#trek commentary

[skybson]

2x06 - Melora

[gaelforcewinds]

super fair criticism !! in ENT there's a vulcan religious cult , one of many mentioned but not displayed, which does not practice the Sarak's religion of logic like most of mainstream vulcan culture, but that's the only one that pops into my mind atm and its not even really an alternate religion but more of a return-to-roots development

re: bajor, since religion is such a huge part of bajoran identity (kai winn, bariel, and kira talk extensively about how religion became a bonding element of the bajoran resistance and a rallying cry), the occupation did its best to root out all signs of religion and culture, so (while its still an excuse for not writing in more religious diversity) that does explain a bit about why we dont see more religions on bajor

i will also say, how many human religions can you think of being mentioned in trek? there's not any explicit mention of religion or religious practices in tng-era trek largely because the show runners at the time were really interested in futuristic universalism, the death of all religion and the enlightenment of humanity beyond needing gods or higher powers

i'm just mentioning that because i think religion can be a good measuring stick for how developed any non-human culture can be, but that can also be reductionist in what culture is and how it can be interacted with; cultural diversity within one species shows up in myriad ways, not just multiple religions but with multiple worldviews, beliefs in how government should work, cultural or linguistic touchstones, etc.

this isn’t anything new or revolutionary to say but i hate how star trek portrays alien cultures as a monolith, maybe with two or three different subgroups at most. first of all it contributes to a lot of the weird bioessentialism written into the show second of all that’s just not how culture works. look at all those posts going around here joking about how what’s considered rude in one culture is polite in another, and that’s just in humans! “all klingons inherently have the Warrior’s Spirit” can you imagine if we said that about humans. sorry guys my ancestral scottish highlander genes are calling me to go beat the shit out of some englishmen i’ll brb

[bardicious]

Honestly tired of the criticism SNW gets from specifically Tumblr (cause when I check reddit, they love it lots). Like, there are some nitpicky ass people here.

Imo, the Gorn are awesome (you saw them once in TOS, get over it!), Spock/Chapel make sense and were always plausible (Also Spock had his fair share of female love interests in TOS that he knew less than Christine), regarding the silly episodes where Spock gets turned "human" or the new one where the crew turns "vulcan" (In quotes because a. I don't think the intention is for them to be accurate representation of either race b. we all just gonna ignore all the silly ass episodes in TOS like they're not part of the series' bread and butter), the musical episode was literally the best musical episode in the entirety of the genre of rando show doing a musical episode.

Spock this Spock that, there's so many complaints about Spock as if the Menagerie didn't have ooc Spock. The complaints about not having enough screen time for this character or that, like, again, let's be real, this show is for people who specifically loved TOS, of course you're going to have lots of Spock, Chapel, Uhura and yes, Jim also (because he's beyond crucial to Star Trek's legacy), and yes, maybe there should be more Ortega and idk whoever that other pilot is, but you still have focus on Pike, Una, and La'an, which is pretty damn good for a show that only has 10 episodes a season.

Lovely to see that the show has a 98% from Rotten Tomatoes, and a 93% from Google Users, which imo, despite the wackos I've seen on this site, is what really matters and means the show is going to keep trucking along despite a minority of negativity.

My long winded way to say, I can't wait for season 3! ❤️

[electronickingdomfox]

Star Trek V with audio commentary from Shatner:

Yeah, I wonder what’s in that scene that’d make two professional actors giggle so uncontrollably...

Yes, it is.

[perseidlion]

This is why streaming is dying.

I'm Canadian, and I used to watch Star Trek on Crave. Crave saved us for awhile from the fracturing of the streaming landscape because it stayed as an umbrella service for quite some time. I used to get Star Trek, HBO, WB shows, Starz, Sony stuff...basically Hulu + HBO + Paramount. That was actually worth it because for the same monthy fee I could get House of the Dragon, Star Trek and more.

But that wasn't going to last forever. When Paramount+ launched in Canada, Star Trek got taken off Crave. I'm a huge Star Trek fan but even I couldn't justify a FIFTH streaming service just for Trek.

