Sunshine... this is not directed at you, per se, but to everyone who continues to use this "this is not Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future" argument against this show. While Roddenberry did envision a future where humanity had learned to control our inner natures and, more often than not, made the morally correct decisions, he did not intend to take it so far that humanity became pacifistic to the point they would lose a war rather than utilize brutal tactics if necessary. ALL of Star Trek history makes this abundantly clear:
*In at least two instances I can think of off the top of my head, Kirk's solution to a threat from an unknown life form is to kill it, as quickly as possible (The Horta in "The Devil in the Dark" and the Salt Vampire in "The Man Trap"). In the case of the Horta, Spock even pleads on the creature's behalf, and Kirk's enlightened response is that the creature is a threat to humans and must be killed. Yes, Kirk finally comes around, but that was NOT his initial, "enlightened" human reaction.
*When he believed he had found a virtual "fountain of youth", Captain Ronald Tracy (TOS "The Omega Glory") has absolutely no problem killing THOUSANDS of Yangs trying to bring that knowledge to the Federation. He even vaporizes one of Kirk's crew (the stun setting doesn't work on his phaser?) and threatens to "burn down" McCoy and Spock to protect his secret. So much for the prime directive and the value for intelligent life.
*When Kirk's tribal friends are threatened with extermination at the hands of a rival faction who are being supplied more advanced weapons by Klingons (TOS "A Private Little War"), Kirk's values and morals don't lead him to blockade the planet and use the Organians and Federation council to stop the situation... no, instead Kirk's solution is to provide identical weapons to his friend's tribe, a move that will, most likely, plunge a peaceful planet into decades of bloody conflict. The end of that episode has Kirk just beaming away... leaving the planet to fall into chaos.
*When there is actually a possibility for a lasting PEACE treaty between the Federation and the Klingons (ST:TUC), high ranking members of the Federation and Klingons conspire together to assassinate the High Chancellor of the Klingon empire and the Federation President... all so they can PREVENT peace. What does that say about those sensibilities when you're will to murder to prevent PEACE and not end a war?
*And, most similar to the situation in Discovery, when faced with the very real possibility of the fall of the Federation to the combined Dominion and Cardassian forces, Sisko conspires with Garak in a plot that leads to the assassination of a Romulan senator, all to coerce the Romulans into entering the war in order to save the Federation. While Sisko was upset that it went this far in order to achieve his objective, at the end of the episode he admits that, given the same set of circumstances he would do the same thing over again. Apparently he has no problems setting aside those "advanced ideals" if it means saving the whole of the Federation against an enemy that was very close to winning the war.
I could sit here and come up with so many more examples where this "enlightened sensibility" was put aside, but I think I've made my point. Roddenberry's actual intent was to show that humanity, on Earth, had learned to put aside our inner nature... but we, in no way, had become pacifists that would let an enemy destroy everything we had built in order to adhere to those principals. In TOS, Kirk, on many occasions, admitted as to how humanity still had that "savage core" and had learned to control it... but had no problems turning to violence himself if he believed the end justified the means.
And that's why it rankles me so much when folks want to trot that out when bemoaning this show. It really shows a lack of understanding and any kind of grasp on the true nature and history of "Star Trek" itself. The show itself, over the course of its 50+ years on movies and television has shown that, when pushed, humanity and the Federation have absolutely NO problem setting aside ideals and using any advantage they can find to win wars that will preserve the Federation in the long term.
And, not to pick on you personally, but you kind of show your lack of knowledge when you say you have to "take my word" that the Klingon's and Romulan's came together for a period... that was not a one-off thing... the Klingon-Romulan sharing of technology was mentioned in both TOS and TNG, and the betrayal of that alliance at Khitomer was part of Worf's backstory. That is a major piece of "the history of the Star Trek universe" and something that anyone familiar with Trek should know.
reply
share
[deleted]
6 years ago
So you're saying that Roddenberry would approve of Burnham attacking her senior officer, causing a war which kills billions, escaping from a prison sentence with the help of a megalomaniac, tampers with time for her own sexual whims with a Klingon spy, gives up all tactical data to a mirror-universe empress who looks like that senior officer who she caused to die and brings them back from their own imminent death because she feels like she is redeemable even thought she ate beings that the crew of Discovery call friends?
