What Actually Makes Star Trek . . . Star Trek?

[@mhyzon1]

When watching Trek with my teen about halfway through TNG S3, my kid says, “Dad, I think I like Star Trek more than Star Wars. Star Trek *means* something. Star Trek is about something.” I have never been a prouder father.

[@notthedroidsyourelookingfo4026]

I'm happy for you. But I don't think that "it is about something" doesn't apply to Star Wars.

[@BenWard29]

I think the OP's kid is trying to say that Star Trek is about larger themes of humanity - many of our larger existential issues, not usually intrapersonal issues. Star Wars tends to be a bit smaller, about individuals, about personal journeys. I would say that Star Wars fits a bit closer to a fable or science-fantasy. That's just my 2 cents.

[@agent_meister477]

I salute you sir 👍

[@KitKatHexe]

​@@BenWard29 It's literally a Science Fantasy Hero's Journey. Star Trek is Science Fiction Social Commentary.

[@IrvingIV]

I mean The _Star Wars_ Prequel Trilogy and _The Clone Wars_ were about the dangers of the erosion of democracy under a state of armed conflict. But that was mostly an insidious undercurrent to the whole thing, which made it brutally effective. One minute, you're watching the Jedi being heroes, and then all too quickly, Palpatine has won, because the whole time everybody was fighting each other, killing each other, he was slowly amassimg power for himself in the name of security and stability, eroding the democratic process, taking control of the economy, of everything.

[@norskgirl2760]

I was 9 when the original series premiered. I can't begin to express how much it meant to me as a little mixed-race girl to see Mr. Spock, also mixed-race. He became, and remains, one of my favorite characters in the franchise.

[@Ken-fh4jc]

That’s great you can relate so specifically but I look at Spock and even Worf as “fish out of water” type characters. Like for me any time I’m outside my own element and comfort zone.

[@shenhurst]

I think we need more human mixed-race characters in Star Trek. Like mixed-race human, the way Nichelle Nichols represented Africans in the '60s, just representing mixed people and the future of humanity, where their ancestry doesn't become part of the plot the way it does for Spock and B'Elanna.

[@Markleford]

"Not one green drop," as they said back then.

[@cassiedevereaux-smith3890]

@@Ken-fh4jc Different people relate any given character in different ways, although, a lot of mixed race children feel like a fish out of water in some situations. So the two reads can overlap quite neatly.

[@danielland3767]

Odd cause I was 9 when TNG was shown to me with my mom watching the replay

[@BuckeyeStormsProductions]

I have heard scientists talk about looking at Star Trek and being inspired by the technology, and I have heard others talk about looking at Star Trek and being inspired by the society. I think a lot of Star Trek fans have not only imagined a better future, but have worked to create it. Some people may not like the current day Star Trek incarnations, but I guarantee there will be a time twenty, forty, sixty years from now when someone will be saying, "Star Trek inspired me." Quite a legacy it has left, and continues to leave.

[@OnTheNerdySide]

DS9 and Enterprise were both criticized heavily when they debuted, just like Discovery, and now roughly 30 and 20 years later, respectively, fans love and defend both shows.

[@nigelmurphy6761]

@@OnTheNerdySide Thats nothing compared to the absolute disdain TNG faced when it first came out back in 1987. It was absolutely hated by TOS fans but it's the trek show that brought me and many others into the franchise . And without TNG, there would have been no DS9, Voyager or Enterprise. So have a think about that.

[@kristopherallen8849]

An interesting story about Roddenberry creating Sulu. Roddenberry originally wanted Sulu to be ambiguous on his exact East Asian heritage. He was looking at a map and saw the Sulu Sea between several Asian countries and thought that was perfect to represent East Asian more generally.

[@robertmiller9735]

I always wondered about that when I was a kid-Sulu is definitely not a Japanese name. But as Sulu is actually American with partial Japanese heritage, it makes sense.

[@ospero7681]

@@robertmiller9735 There is a scene in the novelization of Star Trek IV where Sulu encounters a Japanese kid (revealed to be his great-great-grandfather at the end) and talks Japanese to him - the scene had to be cut from the movie because the kid playing the role started crying and couldn't be calmed down. In that scene, it's revealed that Sulu learned Japanese from old books (his inner monologue goes something like "I must sound like a character from 'The Tale of Genji'"). There is another scene - the one where he steals the helicopter - where he talks to the pilot and, upon being asked where he's from, says he's Filipino rather than Japanese, to sound more convincing.

[@earmixon]

The inclusion of Stone was an especially cool move in TOS as it establishes that Kirk's boss is a black guy. The same goes for Daystrom and M'benga, it establishes a trend of depicting some of Starfleets best and brightest as black in a time of extreme racial tension.

[@SingularityOrbit]

Especially Dr. Daystrom. African-Americans couldn't even vote in the USA at the time, but there was a black man so brilliant he looked down his nose at Kirk, such a genius that he created an AI that outperformed human beings . . . something barely considered plausible in the 1960s. Even more, he was allowed to be a real human being, not a perfect examplar, so M5's becoming a homicidal threat caused Daystrom to have a nervous breakdown. He most likely recovered, though, because his memory lives on in the Daystrom Institute all the way to the end of the 24th Century and beyond.

[@julietardos5044]

Something I read once about that episode is that calling a Black man "Sir" was a revolutionary act.

[@cherylwade264]

Star Trek is based on the Classics like The Greeks, The Romans Shakespeare and The Bible. The retelling the story about the human conditions of virtue and vice that still capture people today. The really strange part is each generation fighting the same fights for each other over and over again. Every time rights are attacked the oppressors are attacked.

[@JohnDlugosz]

@@cherylwade264 In _The Wrath of Kahn_ , the two opposing main characters never meet! My wife didn't like it -- she said "All they do is talk in a room." At one point Kahn delivers a soliloquy that pegs him as a Shakespearean tragic figure. How many movies have the main characters deliver soliloquies rather than just screaming and pummeling the other guy? It's not realistic -- it's a distinctive form of storytelling.

[@DawnDavidson]

@@julietardos5044at the time, it was pretty revolutionary.

[@scottbutler5]

Glad to see the mention of Devil in the Dark, that episode had such a profound impact on me when I was a kid. I learned when I was very young that even the acid-spewing rock monster was just another kind of person we could learn how to talk to. So years later when people tried to tell me that Black people were somehow fundamentally different and not as deserving of humanity, or that gay people were somehow fundamentally different and not as deserving of humanity, those ides never held much sway with me. I like to think I would have grown into a decent person anyway, but I know there are other kinds of prejudice that it took me a lot longer to understand and try to grow past. Devil in the Dark definitely primed the pump for accepting different kinds of people as just people.

[@CallistaZM]

"even the acid-spewing rock monster was just another kind of person we could learn how to talk to" This exactly. Star Trek depicts this very frequently, the effort to find some way, any way to communicate and reach understanding FIRST and only fight back when necessary. Had a huge impact on me when I was a kid.

[@paulhammond6978]

Devil in the Dark is one of my favourite Original Series episodes - for all the reasons you say, that whatever a creature looks like, it could be intelligent, and is worthy of respect. And that whatever you think it's been doing, there might be reasons for its behaviour that you don't understand yet.

[@wellingtonsmith4998]

wonderful content Steve, I especially love your emphasis on Kirk's speech "the principals of liberty and equality must include everyone or it's meaningless"

[@jeffsohler]

While I always felt the episode was a bit corny... The message it delivers is absolutely awesome! We certainly need to follow it better... the intention is there, but it does take more to fight corruption and prejudice.

[@desmondfedaykin8872]

I loved Disco since I watched the first episode. However, on subsequent rewatches, I've noticed an opportunity the writers missed. They expunged Burnham's record at the end so she could resume her Starfleet career, they should have left her record as it was and let her resume her career. It could have been a powerful message about how ex-cons rejoining society as full citizens with equal rights.

[@lcflngn]

Helluva point

[@BS-vx8dg]

That's a genius idea, Desmond.

[@michaelhall2709]

Yes, indeed. After a promising start that season finale was pretty dreadful, I thought. It pretty much killed my interest in the show.

[@aprilpryor2332]

I'm honestly not sure that I even like Star Trek. I feel all warm and tingly when I watch it because it was my dad's favorite show. Watching it makes me feel as though he's still here.