So I waited until Discovery was finished. And then I binged it and season 4 of Lower Decks. And then I cancelled. I won't get it again until S3 of Strange New Worlds and Season 4 of Lower Decks are finished, then I'll binge and cancel again.

There is literally nothing else on P+ I want to watch. I looked, because if there was something I'd cancel Netflix for a bit. But it's all movies I've seen and don't want to rewatch, shows I already have access to on other streamers, or things I have no interest in.

When the networks were working together to put lots of tasty treats under one streamer, it was absolutely worth it. I'd pay $20 a month for Crave if HBO kept making good shows (instead of cancelling them, RIP Our Flag Means Death) and if P+ had lots of Trek (and...didn't keep cancelling those shows like they did Lower Decks and Discovery.) Between that and Trek that would mean I always had a show releasing on the platform that I wanted to watch.

As long as there isn't a steady diet of things that appeal to me, I WILL keep subscribing, binging, and cancelling. Churn is the reason these networks aren't profitable. But there is literally no incentive for me to NOT do that when the things I want to watch are scattered across 5-6 different streamers, each charging $15+ a month.

In trying to get their slice of the pie, the networks have guaranteed there isn't enough food on their buffet to keep people coming back for more.

It creates a vicious cycle. This fracturing means there's not enough budget to support the flagship shows/franchises. Then, they get cancelled and/or budget reduced. So they take away or vastly reduce the thing I want to watch the most.

PLUS none of the networks are nurturing the cult hits/franchises of the future. Shows that have the potential to be the reason I subscribe are being cut off at the knees after virtually no promotion.

I watch every new show like Dead Boy Detectives knowing there is a very high likelihood that this will be the only season I'll get to watch. So much potential is left on the table. If there were four or more shows like Dead Boy Detectives and Kaos getting ongoing commitments from Netflix I wouldn't even consider cancelling my subscription. Instead, I know that any show that isn't an immediate cultural moment is probably getting the axe, or getting two seasons, max. Especially if it's SF&F. Especially if it's queer.

We live in the world where even the critically-acclaimed and franchise-based House of the Dragon is getting truncated episode runs and reduced support.

Regardless of how you feel about how Game of Thrones ended, that franchise is a cultural juggernaut. House of the Dragon is legitimately good and packed with talent. The rough patches of Season 2 can be easily traced back to reduced budgets/cut episode run at the last minute that forced the production team to scramble and adapt.

Honestly. Is there anyone actually committing to their series other than FX, AMC, and Amazon with Rings of Power? Although RoP can also be considered a sunk cost fallacy since Amazon invested a SHIT TON into the IP and the series, so they need it to work. They also have a wobbly track record supporting other shows. (I will never forgive them for cancelling A Leage of Their Own.)

FX and AMC are the only networks that feel like they're actually supporting their content. And what do you get for that? Shogun, one of the best shows in recent memory. The show absolutely swept awards season (and rightfully so) and is now setting itself up to be a tentpole show in the mold of such classics of the historical fiction genre like Deadwood, The Tudors, and Rome.

Interview With the Vampire, is an AMC show which has a very active and passionate fandom eager for more of it and Anne Rice's Immortal Universe. This is a rare example of a new franchise (albeit based on an existing, well-know IP) is really finding its feet and its audience. The audience for it is not of the size of something like House of the Dragon, but AMC is feeding the audience it does have unapologetically, with queer camp horror full of messy, toxic relationships.

Then there's What We Do in the Shadows, which seems to be ending on its own terms this year. FX is a Disney subsidary which somehow manages to commit to the series it creates, which proves it can still be done.

I do hope that FX and AMC continues to support their weird and wonderful shows, and I hope they keep getting rewarded for it with high ratings and awards so that the rest of the networks will smarten up.

If we hadn't just come out of a golden age of streaming where every network was producing excellent TV, all of this heavy cancellation and fragmentation wouldn't be quite so devastating.

