I've adored Star Trek since I was 6 (which wasn't too terribly long ago, actually). My dad loves Star Trek, my 8 younger siblings love Star Trek, but half my adolescent friends think that loving Star Trek is insane. Why? Because, as I believe has already pointed out, the image of Star Trek has radically changed.
I'm accustomed to ST:TOS. The endearingly bad acting, the suspiciously human aliens, the refreshingly non subtle story morals, the fascinating away missions, the Kirk/McCoy/Spock dialogues are all treasured childhood memories. When I think of Star Trek, I envision a hopeful, funny (not always intentionally) show, one which fueled my dreams of science, space, and the future of mankind.
My friends, on the other hand, are accustomed to ST:TNG, ST:DS9, or ST:V. They think of Star Trek simply as a glorified soap opera and a gargantuan money maker...and, indeed, such is what it has become. Efforts on my behalf to introduce them to the charm of the original Star Trek end in failure, as they're a tad too spoiled by more modern sci fi to see anything in the original Star Trek but corny dialogue and bad special effects. The original Star Trek requires both imagination and optimism to enjoy...modern teens are all too frequently deficit in those areas, and cannot enjoy ST:TOS any more than they can enjoy Dr. Who (another favorite of mine).
What to do? I'm not sure that the original message and form of Star Trek can be restored to popularity. American culture, at present, cannot appreciate it. The charm of the original cast members can never really be recaptured. At present, the modern image of Star Trek is that of just another special effects laden TV show...and, in that form, it is dying. Let it die. Perhaps in another day and age, "the true meaning of Star Trek" can be resurrected.
The universe of Star Trek is far more extensive/complex than that of Star Wars...there are oodles of details, intricate stories, and an effort to make a logical explanation for all the occurences within the stories. Star Trek affords fans the chance to become very literate about/intensely involved in a very elaborate fictional universe; the serial, long lasting nature of this universe facilitates both better character development and far better detail building than does Star Wars.
Star Wars, on the other hand, is a looser form of story telling...there is little or no explanation of the physical surroundings of the characters, and the galaxy that they travel is essentially one big backdrop for the actual story. Logical explanations are very rarely made...unlike Star Trek, the way the spacecraft function is never explained, a whole bunch of anomalies are attributed to "the force" and left at that, and a plethora of alien species are introduced with absolutely no explanation as to where they came from, what possible evolutionary advantage can be found in their appearance, or their planetary cultures and philosophies. Star Wars asks one to go with the flow, suspend disbelief ("Why are the bad guys such bad shots? How could whatever species Jabba is evolve in the first place?! How did the droids become sentient?!?!"), and just follow the story...which is absolutely fine by me.
Personally, I find that Star Trek is superior as pertains to the incredible amount of detail to absorb and the greater scope allowed by the episodes, and Star Wars to be superior as pertains to grandiose story telling and sheer fun. And as for the Star Wars/Star Trek fan issue, in my experience, Star Trek appeals more to a more limited, intelligent, technically/logically oriented audience, while Star Wars appeals to a broader range of people, as the story telling entrances even those who normally abhor science fiction. One thing I have noticed is that Star Trek fans are almost always fans of other sci fi as well, while Star Wars fans often don't like sci fi at all in general. Hrm....
There was just as much gun access by minors in the 1950s as today, if not more so. And yet, such horrific shootings never occured; a change has taken place, but this change is unrelated to firearms. Rather, 'tis in the moral values inculcated in the young. There is no longer a cultural incentive for doing right other than "well, if you do wrong, you might get caught". For the shooters at Littleton, the "you might get caught" disincentive was negated, as they planned to kill themselves afterwards...hence, by their culturally formulated consciences, there was no real objection to their responding to ostracism with extreme violence. Taking away firearms would do naught...those who really want them could still obtain them by illegal means anyways...the root cause of the problem is spiritual in nature.
Indeed...I have found NOF to be a most admirable tool, albeit with a few very annoying habits...the worst of which be the fact that it only allows you to edit specific areas of the HTML...
Indubitably...the basis for judging any type of software should be the results that it outputs. For some odd reason, the majority of totally vi/notepad created sites aren't exceedingly nice looking, while sites done mainly with Dreamweaver or Net Objects Fusion usually are. It is on the basis of these observations that I choose to use a WYSIWYG editor, with Allistaire Home Site for tweaking. Using a WYSIWYG program may not guarantee clean, nice looking results, but it certainly makes such results easier.
Indeed...as a homeschooler myself (from the outside, looking in) I have observed that "normal" high schoolers have extremely warped views of reality, valueing the superficial and condemning the unique, and have "social skills" that consist mainly of trying to hang out with the popular/successful/attractive crowd and ostracizing those humans who are not considered members of that crowd. I have all of my educational needs satisfied by homeschooling, and feel no need to go to high school in order to learn first hand what it is to suffer at the hands of narrow minded morons. Some social skills one can do without...