[@joearnold6881]

That’s as good a reason as I can think of to to watch literally anything

[@Zurpanik]

@@joearnold6881Hear hear! @aprilpryor2332 There are probably just as many folks that don't like ST that do haha - you're still a part of the community, and probably one of the biggest parts! No doubt without my mom being such a huge fan when she was alive, I wouldn't have gotten hooked to TNG and made it a big part of my life.

[@mattx449]

Sounds like you know exactly why you like Star Trek ❤

[@Lunch_Box_666]

Thats how I got into tng trek myself, it always has been and always shall be, my favorite show

[@Black-Swan-007]

I love Star Trek and it's a connection with me and my dad as well.

[@OnTheNerdySide]

The technobabble in Star Trek helps disguise the fact that it is pulp sci-fi. Add to that, the reference books beginning with Mr. Scott's Guide to the Enterprise to the various Technical Manuals and blueprints published for the ships, and you've got yourself the perfect recipe for fans taking the show as harder sci-fi than it actually is.

[@lanadelphox]

It also helps that the two most famous/popular scifi/“fiction in space” franchises are Star Trek and Star Wars lol. Love them both, but one is definitely a wee bit more “realistic” than the other!

[@gentleman-shutterbug]

The influence of pulp science fiction is a great point. Star Trek's ultimate origin lies in Edmond Hamilton's Interstellar Patrol stories in Weird Tales magazine, published from 1928 - 1930. The Federation of Planets; the Captain and his diverse crew on the bridge; viewing everything in real time on a large radar-type screen; a cyborg crew member; an entire crew of every nightmarish shape and size who are totally cool with each other; and cat-and-mouse space battles that would make Khan drool. All within the crumbling pages of 1920's magazines. What a wild, mad leap from anything ever known before.

[@paulhammond6978]

That's great information, and a reference I don't remember coming across before.

[@ariadnavigo]

As you did, it is always worth reminding the fierce backlash TNG had when it started... And now TNG is almost the gold standard of what Trek is for a lot of fans. This tells a lot about how us humans can be so so prejudiced against stuff.

[@itsOasus]

It shows how fickle people are or can be.

[@HeadsFullOfEyeballs]

To be fair, a lot of early TNG is pretty bad. I'm glad networks weren't quite as fickle/reactive back then and the show survived long enough to come into its own.

[@kevinward246]

​@@HeadsFullOfEyeballsthis is true. When I rewatch I generally enjoy from Season 3 onwards. Seasons 1 and 2 are pretty hard pills to swallow.

[@ATADSP]

@@kevinward246 I agree. I've been watching through TNG lately, It took me 5 months to get through season 1 because I actively didn't like most of the episodes (I think I did like 6 episodes total from that season). Season 2 is actually much better, but it still has some stinkers like The Child or The Outrageous Okona that later seasons tend to lack.

[@creativerealms]

For the longest time TNG season one was in my opinion the worst season of any Star Trek series. It has recently been topped (bottomed?) by Picard season 2, but TNG season one is still Trek at its worst.

[@TrueYellowDart]

Generally speaking, there needs to be more frequent, casual references to Moon. Such a good film.

[@illexsquid]

I absolutely don't disagree, but I'd hardly call it "hard" sci-fi. It just has a different imaginary toolbox to tell its story.

[@renatocorvaro6924]

First I have heard of it so I, at least, will be looking into it due to this video.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@illexsquid it's certainly farther along in the hardness scale than Star Trek though. We get the communications delay, small as it is from the moon. We get the choice of fusion fuel, and the type of machines which could harvest and process it. (Honestly the orbital shot of the lunar regolith having been churned in giant squares, like American farmland, makes me quite sad sometimes.) Having the computer specifically programmed to keep the people engaged and mentally active is also a thing that's been under research for quite a while, though the capabilities of the AI are somewhat more fantastical. Meanwhile the design of the moon base is a bit more speculative and aesthetic-first, all the stuff about cloning is of course totally fantasy.

[@VocalClassics]

As always, lovely video; thanks in particular this time for your bit in helping normalize "queer" rather than tripping over the lettersets. My mother recently used it while talking to me but not before nervously prefacing it with, "I've heard from others in your community that this word is okay so I'm just gonna go ahead and use it now." It's heartening to hear it not shouted in anger

[@CatDeville]

Just sharing some perspective from those of us who come from the generation where the "Q-word" was only used pejoratively. It's great that you have that relationship with your mother, and that she was at least able to use the word, even if she did feel the need to preface it with explanation. I can identify. As a member of the LGBTQ+ community who is in her 60s, I grew up when it was akin to the "n-word," in that it eventually became OK to use it only if you were a member of that group, (in sociology we call this "in-group language") but NEVER was it appropriate to use it outside the group. So for me, the word is 'triggering' enough that I can't use it *for myself* or about myself, or about anyone I don't know, unless that person *has* expressly stated (or through example shown) that it's O.K. I understand and respect your choice to join those reclaiming queer language, but for many of us, there is too much pain behind some words, and while we can get behind your right to reclaim, and even acknowledge the importance of your work to reclaim the term, and honor your choice to work towards normalizing it, I think that some of us will simply never get to that place for ourselves. We'll always stumble or explain, and we just have to hope that you'll understand and forgive us. At the same time, I deeply appreciate the work of those in the younger generations who are putting in the work towards normalizing what has previously been marginalized... as that's the only way that society is ever going to change and move closer to social norms like those on Star Trek (as we see modeled in Discovery) where differences in sexuality and gender are seen as simply another facet of IDIC. So I agree with your end sentiment... it is indeed heartening, and add my own... seeing shows like Discovery modeling such diversity as normal gives me hope. :)

[@lcflngn]

@@CatDevilleYou make tons of sense. Still, I ID a lot with the OP’s mom. I learned I have a trans daughter a year ago, and always want to love and support her wholeheartedly. Crazy to me that it wasn’t easier for me. It wasn’t surprising, plus I’d worked with and felt entirely comfortable with trans youth in my job for many yrs. Still, though we got used to our new lives and pronouns without too much trouble, pronouns and best language was tougher than I would have imagined. Point being, I think terms change quickly, and we older folks have not only to keep up with our beautiful kids and their various identities, but also with a common useful language. So in the end I like that “queer” is out, it’s so darn useful. If the kids use it, I’m fine.

[@pleasegoawaydude]

It's interesting to hear this when I know that most people who lived through the AIDS crisis specifically refuse *not* to use the word Queer, for the same reasons as I do. I can't let bigots have control over the word.@@CatDeville

[@Se7enNationArmy101]

I wasn't born until 1998 and therefore obviously was not around to watch TOS or TNG while they were airing like my parents did. My first introduction to Star Trek was actually through the 2009 film, which I enjoyed quite a bit. Ever since then I've had a fondness for the franchise, and actually went back to watch every episode of TOS which is now one of my favorite shows of all time. However, my biggest disappointment was probably when I realized that Mr. Sulu never says "Oh my!," which I had always assumed was George Takei's catchphrase on the show

[@thing_under_the_stairs]

"Oh my!" actually became George Takei's catchphrase after he was on Howard Stern's radio show in the 90's (I think it was the 90's?), and that was his response to Howard implying that George has a very large penis. The way he said it in that lovely baritone voice of his caught on, and became the George Takei trademark. Strange but true.

[@rpbajb]

I loved George's portrayal of Sulu the "Finest Swordsman in All of France." Hilarious!

[@thevector]

Number Five: staff meetings. Star Trek is staff meetings. Kidding aside, the thing that means most to me is how problems get solved (some of the time and mostly TNG forward). A meeting, a consensus, a great speech, mutual compromise. I get that it is wrapped up the progressivism and optimism, but it such a distinct Star Trek way of story telling. Thanks for the excellent video essay!

