Star Trek Social Club
r/startrek: The Next Generation
Star Trek news and discussion. No slash fic...
Maybe a little slash fic.
Rules
1 Be constructive
All posts/comments must be thoughtful and balanced.
2 Be welcoming
It is important that everyone from newbies to OG Trekkers feel welcome, no matter their gender, sexual orientation, religion or race.
3 Be truthful
All posts/comments must be factually accurate and verifiable. We are not a place for gossip, rumors, or manipulative or misleading content.
4 Be nice
If a polite way cannot be found to phrase what it is you want to say, don't say anything at all. Insulting or disparaging remarks about any human being are expressly not allowed.
5 Spoilers
Utilize the spoiler system for any and all spoilers relating to the most recently-aired episode. There is no formal spoiler protection for episodes/films after they have been available for approximately one week.
6 Keep on-topic
All submissions must be directly about the Star Trek franchise (the shows, movies, books, etc.). Off-topic discussions are welcome at c/Quarks.
7 Meta
Questions and concerns about moderator actions should be brought forward via DM.
Upcoming Episodes
| Date | Episode | Title |
|---|---|---|
| 07-23 | SNW 4x01 | "Valles Marineris" |
| 07-30 | SNW 4x02 | "Griffin Incident" |
| 08-06 | SNW 4x03 | TBA |
| 08-13 | SNW 4x04 | TBA |
| 08-20 | SNW 4x05 | TBA |
Wondering where to stream a series? Check here.
view the rest of the comments
This is a complete misunderstanding of the wokeness complaints. They aren't about who or what is presented in current trek, but how it's presented. For example, instead of playing out insightful allegories that let viewers figure out the message, thereby crediting us with intelligence, the characters in Picard S2 walk around LA saying, "Wow what a terrible century, there's so much social injustice." That isn't good storytelling, it's a combo of lecturing and virtue signaling, and the fact that it's the right message doesn't change that.
In that case the issue is hamfisted storytelling, not progressive ideas. So calling it "woke" is pointing the wrong direction.
But that's just it. Pushing progressive ideas through ham-fisted storytelling is the wokeness people complain about.
It is also when these things are blatant. Original Star Trek was progressive not because it showed a black person's struggle for equality, it was progressive because it showed black people as equal.
A perfect example is DS9's lesbian kiss. The short version, Trill are a joined species consisting of a humanoid host with a standard lifespan, combined with a very long-lived symbiote that can live for many host lifetimes. The resulting personality is thus a blend of the host and the symbiote.
In this specific episode, there is a rule in Trill society that if two Trill are romantically involved, that relationship has to end when either of the symbiotes move to a new host. The explanation is otherwise two symbiotes would just stay together forever through multiple hosts and never grow or learn. Anyway, one of the show's main characters is a Trill female and in this episode encounters another female carrying the symbiote her symbiote was once married to. So this is a forbidden romance they are both tempted to. It's explained that the previous relationship one of them was in a male host and the other one a female host. Now they are both in female hosts, and this is not brought up even once. The fact that they are both women is not even mentioned. It is completely and totally ignored.
THAT is a non-woke progressive presentation of the idea.
It's not trying to get the audience to empathize with the black person who can't sit in front of the bus, it's just showing the black person sitting in front of the bus and making it not a big deal.
I agree that this is valid criticism. The Star Trek writers have clearly gotten lazier over the years, opting for hamfisted, blatant, "see? we're being woke in this scene" rather than allowing you to think for yourself.
However, the complaint here is laziness and not the nature of the message. I'd even go so far to say that due to the complex storytelling of earlier series, there's a large contingent of the fanbase that didn't realise their progressive nature, and are objecting to how it's woke now.
So basically I think there's two complaints here: a valid one that you're making: "lazy writing is terrible and arguably less effective", and another one coming from, shall we say, those unburdened by an overabundance of schooling that are objecting to progressive ideas that were always there, but they only notice it now with the lazy writing.
Hard disagree.
People are criticizing 'woke'ness- you're assuming that's idiots who don't want to see progressive storylines but somehow didn't notice that Uhura was a black officer when it was assumed black people couldn't do much more than cook and clean.
I think the reality is that people are happy to take progressive storylines, but people strongly resent the specific combination of progressive storylines delivered ham-fisted which one might call 'wokeness'.
