trek.
@wolfstar: “[Discovery is] also not consistent enough to have articulated a coherent value system of its own yet.”
So how’s about an open declarative?
Nail meet coffin (otherwise known as slapping down the Boy Scouts around the camp fire):
“Section 31 may not be the shining beacon of righteous conduct you want it to be … they are a critical intelligence division … we have more pressing priorities than debating article 14 of Starfleet’s charter. Nation building is never pretty. That is the unadvertising truth and you know it.” — Adm. Cornwell
So … it’s ”nation building” now, is it?
Before Discovery:
“Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship [fill in the blank]. Its continuing mission: to explore strange new worlds. To seek out new life and new civilizations. To boldly go where no one has gone before!”
After Discovery (courtesy Behr):
Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship [fill in the blank]. Its continuing mission: to co-opt strange new worlds. To plunder new resources and new technologies. To boldly go where every imperialist has gone before!
That isn’t Star Trek, unless a lot of folks didn't get the memo that 79 episodes of TOS, 366 episodes of TNG and 172 episodes of VOY had been retconned on account of 3 episodes of DS9 and Enterprise each.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Peter G.
Just go back to the beginnings of television. Soap operas originated and exploited the seductive Big Tease, or as it's colloquial referred to today as: WTF?!?
@Peter G.
Just go back to the beginnings of television. Soap operas originated and exploited the seductive Big Tease, or as it's colloquial referred to today as: WTF?!?
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Bold Helmsman
Well, I can't say you're wrong about how historical experience influences interpretation, evaluation and re-evalution of speculative fiction. But, as I stated, I'm completely cognizant of the fact that Roddenberry's Trek can only exist within a very specific paradigm, i.e. a post-scarcity economy.
That's where the speculative part, the idealistic part, comes into play: are we humane enough to ever achieve something so inimical to our lizard hindbrain.
Otherwise any space faring future invariably looks more like The Expanse (which is the most consistently rewarding space opera I've had the pleasure to watch since Farscape in the mid aughts).
@Bold Helmsman
Well, I can't say you're wrong about how historical experience influences interpretation, evaluation and re-evalution of speculative fiction. But, as I stated, I'm completely cognizant of the fact that Roddenberry's Trek can only exist within a very specific paradigm, i.e. a post-scarcity economy.
That's where the speculative part, the idealistic part, comes into play: are we humane enough to ever achieve something so inimical to our lizard hindbrain.
Otherwise any space faring future invariably looks more like The Expanse (which is the most consistently rewarding space opera I've had the pleasure to watch since Farscape in the mid aughts).
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Dave in MN
Context is relevant however.
All organizations and institutions have some kind of oversight office, committee or agency tasked with objectively monitoring and reporting on the lawful/unlawful operations of said organizations or institutions.
Remmick operated within and under the auspices of the Inspector General's office. He wasn't engaged in skullduggery undermining the governments of aligned or nonaligned planets, let alone murdering foreign dignitaries and the like (except until he wasn't Remmick anymore, of course).
@Dave in MN
Context is relevant however.
All organizations and institutions have some kind of oversight office, committee or agency tasked with objectively monitoring and reporting on the lawful/unlawful operations of said organizations or institutions.
Remmick operated within and under the auspices of the Inspector General's office. He wasn't engaged in skullduggery undermining the governments of aligned or nonaligned planets, let alone murdering foreign dignitaries and the like (except until he wasn't Remmick anymore, of course).
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
I guess I can toss this is now.
Whose Star Trek is real Star Trek anyways?
@Bold Helmsman et al
Gene Roddenberry didn't invent Section 31, nor would he have. Gene Coon didn't invent Section 31, nor would he have. Hell, even Fred ”Show Killer" Freiberger didn't think to invent Section 31 to bolster TOS’ third season. Rick Berman didn’t invent Section 31. Neither did Brannon Braga. Nor Michael Piller. Or even Jeri Taylor.
