Slashdot Mirror
Why Charles Stross Hates Star Trek
daria42 writes "British sci-fi author Charles Stross has confessed that he has long hated the Star Trek franchise for its relegation of technology as irrelevant to plot and character development — and the same goes for similar shows such as Babylon Five. The problem, according to Stross, is that as Battlestar Galactica creator Ron Moore has described in a recent speech, the writers of Star Trek would simply 'insert' technology or science into the script whenever needed, without any real regard to its significance; 'then they'd have consultants fill in the appropriate words (aka technobabble) later.'"
You make a good point, but I don't think the problem is just that it's made up, how how unclever the problems and solutions sometimes were. Surely not every problem in the future can be solved by screwing around with the deflector array or realigning dilithium crystals.
Other than Doctor Who (which I like despite the problems, not because of them), every single series I've named is far more solid, far less fluffy, than Star Trek. And even Dr Who is well below ST fluffiness.
Yet the problem is with all those shows is that they suck! :p
I say that tongue in cheek so as not to start a flamewar. I DO hate Dr Who and find it completely unwatchable, but I'm also a big fan of the latin de gustibus non est disputandum -- there's no disputing about taste. I'm fine with the fact that other people like stuff I don't, etc, I just wanted to note that lack or excess of technobabble does not make or break a show's enjoyability. It's characters and plots that matter--even in s.f.
Actually, US soldiers spent the first few years in Iraq recreating A-team vehicles for the amusement of Rumsfeld. It was far more entertaining than the TV show because they died when their designs failed.
Puh-lease. Voyager was much more watchable than DS9. DS9 was all of the played out crap that you saw in TNG put in a different setting (Space Station boldly going fucking nowhere) whereas Voyager took the fish out of water (in this case, Federation crew out in the middle of nowhere without any backup and without any known races) and granted, it had it's low moments, but the drama and action to me were much more personable than that in DS9, which was part garbage (as you said, the Chosen One crap comes to mind) and part mindless battles that ended in Deus Ex Machina (can anyone say the wormhole saves the quadrant when all seems lost). Granted, I could've done without Q being in Voyager (although it was mostly done for comic relief and a little bit of nostalgia) and the TNG appearances near the end (although that was done mostly to help tie up the ending of the series I think).
Voyager is hated mostly by fanboys I think because it got away from the quickly turning stale norm that TNG and DS9 had become known for and tried to be a little bit different. I have no idea, because the characters were a lot more likable than most of those in DS9 (I won't argue that the TNG crew were less likable, TNG is still my favorite overall) with the notable exception of Neelix, and the plot lines a lot more varied than that of DS9, which either focused around the Ferengi bar, the Bajorans, the Cardassians, or the Gamma Quadrant. There were some exceptions, but I just described 95% of the episodes of DS9. The only big arc in Voyager was their conflicts with the Borg and the earlier conflicts with the Kazon. Other than that, you had no idea what to expect from one episode to the next. Oh yeah, and no one on DS9 or TNG had boobs quite like Seven on Voy. And when all else fails, the boobies win!
bat'leth
Sproing!
And the nerd trap works! I knew *someone* was going to quote some Klingon word in response to all the slander.
For your troubles, I'll punch an extra hole in your geek card. I'm sure it'll heal your wounds quicker that way.
John
>>>I agree; I think Star Trek went overboard with the technobabble. But the point is that in ST, unlike "hard sci-fi", the technology is not the point of the show, it's character development, moral issues, etc.
>>>
Question:
Why would I want to waste my time watching a show that, according to the laws of universe, cannot possibly exist? I'm not a big fan of non-existent fantasy worlds, although I did watch some of the Potter movies. I like to look at shows and think, "Well that could happen someday," and that's simply not true of Trek's magic.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall