Since Discovery, despite the Star Trek writers repeatedly beating us over the head with this, I still somehow didn’t catch onto the pattern. If there is a through-line to all the new shows, the notion that acknowledging one’s own vulnerability is a sign of individual strength, and that showing support when others are being vulnerable around you, is also a sign of individual strength.

This may not feel “woke” in the way it’s usually understood, but I really think it’s pushing a long overdue envelope, and one that is arguably more important to our times than a half-black half-white face representing the “illogical” nature of racism.

For example: when I read the angry tweets about the new series (ie; the “pussification of men”, etc.) I can’t even force myself to see them as coming from anything other than weak, scared people who are too afraid of what the world would think of them if they expressed their authentic selves. They want to scare the rest of us into being as scared as they are, because they believe it will make them feel less alone. But loneliness can only be fixed by showing vulnerability.

And that’s the root of the problems in our modern era, isn’t it? Deeply insecure people hurting others in a desperate effort to not be hurt themselves. They haven’t always portrayed this concept in a graceful way, but kudos to Star Trek for keeping up the tradition of asking its audience: “What is it you’re so afraid of?”

  • Wolf314159@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 days ago

    You seem to have almost completely missed the point of allegory and metaphor in TOS. “Time after humanity has dealt with” as you put it is just a literary device to soften the impact when the show was inevitably confronted or viewed by real racists. It was never a really view of the future. It was always a reflection of our present through the lens of futurism, a clever narrative framing device. That narrative framing device could not possibly remain unchangeable through multiple generations without loosing everything that made it work. Attempting to do so, i.e. keeping the storytelling framework completely unchanged and not adapting to new generations and new social dynamics, would have shown a lack of creativity and imagination.

    The show was from a time when the U.S. thought they had beaten fascism (past tense, done, a part of the past) and would soon beat racism, classism, etc. From a time when imperialism was seen as a fundamentally good social force by most of the imperialist public. Today we (mostly) know better. We will probably never truly erase any of them. They are things we’ll have to remain vigilant for. A show today patronizing us with their perfected utopian society which remains VERY imperialist without shining a light on that contradiction just would not work. A show lacking any interpersonal drama also would not work and it’s not even something that was really true for TOS, just a weird kink Roddenberry got into when producing TNG. That’s the context of the way Star Trek has changed and it matters.

    • ValueSubtracted@startrek.websiteM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      The show was from a time when the U.S. thought they had beaten fascism

      I think all the time about how early TNG largely reflected the falsehoods we were being sold at the time - that all of these things were Past Problems.