Entertainment seems like it's constantly in a feast or famine churn. Right now, we're careening toward famine, which is full of one-season shows, overextended franchises, flagship shows being cut/restrained and a whole lot of cheap dreck.

It's the reality TV heyday all over again and I hate it.

[lmaster37]

started watching star trek TOS and will be intermittently posting about it here

mainly to talk about spock because WHAT is UP with him he is SO MUCH WEIRDER than i expected i LOVE him

"the fact that my internal arrangement differs from yours, doctor, pleases me to no end" WHAT DO YOU POSSIBLY MEAN BY THAT !! (star trek tos s01e06 mudd's women)

other hits so far include s01e02 charlie x who explodes people with his mind, s01e05 the enemy within bc i love evil clones and i love Actually This Clone Isn't Evil Because Aggression Tempered And Directed By Rationality And Compassion Is A Necessary Force and also william shatner absolutely killed that entire episode, and, of course, s01e04 the naked time. my god. they truly just gave spock and kirk That Interaction and then moved on. "jim..... i feel friendship for you....." "i've spent a whole lifetime.... learning to hide my feelings......" bites him bites him bites hi

anyway unrelated to all that but why is sulu so hot

[biblioflyer]

The Cardassian War was worse than you probably think.

I wrote a lot about the Maquis with every intention of posting quite a bit more about it, but then I got cold feet. Its actually been a while since I watched some of the critical Maquis episodes. In some instances, I haven't seen them since they aired. So I decided to go back and rewatch some of them. I started with TNG 7x20 "Journey's End." Where I expected a very strident lecture on the evils of forced relocation, I found something deeply nuanced and something that also reframed how I understood the Federation's conflict with the Cardassians.

If you're in a hurry, the big revelation was that, per Picard, millions of people died in the Cardassian - Federation War.

If you haven't been part of debates about what the scale of the Star Trek setting is or are more attuned to more recent series, millions may not actually seem that many people. Star Wars and 40k fans are probably squinting and wondering what all the fuss is about.

So let me provide some additional context. This is going to be mostly Doylist in nature, i.e. "meta" commentary.

Millions of people equals thousands of Galaxy-class starships. At a time when we'd seen not more than two Galaxy-class starships on screen at the same time and per the Next Generation Technical Manual (which was quasi-canon at the time, essentially given high regard by creatives working on Trek but always subject to being overruled if the needs of the story dictated) there could be as few as five Galaxy-class starships active at the time, but perhaps eleven including the initial batch of six and assuming the six framed out but not completed hulls were built to completion and subtracting poor Yamato.

Just a few seasons before, the loss of 39 ships and 11,000 personnel at Wolf 359 was considered a pretty devastating loss.

If it were strictly Starfleet and Cardassian military personnel, millions would be staggering losses representing the equivalent of thousands of starships or some mix of ships and major stations or ground forces. My gut tells me that given the way TNG seems to be a smaller scale setting than Trek would later be depicted, this wasn't intended to be solely military losses but also inclusive of and maybe even disproportionately falling upon civilians. Given that the Federation doesn't directly target civilians as a general rule, I do have some theories on how this might come about: namely by making space warfare messier than its generally presented: Star Wars and The Expanse have both done great representation of how conflicts that play out in space can still result in collateral damage to civilian stations and planetary settlements.

Notably, later series like DS9 and Discovery will do a "soft" retcon of Starfleet to include as many as 7,000 ships in the 23rd century and perhaps around 30,000 in the 24th century (citation: Ron Moore & extrapolation based on fleet size quotes) but while this isn't a hard retcon in that it doesn't override firmly declared facts and figures, it also doesn't seem like these larger numbers were ones TNG was operating with when it threw a mere 40 ships at the Borg or had Starfleet yet again being unable to avoid pulling ships out of dock mid-refit and stuffing Enterprise crew on them to catch the Romulans smuggling arms to House Duras.

