site banner

Small-Scale Question Sunday for September 18, 2022

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

8
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

IMO Far Beyond The Stars is the pinnacle of all Star Trek.

That's hard for me to understand. To me, it's Star Trek: Picard level of "I'm gonna take the thing you like, and hamfist my politics up it's arse". It wouldn't be hard to argue that's literally Anti-Trek.

Didn't really care about the politics one way or the other. Sharp writing and a culmination of everything that Sisko was puts it far above any other episode to me. I suppose it wouldn't be as interesting to people who aren't as fascinated by Sisko's visionary nature.

Well, I might be missing something big, but my entire point is that it's not a culmination of everything Sisko was, but a sudden pulling out of the story, and making it something it wasn't.

As for the writing, this is where it's a bit hard to ignore the politics, because I can see how someone can see it as good, but only the same way God Is Not Dead was good.

The progressive convictions combined with the overwhelming longing for expression were quintessential Sisko. Sometimes people take the scaffold they were given and turn it into something remarkable, and in this case the politics were just a springboard for Sisko's vision.

When you say "overwhelming longing for expression", do you mean expression of the progressive convictions, or expression generally?

If the former, there's the rub. It's the 24th century, the entire point of Star Trek is that humanity matured, and got it's shit together. Progressive convictions don't really set you apart from anyone else in the Federation. And does having a vision even count as expression?

If the latter, I'm just confused. If he had such a burning desire for expression, shouldn't he be an artist of some sort IRL, not just in his vision? A warrior-poet, at the very least.

Expression generally.

I think you're not right about the history of Star Trek. Roddenberry was very much a progressive (admittedly, I may be using the word incorrectly; it is at least liberal-international). Look at how the cast of the original Trek was based on racial/national diversity. TNG was a society of people who were so enlightened they moved beyond cash.

What do you mean? That's exactly the point I was making.