Spoilers Star Trek: Deep Space Nine


log in or register to remove this ad

The Ferengi were why I just couldn’t stand the show, but will agree they are peak DS9 and why so many of the episodes are unwatchable. Not even that they’re so irritating, but because they’re so obligate irritating. A perfect example of an “other”in TNG where it’s always the Federation that has to understand “them”, rather than “them” having even the slightest awareness of other perspectives. I’m sure over the course of those seasons Ferengi characters develop an awareness of perspectives other than their own for some purpose other than to manipulate them for their own goals. And of sure, one can say that non-Ferengi are actually the same, focused on their goals, rather than Ferengi goals and so just as unreasonable. But, that would take a lot of mental gymnastics.

DS9 is such an unwatchable show for me because the issue of dealing with irrationally unreasonable people is like every episode. And it really foregrounds the racism of Star Trek, all these cultures/races/species whose members are so unable to focus on task at hand but instead stuck in their obligate ways. And you have a cool reasonable person like Sisko dealing with a huge menagerie of forking short shows who can’t be anything but what they are.
I can tell that you've never worked in an airport.
 


Sounds like it was a show about humans.
Well, yeah. That's what Star Trek has always been. And the open-minded Federation represents, in part, the viewer as various problems of human existence are explored and we ask the questions, "how can we all get along?" and "How can we deal with this?" War and violence, political and religious extremism, greed, social rigidity and mobility, human rights and dignity. The Federation viewpoint is the one that has to be open and tolerant of everyone else around them without being encumbered by too much of any other extreme viewpoint in order to really explore these topics and think of methods for dealing with them.
 


I've posted this a few times, but since we got a DS9 specific thread ill discuss it again. The fact that previous Trek shows were the galaxy through the Federation's eyes and that DS9 was actually the Federation through the galaxy's eyes. This reexamination was very interesting to me. It finally made the Trek world feel less curated and more real. A lot of folks disliked the show because it broke Trek-isms like one ship and crew, and Rodenberry's utopia optimism, but I think it wasn't either of those things. The real culprit was exceptionalism, particularly for an American audience.

In the original series, you had a diverse cast under a BAMF captain. They went around solving problems by the seat of their pants. As long as they followed diligently captain BAMF as he always knew what to do. Essentially, a hammer punch and/or lip lock resolved anything the universe could throw at them. TNG was a bit more nuanced. We now had a diverse ship of the absolute best minds of the Federation. They tended to solve problems more with their mind, but still you had this exceptional crew taming a violent and unreasonably wild yet endless supply of caricature aliens filled galaxy.

Then, you have DS9. The Federation is sent into a backwater system to play neutral party to a formerly occupied species and their captors. Neither of which wants them there. The station systems are not reliable, the species not satiated or defeated easily overnight, but problems that adapt and change over the entire series run. A lot of this had to do with the rise of serial television over episodic, but at the same time Trek was breaking a mold and moving into telling more nuanced story telling. The moraly grey aspects often appeared to chafe the utopia Gene set up, but I think it goes well beyond that in expectation of an exceptional crew blowing through a straw galaxy. YMMV.
 

@Umbran and @billd91
My reply to @Smackpixi was stating the obvious about these curious races who are (his words) "all a-holes" and "annoying people", were but a representation of ourselves. i.e. he had an issue with people being people.

I'm a huge fan of DS9 - the characters, the relationships, the worldbuilding....
 

I've posted this a few times, but since we got a DS9 specific thread ill discuss it again. The fact that previous Trek shows were the galaxy through the Federation's eyes and that DS9 was actually the Federation through the galaxy's eyes. This reexamination was very interesting to me. It finally made the Trek world feel less curated and more real. A lot of folks disliked the show because it broke Trek-isms like one ship and crew, and Rodenberry's utopia optimism, but I think it wasn't either of those things. The real culprit was exceptionalism, particularly for an American audience.

In the original series, you had a diverse cast under a BAMF captain. They went around solving problems by the seat of their pants. As long as they followed diligently captain BAMF as he always knew what to do. Essentially, a hammer punch and/or lip lock resolved anything the universe could throw at them. TNG was a bit more nuanced. We now had a diverse ship of the absolute best minds of the Federation. They tended to solve problems more with their mind, but still you had this exceptional crew taming a violent and unreasonably wild yet endless supply of caricature aliens filled galaxy.

Then, you have DS9. The Federation is sent into a backwater system to play neutral party to a formerly occupied species and their captors. Neither of which wants them there. The station systems are not reliable, the species not satiated or defeated easily overnight, but problems that adapt and change over the entire series run. A lot of this had to do with the rise of serial television over episodic, but at the same time Trek was breaking a mold and moving into telling more nuanced story telling. The moraly grey aspects often appeared to chafe the utopia Gene set up, but I think it goes well beyond that in expectation of an exceptional crew blowing through a straw galaxy. YMMV.
The Federation was still the semi-utopia of Roddenberry's vision, for the most part, but we got to see both how they interfaced with other cultures and how they dealt with war.

 


The Federation was still the semi-utopia of Roddenberry's vision, for the most part, but we got to see both how they interfaced with other cultures and how they dealt with war.

Sure, but this felt a lot more earned. You have two species here always dubious of the Federation and now realizing they are actually a generally good force, and at this point, their only hope.
 

Remove ads

Top