Regardless of how the numbers breakdown, this was anything but analogous to a protracted series of border skirmishes and raids ala the colonial theaters of various European imperial wars, which full disclosure, was my working mental model for understanding this conflict.

So why does this matter for understanding the Maquis?

I think it matters for understanding the Federation's motives in signing what most fans and many in universe characters feel is a "bad" peace with the Cardassians. This wasn't a vanity war that super powers sometimes find themselves in where they'll fight for years in some corner of the globe that is strategically irrelevant to the imperial heartland but has somehow gained incredible psychological significance in the minds of defense planners, politicians, and yellow journalists. This is a conflict that cost the Federation quite a bit of blood for planets that are described as having been settled for at most a few decades and, at the very least, we've never really heard anyone from the Federation complain about a lack of satisfactory M-class planets.

Of course as represented by the North American Indians (TNG's term, not mine) that had settled on Dorvan V, from the perspective of the colonists, they had roots and distinctive cultural identities that they desired to have respected and felt warranted their own planets. From the Federation's perspective, these are people who have barely settled their worlds and one world should be as good as another. If you run the numbers through "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" then this starts looking even more tilted towards the Federation's perspective.

Now the counter argument is the bog standard opposition to authoritarianism and violent revisionists argument. This is the argument that the moral responsibility for avoiding catastrophic loss of life is on the one who is the first to use violence to try to advance their interests, at least at the level of astropolitics. In this framing it is not the responsibility of the Federation to mollify the Cardassians by conceding on irrational fears or immoral demands.

A cynical reading of this argument might find within it the notion that the Federation should just do what it wants, as long as its consistent with the Federation's values, and if the Cardassians have a problem with it up to the point of attacking, then the Federation should fight back and not stop until it reaches Cardassia and overthrows the military junta in charge or at the very least, removes any Cardassian presence from Federation borders and denudes Cardassian capacity to strike across the border.

The idea here being that conceding to the Cardassians rewards them for their willingness to use violence to achieve their goals, which further incentivizes them to use violence, and arguably did incentivize them to use violence as evidenced by accusations of poisoning wells and damaging infrastructure to drive ex-Federation citizens off the worlds that were ceded to the Cardassian Union.

But this argument has always contained within it the implicit assumption that the Federation had the capacity to rollback Cardassian warmaking capability and to keep up pressure on the Cardassians until the Cardassians cry uncle. A war in which millions died and where the Federation is trading away planets is not one that seems to imply the Federation had the capacity to hammer the Cardassians until they relented or there was a deficit of will to fight this war to the hilt, recognizing that pushing the war all the way to the orbit of Cardassia Prime would result in Union space being ungoverned and insecure until the infrastructure and ships were replaced.

Anyone who has watched the outcomes of the Global War on Terror or the various civil wars and revolutions that have happened in recent years should be very cognizant that a lack of order and security often results in problems being exported to adjacent regions. Problems meaning traumatized and impoverished refugees seeking safety and sustenance in places ill equipped to provide for them materially and often with some or a lot of mutual incoherence and mistrust happening at the cultural level as norms clash. Problems also meaning unaccounted for military equipment finding its way into the hands of revolutionaries, terrorists, and pirates who pursue their own goals and survival needs through the use of weapons on anyone who has something worth taking.

The United States did not kill a million or more people in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other MENA region countries through the use of weapons from 2001 to date. Iraq from 1991 to 2001 didn't have a million excess deaths* because of bombs detonating in people's homes, those deaths resulted from damage to infrastructure and internal supply chains because civilization is actually rather fragile and even people we regard as "less developed" are not meaningfully closer to nature and more resilient than we in the WEIRD category. If anything they exist in a more delicate state because they are often living on more marginal and stressed land with infrastructure that lacks redundancies or substantial state capacity to move people and resources around quickly to address sudden need.

*It should be noted that while these figures are widely quoted, the methodology has been questioned. I would encourage readers who want to get their historical facts correct to examine the evidence and decide whether Iraq sanctions are something one wants to use in a context other than describing the potential consequences of a fictional war.