Aspiring edgelord Ira Steven Behr invented Section 31 (the clandestine organization didn’t even make an appearance until the sixth season of DS9, and its only other appearance was in that cluster**** Enterprise). And given the specious, self-serving verdict he arrived at about the so-called negative feedback to DS9’s Rejoined, I hold Mr. Behr’s opinions about what Star Trek is or isn’t in very low regard.
Behr, again…
"Why is Earth a paradise in the twenty-fourth century? Well, maybe it's because there's someone watching over it and doing the nasty stuff that no one wants to think about. Of course it's a very complicated issue. Extremely complicated. And those kinds of covert operations usually are wrong!"
Gene Roddenberry’s United Federation of Planets is not Iain Bank’s The Culture (great book series by the way). Nor did Roddenberry conceive of the UFP as a mere analog to that American run dog and pony show called NATO. If anything, it’s a stark refutation of it. Gene Coon’s rewrite of “Mirror, Mirror” is the most obvious critique of the military-industrial complex and American imperial overreach in Trek canon.
And Roddenberry certainly would never have countenanced Bank’s Special Circumstances operating under the hood of the UFP because, for one, it would bely the moral imperative of non-interference that was established, and two, beggars belief that an organization like Section 31 could operate unremarked or unnoticed under the eyes, ears, noses and antennae of all the technologically advanced societies comprising the UFP (unless they're all in a conspiracy of silence).
Basically: given how technological advances have been informing and shaping hot button issues like privacy and surveillance today in the early 21st century, imagine how these same issues might evolve in the Roddenberry universe over the course of 200, 300 years, and what laws, treaties, technology and corresponding counter technology would be enacted, enforced and erected across worlds light years apart to prevent organizations like Section 31 from even achieving escape velocity.
So to suggest that Starfleet couldn’t pursue its peaceful, non-interventionist mandate without resorting to dirty tricks is pure projection on your part, Behr’s, and all the others who don’t, can’t or are unwilling to see anything possible past jury-rigged, Cold War genre tropes at best, or the ecocidal neoliberal agenda at worst.
Which is obviously why Roddenberry’s Trek could only thrive within a post-scarcity paradigm. In order for the future to be better off, humanity has to be better off (not just some).
Ira Steven Behr had his own agenda and priorities trying to get 26 episodes a year to air, and like other supposedly well meaning cooks adding to a broth, he thought it would be a good idea to stir in some Section 31 and mix things up a bit. Well, it did mix things up, and it wasn't a good idea then, and still isn't a good idea now, because it flies in the face of Trek’s received philosophy, at least as far myself and many like-minded individuals have come to appreciate it over the decades.
So, no, Behr certainly is not my source of “real” Star Trek. Frankly, one could strike DS9 from canon and I wouldn’t miss a thing apart from perhaps the often delightful interplay between Ben Sisko and Jadzia Dax.
Ultimately, this thing called Star Trek that has been riding the pop culture matter stream for the past 50 years is based on a wholly unoriginal and uncontroversial proposition, one made by countless people over the course of history: that humanity could boldly go where a pack of feral dogs fighting over a bleached bone in an alleyway cannot and never will go.
In nuce: Behr’s Section 31 farts in Star Trek’s general direction.
I guess I can toss this is now.
Whose Star Trek is real Star Trek anyways?
@Bold Helmsman et al
Gene Roddenberry didn't invent Section 31, nor would he have. Gene Coon didn't invent Section 31, nor would he have. Hell, even Fred ”Show Killer" Freiberger didn't think to invent Section 31 to bolster TOS’ third season. Rick Berman didn’t invent Section 31. Neither did Brannon Braga. Nor Michael Piller. Or even Jeri Taylor.
Aspiring edgelord Ira Steven Behr invented Section 31 (the clandestine organization didn’t even make an appearance until the sixth season of DS9, and its only other appearance was in that cluster**** Enterprise). And given the specious, self-serving verdict he arrived at about the so-called negative feedback to DS9’s Rejoined, I hold Mr. Behr’s opinions about what Star Trek is or isn’t in very low regard.
Behr, again…
"Why is Earth a paradise in the twenty-fourth century? Well, maybe it's because there's someone watching over it and doing the nasty stuff that no one wants to think about. Of course it's a very complicated issue. Extremely complicated. And those kinds of covert operations usually are wrong!"
Gene Roddenberry’s United Federation of Planets is not Iain Bank’s The Culture (great book series by the way). Nor did Roddenberry conceive of the UFP as a mere analog to that American run dog and pony show called NATO. If anything, it’s a stark refutation of it. Gene Coon’s rewrite of “Mirror, Mirror” is the most obvious critique of the military-industrial complex and American imperial overreach in Trek canon.
And Roddenberry certainly would never have countenanced Bank’s Special Circumstances operating under the hood of the UFP because, for one, it would bely the moral imperative of non-interference that was established, and two, beggars belief that an organization like Section 31 could operate unremarked or unnoticed under the eyes, ears, noses and antennae of all the technologically advanced societies comprising the UFP (unless they're all in a conspiracy of silence).
Basically: given how technological advances have been informing and shaping hot button issues like privacy and surveillance today in the early 21st century, imagine how these same issues might evolve in the Roddenberry universe over the course of 200, 300 years, and what laws, treaties, technology and corresponding counter technology would be enacted, enforced and erected across worlds light years apart to prevent organizations like Section 31 from even achieving escape velocity.
So to suggest that Starfleet couldn’t pursue its peaceful, non-interventionist mandate without resorting to dirty tricks is pure projection on your part, Behr’s, and all the others who don’t, can’t or are unwilling to see anything possible past jury-rigged, Cold War genre tropes at best, or the ecocidal neoliberal agenda at worst.
Which is obviously why Roddenberry’s Trek could only thrive within a post-scarcity paradigm. In order for the future to be better off, humanity has to be better off (not just some).
Ira Steven Behr had his own agenda and priorities trying to get 26 episodes a year to air, and like other supposedly well meaning cooks adding to a broth, he thought it would be a good idea to stir in some Section 31 and mix things up a bit. Well, it did mix things up, and it wasn't a good idea then, and still isn't a good idea now, because it flies in the face of Trek’s received philosophy, at least as far myself and many like-minded individuals have come to appreciate it over the decades.
So, no, Behr certainly is not my source of “real” Star Trek. Frankly, one could strike DS9 from canon and I wouldn’t miss a thing apart from perhaps the often delightful interplay between Ben Sisko and Jadzia Dax.
Ultimately, this thing called Star Trek that has been riding the pop culture matter stream for the past 50 years is based on a wholly unoriginal and uncontroversial proposition, one made by countless people over the course of history: that humanity could boldly go where a pack of feral dogs fighting over a bleached bone in an alleyway cannot and never will go.
In nuce: Behr’s Section 31 farts in Star Trek’s general direction.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Mertov
STD will live or die by its own sword. That sword being its scheme to retcon the still very much revered TOS and its cast of characters, because like Paramount and J.J. Trek, CBS wants and needs a soft reboot to keep the IP alive.
But just like J.J. Trek, STD is gonna go the way of the dodo.
@Mertov
STD will live or die by its own sword. That sword being its scheme to retcon the still very much revered TOS and its cast of characters, because like Paramount and J.J. Trek, CBS wants and needs a soft reboot to keep the IP alive.
But just like J.J. Trek, STD is gonna go the way of the dodo.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Mertov
As I stated upstream, I'm not speaking to the truth or falsity of Eaves' statements, or even CBS', which I've read, of course.
I'm just walking the steps back up the bread crumb trail to the source of the brush fire.
Eaves (and Schneider) made public statements about a particular IP and then they went into… silent running.
Make of it what you will.
@Mertov
As I stated upstream, I'm not speaking to the truth or falsity of Eaves' statements, or even CBS', which I've read, of course.
I'm just walking the steps back up the bread crumb trail to the source of the brush fire.
Eaves (and Schneider) made public statements about a particular IP and then they went into… silent running.
Make of it what you will.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@anyone
If you're weren't aware of it already, there was a thread at TrekBBS on the subject started back in April 2018 that includes pulled Q&A quotes from Eaves' downed Facebook page.
Again, did Eaves know what the *bleep* he was talking about?
Only the Phantom knows.
@anyone
If you're weren't aware of it already, there was a thread at TrekBBS on the subject started back in April 2018 that includes pulled Q&A quotes from Eaves' downed Facebook page.
Again, did Eaves know what the *bleep* he was talking about?
Only the Phantom knows.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Bold Helmsman
Ya, "everyone" who wasn't already a Trek fan that never tuned into Enterprise or "everyone" who wasn't already a Trek fan that made Nemesis or Beyond the monster hits they weren't.
The sorts of everyones that jump a sinking ship faster than rats at the next shiny thing to come over the horizon.
STD is in for the same sorry fate, and not just because it's thumbed its nose at long-time fans or requires a paid streaming service to watch.
And, no, Trek was never intended for everyone. The Cage didn't get canned for nuttin', you know. TOS' actual popularity amongst a certain demographic was only recognized when it took off in syndication, and then only hit prominence and broad appeal with TNG because it had no genre competition and no network breathing down its neck.
@Bold Helmsman
Ya, "everyone" who wasn't already a Trek fan that never tuned into Enterprise or "everyone" who wasn't already a Trek fan that made Nemesis or Beyond the monster hits they weren't.
The sorts of everyones that jump a sinking ship faster than rats at the next shiny thing to come over the horizon.
STD is in for the same sorry fate, and not just because it's thumbed its nose at long-time fans or requires a paid streaming service to watch.
And, no, Trek was never intended for everyone. The Cage didn't get canned for nuttin', you know. TOS' actual popularity amongst a certain demographic was only recognized when it took off in syndication, and then only hit prominence and broad appeal with TNG because it had no genre competition and no network breathing down its neck.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Booming
I wasn't speaking to the truth or falsity of any of it, just relating reports associated with the story. As Dave in MN pointed out, it might be true it might not be true.
You could always email John Eaves yourself and ask him if CBS threatened him with a lawsuit if he didn't pull down that Facebook post of his.
@Booming
I wasn't speaking to the truth or falsity of any of it, just relating reports associated with the story. As Dave in MN pointed out, it might be true it might not be true.
You could always email John Eaves yourself and ask him if CBS threatened him with a lawsuit if he didn't pull down that Facebook post of his.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Booming
Also see trekmovie.com: "…comments from Eaves’ now-deleted Facebook post … implied that there were legal issues surrounding the use of the classic USS Enterprise design which dictated the changes seen in Star Trek: Discovery."
@Booming
Also see trekmovie.com: "…comments from Eaves’ now-deleted Facebook post … implied that there were legal issues surrounding the use of the classic USS Enterprise design which dictated the changes seen in Star Trek: Discovery."
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Booming
Google is you friend (when it really isn't).
See "Star Trek: Discovery's Version of the Enterprise Had to Be Modified for Legal Reasons" @ i09 for example.
@Booming
Google is you friend (when it really isn't).
See "Star Trek: Discovery's Version of the Enterprise Had to Be Modified for Legal Reasons" @ i09 for example.
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
The 25% rule thingy got started with John Eaves relating the guidelines for the redesign of the Enterprise for STD. A guideline presumably directed from legal.
"After Enterprise, properties of Star Trek ownership changed hands and was divided, so what was able to cross TV shows up to that point changed and a lot of the crossover was no longer allowed… That is why when JJ's movie came along everything had to be different. The alternate universe concept was what really made that movie happen in a way as to not cross the new boundaries and give Trek a new footing to continue."
This has since been rebuffed by CBS which claims modern VFX and adjusting for size relative to the Discovery were the motivating factors.