Slashdot Mirror
I've adored Star Trek since I was 6 (which wasn't too terribly long ago, actually). My dad loves Star Trek, my 8 younger siblings love Star Trek, but half my adolescent friends think that loving Star Trek is insane. Why? Because, as I believe has already pointed out, the image of Star Trek has radically changed.
I'm accustomed to ST:TOS. The endearingly bad acting, the suspiciously human aliens, the refreshingly non subtle story morals, the fascinating away missions, the Kirk/McCoy/Spock dialogues are all treasured childhood memories. When I think of Star Trek, I envision a hopeful, funny (not always intentionally) show, one which fueled my dreams of science, space, and the future of mankind.
My friends, on the other hand, are accustomed to ST:TNG, ST:DS9, or ST:V. They think of Star Trek simply as a glorified soap opera and a gargantuan money maker...and, indeed, such is what it has become. Efforts on my behalf to introduce them to the charm of the original Star Trek end in failure, as they're a tad too spoiled by more modern sci fi to see anything in the original Star Trek but corny dialogue and bad special effects. The original Star Trek requires both imagination and optimism to enjoy...modern teens are all too frequently deficit in those areas, and cannot enjoy ST:TOS any more than they can enjoy Dr. Who (another favorite of mine).
What to do? I'm not sure that the original message and form of Star Trek can be restored to popularity. American culture, at present, cannot appreciate it. The charm of the original cast members can never really be recaptured. At present, the modern image of Star Trek is that of just another special effects laden TV show...and, in that form, it is dying. Let it die. Perhaps in another day and age, "the true meaning of Star Trek" can be resurrected.
"And last, girls just aren't as intelligent as guys..."
Hmmm...you claim to be having a bit of trouble meeting geek girls...could the above comment be a a fair indicator of *why*?
The universe of Star Trek is far more extensive/complex than that of Star Wars...there are oodles of details, intricate stories, and an effort to make a logical explanation for all the occurences within the stories. Star Trek affords fans the chance to become very literate about/intensely involved in a very elaborate fictional universe; the serial, long lasting nature of this universe facilitates both better character development and far better detail building than does Star Wars.
Star Wars, on the other hand, is a looser form of story telling...there is little or no explanation of the physical surroundings of the characters, and the galaxy that they travel is essentially one big backdrop for the actual story. Logical explanations are very rarely made...unlike Star Trek, the way the spacecraft function is never explained, a whole bunch of anomalies are attributed to "the force" and left at that, and a plethora of alien species are introduced with absolutely no explanation as to where they came from, what possible evolutionary advantage can be found in their appearance, or their planetary cultures and philosophies. Star Wars asks one to go with the flow, suspend disbelief ("Why are the bad guys such bad shots? How could whatever species Jabba is evolve in the first place?! How did the droids become sentient?!?!"), and just follow the story...which is absolutely fine by me.
Personally, I find that Star Trek is superior as pertains to the incredible amount of detail to absorb and the greater scope allowed by the episodes, and Star Wars to be superior as pertains to grandiose story telling and sheer fun. And as for the Star Wars/Star Trek fan issue, in my experience, Star Trek appeals more to a more limited, intelligent, technically/logically oriented audience, while Star Wars appeals to a broader range of people, as the story telling entrances even those who normally abhor science fiction. One thing I have noticed is that Star Trek fans are almost always fans of other sci fi as well, while Star Wars fans often don't like sci fi at all in general. Hrm....
There was just as much gun access by minors in the 1950s as today, if not more so. And yet, such horrific shootings never occured; a change has taken place, but this change is unrelated to firearms. Rather, 'tis in the moral values inculcated in the young. There is no longer a cultural incentive for doing right other than "well, if you do wrong, you might get caught". For the shooters at Littleton, the "you might get caught" disincentive was negated, as they planned to kill themselves afterwards...hence, by their culturally formulated consciences, there was no real objection to their responding to ostracism with extreme violence. Taking away firearms would do naught...those who really want them could still obtain them by illegal means anyways...the root cause of the problem is spiritual in nature.
Indeed...I have found NOF to be a most admirable tool, albeit with a few very annoying habits...the worst of which be the fact that it only allows you to edit specific areas of the HTML...
Indubitably...the basis for judging any type of software should be the results that it outputs. For some odd reason, the majority of totally vi/notepad created sites aren't exceedingly nice looking, while sites done mainly with Dreamweaver or Net Objects Fusion usually are. It is on the basis of these observations that I choose to use a WYSIWYG editor, with Allistaire Home Site for tweaking. Using a WYSIWYG program may not guarantee clean, nice looking results, but it certainly makes such results easier.
Indeed...as a homeschooler myself (from the outside, looking in) I have observed that "normal" high schoolers have extremely warped views of reality, valueing the superficial and condemning the unique, and have "social skills" that consist mainly of trying to hang out with the popular/successful/attractive crowd and ostracizing those humans who are not considered members of that crowd. I have all of my educational needs satisfied by homeschooling, and feel no need to go to high school in order to learn first hand what it is to suffer at the hands of narrow minded morons. Some social skills one can do without...