[@AbiNoelCarter]

These exact characteristics are always why I was so excited to see Star Trek come back to TV in 2017. Particularly the idea it puts forth that we have to be optimistic about the future, even in the face of what times can seem insurmountable challenges, is an argument I think the world needs to see more of (similarly; west wing). There has been such an explosion of "grimdark" TV/movies -- everything from game of thrones to Batman killing people -- and that both reflects both how we are feeling already, but can (I believe) contribute to societal apathy, nihilism, etc. Just as diverse representation matters, one of my FAVORITE things about Star Trek is that is constantly shows us that optimism matters too. Thank you for this video and all the great work you do! ❤

[@SingularityOrbit]

I know that many viewers were put off by Discovery's dark tales of seasons 1 and 2, thinking they were "not Star Trek." Those were pre-TOS tales, one depicting the first Klingon War that was known to have happened prior to classic Trek, the other depicting another near-disaster of the kind Star Trek is famous for showing. I hope those who were turned off by Discovery's showing the darker moments on the way to a better future tuned back in to see what they got up to in season 4.

[@Vulcanerd]

This is precisely the reason why I push back against 'dark' or 'grimdark' Trek. It just causes Trek to slide back into any other 'gritty' sci-fi, losing a core aspect of what makes it stand apart from others. I like those other series, too, but that's not what I watch Trek for. More and more, TOS and TNG look like the exception in Trek universe rather than the norm (and I like DS9, but part of DS9's appeal and storytelling was how it diverts and dabbles into the gritter side of Trek).

[@Kubamorlo]

one of the issues with Discovery and Picard is they started with dark times for the federation without building up to them like prior shows did. DS9 did not start with the dominion war. TNG did not start with the Borg. Enterprise did not start with the Xindi attack on earth.

[@modgeosys]

Technically, Discovery started in a bright time at the beginning of the first episode, then went dark really fast. TOS would’ve gone somewhere similar with Errand of Mercy if the Organians didn’t intervene. What I love about Discovery is that the ideals of the Federation and Starfleet are challenged, then effectively redeemed. That actually makes it more compelling than an idealism that is never challenged at all. All of this to say that Discovery is stronger Trek than we sometimes give it credit for.

[@BS-vx8dg]

This was superb. I *love* that you identify ST as "pulp", because that term needs to be embraced. Too many SciFi fans indeed have a snobbery about "real" sci fi and what they call "fantasy", but let us do what many have done successfully before us, embrace a term used by some derisively and claim it as our own. This is not to say that I don't also enjoy "hard" sci fi, like Arthur C. Clark (though even he stretches things on occasion), but *there is nothing wrong* with our genre. Changing gears now, your analysis was so spot on that you've identified (for me) the thing that makes ST: Discovery not "feel" like Star Trek. For many of us (and this of course is merely our perception), Discovery does not feel "optimistic". I completely respect arguments to the contrary, and without doubt, if examined piece by piece Discovery has fantastic elements of optimism. But it feels like it is in a darker place than most other Trek. Now I have only watched the first three seasons, so I'm limited by that experience, but while I love the characters, and might even argue that Michael Burnham has the single most amazing character arc in all of Trek, the universe in which she is placed *does* feel different than most other ST series. I watched Season 3 in hopes that this would be a way to change this, and while it was a genius decision to fly into the future (and should have been done from the start), but of course that future is one that is a bit bleak as well (though I'm hoping/guessing that Season 4 will turn that around at least a bit). But yes, Steve, I do think that's why so many people think Discovery doesn't "feel" like Trek.

[@danaenight]

Steve! I wept at least three times watching this. I've watched every single star trek video you've made and I think this is the best and most important. We also said "nailed it" simultaneously. Thank you. Never stop.

[@jeffnorris7592]

Not Jeff again. Steve, I think an aspect of Trek that you missed is the sense of wonder. It's that feeling that there's something out there vast and mysterious and we're compelled to find it. Take away the Prophets from DS9, for example, and you have a nicely done show just about war and conflict. I like to use two scenes to illustrate the sense of wonder. The first is fairly early in the very first episode, The Cage, where the landing party encounters some quivering flowers that are singing. Spock touches them and holds them still, and the singing stops. And Spock looks around like, wow, look at that, and he smiles. The other is the end of Wrath of Khan, where everyone is gathered on the bridge, watching the rapid evolution of the Genesis planet. They stare in awe at this act of creation. Kirk looks on in wonder and says, "I feel young." That Trek has maintained that sense in an increasingly brutal world is a testament to it's concept.

[@christopherdavis3424]

I remember seeing a video on TikTok a while back of someone saying why they liked Star Trek and it was basically your fourth point that you made. He basically said so much sci-fi shows how humanity dooms ourselves in one way or another with wars or whatever, but Star Trek is the one franchise where we get things right and make a better world for ourselves and our kids. When I think of Star Trek, I think about that hope for a better tomorrow for myself and my kids. Also, SO EXCITED for your Generations video next month! Can’t wait! Your rewrites of the Enterprise and Voyager finales are some of my favorite videos you’ve done so very excited for this upcoming video!

[@John73John]

We've been wondering what conservatives could possibly enjoy about Star Trek. When you were talking about "The Omega Glory", and Kirk had to explain the people's constitution to them, and it was identical to the U.S. constitution, I had kind of a realization. There are a number of episodes like that, both from TOS and the TNG era. "A Taste of Armageddon" and "Justice" also come to mind. Some planet-of-the-week has a broken moral/legal/social/religious system, and the enterprise crew tries to fix it. Or sometimes they fail to fix it and have to leave, lamenting the bad situation they were unable to help. I think what the conservatives see here is the heroic Enterprise crew engaging in their own favorite hobby of minding everyone else's business. Just as they may support the U.S. invading a foreign country in order to "spread democracy", they also cheer for what they interpret as Kirk or Picard spreading their own morals at the point of a phaser. Never mind that those morals are the polar opposite of conservative values. That's not the important part. "We think we're right and you're wrong, and we're going to hit you until you stop being wrong." is how they see episodes like this, and that's as far as the thought process goes.

[@MattMcIrvin]

Like I've said before, I think many conservatives actually think the progressive messaging of Star Trek: TOS, or whatever series they grew up with as children, is fine--it's just that they have a static view of how much progressivism is right. There used to be a lot of problems and injustices that needed fixing. But at some point in the past (probably when they were small children, or a few years before they were born), we reached a finish line where everything was OK, or at least as good as things could feasibly get, and anyone trying to change things past that point is just making trouble. It's kind of like the question John Oliver once tried asking a whole lot of people--"when were The Good Old Days exactly?" The answers people give vary a lot, but it's almost always when they personally were little kids, or a few years before that.

[@TheoRae8289]

​@MattMcIrvin I've had more than a few flat out tell me that the progressive aspects are the fiction so there's no mental gymnastics. They'd also rather live in the mirrorverse

[@ericlove121]

Star Trek to me is the Star Trek is always been the characters and their relationships and interactions

[@geekystevencomedy]

When I'm feeling charitable, I think a lot of the people complaining about an undefined missing element of Star Trekiness in newer Trek are talking about the comfort and nostalgia they get from the show. I don't think that's invalid, just impossible to address if you're making new content. You can't bake in 30 years of fond memories and cultural relevance.

[@rmdodsonbills]

Yes, I think there's something to that. Beyond that, I think the minds behind Discovery made a mistake in taking a very cavalier attitude toward canon in a franchise with a long history of being pretty respectful of canon. I bet they could have avoided a huge portion of the complaints had they set the show a thousand years after TOS from the get go (or establish that it's in another alternate timeline, though I don't like this option as much). Or, at the very least, that was the gist of most of my complaints. Disco season 2 felt a lot like the last act of Revenge of the Sith in that there was a scramble to make sure the story they were telling matched up with the story that had already been told. For the record, I think Disco did it better.

[@wreday720]

Right? Its just a nonsense expectation. But I cant blame them, its inevitable when you're bringing back something that meant alot to people

[@Seal0626]

_Picard_ tried, and not to its benefit.

[@DawnDavidson]

I don’t think it’s JUST the nostalgia factor. I feel that both ST: LD and ST:SNW both have that quality that makes ST, ST. At least the first season of Disco (all I’ve watched so far) does not have it. The cavalier approach to existing canon most certainly did NOT help. I don’t know what the hell those “Klingons” are supposed to be, or why they found it necessary to “update” them in a way that ignores decades of established character and language development. Maybe someone brand new to the franchise would have less of an issue with it. I’ve heard that Disco gets better, so maybe I’ll be happier once I get to later seasons, especially with all the queer diversity. I certainly agree with Steve that a progressive world view is one of those characteristics, as is the diverse cast.