When considering how to deal with Russia and its invasion of Ukraine, there are moral debates about how hard to press the civilian economy. Namely because so much of the infrastructure and daily necessities of life in modern countries count as "dual use." As in there are legitimate civilian uses that it doesn't seem productive to deny people: transistors are essential for access to information - both state controlled but also outside channels, and operate everything from thermostats to live saving medical equipment. The distinction between a transistor appropriate for running an insulin pump and one for a hypersonic missile is increasingly blurry.

An analogy could easily be drawn to isolinear chips and replicators. We in the fandom often assume that the Federation's ability to be precise in its application of lethal violence is practically omniscient and omnipotent, and that with its august technology, it has been liberated from having to make hard decisions. Yet if the Federation wants to destroy the warmaking capability of the Cardassians, how "deep" into the Cardassian infrastructure does it need to go?

Can you imagine Captain Picard sleeping well at night after calling a senior staff meeting to debate the legitimacy of striking a fusion reactor in a dense urban area that has been unplugged from the civilian grid and hooked up to an industrial replicator pumping out photon torpedo thrusters?

Further, the moral and political science assumptions of the Federation seem to rule out the idea that Cardassian civilians suffering and dying is an appropriate form of justice for Federation lives nor does suffering seem to predictably and reliably lead to revolution. Historical evidence is at best mixed and perhaps even damning. Try wrapping your head around the idea that Russian forces continued to fight their foreign enemies in WW1 at the same time as different Russian formations were fighting each other during the civil war that broke out as a direct consequence of World War 1. In short, while the war had certainly radicalized much of the public, there was still a lot of anger and blame directed to those who had been killing Russians before Russians were killing Russians.

So what is the Federation to do?

Keep fighting a war it probably wasn't technically losing but definitely didn't seem to be winning?

And perhaps the Federation couldn't win without paying a cost in both Federation and Cardassian lives, many of whom might be noncombatants, that was unpalatable?

What was it supposed to do after Wolf 359?

Postscript:

A bit more about the plot of the episode itself. "Journey's End" is probably one of the best TNG moral dilemma episodes. There are critiques to be made obviously. That the Indigenous people depicted seem to be a bit generic to the uneducated eye and do not claim a specific tribal / national identity feels weird at the end of 2024, but it also provokes an interesting discussion about the degree to which there isn't already a lot of syncretism among peoples who have experienced massive depopulation and loss of political agency, whether through intentional genocides, loss of territory, or disease. Its not hard to imagine this "North American Indian" identity found on Dorvan V being a syncretic identity that emerged in the 2100s once interstellar colonization really took off. Its strongly implied to be a "fresh start" movement that was itself controversial and many indigenous North Americas opted not to join them; but its membership could be plausibly drawn from many cultural identities.

However, the moral dilemma at the heart of the episode is handled with exquisite care and steadfastly refuses to make anyone objectively the bad guy. Every Federation character, even hardline consequentialist Admiral Nechayev, is respectful to the people of Dorvan V and mindful of their historical trauma even as it recognizes that the Federation's own interests are largely incompatible with respecting their demands.

Even Gul Evek, the named Cardassian leader of the show, relents after an impassioned plea from Picard. Evek admits to losing two out of three sons in the war and speculates that if the Dorvan V inhabitants leave the Cardassians alone, they will be left alone. Evek was convincing at least to this member of the audience. The framing felt hopeful rather than like everyone was being asked to swallow a Targ dung sandwich.

In checking to make sure I spelled his name correctly, I've become aware that Evek becomes a recurring character and I'm intrigued to see if there are clues to be found as to whether you could argue that he was lying or that events took on a life of their own and Evek was simply proven wrong. Its possible that Dorvan V was largely spared but the Obsidian Order or other elements of the Cardassian government decided to act in places it thought the Federation wouldn't be paying as close attention and the radicalization of the Maquis in turn radicalized Evek.

