Star Trek: Strange New Worlds

ATTENTION: If you had an account that was created before September 1st 2021 you will need to re-create your account again. We apologize for this inconvenience. This should not happen again.

Kalidor

Administrator
Staff member
Council of Elders
Citizen
Yeah the Robert April stuff just stokes the usual racist idiots commenting about things. You know, the ones who, with no point of reference just start saying shit like "I love that he's black so we can enjoy all the white man tears" even though nobody ever said a bad thing about it because no one actually cares.

It's the same thing as it always is, countless posts posturing about how they get off on people "Being mad" even though no one is. The closest thing I've ever seen to it are lore purists who say he should have been cast to resemble the character that was introduced. Which of course is rebutted by things like "We know what they *really* mean".

That's one thing I've loved about this place. That dumb shit is virtually non existent here at The Allspark. We might get into gripe fests about some things or exchange our opinions about stuff... but it least they aren't all disingenuous bullshit takes for the sole purpose of peacocking virtue points.
 

Copper Bezel

Revenge against God for the crime of Being.
Citizen
There certainly are disturbingly racist takes out there. I took a look at the comments section of that video from earlier:
If I was being really paranoid, I'd say "yeah of course they replaced the first Captain of the Enterprise with a black man...just as they replaced the first ever Doctor Who with a black girl." As has been said MANY times already, this isn't about equality or representation, it's about claiming what others had built. It's about saying "this is ours now" because they can't or don't want to create their own characters.
Black people are stealing Star Trek from its rightful owners, white people. Sure.

Now, obviously, YouTube comments are a reliable cesspool of bad takes and regressive politics, and I wouldn't have gone there looking for a black swan existence proof otherwise. I'm not characterizing the whole Trek fanbase here. Point of fact, that was the most overtly racist or angry post I saw in the first couple screenfuls of comments, and I saw one "ha, get over it" post on the way there, with much of the rest in roughly in the "just make a new character" group or joking about a canonical explanation for why he's black now.

People lightly snarking at the choice, or calling the writers dumb for not using a different name, though - how many of that majority are consciously motivated by an opinion they recognize would be considered racist, but aren't saying so? I'm betting it's not all. I'm betting it's not none. I'm betting a lot more of them, consciously or unconsciously, are reacting to something that feels like "typical forced diversity" that their favorite talking heads have told them is bad and cheap and pandering. They don't care about the race of the character, but they also don't care about racism or representation, and they're more likely to criticize a TV show for rocking the boat than they are to call out the racists in the discussion. Enlightened centrists concerned about the assholes on both sides don't tend to be allies of representation. They want you to take your politics out of their franchise, and if putting in black people brings politics with it, they ultimately want you to get rid of those, too.

As for telling people what they *really* mean: I was raised by parents and have been around all sorts of people who *really* meant things. My stepfather was quite threatened by the presence of Starbuck in the BSG reboot as a gender-nonconforming woman. He would not have described himself as such. What he told me instead was that if they wanted to write her the way they did, they should have kept her a man instead. I think people who are uncomfortable about women or racial minorities taking on certain kinds of roles, for reasons they might not really understand themselves, can massage those feelings into something more acceptable. It's not that the reaction they're having is based in a racial bias, it's that they're defending canon or calling out pandering or tokenism and so on. Maybe not everyone who makes those kinds of arguments is motivated by racism, but we expect the converse to be true, that people who are motivated by racist ideas are going to tend to sound like that. If you've been burned enough times by people who sound like that right up to the point they turn heel, you learn not to take everything at face value. And I mean, I'm white, I have the privilege not to experience that as regularly or seriously as a lot of folks.

Even if someone is interested in protecting canonicity, which as I've said I can't fully relate to because that's not something I value, I really do expect them to at least have some awareness that old media can have baked in biases that they shouldn't be protecting. Obviously, Captain Pike in The Cage is canonically sexist, and no one's upset that they broke continuity to change that. Meanwhile I've heard black D&D players talk about getting into a game in old versions of the system, and being told they couldn't play a black elf because black elves are evil. The other participants are just lore purists, but the lore in this case is racist and they're not self-aware enough to see the problem with defending it.

So no, you can't call someone "racist" for wanting those kinds of guys to get over it or die mad about it. At worst, they're making a false positive assumption in a pretty plausible situation, usually in response to people who are themselves having an immune response to what they call "woke" or "forced diversity" or whatnot. Calling them "racist" is pretty much the same as those comments on the video in the vein of "What if they made Geordi Asian?" - the fact that you're assuming an even playing field where everything is symmetrical and reciprocal is the problem.
 

Sean Whitmore

Member
Citizen
Part of the pain of the Discovery redesigns for me is that it came attached to the whole Axanar fiasco, which was set around the same time period and made the much more creatively-interesting choice of treating it as a period piece.

That's funny, I just happened to rewatch that last night.

I'm not a fan film guy, Axanar only came to my attention because of the lawsuit, but I really liked it. I liked Soval bridging the gap between the Enterprise and TOS eras. I liked the backstory given to Garth (one of the half-dozen war heroes whose escapades were "required reading at the Academy"). I even liked the documentary style (and tried not to think about the likelihood of the Klingon general who lost the war agreeing to sit down for an interview).