[@arnoldfreeman2885]

I’m going to go ahead and say that’s untrue. At least, I cAn attest to that. I didn’t have anyone in my family watch Star Trek and I only started watching after I saw JJ’s movie back in high school. The first episode I watched was “Plato’s Stepchildren”, because it was famous. I was floored at how progressive, forward thinking and imaginative it was. Then I learned that it was considered a bad episode. If this was a “bad” episode, what were the good episodes like? Pretty soon, within about a year, I binged all of TOS, TNG and the first six movies. No nostalgia, no fond memories from childhood, just two great series that are thoughtful, diplomatic adventure stories-a combination I didn’t even know could exist, or that I even wanted until I watched Star Trek

[@Black-Swan-007]

My dad was always a big Star Trek fan. I grew up watching re-runs of TOS with him. I was born in the middle of TNG's second season. My dad (who shared the name of our dear Captain K) was a staunch Republican who had served three tours in Vietnam and referred to the Peace Sign as "The foot of the American Chicken". I wish the existence of you and your channel was around about a decade ago. My pops passed away in 2019 and I would have loved to have talked about Star Trek in this context with him, to really dig in there and find out just what about this show and its "in your face" left wing politics appealed to him. Thank you for everything you do, Steve. It brings back happy memories of my dad, whom I miss very much.

[@HBHaga]

Your father was named Tiberius? Weird.

[@Black-Swan-007]

@@HBHaga no lol

[@katarishigusimokirochepona6611]

​@@Black-Swan-007😂😂😂

[@katarishigusimokirochepona6611]

​@@HBHaga😂

[@hermask815]

I’ll add the chicken foot to my vocabulary 😊

[@alanbear6505]

TNG did give us a hand waved explanation for why there are so many humanoid races…but it was cheesy and they never really mentioned it again. (I always refer to that as “The Letter From Mom episode “)

[@MattMcIrvin]

Star Trek: TOS actually attempted one as well, in some remarks about a vanished elder species called "the Preservers" who had transplanted groups of humans, and presumably other species, to other planets. But it obviously didn't cover all of the bases. And those "Earth parallel" planets in TOS, that could have a history matching Earth's in every detail up to some point of divergence, were in some cases simply not explained at all. It was just a thing that apparently happened sometimes. The series bible had explicitly mentioned this as a way of using the existing Paramount backlot and available props and costumes.

[@NucularRobit]

There is also a Voyager episode that says a single comet is responsible for at least a large swath of humanoids. It's the episode(s) with Kurtwood Smith. When he is looking for targets to erase from the timeline he considers a comet and this is when we are given the info.

[@sumjedi]

From a guy as old as trek, there used to be a real theory before TNG that worlds like earth would evolve life just like earth, I.e. humanoids, trees, etc as that would be the “easiest route” for natural selection to take. This was part of the pitch for a lower budget sci fi, and why TOS sticks to class m planets.

[@earmixon]

TNG often gets knocked for it's depiction of women in the earlier seasons. It might be worth looking into how that depiction changed and improved over time and with a few jarring exceptions was fairly good by the later seasons. Troi and Crusher both get to take command of the ship and their focus episodes give them far more heroic and proactive roles. It becomes far less common for their stories to focus primarily on romance or put them in a position to be rescued. They are also given more interesting things to do in general. We eventually get Ro, who takes on a similar role to Tasha but is on the receiving end of better writing. By seasons 6-7 the women of TNG are fairly well written.

[@robertt9342]

@@soul0360. People often forget context when discussing progressive ideas.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@robertt9342 I agree, but also think it's important to keep in mind that can't be the only thing either. It's a lot like when people insist on reviewing vintage cars only in how they stacked-up against their competition; that's important for understanding their success (or lack thereof) as well as any impact they had on history... but it also has zero relevance to how well they keep-up with current traffic. Similarly, caring only about how they drive in modern conditions and with modern expectations is missing 75% of the picture, and they must be appreciated in a sort of superposition of the two at once. Hopefully the metaphor is self-explanatory enough! I've been experiencing a mix of those two feelings about both 90s media and 90s cars lately. They still feel like the comforting surety of growing-up, but also they've so quickly both moved from "still remarkably modern in various ways" to "showing their age, cracks in the veneer everywhere".

[@michaelnuzzo5698]

So many interesting points. One I feel you kind of glossed over (probably due to time) was the bit about how sometimes the Federation creates the problems and isn't perfect. Nothing exemplifies this quite like the 4-part story of TNG's "Journey's End", DS9's two-parter "The Maquis", and TNG's "Preemptive Strike" which tells the story of the origins of the Maquis group. It covers how the treaty left Federation citizens in Cardassian territory, Picard's refusal to displace them created a tense situation which led to an unconventional war between the Federation colonists left behind and the Cardassian settlers and government moving in, and how the Federation ultimately lets the situation spin out of control. As Sisko later tells Eddington, the success of the Maquis is one of the factors that weakened the Cardassian Union eventually leading to them joining the Dominion. So much of the Dominion War has its roots in that earlier treaty and how Picard let the settlers stay behind.

[@MalzraAirwynn]

Having only recently started watching Discovery, I can sort of see where people are coming from with this. But ultimately it still feels like star trek, even if a different flavor of it. The moment that really sold me on it having the general 'spirit' of it was when the Tartigrade turned out not to just be a rampaging monster, but a creature that had been in pain. And that arc ending with one of the crew taking the burden of hooking up to the network on himself rather than risk killing it and eventually setting the creature free. Discovery isn't perfect, it has flaws, it makes mistakes, but it does still ultimately feel like star trek to me.

[@seymssogood]

With the serialization of Disco, the progressive themes are woven throughout each season. In the 4th season, one that stood out to me was the progressive approach to criminal justice. Rather than being punitive, it's rehabilitative. The reasons, or context, for committing such acts matter. It wisely eschews the concept that justice should be blind.

[@DLZ2000]

Absolutely. One of my favorite things about DSC season four was Book's sentence being an example of restorative justice. The whole season was basically "The Devil in the Dark" mixed with "Darmok," The Day the Earth Stood Still, Close Encounters, The Abyss, Contact, and Arrival, since it addressed Trek's primary theme of communication being hard but essential, that negotiation was possible.

[@SingularityOrbit]

An interesting side to this point is that Burnham received a life sentence in the first season for mutiny (which was overturned for extenuating circumstances). That was a Federation, a Starfleet, before the original series. By the treatment of Burnham and Book the show expressed a core philosophy about justice: throwing people away is wasteful and wrong, and helping people achieve their best selves makes the world better.

[@MrRedFoxorMrelzorrorojo]

Progressive.

[@kaitlyn__L]

@@DLZ2000 yes! Season 4 has to be my favourite season of Disco, for all those reasons and more.

[@dr.moneypenny9748]

Interesting video! If there’s one other essence found in Star Trek, I’d say it’s a “joy for learning.” For me, Star Trek is one of the few shows that shows its characters excited to learn in a positive way. How often do you hear Picard fascinated about an archaeological dig? Or Archer wanting to investigate phenomena himself? The default in this universe is that knowledge is powerful and exciting. In my mind, this quality is why characters are open-minded and curious about diversity.

[@DouglasCarrington-dc4vw]

First, I am an old fart. Growing up in the 1950's and early 1960's I really enjoyed movies like "The Thing", "War of the Worlds", "Them", etc. When Star Trek first aired, I was in Vietnam. It wasn't until the late 1970's that I saw the original Star Trek TV series on late nite TV. I have been hooked ever since. THANK YOU GENE RODDENBERRY!!

[@richardwild76]

I'd say the essential ingredient to Star Trek was the idea that humanity has stopped infighting and has finally learned to work together, everyone is included, everyone is valued, and no-one is left behind. Roddenberry's original idea that there should be no conflict within the crew at all was overly strict, but the essential premise was still honoured in TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise, although DS9 deftly explored the possibility of corruption and dark forces within the Federation while still managing to feel like Star Trek. I think once you step away from this and start pitting your human characters against each other, as a natural state of affairs, now you're just making sci-fi, it's not really Star Trek any more.

[@elle11277]

I have always called Treks "(my) space soap opera". I was five when I saw my first Star Trek back in the 60's, and instantly fell in love with Spok and his pointy ears. Aaaand, I just got some new pointy ears for my zombie red-shirt costume for Halloween. Star Trek has always been huge influence for me and I'm happy for it.

[@flynngames4703]

The two most important things Star Trek taught me was how to critically think when presented with multiple viewpoints and how to be compassionate. I learned this at great personal risk in the 70s sneaking into the basement to watch late night showing of TOS on Sundays.

[@JBBell]

Great work. Re-invigorates my love of the series and what it represents, and most importantly, the optimism it conveys. Especially in what seems like the darkest timeline, it's important to have this fiction to help us see what could be, and to have video essays like this to remind us that it's still there, guiding and buoying us. Thanks.

[@rudetuesday]

I've been a Trekkie my entire life. The original show, and the fans that helped keep it alive, are a big part of how I got to be myself very early. Thanks for your thoughtfulness and enthusiasm. LLAP

[@tonyjackson4078]

I've always held onto the concept of all the crap we're going through currently, no matter how bad it gets, that humanity will one day dig itself out. Get our collective heads on straight and actually work together instead of warring and fighting ourselves. The idea of a functioning world society, everyone having a voice, is what I consider Star Trek.

[@seantlewis376]

I was born overseas in 1966. Family lore has it that Star Trek was the first American television I ever saw, and I've been with it ever since, for all the same reasons you cite, from pulp sci-fi to telling stories of optimism and societal progress.

[@ingo.steinhaus]

I saw my first episodes of Star Trek during the first syndication in Germany. That was in 1972 and I was nine years old. The series was on in the early evening and I was allowed to watch it because it was considered a children's series. That was because all the "difficult" passages were cut out or defused by harmless dubbing. Many episodes that were considered brutal were not even shown - only about 40 episodes made it through the strict court of the censors. I only saw the complete and uncut TOS a few years ago, but then in English. Nevertheless, this series has had a very strong influence on me, possibly even more than many other series, films and books I have consumed since then. The diversity of the series, which was very striking for a German nine-year-old, made a particularly strong impression on me. Although I hadn't seen a black person at the time - and wouldn't meet one for a long time - everything seemed perfectly natural to me. I still remember the feeling from back then: Aliens, Afro-Americans, Asians, Russians - the future is being portrayed, it's all normal. Of course, that's exactly the effect Gene Rodenberry had in mind. In children's TV, such diversity was absolutely unusual in Germany at the time; the world was essentially white - and definitely male. Star Trek taught me an other lesson: Life forms are very different and it's a good idea to be open and friendly. That's how you make friends. That's how you avoid trouble. Maybe except with Tribbles.

[@ValdestotsVoice]

It is nice to hear a philosophical take and discuss what true Star Trek at its core is which is the embetterment of humanity and the ability to reach for something better that benefits everyone

[@andrewriley9821]

"We make mistakes, but we're human, and maybe that's the word that best explains us." - Janes T Kirk Humanity in Star Trek isnt perfect and we dont always get everything right and there are times people fail, but as a whole humanity is trying to be better, to be more than they have been in the past. The journey never ends, but Star Trek reminds us that it is better to travel than to stay still.

[@jamesbarr8218]

For me, the draw has always been the allegory, metaphors, moral conundrums. It’s what Trek is for as far as I’m concerned

[@Mr.PeabodyTheSkeptic]

My 50+ year old special needs brother's favorite show is Star Trek. We've attended conventions since the 80's ( what the hell is Comicon?) Back then the r-word and acceptance of demeaning those lesser than the norm was accepted if not dismissed as 'just the way things are'. Star Trek made my brother feel comfortable about who he is, regardless of societal ignorance. And when the taunting, hate speech, physical abuse, and marginalization just couldn't be explained away as 'that's just the way things are', his little brother would rock the shit out of many people's worlds. Remember, the Enterprise was still a kick ass military vessel that didn't take crap when pushed to far.

[@itsOasus]

I always thought science fiction and science fantasy were a bit different. But now that we're talking about it, I honestly don't know what would make them so different. So... Yeah. Thanks for giving me something to think about.

[@sleepykitty1985]

It's funny you say that. I came across an article yesterday that talked about the difference with "literary fiction," and I think it's probably got a similar story. A new name to separate the feeling and/or another way to market.

[@airbedruad]

Oh I should have read the comments before I charged to put in my 2 cents… My understanding was that Science Fantasy, while having scientific themes like space ships and aliens, also had unexplainable concepts like magic and myth (Star Wars I am looking at you).

[@LeChaunce]

Science Fantasy is a sub-genre within the overall Science Fiction oeuvre.

[@natestadler2352]

​@@airbedruadStar wars is more of a Space Fantasy. (I know all these terms are way too similar). It basically is what you are saying, but I want to stress that Space for Star Wars is a setting, not a genre. The Star Wars Story could be told, pretty much unchanged, in a High Fantasy setting.

[@scottbutler5]

Like a lot of other things, it's more of a spectrum with very fuzzy areas of overlap rather than strict categories with sharply-defines borders.

[@wokeaf1242]

Nicely said, but I’m not going to lie. I wish you didn’t dislike Lower Decks so much. Of course it’s fan service. That’s the whole point of the show. Had to get that in. Great video.

[@georgelionon9050]

Well maybe he doesn't like it because he doesnt like that point..

[@rmdodsonbills]

Yeah, me too. Yes it's fan service, but it's also poking fun at a franchise that has always taken itself pretty seriously even when it's being very absurd. I mean come on, a pool of oil that hates everyone? A giant hand in space? Honey, I shrunk the runabout?

[@SingularityOrbit]

I totally get not liking a show because it feels off to you. I don't get not liking it because the characters are fans of exciting things done by an earlier generation. I mean, have you ever heard about how Edwardian and Victorian naval guys in England hero worshipped Nelson? Have you ever heard of kids in the 1960s playing at being WWII soldiers? Before we had speculative fiction shows to obsess over, people were nerds about medieval knights or the American Old West. The Lower Deckers know about Starfleet history, which is full of bizarre stuff far more interesting than a shootout or a tourney. Those Old Scientists met "gods" and fast-talked computers and saved whole worlds. The one thing I always thought was weird about TNG was that the crew of the _Enterprise-D_ had to learn about the adventures of the original _Enterprise_ from computer logs, just in time to fix their similar problems. William Riker should have been a Kirk fanboy with his personality and problem-solving approach, to say nothing of Data waiting until the last moment to learn how Spock handled being a logic-driven person in a ship full of emotional humans. There aren't _enough_ TOS fans in 24th Century Trek!

[@thing_under_the_stairs]

@@SingularityOrbit Funny you mention it, it was always my own personal belief that after having to take history at the Academy, Riker *WAS* the biggest Kirk fanboy in the Federation, and dreamed of following in his dashing footsteps... until he got his job on the Enterprise D, and discovered the wonders of Picard to fanboy over. ;)

[@jeffsohler]

There is just so much to LOVE about the message Star Trek delivers! The world needs more!

[@oke518]

Steve I don't know how you do it. But you've done it more times than I can count on this channel you've taken thought and opinions that I've had for years and been unable to properly convey and then swap them into a KZbin video it almost perfectly conveys one of those topics. Not saying we agree on everything but we for the most part and these videos whether they've Yvonne Star Trek or politics or the other insane things that our world throws at you that you address every now and then they have been a real help in my life it helps to have somebody say what I'm thinking and not sound half as crazy as when I say it simply because you can order your thoughts and presented far clear that I am capable. Keep up the Fantastic work❤

[@kamalalsb7292]