After all, since that the Cardassian Union was in effect waging a proxy war in the Demilitarized Zone, it would take little to convince some Cardassians that a guerilla movement with ex-Starfleet in almost all command roles and using Federation hardware represented a Federation proxy war with top level support. Which would in turn require the Federation to at least make some efforts at combating the Maquis in order to sell the Cardassians on the idea that the Maquis are not a plausibly deniable arm of Starfleet Intelligence.

But the Maquis are obviously are going to do what they need to do to defend their worlds, whether its their actual colonies or because they object to Starfleet sitting on its hands in the face of reports of atrocities.

In retrospect, for an era that was just testing the waters for multi-season arcs, this is such smart and tragic world building. Unlike say, the plot to destroy Qonos in Discovery or the anti-Changeling bioweapon being the Chekov's gun necessary to resolve the Dominion War, very little about the Maquis arc feels contrived and much more well supported by the world building around it.

[jinxtheshadow]

went to a convention today: had to grab this even though I don’t have a record player currently.

Looking forward to being able to listen to it when i can get my hands on one~

Also i’m absolutely in love with the cover art- the blueprint aesthetic is just *chef’s kiss* 🤌

[could-they-be-a-pro-wrestler]

[noratheelk]

my family watched Star Trek: The Motion Picture

here are the highlights from my family's (mostly my dad's) commentary:

less than five minuets in when my dad said "it"s giving Star Wars"

"meanwhile, Spock's meditating near where Anakin lost his legs"

my dad: why does spock have long hair?

me: he's in his Beatles era

me: this is British Spock, and he's somehow even more fem than Spock.

my dad: Kirk's like "I have a type and it's femboy Vulcans" then Spock cocks an eyebrow "Fascinating"

she apparently heard about kirk's reputation 💀

"They put a beard on him in the transporter as a prank"

"why does McCoy have this gold medallion?"

"he's been off pirating"

"he got to have a cape!"

"why is Sulu in short sleeves?"

"he's showing off the gun show - wait everyone has summer clothes!"

"why is he still that doctor in the jail cell?" (a reference to this, from an episode of Bonanza)

I think it was around this time that Uhura says the line "No response to friendship messages, sir" which I found to be hilarious because that's how it feels to make friends

*Various mockings of Shatner's line delivery when saying "Spock"*

my dad pointed out this scene is taken almost directly from 2001: A Space Odyssey, I asked him if the scene in that movie was followed by an iconic bromance scene and he said no

"they get in there and it's just Trelane"

"Spock's got a hoodie"

"It's like one of those foam pits"

"V'Ger lives in a trampoline park"

[voiidvagabond]

I made a garashir edit. These two make me insane.

Also on ao3 right here.

[star-trek-smash-or-pass]

The Great Link

No propaganda submitted.

[pendragonsclotpole]

i really appreciate how so many youtube essays on shipping/slash/fandom/fanfiction in general include some kind of reference (verbal or visual) to spirk and destiel.

i just adore how these two ships have been objectively accepted as the forefathers of shipping culture. it’s like the fanon equivalent to that one academic work every related scholar in your field needs to cite to have any semblance of credibility. without the mention, who even are you?

two different eras. the ships that launched a thousand ships. one day there shall be a college class on fanfiction/fandom/shipping, and there will be posters of both of these ships, and they will be featured in the citations!

what other ships will be/are in this category?

[emilinqa]

i rewatched mirror mirror earlier and theres a bit of an untapped comedy to kirk's final words in the mirrorverse is him trying to convince mirror spock to mutiny. like, its for the purposes of overthrowing the fascist federation but its funny because it comes off like

kirk: you should crazy murder the evil version of me. by the way. goodbye forever

evil spock (with a beard): i'll think about it

[muirmarie]

thinking about if tos mccoy had died before romulus was destroyed, tos spock could've been carrying his not-quite-a-katra during the events of the aos movies

[ratingboomercomics]

Twink death

1/10 this is fatphobic but I actually like how old computers looked better, so the boomers got me there