I'm saying that for myself too. I am STRONGLY in favor of inclusion. I have NO problem seeing any race, gender, sexual orientation, etc of character on screen, and I want to see all groups represented fairly.
A great example of that was The Expanse. It's part of the overall series plot that since humans went to space, former national borders no longer applied much so cultures mixed together. So you get this major disconnection between name ethnicity and physical appearance ethnicity (IE, Japanese guy with a French name, Black character with a Japanese name, etc) and nobody bats an eye. One of the first plots revolves around a man and his husband who are going to retire together and nobody gives a shit they're gay. Like it's not even brought up, it's just 'me and my husband are going to retire on Mars' and this is treated as a perfectly normal thing that a man of advanced years would say.
Like myself, I bet you'd find a lot of the same people unhappy at 'wokeness' in Trek have NO problem with The Expanse- because it's not woke, it's inclusive.
Now full disclosure- I've not actually seen any of the new Trek- didn't have Paramount+ until my partner wanted to watch Landman and nothing I heard about any of the new stuff made it sound like a must-watch. So I'm speaking conceptually on wokeness.
But in my experience, wokeness is pretty much the same no matter who's writing it or in what venue. It's NOT the same as inclusion.
BTW- if you haven't watched The Expanse I highly encourage you to do so....
I've seen (and read) The Expanse, and you're right, it's fantastic. One of the authors has also repeated gone on record as doing his best to fight the patriarchy.
And that is exactly my point.
You think The Expanse would be better if Avasarala was a strong woman leader fighting to make her mark in a male-dominated world? I think not. The whole thing that makes her so great is that she can be herself, by not needing to prove herself worthy she proves herself worthy. Or Bobbie Draper- if she was the GI Jane, struggling to be taken seriously in a male-dominated MMC? No, then the story stops being about a badass woman being badass, and starts being about the men who don't recognize that badassery. And that's a MUCH less interesting story. Or Drummer- I've not yet read the books but I understand TV-Drummer was a combination of two characters-- after the mutiny on Tycho she's wounded, someone tries to help her up but she pushes them away, grabs the guys sidearm, blasts the two mutineers, and hobbles off to the infirmary on her own... would that scene be better if someone was saying 'I guess women can have balls after all'?
No, the way you fight patriarchy, or racism, or homophobia, isn't to fight patriarchy or racism or homophobia. It's to show people what happens after patriarchy, racism, and homophobia are defeated, and let people decide that's the world they want.
The Expanse took great strides to fight a number of prejudices. But never once was it 'woke'.
The complaint isn't about the woke sentiments themselves, it's about replacing interesting storytelling with lecturing on those themes, and the people in charge of trek right now using the show as their pulpit. IMO it's phony virtue signaling, but it's working because the main target audience has largely been ignored in the past, and are very easy to bait and quick to defend anything that looks like an ally and see any critics as evil enemies.
Then again, I am pretty sure, when we walked around e.g. the medieval times, we would bubble out the blatantly obvious as well.
"Look, those idiots don't know about bacteria. Dumbasses."
That was McCoy's attitude about dialysis and 20th Century medicine in general, which was well in keeping within his crotchety nature and was slightly comical, not meant to preach that 20th Century medicine is backward. But if we went to medieval times and called them dumbasses for not knowing about modern biology, that would be showing our own ignorance.
Trek is known for allegory, but routinely abandons it for time travel stories. Star Trek IV and Deep Space Nine’s “Past Tense” and “Far Beyond the Stars” all examples that tackle societal issues very directly, and they’re all highly thought of.
To be clear, I think Picard features possibly the worst writing in modern Trek, so I’m not setting out to defend it on all fronts. But the idea that addressing societal issues head on isn’t a valid approach for Star Trek doesn’t add up for me.
Maybe it's a question of degree - I didn't watch all of DS9 and don't remember those two episodes, but I honestly can't think of other instances where characters walked around bemoaning the state of affairs beyond a comment or two. In the Harlan Ellison episode with Edith Keeler nobody commented on it being a shame that there were still millionaires while poor people were eating soup kitchens, for example. Same for the Gary Seven episode - there were brief matter of fact comments on young people being unhappy with things, but no lecturing on the military industrial complex profiting off the Vietnam War. Maybe what you're talking about evolved later.