Roddenberry had a pretty callous approach to command in that case.
reply
share
Jamfo (408)
6 years ago
Again, this is the same Roddenberry who DID approve of a Captain who allowed the entire crew of his ship to die, broke the Prime Directive by taking sides with one of two rival factions, used his advanced technology to PERSONALLY kill thousands and thousands of the other faction, vaporized one Starfleet officer and threatened two others in order to force Kirk to send down more phasers in order to PERSONALLY kill even more thousands and thousands of other living beings, and used trickery and guile to force a fight to the death with another Starfleet captain, all to bring some "fountain of youth", which ended up not existing at all, back to the Federation?
This is from the Original Series episode "The Omega Glory"... go look it up.
What Roddenberry WAS in favor of was characters with human flaws and frailties, and how they overcame those to be better people. Burnham thought she was reacting logically, having learned information on dealing with the Klingon's from the Vulcans. How many times had we seen Kirk or Picard go directly against the orders of superiors when they thought they were right? How about Spock basically committing an act of betrayal and mutiny, all so he could kidnap his former captain and take him to a planet banned (with a death penalty, nonetheless) by the Federation? As we know from watching the series, T'Kuvma was hell-bent on starting that war, and nothing Burnham did was going to change that. So she was wrong to attack her captain (and was willing to accept that), but she did not cause the war.
So, given we have plenty of examples going all the way back to TOS of Starfleet officers acting in very "un-enlightened" ways, I guess we do have to conclude that Roddenberry had a pretty callous approach to command. Or, maybe he just understood that in order to tell a good story, you had to have characters who were less than perfect and who were only too human after all. THAT is how you draw parallels to contemporary society in order tell stories that are allegories of the issues of our times.
reply
share
[deleted]
6 years ago
"Or, maybe he just understood that in order to tell a good story, you had to have characters who were less than perfect and who were only too human after all. THAT is how you draw parallels to contemporary society in order tell stories that are allegories of the issues of our times."
I guess we just differ on what a good story is then. I'm more than happy to have a character struggle to overcome the odds and bring about the best morally acceptable outcome for the majority, even if that isn't the ideal solution they'd wish for. I just don't get that with Burnham or with much of the crew of the Discovery.
But then I'm not protesting on university campuses over Halloween outfits, preferred pronouns or how authentic the General Tso's chicken is at the cafeteria compared to how it is in Beijing. Perhaps I'm just out of touch with contemporary society and the floods of new fans Discovery will take on will be worth it for the franchise and its future for all.
I suppose time will tell.
reply
share
Jamfo (408)
6 years ago
Reality... of course, we can differ on our opinions! That is what makes entertainment interesting... if everyone liked the same things, or there was only one way to tell a story, things would be dreadfully boring.
One thing I am interested to see, and one things the producers are trying to point out, is how all of this plays out now that the crew is NOT under the influence of someone who has been manipulating them, and the events around them, since episode 3. As we now know, the mirror Lorca has been manipulating events for his own personal gain, and none of the other characters have realized this. They've all been put in positions that made them act in certain ways that would benefit Lorca's ends. Now that that factor has been removed, it will be interesting to see if everyone migrates back to the type of standard we are expecting. This is something that we start to see a glimmer of with Saru's speech in the last episode... this was the first time we saw the entire bridge staff brought together in a very TOS or TNG type moment. And, the way Saru stated that this was, indeed, the Discovery's "maiden voyage" hints that we are about to see changes to a more "Starfleet" type environment.
reply
share
[deleted]
6 years ago
We'll have to see what it becomes. I didn't like TNG on its first season and DS9 took a little less but still some time to get into. I can't understand the love for most of VOY but I know it is there and I thought ENT was mostly awesome.
Obviously TOS was first and foremost and that it where this series is closest to and so hope and time are the only things I can rely on at the moment.
It's not a bad show, I'm just not sure how Trek it is at the moment Jamfo.
reply
share
sunshine62 (250)
6 years ago
by Jamfo:
Sunshine... this is not directed at you, per se, but to everyone who continues to use this "this is not Gene Roddenberry's vision of the future" argument against this show. While Roddenberry did envision a future where humanity had learned to control our inner natures and, more often than not, made the morally correct decisions, he did not intend to take it so far that humanity became pacifistic to the point they would lose a war rather than utilize brutal tactics if necessary. ALL of Star Trek history makes this abundantly clear...
____________________________________________________________________________
@First off "STAR TREK" 1966 is the only series of the franchise that depicts Roddenberry's true vision .
Every series that followed was a step more towards the other direction.
Focusing on details , we tend to miss the bigger picture.
In Roddenberry’s vision mankind has learnt to put aside its egoism … there is no more famine, disease, racism and war .