Here's my controversial take - it literally all comes down to "How is the Movie/Show using it's budget and the available technology?" Every Trek show up from TOS to ENT was limited by its budget. Trek shows I believe have worked with higher budgets than a lot of other shows but there were still some distinct limitations to what was possible. You didn't see a lot of dynamic battles because that was expensive - there would be whole episodes where no one left the ship or repeatedly reused 'planet' sets. They had to work around the technological limitations and come up with clever, or sometimes a little goofy solutions to those limitations. And as a result, there's a distinct style to those old shows, there's aspects of the format that you see in every series that are there because they couldn't do things any other way. There's a smaller scope and a lot of the bigger grander stuff comes across via implication. You are told, not shown - but they kind of make it work in their favour where logically it shouldn't. During a battle someone would say "Shields down to 33%" and the room would shake - but you wouldn't always get an exterior shot of the ship being hit, and it would be even rarer to be shown distinct damage being done to the ship - just an explosion hitting it for the most part. However, post ENT... visual effects technology got INCREDIBLY advanced, you could do some really impressive shit with VFX all of a sudden, and for a lot cheaper than ever before. There were even a lot more options available with PRACTICAL effects and things like costume design, too. With all that available - the limiters are gone. Kelvinverse I don't necessarily want to count here because it's a movie, the expectations and budget and such were totally different to the shows and the comparison's not fair, so I'm just gonna use Disco as the first real example of this. Disco could do so much more than any other Trek series before it, so it did. Without those limitations, Disco ended up feeling sort of generic and indistinct. They could do anything and everything, so they did - and it lost the "feel" that Trek was known for. They could show you really cool effects, detailed ship-to-ship combat, HUGE sets, really impressive visuals - so obviously they took advantage. But the consequence was that the scope of the show suddenly got so massive that the actual focal point had to be a 'Main' character. I know people say "The Captains of each show are the main character" but I think it's reasonable to say that Discovery has a far more definitive PROTAGONIST than any other Trek show, with the ensemble cast having literally nothing to do until season 3. So you have a franchise that has previously been a lot of self contained space adventures, shifting focus between various members of an ensemble cast, usually with everything happening on a slightly smaller, closer scale - and then suddenly an entry in that franchise where everything is huge, everything is massively important, everything is serialised, and the ensemble is... essentially unimportant, basically. This isn't cuz Disco is bad, by the way, I don't like it but I'm not gonna begrudge anyone who does, I just wanna illustrate how different it is from what came before - and that that mostly came down to Disco being ABLE to do more than any Trek show ever had previously. But a few years later, when adjustments to the new status quo have been made - you then get a show like Strange New Worlds. SNW is very good at CHOOSING when to limit itself. Essentially SNW largely writes it's stories as though it were operating on the same sorts of restrictions as previous shows in the franchise - and then uses the tech and budget it has to make those stories look and feel amazing. But SNW will get a little silly! They'll do a whole episode where no one leaves the ship and the sets are reused, they keep things focused on the cast and characters more than focusing on some grand overarcing story. It doesn't refuse to do anything visually stunning or dip into a broad scope in terms of set design or vfx or whatever, but it doesn't focus so heavily on what it CAN do. The distinction for me is - you could take the script for any episode of SNW, and you could remake that episode using the resources available to the production crew of say, TNG. But if you tried to do the same with Disco - it would be impossible for 90% of the episodes of that series without radically changing a LOT of things. THAT to me is what makes Star Trek FEEL like Star Trek.

[@scottleespence752]

Space Opera is another common term for the type of SF Star Trek belongs to. And concerning Space Opera and FTL travel, my favorite FTL Drive is the Inertia-Less Drive for Doc Smith's Lensman stories. I'm pretty sure the concept for Inertial Dampers was inspired by that. The Lensman stories being far from Progressive, in fact being downright militaristic, also featured characters from numerous worlds and species cooperating as part of the Galactic Patrol. Another thing concerning "Genre Fiction" vs. "Realistic Fiction" is that even if you are dealing with imaginative and fantastic scenarios, there needs to be internal consistency and emotional plausibility. Books, TV shows, and movies that fail usually do so because the internal mechanics constantly change, or the characters do things simply to advance the plot.

[@MatthewCrocker]

My favorite FTL is the Infinite Improbability Drive.

[@wratched]

I would add a fifth criterion, one that many modern iterations have missed: Star Trek is theatrical. The best Star Trek actors have always been theatre actors, and the best scenes, the ones everyone remembers, are not usually planets blowing up but intense scenes of dialogue between characters.

[@brianbaker2455]

Star Trek and I are almost the same age, and it's grown up just like i have. The attitudes of American society is reflected in the progress and improvement of ST, and I for one am glad to have my assumptions challenged by the philosophy of ST. I am appreciative of my growth as a person that was caused by the questions raised by the series that would not die.

[@JasonRainbows]

If you REALLY want to see a Star Trek series that REALLY captures the Star Trek sweet spot, check out STAR TREK: CONTINUES. I swear I feel like a kid in the 60s again experiencing actual new episodes of the original series! For example, one of my favorite scenes: Three female ensigns walking down a neon-colored hallway, wearing mini-skirts and go-go boots, discussing what they're going to do later that "night". One says "I'm just gonna go to my quarters and get some sleep." The other responds "Yeah seven vodka martinis will do that to you." Soooo 60s!

[@robertterrell3065]

This was a super awesome and informative video :) So glad you went to the obvious great effort to make it. I'm sure a lot of Trekkies appreciate all the hard work. I certainly did!

[@chimaxx]

I always think of Star Trek as a workplace drama in space. The space opera elements are the set dressing and plot catalysts. At core it's about the characters on the ship, the work they do, and their relationships.

[@JozettaStych]

I don't know if this would fit into your thesis, but another defining feature of Star Trek that sets it apart from other genre franchises is that it's all set within (or viewed through) the narrow scope of a hierarchical organization. The only exception I can think of is "Picard", where the protagonists are free agents acting independently-though even it is arguably post-hierarchical, with its lead being a former captain and member of the Borg collective, etc. It's a lot like "M.A.S.H." or "Hill Street Blues" in that regard; everybody exists primarily in terms of their relationship to The Organization and its mandates/strictures. In Star Wars, characters are farm boys and princesses and pirates. In Star Trek they're either officers or enlisted personnel, personnel belonging to similar hierarchical organizations, or some odd civilian or other encountered by said organizations. All inhabit a controlled and rigorously administered proprietary environment, either giving or getting orders while attending to their duties in rank uniform. It's odd that such a definitively conformist paradigm is used to express such enlightened, liberationist ideals. I find that watching a lot of Star Trek even tends to get me thinking in terms of Star Fleet and its prerogatives.

[@allanjmcpherson]

I remember when I first saw The Omega Glory, it seemed like such a strange premise for an episode. It seemed like a weird combination of teaching solidarity and American exceptionalism. It was only when I was older and understood the context it was written in and the audience it was written for that I really got why it was what it was.

[@brianloy7856]

As a 60 year old fan of Star Trek and it’s children and grandchildren. I agree with the great majority of this post. As a child I greatly enjoyed TOS and the re-runs of TOS and TAS in ‘73. When TNG came out in ‘87 I was then an adult (24 years old) and I absolutely loved it, as did my young children. Star Trek always presented a “This COULD BE” future. I was not moved by “Discovery” despite my desire to love it. I didn’t love or hate DS9, Voyager, DS9 or Enterprise. None of these drew me in like TOS or TNG. I wanted to be consumed by “Picard” but not until the last season did I look forward to the next episode. However, SNW finally pulled me in like TOS and TNG. I have to believe there is a community of us that absolutely loved TOS, TNG and SNW. Why doesn’t Paramount tap into that?

[@KnaveMurdok]

My favourite part of "Let He Who Is Without Sin..." is that this guy went to a vacation planet to criticize people on their laziness and decadence. a place where daring space explorers from all over the galaxy go to unwind for their death defying day jobs where they save colonies from starvation, pull giant meteors out of the sky before they destroy whole planets, fight off invading forces and explore mind bending space phenomena that would, to put it lightly, make this guy shit his pants. He caught these people while they were trying to desperately take a break from their everyday life or death existence and said "Hey! You're lazy! You're being lazy!" Imagine this bro walking into a place like DisneyLand and being like "I cannot believe that this is what life is like for everyone all of the time!"

[@aktionmancer604]

Best lower decks breakdown videos around. Other channels are not as thorough. Keep it up!!

[@murraysharpe8676]

I'm genuinely impressed by delivery of these ideas

[@jebbloch4868]

Thank you very much for expertly putting in words what makes this franchise great.

[@nblankensh]

What makes Star Trek feel like Star Trek for me? Hope for the future, determination, perseverance in the face of adversity, doing the right thing in a difficult situation, except for when you don't, embracing differences and reversing the polarity on things.

[@ShinGallon]

This is completely unrelated to the reason of this video (which is fantastic BTW) but I love the Tom Servo figure on your dresser. That show formed roughly 80% of my sense of humor.

