Skip navigation.

It's just life

So why get all worked up about it?

The wonders of Science Fiction - and Battlestar Galactica

, , , ,

I'm not your typical sci-fi fan. I don't get all excited at the mention of technical jargon. Talk about wormholes, ion cannons, fusion reactors, hyper space and drives is interesting for a while - and then it dries up. Some shows seem to think that the way to create an authentic setting is to cram it full of all sorts of meaningless drivel that hardly amounts to actual words. Star Trek is a perfect example. Star Trek is boring, but became popular because it came onto the entertainment scene at a time when the universe was THE topic of the day, what with the space race, moon landings etc. It was in a real sense breaking new ground, but did in no way come near the potential of the genre. Basically, Star Trek is a show about technology, the brainchild of a person living in the shadow of the bomb, and an ever escalating technological race. The world was not about people, so Star Trek is not about people. It is a show where one-dimensional archetypes, cardboard models, are used as means to showcase technological vision.

Franchises like Star Wars have gone down a similar route, what with the creator losing his original inspiration and letting a once great concept collapse into another effects galore bore.

So what's really the point of science fiction? Is it to create an exciting universe where a more advanced version of the human race stumbles across an alien race and then battles it out? Well, yes, it could be. But that only works - it ONLY works - if the focus is on the humans and not the technology that empowers them. The technology should shed new light on humanity, not the other way around.

For a long time I held up Babylon 5 as the holy grail in sci fi shows. A lot of people dislike it, but upon further investigation, it turns out that these people have watched one or two episodes and decided that it wasn't their cup of tea. However, the creators of Babylon 5 carry a much grander vision - it's a show that does not cater to the goldfish minds of the MTV generation. It is still the only show that I know of that - before filming started - had a story arc spanning five - FIVE - seasons planned out. The perspectives, the revelations, the sense of awe you experience when you get information in season 4 that completely alters your understanding of something that happened in season 1, is pretty grand. Babylon 5 works because it's about people. The characters actually CHANGE, they go through personal traumas, they are nuanced and you constantly experience new facets of their being. Compared with the universe where the order of the day is something like this:

"Alien lifeform ahead, what is it Data?"

"I-do-not-know!"

Aaah, it's entered the ship, and taken over the captain! The captain who is always perfect now talks funny and is really keen on pressing the button next to the energy core which says "do not push". Says No 1: "Crew, we must get the alien out of the captain! He doesn't want to drink tea with me anymore" Cue search for alien antidote, free captain Picard, end episode and reset universe.

Thrilling, isn't it?

But the world moves on and while Babylon 5 is still an all-time favourite of mine, I have now started watching a show that carries amazing potential - Battlestar Galactica (BG). Again, here's a show that is about people, who just happen to be in space (and who are about to be eliminated as a species). There's hardly any technical jargon, and there seems to be great potential for fleshing out the characters. I won't go into too much detail, but suffice to say that BG does all the right things - it uses Sci-Fi as a means to ask questions about the human race and the direction we're headed in. That is ultimately the purpose of sci-fi, to use a setting that is alien to drive home the great problems and grand beauty, the very paradox of humanity, with even greater force.

And when that part of the package is taken care of, it hardly hurts that it looks absolutely stunning. The space scenes in this show are probably the best I've ever seen. It uses a documentery style filming of snap zooms and handheld camera moves that puts you right into the fray. It looks beautiful.

I pray to whatever gods that be that this is not yet another show that will be milked to complete starvation just because it happens to be popular. I hope the vision is as grand as in Babylon 5 with stories being planned years in advance, not around a table with script writers with writing blocks who look dumbfounded at one another asking "what should the next episode be about?". Otherwise this gem will end up as the rest of the drivel produced by an ever more depraved, uncreative and ignorant entertainment industry.

Crossing the comfort zone - resting in the eyes of a strangerThe hypocrisy of the media - a funny story

Comments

vetler 25. May 2006, 13:07

For years I've waited impatiently for someone to create a new scifi series as good as Babylon 5. Battlestar Galactica is good, but it still remains to be seen if it can surpass the greatness of B5.

EivindFS 25. May 2006, 13:49

Yes, it does. I actually have a sneaking suspicion that new BG seasons will be produced as long as people want them - and that the greatness of the show thus will be lost. I mean, the original was only one season long and without really knowing, I suppose the first season of the remake basically mirrors the first season. Which suggests that every season after that is just whacked onto what was already a complete storyline. Is this correct? I hope it isn't. Because that would be bad news for the lasting power of this show.

vetler 25. May 2006, 17:59

Although I haven't seen the original series, from what I hear the new BSG is set a while after the original series, actually. But still, it might be that they are just making it up as they go, like they do in Lost. A part of what made B5 so damn good, was of course that the story was planned so well, and that it was only planned to run 5 years.