The 25% rule thingy got started with John Eaves relating the guidelines for the redesign of the Enterprise for STD. A guideline presumably directed from legal.
"After Enterprise, properties of Star Trek ownership changed hands and was divided, so what was able to cross TV shows up to that point changed and a lot of the crossover was no longer allowed… That is why when JJ's movie came along everything had to be different. The alternate universe concept was what really made that movie happen in a way as to not cross the new boundaries and give Trek a new footing to continue."
This has since been rebuffed by CBS which claims modern VFX and adjusting for size relative to the Discovery were the motivating factors.
Re: DSC S2: An Obol for Charon
On the latest episode of Star Trek: Discombobulation…
0:00 Nu-Number One teleports over from the Enterprise (overheard on the comm channel).
0:52 Nu-Number One orders a Happy Meal; Nu-Pike, the coffee. Nu-Pike states the Enterprise is in space dock.
1:14 Nu-Pike and Nu-Number One conduct a tête-a-tête in Discovery’s mess hall. A static star field is observable in the windows behind them. Discovery is at station keeping.
1:46 Nu-Pike is called away to a briefing in the ready room and leaves Nu-Number One to leisurely finish her fries.
2:03 An interminable 90 seconds follows with Tilly oversharing as usual and Stamets carrying out his assigned duty as Discovery’s GBF*.
3:45 Cut to ready room (where the briefing Nu-Pike is late for is already in progress). The view out of the ready room’s windows show Discovery at warp.
4:50 Nu-Pike enters the ready room carrying his coffee, promptly breaks up the briefing and instructs the navigator to plot a new heading at maximum warp.
5:05 Burnham interjects: “I understand your first officer (Nu-Number One) is on her way to space dock. Was her visit informative?”
.˙.
1. Between the time we last saw Nu-Number One leisurely eating her fries in the mess hall and the 1:42 secs. it took Nu-Pike to get to the ready room, Discovery was already at warp and certainly a long, long ways from space dock. Which means that literally no time passed between Nu-Number One finishing her Happy Meal, being teleported back to Enterprise in space dock, and Discovery leaving space dock and going to warp.
2. Who gave the command to go to warp anyway?
3. How and when did Burnham find out Nu-Number One departed Discovery?
4. Was Nu-Pike’s coffee still hot?
Bueller?
This is just like Sarek’s disappearing act from the first episode all over again. One moment he’s there, and the next he’s … where did he go and how did he get there?!?
I realize STD has to move faster than the speed of thought to keep the ADHD generation in their happy space, and that so long as all that shaky, shiny & sparkly goin’ on keeps the eyes busy nothing actually has to amount to a hill of beans between the ears, but, sheesh, this pre-credits sequence really takes the cake for haste makes waste…
****
The non-sensical Universal Translator crisis is a topic unto itself.
****
1. By ordering a cheeseburger, fries and shake, Nu-Number One…
a) had Majel Barrett rolling over in her grave?
b) didn’t trigger an Incel uprising?
c) (with the retro do & makeup) let slip she’s actually a Jetson’s cosplayer?
d) became a role model for diet junkies who now strive towards a bright, bounteous, post-scarcity future where the daily consumption of fast food no longer poses a barrier to keeping a figure like a 46 year old Rebecca Romijn?
2a. The Discovery doesn’t have long-range sensors to detect objects in its path. It just J.J. jumps into trouble anytime anywhere when its dramatically convenient.
2b. The Federation itself doesn’t routinely map, probe or conduct long range scans of the Alpha Quadrant for largish astronomical bodies (unusual or otherwise). Nor does it inform its fleet of the location of said largish astronomical bodies (unusual or otherwise).
3. Nu-Pike is afraid of ghosts and spiders. Clowns too, probably (can’t wait for that episode!)—and no doubt all the other scary things stereotypical 8 year old girls are afraid of. A perfectly scientific post-viewing poll that was conducted revealed that these personal admissions apparently took the testosterone edge off Nu-Pike and subsequently made him appear less toxic to viewers who would otherwise find his lack of “girlishness” ironically sexist.