[@Ghostie.]

Damn, I just realized I've been listening to you talk threw different videos for almost 6 hours now. geezs :D

[@flatliner974]

This video brings tears to my eyes. I love this franchise so much.

[@DataLal]

Me too. I feel so proud to be a Star Trek fan. *sniffle* Although, not THAT proud - I have a lot of catching up to do with the more recent series.

[@dotter8]

Phasers! Phasers reflect the very heart of Star Trek; they can be *set on stun!* If you're armed with a phaser, you _don't have to_ kill. In "A Piece Of The Action," even the Enterprise's main array could be set on stun. Phasers end the violence, they don't spread it, like a disruptor or a firearm. I wish somebody would work on inventing them IRL.

[@MaraudingManiac]

One more piece of the puzzle for me is that Star Trek is Diplomatic. Star Trek characters do their best to resolve situations without violence, only resorting to it as a last resort. The Federation is very hesitant to ever engage their enemies, and usually will stop fighting if it is at all possible to do so. Elaan of Troyius, Kirk spares a Klingon vessel he had dead to rights to focus on his mission. The Defector: Tomalak manipulates the Enterprise into a position which is diplomatically disadvantageous to guarantee its destruction and Picard still manages to avoid a fight. In fact, the Enterprise-D never destroys a D'deridex class warbird, SAVING them on more than one occasion. Even the Borg - which is depicted as an enemy you cannot negotiate against, gets Hugh, which proves that even if your enemy won't negotiate, the Federation will respect your citizens. DS9 shows another side of this. War with the theocratic fascists of the dominion is inevitable, but the Federation does absolutely all it can in order to prevent it. Indeed, the Federation's hesitance to engage in open warfare, and their willingness to arbitrate peace between other powers is the only thing that keeps the Alpha Quadrant intact enough to stand a chance against the Dominion. The Klingons, despite being a military powerhouse, pre-emptively attack the Cardassians out of fear that they will be annexed by the Dominion, ironically making them feel like they were forced to join the Dominion in the first place. DS9 ultimately accepts the desperation of Sisko, a well-meaning man who jumps at the chance of peace when the Federation has the Dominion cornered but rejects that of Section 31, who would exterminate a race to save the Federation. Voyager also depicts how an isolated ship not backed up by its faction will struggle for diplomacy. They are shown trading with and helping out many neutral species, adhering to many of their principles even far away from home. Diplomacy is a little out of focus compared to the previous series, but it is nonetheless relevant. Diplomacy is also not really Archer's strong suit as the Federation hasn't even begun yet, but the foundation is constructed, as the four core member worlds come together. The movies are... not really the best showcase of this, with the exception of TMP, Voyage Home and Undiscovered Country. The movies, for the most part, force an unresolvable conflict that has to be solved with a bombastic ship-fight, never taking a moment to back down from the fight. Undiscovered Country does manage to have a fight which ends in violence, but the greater goal of the movie is the Khitomer Accords.

[@nealjroberts4050]

This encapsulates why i felt Lower Decks to be more Trek than Picard.

[@Mothuzad]

Every 5 minutes, I want to click that Like button, but then, damn, already clicked it.

[@emergencyremedialtruth8593]

Star Trek was a western set in space. Rodenberry was into the strongly recognizable characters of westerns, and almost every actor had been in a lot of westerns. Very compatible with it's times, and operatic stories. there will be Star Trek fans for generations to come.

[@georgepitcher136]

Well done Steve. This channel consistently delivers a well thought out review and analysis of Trek. Bravo! Keep it coming. :)

[@kenschmidt4542]

Really appreciate your content (especially Star Trek related), Steve! Thanks!

[@robprice4726]

Excellent! Well thought out and well structured video. Thank you :)

[@lorenzodicapo6305]

Thanks, great piece. I'm a little surprised that there's no mention of Star Trek Continues. I know it's fan made, unofficial, and therefore not part of the canon, etc., but if you're going to talk about 'feeling like Star Trek,' and you don't even mention this series, well, it probably means you just haven't seen it yet. There are eleven episodes, I think, made in the mid 2010s. It takes place within the original Star Trek universe, on the Enterprise with its original crew. The actors are all decent, the guy who plays Kirk, Vic Mignogna, is great- he doesn't exactly imitate Shatner, but he's obviously drawing a lot of inspiration. The plots directly relate to, or follow within the timeline, episodes from the original series. They even got a couple of guest actors from the original series to reprise their roles. That, in itself, connects the two series in a real tangible, concrete way. They use the original theme, and the original monologue, (although it's almost immediately switched up in the second episode, a great sequel to the original one where a few of them get trapped in that parallel universe where the girls' uniforms are sexy and everyone's a dick) The sets, the effects, the way it's filmed- everything re-creates the original series. The familiar bridge, the uniforms, the corridors and elevators. There's even a Jeffries Tube. The same background music/ambient noise, the swishy noise when the doors open, the phasers, etc. I don't know anything about film, but it's like they dug out all the old cameras and filters- this looks eerily like the original. Hell, the actor who plays Scotty is Christopher Doohan. That's James Doohan's (the original Scotty) actual son. Here's the thing: they didn't skip the cheese. There are corny, inpassioned speeches, lazy alien design, oily lens filters, and yes, a green dancing girl, but it seems to me that this is completely in line with the original, makes it feel even more like Star Trek, and is a huge factor in defining/continuing its 'spirit'. Look, obviously, I can't say enough, so here's the last thing. I was a little kid when the original series aired. My TV content was highly monitored and limited by my parents, but Star Trek got a pass because the moms had a crush on Captain Kirk. I didn't get to watch 'trash', so Star Trek was special, I can remember the feeling of excitement and anticipation that just the first three notes of that theme brought on. I curiously watched the first episode of Continues. By the time the theme played for the second one, I could feel that seven year old's excitement. Check it out

[@cassiedevereaux-smith3890]

Ad Astra Per Aspera is the only star trek anything which makes me cry.... and not just cry but BAWL. So powerful.

[@DLZ2000]

Star Trek is a diverse group of seemingly implacable foes learning to communicate in order to solve problems in a society in which the basic needs for survival are met without means testing. It shows that utopia is a process, not a destination, and that it requires constant vigilance to make sure that civil rights don't regress, because that's all a utopia could ever be. It shows that optimism isn't "good things happening," but how we react when bad things happen. It's literally impossible to show optimism on a bed of restful laurels. DS9, ENT, DSC, and PIC seasons one and two show both of these things, and how we can possibly overcome those bad things by peace through communication. To that end, I feel like we've only scratched the surface of what kinds of shows we could have in Trek. Here are shows I’d like to see: * following people traveling in space in a profession other than Starfleet: artists, actors, musicians, journalists, politicians, doctors, etc. * a show similar to TNG’s “First Contact,” in which a planet learns about the existence of aliens and that the UFP exists. * a show that takes place in the 2160s, as the UFP is just being formed, the people forming the government hire historian(s) to consult on the project, which allows that story to parallel with the unification of Earth after First Contact, in both timelines, we see the effects of the decisions made by the new government on the general public. ENT or First Contact characters could be in it. * an Earth-based series at any point in Trek history. * a show set on a colony. * West Wing: Rom I’d also be interested in spinoffs such as: * Wesley and Kore as Travelers * Rios, Teresa, and Ricardo fighting for medical equality in the 2020s. * Jurati’s adventures over the course of the 400 years where she crafts her own version of the Borg collective while staying out of history’s way, waiting to emerge and reintegrate with the rest of the galaxy. * Literally anyone on La Sirena, working for the Fenris Rangers, similar to the fanfilm series Star Trek: Aurora. I suppose Worf and Elnor are free agents and have familiarity with the ship. If it's the two of them, it could be a way for Worf to come to terms with his previous hate for Romulans, through training Elnor. I would have originally preferred Seven and Raffi, but they appear to be occupied with the Enterprise. * a show about Book’s relief efforts after the DMA attacks. * a show or miniseries that ties up the loose ends from “Calypso.” My theory is that the Discovery’s jump duplicated the ship, and that copy has been dormant and adrift up until the time when our Discovery emerged.