EivindFS 25. May 2006, 22:42

Yes, Babylon 5 was unique in its vision. I still don't know of any other TV show that was made in such a way. And today, I think studios are just too damn afraid - just look at what happened to Firefly...

dixonhill 17. August 2006, 12:43

"Star Trek is not about people"
Perhaps you should watch a show before you make blatently wrong comments about it.

EivindFS 17. August 2006, 14:48

Oooh, I sense that you like Star Trek. Enlighten me if you will? :smile:

dixonhill 17. August 2006, 18:51

Actually I do belive that you need to sit down and actually watch the shows, me sitting here giving you synapses will never enlighten you.
One easy example is this one:

Paint one guy black on the left side and white on the right - then paint another guy with white on left and black on the right and have them hate eachother simply because of that difference.

Just because Gene Roddenberry doesn't come in at the end of the episode and scream "It's about people of different races hating eachother!" doesn't stop you from seeing and understanding that that is the actuall point of the episode.

"It speaks to some basic human needs, that there is a tomorrow - it's not all going to be over in a big flash and a bomb, that the human race is improving, that we have things to be proud of as humans. No, ancient astronauts did not build the pyramids - human beings built them because they're clever and they work hard. And 'Star Trek' is about those things." - Gene Roddenberry

See the word humans? :wink:
What you've written is very well written, for instance the continuity in Trek is close to non-exsistent in TOS and TNG but the human condition is actually the whole basis of Trek and a claim such as yours makes me wonder if you've seen that much Star Trek at all...because you can't watch Star Trek, esp. TOS and make such a claim....

It's sorta like saying "B5 is not about ancient species who again try to conquer eachother, it's about space spiders who want to rebuild WTC"...

EivindFS 18. August 2006, 10:49

Dixonhill, I see what you're saying, and I admit to not having seen all that much Star Trek (about 10-20 episodes of TNG and one or two movies) but my issue is one of depth. You remember action films from the eighties? You know, those were the hero met a girl, they fell in love, bad guy kidnaps girl and murders family, hero goes on revenge mission, kills the bad guy in one helluva fight (during which you were standing on your couch scream "DIE MOTHERFUCKER!") unchains the girl so she just avoids the timed trap that is about to be triggered, embraces the guy and kisses while credits roll. Everything is fine and dandy (well, apart from the fact that fifty people are dead of course).

Now, the template eighties action film will be my analogy for Star Trek. These films were not about people. Sure, they had people in them, but their psyches/personalities were so one-dimensional as to be impossible to differentiate from a robot. They weren't people as we know them, complicated many-faceted beings with a seemingly almost unlimited amount of layers of depth. No, these people were just vehicles for the production team who had a dirty message to hammer in.

Now, the purpose of said action films was to further the hegemony of US philosophy and politics and was as such nothing but the most concerted propaganda-campaign in the history of the world (it is in fact the only thing that is still holding the world's opinion of the US above utter contempt - the sheer mass of propaganda willfully consumed still make people feel somewhat mushy and warm-hearted about the US when they get past their hatred of the current administration).

In this regard, Star Trek's effort can be described as near-heroic, as it did indeed bring up xenophobia in a very obvious way and must somehow have helped Americans, albeit it indirectly, see people of the Soviet Union as more then mere evil creatures. But, you know, Star Trek was also just a vehicle for a message, albeit a much better message, but still it's all political. There is little depth to the personalities of the series of Star Trek that I have personal experience with (although I've been told that Voyager is different in this regard), and they're all cardboard cutouts, means with which to stage situations where morals can be preached.

So, yes, Star Trek is about humans, but humans that are so oversimplified as to make them seem like robotic puppets. The concept of someone in Star Trek doing something "out of character" is almost laughable. Out of character? "Well, that, Number One, is because the captain is infested with an alien lifeform! Surely, he has not an atom of evil in him!"

I'm sorry if I'm insulting a personal favourite of yours, but hey - we're human beings, long live diversity (see, diversity, that's the kicker right there!!!).

dixonhill 18. August 2006, 22:37

I think one of the points of Star Trek that you've missed is that humanity there has evolved.
In Next Gen they tell "us" that people now work to better themselves, that they have left behind their petty desires (e.g. satisfation of ego, wealth and the likes) that there is no poverty (in the federation), no starvation and no disease.
This ofcourse is mainly due to the fact that the series started in the mid 80's with all the weird stuff that happend in peoples mind during that decade :wink:

I'm not saying that your wrong, misunderstand me right as we Norse say, the people there CAN be considerd...shallow... and one might argue (as I do) that human nature would never allow for the removal of ego satisfaction etc.
Deep Space 9, the series' that followed TNG shows a very different picture of humanity, the series lead Commander Sisko not only has a huge chip on his shoulder towards Captain Picard but he even hates him.
This because Picard was captured by the cyborg "species" The Borg and turned into Locutus, who in turn helped the Borg to kill unspeakable amounts of people...
Now this was not Picards doing, Locutus' brain was hardwired into a collective of minds and the information in Picard's brain was simply ...slipstreamed if you wish... from his neural network.
Therefore it's unreasonable for Sisko to hate Picard since it wasn't Picard but Locutus that helped the Borg destroy a vessel and in doing so killed Sisko's wife (hence the grudge).

In Voyager, a (Once Norwegian) woman is rescued\kidnapped from the Borg and during the series' next seasons she shows clear character development.
The on-board (ROM if you wish) Holographic doctor is allowed to alter and add to his routines which again leads to serious character development.

In Nemesis, Data is clearly not the same Data that we saw in the last seasons of TNG, and in TNG, Data in seasons 1 and 2 is clearly under developed compared to the Data in the last season...

Heck, in Enterprise they managed to waste two whole seasons on a single storyline, I say wasted because it wasn't a really good storyline... but still there are clear differences between those we meet in season 1 and those that disembark in season 4 and there is continuity...

As for someone doing something "out of character".... well thats not very normal in ANY tv-series, whole manuscripts get tossed simply because Mr.X on a number of occations behave out of character... this is not unique to Trek.

Now I can understand that you might think that Trek is about transporters, tricorders, phasers and wormholes.
You see, they always had people on staff with degrees in science and what not, oh you'll find errors here and there but sometimes that necesary to get things done.

Now bear in mind that you actually have support in the Norwegian Trek community but it's along the lines of "he does have a teenie weenie point" and you do but come on, ten episodes?
Thats ten out of... let's see TOS has 79 episodes, TNG had about 178, DS9 had 176, VOY had 177 and ENT had something like 100... So ten out of ca. 600 episodes....a weeee bit thin and not much to give a good basic insight huh? :wink:

Now Trek is my favourite Sci-Fi, hands down but I would never try and force someone to watch it but perhaps you might consider watching just a few more... you might just see that theres more to it then you think.
Heck, just watch Nemesis, Data will suprise the hell out of you, not by what he does but WHY he does it.

As for diversity..... IDIC - Infinate diversity in infinate combinations (Vulcan Pro-Verb)...
though I like the Klingon Pro-verb "Today is a good day to die" better :wink:

EivindFS 28. August 2006, 10:48

Thanks for enlightening me on Star Trek, dixonhill :smile: I do realize I don't know much about the show and that I don't really have a lot of foundation for making sweeping statements about it. I recognize that it laid down the foundation on which all other sci-fi shows that followed built their success, which is reason enough to hail it in itself.

But I can't help but thinking, judging from what I've seen, that the humanity portrayed in Star Trek is not so much a better humanity where ego drives have disappeared, but one where they have been suppressed by a fascist government, turning everyone into clones, mere conformist tools for the empire. Everything is so 'orderly', so organized and perfect that it's creepy. But then again, what do I know? :smile:

dixonhill 4. September 2006, 09:22

your welcome :smile:
and it can get creepy at times but then you just look at Troi's boobsuits and it all works out just fine :wink:

Though I still recommend further viewing, you'll see that they have some great themes in there.

sunandgames 19. March 2008, 20:12

As I read the beginning of the post, I must confess to getting a little worked about the whole Star Trek is all about technology, and nothing about humans bit. But, I see dixonhill has gotten his point across far better than I could, and brought enlightenment to yet another sci-fi devotee.

I grew up watching the original Star Trek with my Dad. While I probably didn't get all the human behavior nuances as a child, as I watched them in my later years, I certainly did. The episode with the alien race that had black/white and white/black skin was certainly one of the best. One of the true hallmarks of great science fiction I think, is when it places you in a situation that allows you to examine your own beliefs without all the stereotypes we normally carry around. I remember watching that episode, and thinking, why do these guys hate each other so much? They're exactly the same. If you take into consideration the year in which that episode aired, and all the racial tension in the US, it was an incredibly timely topic.

I do believe that some of the later series's (TNG and later) lost a little of the human element, but not entirely. Data was always an interesting character, when they used him to explore the concept of "what does it mean to be human?". A favorite sci-fi theme of mine. Often they used it in a humorous way, which I found a little shallow, but the times it was used in a more self introspective way was always interesting.

FYI, I loved Babylon5 and am actually awaiting the next episode of BattleStar Galactica as I write.

Thanks for the well thought out and interesting post guys!

Write a comment

You must be logged in to write a comment. If you're not a registered member, please sign up.

November 2009
S M T W T F S
October 2009December 2009
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30