In three hundred years time mankind , a united race, is focus on maintaining the wellbeing of its people and its planet.
The United Federation of Planets is an organization that represents all the noble values that mankind ,and another 150 planet members , have vowed to live by.
Obviously , there will still be corrupt people , " bad apples " ,but in GR future world they are a MINORITY , a very small portion of Earth’s population …(they’ll be the antagonists/villains in some episodes).
In my OP I said I hope the writers don’t go down a certain path ..that is :have the Federation accept the help of Georgiou , a war criminal , to win the war against the Klingons .
Roddenberry had at heart this idea of the United Planets of the Federation , where humans and other species coexist in peace. He called his “vision “ STAR TREK . THIS is the story he wanted to tell ….where mankind had eliminated war and WAS NOW UNITED IN A PEACFUL EXPLORATION OF SPACE.
continues.....
reply
share
sunshine62 (250)
6 years ago
continue..
I just saw episode 13 …a bleak and dark future…..the odds are against the Federation planets and their only hope in defeating the enemy leaves them no choice but to put aside their noble and just principals and accept the help of a war criminal.
Well this is far from the flourishing ,optimistic world Roddenberry wanted us to believe possible in our future.
This is a world where even peaceful Vulcans see no other option but to put aside , values and morals and make a pact with the devil.
Don’t get me wrong I am enjoying the dark tone in STD but this certainly is not the story Roddenberry wanted to tell….it resembles more Star Wars…where conflict, pain ,tragedy , horror and death are the main theme.
STAR TREK is suppose to be an adventure , the journey of a captain and his crew in search for life in space… for new discoveries, for new understandings , for knowledge that will help mankind understand better themselves and its place in the universe..
The Enterprise encounters peaceful aliens but also mean and cruel ones ,Kirk has to deal with “ the bad apples”: humans that have gone rogue, are sick , mental or are simply interested only in personal gain.
Kirk does his best to uphold the values and morals of the Federation trying to use words rather than force .
He’s a courageous captain ,an honest man, he tries to undo or fix situations created by others …most of the time he is successful, other times we get a bittersweet ending.
GENE’S VISION OF HUMANITY ‘S FUTURE is overall positive, encouraging, optimistic…STD instead is just all about warfare.
reply
share
maximmm (3096)
6 years ago
Hmmm - so we are seeing more flaws than usual - from what I can tell, most of humanity is at peace. Most creatures on the ship coexist peacefully and cooperate on all matters. They tried to use words during the first episode and things went south rather quickly. It has long been established that there was a Federation-Klingon war in the past - and we are certainly seeing that (I still have an issue with the new Klingon makeup - we all saw cloned Khaless - he looked nothing like these early versions of Klingons).
At the end of the day, this is war - and much like the DS9 war story arc - there's little communication between the war parties. If they go the DS9 route - they'll enlist the female Klingon and she'll serve as the peacemaker at the end of the war - much like Odo did.
Of course, you could argue that DS9 was also not alligned with Gene's vision - but it was still one of the best ST shows.
As things stand, I have no problem with the dark ST world we are seeing - given that there's always Orville to lean back on for some light comedy bits.
Voyager was very much in line with Gene's vision and it was the worst ST show -
reply
share
sunshine62 (250)
6 years ago
by maximmm:
Voyager was very much in line with Gene's vision and it was the worst ST show __________________
@I am a Star Trekkie at heart but sadly I have only see a handful of Voyager episodes.
TOS is the only series I have finished recently seeing in its entirety despite I saw my first handful of episodes in the 70s.
With the exception of the last two season ,I saw TNG once 20 odd years ago on TV.
I have seen parts of the first two seasons of DS9 but I read that there is a lot of warfare at one stage.
ST.Enterprise : I watched some episodes of the first two seasons....
So yes there are huge gaps missing in regards to my knowledge of the franchise ... and this lack of knowledge, of course , at times for the better or worst, reflects in my comments .
That said I still am convinced that Roddenberry would be horrified to see what has become of HIS vision .
TOS (the essence of his vision) and STD are complete opposites.
Of course at the end of the day the producers are only interested in $$$$$ and a good script with descent dialogue set in war time with great CG I/battles and violence , sells more than Roddenberry 's optimistic vision of our future where humanity is focused on exploring space and seeking out new life, new civilisations ...a quest of knowledge that will help humanity find new ways to better life for everyone
Take away words like Federation , Klingons , Vulcans ,Andorians and we are just left with a well crafted science -fiction series .
At least that's my opinion.
reply
share