And I much prefer the simple explanation for the war (this is what the Klingons do, they conquer things) over the weird fear that the Federation was going to destroy their identity or whatever from Discovery.
 

Kalidor

Administrator
Staff member
Council of Elders
Citizen
It's more of me just pointing out how many people lack the utter self awareness of their hypocrisy. If your default reaction to a black actor being cast is "Why does it have to be a black person?" then there are probably some racist undertones in there and it's fine if people call it out when they see it.

But that cuts both ways. When your first reaction to a black actor being cast is to laugh about it out of spite because it will create scenarios you imagine happening and think it's funny, then there are probably some racist undertones there as well. Especially when the ratio is about 10:1 between the latter and the former. And further than that, the latter is usually just other white people.

In either case, both vocal groups are assholes since when normal people see a black actor being cast their default reaction is "Cool, I saw him in X" or "I've not seen him in anything so it will be interesting to see his take."

You see what I'm saying?
 

Copper Bezel

Revenge against God for the crime of Being.
Citizen
Oh, okay, I see what you're saying, if some white liberal fan wants black people cast first and foremost because it will make the (also white) 4channers angry, then they're being racist themselves by reducing that actor to a pawn and only thinking of them in terms of their race. That's probably true. I've had friends who would get really weird when talking about certain minority groups, in an ostensibly "positive" way, that seemed like signaling or compensating and made me really uncomfortable. And while the harm isn't as obvious as the other guys, that kind of mindset can turn a discussion really toxic really fast.

And you know, I have to be honest and say that within the teensy little part of me that feels bad for Discovery with SNW already looking so much better, there's another, smaller piece within that part that feels really bad that the show that well out of its way for a cast that wasn't dominated by straight cis white dudes is the one looking like the ugly step-sibling to the one headed by two straight white guys and a white lady. And while within that smaller piece within the part, there's a little bit of concern for Paramount taking an unfortunate message from that in there, quite a lot of the space is taken up by the feeling that the wrong fans are going to feel validated by it. Which is like some double-reverse permutation of egging on the racists, whether imaginary or otherwise. Of course, if they're anything like the folks in that YouTube video's comments, they're all somehow still so stuck on hate mode they didn't even notice SNW looks good and I've got nothing to worry about. 😣
 

Rust

Slightly Off
Citizen
I'm glad Robert April finally got some screen time.
I really don't give a toss who plays him.

I've sent certain segments into fits by pointing out there's not a single character in the franchise that must be *Insert Race Here*.
 

PrimalxConvoy

NOT a New Member.
Citizen
They’ve said numerous times that the Animated show isn’t canon even if they borrow stuff like “Yesteryear” from it occasionally.

- https://www.cbr.com/why-star-trek-animated-series-canon/

- https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek_canon

"
At the end of the first season of Star Trek: The Next Generation, all licenses for Star Trek spin-off fiction were renegotiated, and the animated series was essentially "decanonized" by Gene Roddenberry's office. Writers of the novels, comics and role-playing games were prohibited from using concepts from the animated series in their works.[12] Among the facts established within the animated series that were called into question by the "official canon" issue was its identification of Robert April as the first captain of the USS Enterprise in the episode "The Counter-Clock Incident".

The Star Trek Chronology by production staffers Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda does not include the animated series, but does include certain events from "Yesteryear" and acknowledges Robert April as first captain of the Enterprise.[13] The timeline in Voyages of the Imagination dates the events of the series to 2269–2270, assuming the events of the show represented the final part of Kirk's five-year mission, and using revised Alan Dean Foster stardates. In the updated October 1999 edition of their book: The Star Trek Encyclopedia: A Reference Guide to the Future, Michael and Denise Okuda state that:

In a related vein, this work (i.e. book) adheres to Paramount studio policy that regards the animated Star Trek series as not being part of the "official" Star Trek universe, even though we count ourselves among that series' fans. Of course, the final decision as to the "authenticity" of the animated episodes, as with all elements of the show, must clearly be the choice of each individual reader.'[14]
David Gerrold, who contributed two stories to TAS, stated in an interview his views on the canon issue:

Arguments about "canon" are silly. I always felt that Star Trek Animated was part of Star Trek because Gene Roddenberry accepted the paycheck for it and put his name on the credits. And D. C. Fontana—and all the other writers involved—busted their butts to make it the best Star Trek they could. But this whole business of "canon" really originated with Gene's errand boy. Gene liked giving people titles instead of raises, so the errand boy got named "archivist" and apparently it went to his head. Gene handed him the responsibility of answering all fan questions, silly or otherwise, and he apparently let that go to his head.[15]
Writer-producer D. C. Fontana discussed the TAS Canon issue in 2007:

I suppose "canon" means what Gene Roddenberry decided it was. Remember, we were making it up as we went along on the original series (and on the animated one, too). We had a research company to keep us on the straight and narrow as to science, projected science based on known science, science fiction references (we didn’t want to step on anyone's exclusive ideas in movies, other TV shows, or printed work). They also helped prevent contradictions and common reference errors. So the so-called canon evolved in its own way and its own time. For whatever reason, Gene Roddenberry apparently didn’t take the animated series seriously (no pun intended), although we worked very hard to do original STAR TREK stories and concepts at all times in the animated series.[16]

(Source: - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_The_Animated_Series )
 

AgentOrange

Member
Citizen
I've sent certain segments into fits by pointing out there's not a single character in the franchise that must be *Insert Race Here*.
But if Chakotay wasn't descended from the Rubber Tree People, those vision quests could be really problematic.
 

DarkeklawGW

Immortal Maximal OC
Citizen
Just saw the First Episode on YouTube on Paramount's Channel.

That felt like Trek to me. It was a fun watch and was over before I realized it. I enjoyed the representation of every character there. I've been a in and out fan since Enterprise. I won't speak on Discovery or Picard as I've only seen clips and can't give a full feel for either show. My only real problem that turned me off of Disccovery was how they once again redesigned my favorite trek race (Klingons) but it's not work vitriolic hate over.. (Also the main reason I haven't seen Discovery and Picard is I'm not shelling out money for every streaming service that has shows I "Might" get into. ) But SNW was good. I hope it does well.
 

Copper Bezel

Revenge against God for the crime of Being.
Citizen
They do still have a one-week trial free with any new account. If you're curious to see whether Discovery, Picard, and SNW are worth paying for, you could pick a convenient week and binge some stuff. Personally (as you can already tell from this thread) I'd start with Disco S3 and whatever SNW is available by then.
 

Steevy Maximus

Well-known member
Citizen
They do still have a one-week trial free with any new account. If you're curious to see whether Discovery, Picard, and SNW are worth paying for, you could pick a convenient week and binge some stuff. Personally (as you can already tell from this thread) I'd start with Disco S3 and whatever SNW is available by then.
Don't forget Lower Decks! :p
And Paramount+ does have a decent little library of content. Halo has been pretty solid, and they've got Jackass Forever, Infinite and Snake Eyes: GI joe available to watch as well.
 

Axaday

Active member
Citizen
That's funny, I just happened to rewatch that last night.

I'm not a fan film guy, Axanar only came to my attention because of the lawsuit, but I really liked it. I liked Soval bridging the gap between the Enterprise and TOS eras. I liked the backstory given to Garth (one of the half-dozen war heroes whose escapades were "required reading at the Academy"). I even liked the documentary style (and tried not to think about the likelihood of the Klingon general who lost the war agreeing to sit down for an interview).

And I much prefer the simple explanation for the war (this is what the Klingons do, they conquer things) over the weird fear that the Federation was going to destroy their identity or whatever from Discovery.
I need to watch that some time. It was a leading fan answer to the question of what Discovery was originally supposed to be about.
 

Monique

Guess whos back
Citizen
Caught the first two episodes. It's surprisingly okay. Not quite amazing yet but has potential. After Discovery and Picard my expectations were low but so far so good on this one.
I'm not sure about Sam Kirks mustache however. I get that he had it back in the day but like you know... if were changing peoples entire races we can probably get away with losing that 'stache.

Do wonder if they will be able to resist having Pike find a way out. I assume not because of canon but also the trek timeline is so battered at this point and it's not like it would have major ramifications on the timeline besides negating a couple episodes of ToS into an alt timeline.
 

Copper Bezel

Revenge against God for the crime of Being.
Citizen
Do wonder if they will be able to resist having Pike find a way out.
Maybe I'll feel differently in five years, but I hope that decision is locked in a box and the key cast into Mount Doom. SNW is giving me hope that Trek can be good again and I don't want to see it dipping into the Picard S1 playbook.
 

Sean Whitmore

Member
Citizen
3 for 3! This one gave off a lot of "Naked Time" / "Naked Now" vibes, continuing the fine tradition of early-first-season-contagion episodes.

If I have any minor nitpick (and it's not even about the events of this episode, exactly), it's
that everyone seems very quick to say screw Starfleet regulations. I know Kirk's era was more "wild west" than Picard's, and that this is even earlier still, and obviously nothing's being done for immoral reasons. I'm only wary because the other new shows often give off a "Starfleet sucks, only our ragtag heroes are good" vibe, and I don't want that from this.
 

Axaday

Active member
Citizen
Maybe I'll feel differently in five years, but I hope that decision is locked in a box and the key cast into Mount Doom. SNW is giving me hope that Trek can be good again and I don't want to see it dipping into the Picard S1 playbook.
I don't want them to change the continuity, but I'd like to see some play with the question of whether it is really immutable for him. I would like to see at least one situation that looks like it could be the one and he finds another way. But in the end, what I want to see is that there is a moment that he knows this is it and he hasn't dodged it after all and he could totally dodge it now. But he doesn't dodge it because it is what needs to be done. There are people that need saving and it is his duty and he can't ask someone else to do his duty for him.
 
Top Bottom