[@kaywebbharrison3373]

Wonderful! My first episode was the one set on Organia, so I didn't start with the first in Sept 1966. However, I did watch every episode after and the reruns when the series went into syndication. In 1966-67, I was in my Junior Year of High School.

[@DawnDavidson]

What a great age to be when encountering Trek for the first time! I was 4 in 1966, so my original watching mostly gave me nightmares. (Lights of Zetar, I’m looking at you!). But I became a hardcore Trek fan in Jr High and HS, with syndicated reruns and The Motion Picture. Good times!

[@PeBoVision]

'That and Phasers' You SO landed the ending.

[@pantalonesdemuerto7960]

Perhaps this may be a bit superficial, but I think one of the fastest ways to make a Star Trek feel less Star Trek-y is to give it an adequate budget.

[@morlockmeat]

That was excellently put. Bravo!

[@CatDeville]

Very interesting discussion, and one that I'm, for the most part, in agreement with. Where I would quibble a bit is just with terminology. I agree that Star Trek is "pulp sf," although "pulp sf" also includes a lot of what you would likely call "hard" sf or what some would call "technological sf." First, I've never liked the terms "hard sf" vs. "soft sf," and since I grew up to be a sociologist, I now grok that this is at least partly because it's entrenched in the same bias that calls the physical sciences "hard science" while considering the social and behavioral sciences "soft" (or even pseudo-sciences - although is is *much* easier to study something scientifically when the phenomenon being studied is easier to measure, as it more often is in the physical sciences than it is in the social and behavioral sciences, so from my perspective the terms seem inverted but that's a completely different discussion ;) ) But how I've always differentiated categorically has been to look at the story to see what science does it focus on extrapolating around. What you're referring to as "hard" science, or "technological" science fiction generally centers the discussion around extrapolations on technology, whereas sociological science fiction, like Star Trek, does incorporate technical advances, but the heart of the story is centered around extrapolations of how those changes affect things sociologically. So that's the difference to me. But as to them being "pulp sf", I would point out that a great deal of science fiction published in the "pulps," all the way back to the '20s-30s (when the science fiction pulps got their start) were stories that we would classify as "hard sf" today. Indeed, Hugo Gernsback, who published the first science fiction "pulp" magazine, Amazing Stories, preferred to focus on what we would today call "hard sf," as he believed that the stories should be instructive, apparently only adding more "fantastical and unscientific" fiction to Amazing Stories out of a need to attract readers. :) And most of the authors that we know of today as "hard sf" writers got their start in the pulps along with those we see as "soft sf writers. So I don't really see that being a defining difference. Some would call Star Trek "space opera," and in many ways that does apply, at least to the original series, but it was never *just* "space opera" (although an argument could be made that Roddenberry, with his pitch that it was "Wagon Train to the Stars" certainly framed it as such, but even ToS never remained *simply* a space opera, and the critical element of space opera (space warfare) was actually only present in a relatively small number of episodes in ToS. So really, the only place I really disagree with you is in how we classify Star Trek into a science fiction subgenre, and now-a-days that gets extremely complex and it has always been subjective. One might say it's the nature of the constantly evolving literary beast. And I freely admit that, as a sociologist, I'm biased. I actually credit Star Trek, which I've been watching since I was a wee child (I was born in 1961, and it's actually one of the first shows I remember watching and looking forward to (along with Lost in Space)) for being responsible for developing a natural "sociological imagination." :)

[@dm121984]

Star trek always gives a feeling that, though the federation isn't perfect, it tries hard to try to improve over time and maintain its existing standards. DS9 was something of a challenge to that vision, after all, it showed starfleet building its first ever pure warship to fight the Borg, and the dominion was an existential threat to the federation's existence. However, even that show generally shows the federation is full of good intentions, even if they don't always get executed well.

[@CavHDeu]

Nice that you had mentioned Moon. One of my favorite movies.

[@Darbobski]

I admire Steve for even attempting this. It is like trying to separate out the ingredients of a complex recipe without a definitive list or at least being able to talk to the chef. For me, a big part of the success of Star Trek was due to 2 things happening at the time it came out. 1) We were on a national quest to the moon that had everyone enraptured by all things "space". 2) The country was in an ongoing and elevated battle for human rights. It is easy to forget that blacks and whites were not legally allowed to marry until 1967. Of course, it was more than just those elements that made Trek stand out, but there can be little doubt that they "struck while the iron was hot", so to speak. Trek melted itself into US history and there is no sign that it will ever fade away, which is great since we need the Trek message now more than ever.

[@MattMcIrvin]

Not only that--while it was legal, marriage between black and white people did not have *majority public approval* until sometime in the Bill Clinton administration. Around the time that Star Trek: TNG was on the air, in fact. That continues to amaze me and I lived through that whole era.

[@CannonSP117]

LL&P sir! I'm right there with ya, agree wholeheartedly. I'm currently playing Starfield and I'm getting Star trek vibes from the in-game faction, Constellation. It's like if NASA, SETI, & The Explorers Club had a love-child. Cheers!

[@gdp3rd]

Thank you, Steve. Star Trek, from those first Thursday nights, has been Inspiration & Aspiration.

[@jonathansnow1886]

Great. Totally agree, and I watched TOS from Day One. I loved/love Star Trek's sense of optimism. Now I am old, and glad that ST has thrived. even I'm personally still somewhere back on Talos IV in my own head.

[@StevenJBen]

I guess I would say something like "in the future, perfect Humans from a utopian Earth travel to strange new worlds where they meet humanoid aliens that represent specific flaws of current Humans, and use progressive values to show how to fix the problem" It's not perfect but it sums up what I think Star Trek mostly is. It's why I think it's so important that the aliens we meet are just people with forehead ridges and why it's actually important their cultures are so 2-dimentional. We need to recognize ourselves in the aliens, and we need to focus on a specific flaw because that's the point in meeting them. Ferengi represent our greed and out of control capitalism. Klingons represent our aggression. Romulans represent our paranoia, and so on and so on. Star Trek magnifies the flaw and then uses our characters to show how a better version of Humanity can overcome those problems.

[@jamesholland8057]

The Enterprise itself is astoundingly wonderful.

[@pjbailey2313]

Another excellent essay! I always wondered how I turned out to be such a staunch progressive, I’m a child of Star Trek!

[@DavidStowers-o7k]

The Omega Glory is one of my favourite original series episodes. Its themes of what our planet could've become had calmer minds not been in charge (Imagine Nixon winning instead of Kennedy in 1960 for example).

[@kyuminnie137]

Bruce Greenwood ‘s Pike is so underrated

[@robertt9342]

One of my problems with Strange New Worlds is that while they come up with interesting stories, but wrap them up quickly. Its not about limitations of episode length, it’s about trying to fill space with other plots to avoid modern concepts of pacing. It’s like they have good ideas but don’t know how to fully execute and conclude them. It doesn’t make them bad, just underwhelming.

[@DawnDavidson]

It takes all kinds, I guess. Because I am LOVING the return to a largely episodic format, but also with long story arcs of character and world/universe development. I think SNW hits a really great balance between TOS type storytelling (ALL episodic, nearly interchangeable), and ENT storytelling (season long arcs with multiple cliffhangers). It works for me!

[@robertt9342]

@@DawnDavidson . I think you missed the point if you think I was criticizing the episodic storytelling, my problem was the pacing and and filling the show with secondary and tertiary plots to avoid flushing out the primary story and provide a well built conclusion. It basically builds the story and then suddenly ends it. The second season has had a couple of better episodes where the payoff feels earned instead of just existing.

[@cherylsiedelmann6329]

You nailed it. Great job!

[@ghostporcupine]

Steve, i saw this video when i was trying to figure out what to write a class paper on and you pinged my brain hard enough that I'm now writing an excessively intense series of papers about pulp and Trek

[@jasperdoornbos8989]

Man, you are good! I loved this addition “and phasers” 😂😂😂

[@renatocorvaro6924]

What makes Star Trek Star Trek is that it's Star Trek. Unless it's DS9, in which case it's Star Loitering (but still Star Trek).

[@JanetDax]

I love Avery Brooks' comment that Sisko wasn't a Black station commander. He was a station commander who was Black.

[@Tychoxi]

what makes star trek star trek is exactly every little thing star trek was doing while I was growing up and watching it