4. Clearly Tig Nigaro exists in some corner of pop culture I don’t frequent, because I honestly don’t get what the big deal is with her, other than the character she portrays is just another one of those glib, quippy assholes that blight the J.J., Whedon and Marvel Media-Verses.
5. Without assigning the subjective viewpoint of the hallucinating third party, the director broke the fourth wall with his objectified depiction of Stamets’ and Jet’s shared hallucinatory experience.
6. We still haven’t seen engineering or its chief because:
a) the brewery was demolished back in 2016.
b) CBS couldn’t get Netflix to pony up the quatloos for the set?
c) Discovery’s designer forgot to sketch one into the plans.
7a. Starfleet enlists officers of alien origin without an acceptable clinical understanding of their physiology or psychology.
7b. Starfleet promotes cadets with debilitating self-esteem issues into the officer ranks.
8. Burnham and Saru share an heretofore unseen and unmentioned bond of profound, expository depth. Well … Doug Jones’ makeup and body appliances were convincing at least.
9. The “we hardly knew you” CGI plot device of the week blowed up real good, endowing Discovery with the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything, and … oh ya … Nu-Spock’s wayward heading too. How convenient. No doubt there’s a chapter on the Red Angel as well.
10. Orb’s Memory = Coin which is given to Nu-Pike = Charon who downloads it into Discovery = Hades(?) ∴ Hmmm… how apropos.
* GBF = Gay Best Friend
1 star out of 4 (for Stamets’ DIY handiwork).
On the latest episode of Star Trek: Discombobulation…
0:00 Nu-Number One teleports over from the Enterprise (overheard on the comm channel).
0:52 Nu-Number One orders a Happy Meal; Nu-Pike, the coffee. Nu-Pike states the Enterprise is in space dock.
1:14 Nu-Pike and Nu-Number One conduct a tête-a-tête in Discovery’s mess hall. A static star field is observable in the windows behind them. Discovery is at station keeping.
1:46 Nu-Pike is called away to a briefing in the ready room and leaves Nu-Number One to leisurely finish her fries.
2:03 An interminable 90 seconds follows with Tilly oversharing as usual and Stamets carrying out his assigned duty as Discovery’s GBF*.
3:45 Cut to ready room (where the briefing Nu-Pike is late for is already in progress). The view out of the ready room’s windows show Discovery at warp.
4:50 Nu-Pike enters the ready room carrying his coffee, promptly breaks up the briefing and instructs the navigator to plot a new heading at maximum warp.
5:05 Burnham interjects: “I understand your first officer (Nu-Number One) is on her way to space dock. Was her visit informative?”
.˙.
1. Between the time we last saw Nu-Number One leisurely eating her fries in the mess hall and the 1:42 secs. it took Nu-Pike to get to the ready room, Discovery was already at warp and certainly a long, long ways from space dock. Which means that literally no time passed between Nu-Number One finishing her Happy Meal, being teleported back to Enterprise in space dock, and Discovery leaving space dock and going to warp.
2. Who gave the command to go to warp anyway?
3. How and when did Burnham find out Nu-Number One departed Discovery?
4. Was Nu-Pike’s coffee still hot?
Bueller?
This is just like Sarek’s disappearing act from the first episode all over again. One moment he’s there, and the next he’s … where did he go and how did he get there?!?
I realize STD has to move faster than the speed of thought to keep the ADHD generation in their happy space, and that so long as all that shaky, shiny & sparkly goin’ on keeps the eyes busy nothing actually has to amount to a hill of beans between the ears, but, sheesh, this pre-credits sequence really takes the cake for haste makes waste…
****
The non-sensical Universal Translator crisis is a topic unto itself.
****
1. By ordering a cheeseburger, fries and shake, Nu-Number One…
a) had Majel Barrett rolling over in her grave?
b) didn’t trigger an Incel uprising?
c) (with the retro do & makeup) let slip she’s actually a Jetson’s cosplayer?
d) became a role model for diet junkies who now strive towards a bright, bounteous, post-scarcity future where the daily consumption of fast food no longer poses a barrier to keeping a figure like a 46 year old Rebecca Romijn?
2a. The Discovery doesn’t have long-range sensors to detect objects in its path. It just J.J. jumps into trouble anytime anywhere when its dramatically convenient.
2b. The Federation itself doesn’t routinely map, probe or conduct long range scans of the Alpha Quadrant for largish astronomical bodies (unusual or otherwise). Nor does it inform its fleet of the location of said largish astronomical bodies (unusual or otherwise).
3. Nu-Pike is afraid of ghosts and spiders. Clowns too, probably (can’t wait for that episode!)—and no doubt all the other scary things stereotypical 8 year old girls are afraid of. A perfectly scientific post-viewing poll that was conducted revealed that these personal admissions apparently took the testosterone edge off Nu-Pike and subsequently made him appear less toxic to viewers who would otherwise find his lack of “girlishness” ironically sexist.
4. Clearly Tig Nigaro exists in some corner of pop culture I don’t frequent, because I honestly don’t get what the big deal is with her, other than the character she portrays is just another one of those glib, quippy assholes that blight the J.J., Whedon and Marvel Media-Verses.
5. Without assigning the subjective viewpoint of the hallucinating third party, the director broke the fourth wall with his objectified depiction of Stamets’ and Jet’s shared hallucinatory experience.
6. We still haven’t seen engineering or its chief because:
a) the brewery was demolished back in 2016.
b) CBS couldn’t get Netflix to pony up the quatloos for the set?
c) Discovery’s designer forgot to sketch one into the plans.
7a. Starfleet enlists officers of alien origin without an acceptable clinical understanding of their physiology or psychology.
7b. Starfleet promotes cadets with debilitating self-esteem issues into the officer ranks.
8. Burnham and Saru share an heretofore unseen and unmentioned bond of profound, expository depth. Well … Doug Jones’ makeup and body appliances were convincing at least.
9. The “we hardly knew you” CGI plot device of the week blowed up real good, endowing Discovery with the Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe, and Everything, and … oh ya … Nu-Spock’s wayward heading too. How convenient. No doubt there’s a chapter on the Red Angel as well.
10. Orb’s Memory = Coin which is given to Nu-Pike = Charon who downloads it into Discovery = Hades(?) ∴ Hmmm… how apropos.
* GBF = Gay Best Friend
1 star out of 4 (for Stamets’ DIY handiwork).
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@UnknownGenius
Believe it or not, but there are at least as many shades of right as there are of left. And identity politics is GMOd fruit thrown from the Tree of Fake News née Knowledge, anyways, so…
In other words: skin colour is immaterial. Sexuality is immaterial. Gender is immaterial. Decorum is immaterial. These calling cards are as relevant to the politics of this show as the Discovery's deck plans. But they certainly drive the plebs to distraction, don't they?
From behind the curtain outa earshot:
“Our work here is done, wouldn’t you say?”
“Indubitably. And work well done, if I may say so myself.”
"You may."
"You're too kind."
"You flatter yourself." [beat]
"Shall we be off, then?"
"Mmmm… Somewhere with more of a challenge, perhaps?"
"Indeed! I have heard word of some Pickard thingee."
"A Pickard thingee?"
"Yes, a Pickard thingee. Very high profile. Thoroughly upstanding stuff. And altogether ripe for the taking."
"Sounds inviting. Alrighty then, Pickard it is."
"Tally ho?"
"Tally ho!"
@UnknownGenius
Believe it or not, but there are at least as many shades of right as there are of left. And identity politics is GMOd fruit thrown from the Tree of Fake News née Knowledge, anyways, so…
In other words: skin colour is immaterial. Sexuality is immaterial. Gender is immaterial. Decorum is immaterial. These calling cards are as relevant to the politics of this show as the Discovery's deck plans. But they certainly drive the plebs to distraction, don't they?
