T w e n t y S i d e d

Steve Shives posted a video the other day about how more recent Star Trek properties are more willing to show flaws and failures; imperfections in the characters and institutions featured in the stories. But also, prominently; how they almost always “take it back” in the end. “Fall short of committing.” “Pull the rug out.” Most especially regarding Starfleet, which is the ultimate authority and representative of *all* humans and allied species and cultures in most Star Trek media. Shives pointed out three examples from the Picard series, Strange New Worlds, and most recently the first series of Starfleet Academy. The Picard example can to an extent be laid next to the blender the whole idea was run through at some point, and Strange New Worlds; being very episodic in nature, I would be willing to not take overly seriously because what’s true in one episode isn’t necessarily true in the next. (I want to be clear, this is based on taking things at face value and REFUSING to look even slightly deeper…my opinion changes once that is done.) But the Starfleet Academy example is very clear and unapologetic, as that series IS built on an overarching narrative with specific actions and a named and repeatedly featured villain. But in the end, despite creating an obvious and understandable story arc, the writers choose essentially to have the protagonist of the backstory NOT LEARN anything, or change because of events even though that is repeatedly shown throughout the series, but defend their decisions which they have regretted for two decades with “hey, everybody makes mistakes. You have to understand the context, blah blah blah.” I mean, it’s a choice; but the story naturally supported a different conclusion. It was sitting right there. The whole series was based on the idea. And I’m not gonna tell you about it because spoilers.

A lot of people will be tempted to argue about this along the lines of “New Trek” vs ‘Old Trek.” There are topics here that are relevant; heck I introduced one of them: “New Trek” is much more willing to show the problems of the future. I don’t have an issue with that myself and I certainly don’t see it as *contrary* to Star Trek in any way. I also, ftr, don’t care about Star Trek or any other sci-fi property being “political.” I think being political is a valid use of spec fic. I DO NOT have much tolerance for “it has to present THIS OPINION, or NOT PRESENT THIS VIEW; or it doesn’t count.” If I don’t enjoy watching a TV show, I’m not gonna keep watching it. A good example: I don’t disagree with the overall narrative of Deep Space Nine. It’s fine. But I don’t enjoy the series. Nothing particularly bothers me, I’m not gonna go on any rants about it, I just don’t like watching it. There’s probably one or two scenes in every episode I enjoy. But overall the series generates no emotion for me. I just don’t like it.

Hopefully, people read to this statement: my biggest takeaway from Steve’s video was reinforcing something I talked about a couple of times regarding horror slasher villains; the lore of the series. No matter what you’re making, if your product is simply marketed as or actually meant to be part of an existing franchise, people are going to bring all established lore with them when they watch (or play, or listen, or read.) The important part of my Star Trek argument is the inverse; the closer you get to the origin the less lore applies. And I’m gonna write some thoughts on that rather than…other things.

Star Trek, the original series (which I will refer to frequently as TOS, as is the custom) had no lore. Certainly we retroactively apply a meta-narrative and try to make it all fit NOW, but it’s important to understand that is a form of retconning itself. What class of ship is the (TOS) Enterprise? If all you knew about Star Trek WAS TOS, then it’s a “Starship”-class…starship. I’m making a bit of fun but if you don’t know, that class is literally stated in one episode.

Who and what the entire future universe was, was brought into the series. Not to say the real, current world wasn’t an influence; the often-brilliant commentary, some of which is built directly into the fabric of the series, wouldn’t be possible without an audience bringing their own assumptions and understandings. Again referencing the Enterprise, it even has a class because post-WW2 United States was most-familiar with thinking of large vessels by their “class.” The “USS” part of “U.S.S. Enterprise” would have been expected, but was written to be United Space Ship and was referenced in multiple episodes of the original series. The “NCC” of the registration number “NCC-1701” was derived from “N” being the aircraft registration code for U.S. aircraft, one of the “C”‘s meant to imply “civilian,” and the second “C” because the Soviet Union was abbreviated N.C.C.P. Designer Matt Jefferies believed any effort to explore space would require U.S. and Soviet cooperation. A fundamental message of the series was of world cooperation. At the time of production the Soviet Union was the dominant “enemy” of the United States, therefore implying in any way cooperation, even only in looks, with the Soviets was preposterous. The series would later add an almost cartoonishly stereotypical Russian cast member to push the point further. (All the meanings and implications of the Chekov character is an entire separate discussion.) The number “1701” was chosen for visual clarity on television. Because the actual choices were non-series-lore-related, none of this is “in universe.” In fact “NCC” has no official lore, although fandom broadly accepts the idea that “NCC” means “Naval Construction Contract.”

The casting of the original series itself was both a great asset and occasional hindrance. The premise of the series and many stories require that the viewer see the relevance to the obviously human audience of the 1960’s. “Aliens” are therefore very human-like. Yes, the budget was a major factor here, as well; but we can’t disregard that the more “alien” something seems the easier it is to dismiss their thoughts and motives. This can be a benefit as well; it’s easier to accept an alien’s view of life solely on the grounds that “they can’t view things the same way as a human.” The original series was able to tuck a lot of criticism into alien viewpoints. Sometimes completely unremarked, because people dismissed the “alien” thoughts. And the series frequently couched commentary within a joke. Laugh at the alien who doesn’t understand humans. Clever, to an extent; but it’s also clear many viewers missed the point. Then, of course, the final laugh at the alien became it’s own trope. As Star Trek series led to Star Trek series, having a predominantly-human and human-like cast did have the effect of limiting how exotic a story could be. Creator Gene Roddenberry tried several times to explore stories with alien viewpoints that were rarely positively-received. Roddenberry’s fixation on sexual relations likely limited several of these stories as well, but that was its own problem. Star Trek The Next Generation introduced more alien cast members, encounters, and sometimes viewpoints; but learned quickly their realm was human melodrama, just like TOS.

“Starfleet” and “The United Federation of Planets” are both products of the original series, but they weren’t created complete. The role and nature of both would change based on the needs of the given story they were included in. This led to both institutions being defined by a set of waypoints in the fog. This more than anything led to a wide variety of views in the fandom about how these structures formed and operated, and exactly what they *were* in relation to particular stories. It doesn’t help that any product not presented through a licensed TV(/streaming) series or movie is NOT canonical. As with Star Wars, there was a period when novels and comic books, and roleplaying games, for the record; were all the fandom had. These frequently were created by or benefited from input by known Star Trek writers and were often accepted as factual relative to the original property. Creators sometimes even talked or acted as if these stories *were* part of the main timeline.

By the time you reach Star Trek The Next Generation in 1987, the list of what people *think* they know about Star Trek that has never actually been established is much longer than the known factbook. The lore behind TNG was the original series, technically the animated series (but that wasn’t referenced by many people) and three movies (a fourth was in production at the same time and would be released only months before the series debuted.) Non-canonical lore had been around for almost twenty years, but the efforts to produce more Star Trek since the 1970’s had more impact on the finished product. And the movies, for that matter. But TNG was also the first time I remember people presenting “problems” with the series based solely on their understanding of the Star Trek universe; the lore. And it’s kind of just become worse ever since. And then you add “the internet” a decade later and you get into the era of online tribalism. Which is, like many other things I talked about, it’s own issue.

Paige Francis He/him