From behind the curtain outa earshot:
“Our work here is done, wouldn’t you say?”
“Indubitably. And work well done, if I may say so myself.”
"You may."
"You're too kind."
"You flatter yourself." [beat]
"Shall we be off, then?"
"Mmmm… Somewhere with more of a challenge, perhaps?"
"Indeed! I have heard word of some Pickard thingee."
"A Pickard thingee?"
"Yes, a Pickard thingee. Very high profile. Thoroughly upstanding stuff. And altogether ripe for the taking."
"Sounds inviting. Alrighty then, Pickard it is."
"Tally ho?"
"Tally ho!"
Re: DSC S2: Saints of Imperfection
@Lord Morn
Oh boy, where to begin? I won't actually, because it would be unseemly to take up too much of Jammer's space shit canning another author’s publication, still the fella literally falls on his face with the likes of…
"Voyager is not about exploration. Voyager is about a ship desperately longing to return to an idealised notion of home, much like Trumpism longs for a return to an idealised past."
Clearly Darren didn't get the studio press kit back in '95.
Voyager was abducted and transported 70,000 light years from their home in the Alpha Quadrant. Where the hell else were they supposed to go? And what in all get out is notional about getting back to where you were abducted from?
Where he was hoping to go with that Morlocks in MAGA hats angle is beyond me. But wherever it was, he didn’t dig deep enough.
Anyway, along with dishing out a great many more false equivalencies between VOY and DS9, the author engages in straw man arguments (woulda, coulda, shoulda in universe stuff; citing R. Moore, in fact) to bolster his thesis whilst completely ignoring the sad realities of producing for network television (TOS’s storied production, anyone?).
In the main, there’s a whole lot of intellectual dishonesty, stretching a theory until it so thin it’s about to break, and drawing really, really strained conclusions going on in that article—though I can't disagree with his description of the first couple jingoistic seasons of Enterprise.
****
Ya know what turned me off J.J. Trek back in '09, other than how loud, dumbed-down and obnoxious it was, it was seeing Spock smirk at the thought of Nero's destruction and hearing Kirk authorizing that destruction with a phrase as cavalierly broish as "you got it."
@Lord Morn
Oh boy, where to begin? I won't actually, because it would be unseemly to take up too much of Jammer's space shit canning another author’s publication, still the fella literally falls on his face with the likes of…
"Voyager is not about exploration. Voyager is about a ship desperately longing to return to an idealised notion of home, much like Trumpism longs for a return to an idealised past."
Clearly Darren didn't get the studio press kit back in '95.
Voyager was abducted and transported 70,000 light years from their home in the Alpha Quadrant. Where the hell else were they supposed to go? And what in all get out is notional about getting back to where you were abducted from?
Where he was hoping to go with that Morlocks in MAGA hats angle is beyond me. But wherever it was, he didn’t dig deep enough.
Anyway, along with dishing out a great many more false equivalencies between VOY and DS9, the author engages in straw man arguments (woulda, coulda, shoulda in universe stuff; citing R. Moore, in fact) to bolster his thesis whilst completely ignoring the sad realities of producing for network television (TOS’s storied production, anyone?).
In the main, there’s a whole lot of intellectual dishonesty, stretching a theory until it so thin it’s about to break, and drawing really, really strained conclusions going on in that article—though I can't disagree with his description of the first couple jingoistic seasons of Enterprise.
****
Ya know what turned me off J.J. Trek back in '09, other than how loud, dumbed-down and obnoxious it was, it was seeing Spock smirk at the thought of Nero's destruction and hearing Kirk authorizing that destruction with a phrase as cavalierly broish as "you got it."
Re: ORV S2: Deflectors
@Charles J
Yup.
Look past the tropes and what you get is some uncomfortable mixed messaging.
@Charles J
Yup.
Look past the tropes and what you get is some uncomfortable mixed messaging.
Next ►Page 1 of 3