Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jian" data-source="post: 9726712" data-attributes="member: 78087">Just watched Badda-Bing Badda-Bang, which is a pretty good episode and IIRC the first one of those I haven’t actually seen before. It’s also a really interesting one in a couple of ways - the first, and more trivial, is that it really felt like a RPG moment. The PCs have come up with a plan to rob the casino and as the GM you feel you can’t tell them it’s not a very good plan - there’s no slack in it and they’re way too much into the period and aren’t using most of their main advantages - but you just have to grit your teeth and hope they muddle through, which thankfully they do.The second is the issue about civil rights in 60s America, which both Benjamin Sisko and Avery Brooks have every right to express their dissatisfaction about. But they’re just supposed to ignore it and go along with the game because everything is better now. And yes, things may be better in the 24th century, but they certainly weren’t in 1999 and they aren’t now - this is some arrogant Francis Fukuyama end-of-history nonsense. If there’s one thing we’ve learned painfully in the last decade it’s that these issues are never, ever settled for good. It’s perfectly possible for racism, sexism, homophobia etc to be worse again in the 24th century. You know what? Avery Brooks is right. Any Star Trek series should address social justice with relevance to today and the past, because that’s the only way it’ll be relevant to the future we all aspire to.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jian, post: 9726712, member: 78087"] Just watched [B]Badda-Bing Badda-Bang[/B], which is a pretty good episode and IIRC the first one of those I haven’t actually seen before. It’s also a really interesting one in a couple of ways - the first, and more trivial, is that it really felt like a RPG moment. The PCs have come up with a plan to rob the casino and as the GM you feel you can’t tell them it’s not a very good plan - there’s no slack in it and they’re way too much into the period and aren’t using most of their main advantages - but you just have to grit your teeth and hope they muddle through, which thankfully they do. The second is the issue about civil rights in 60s America, which both Benjamin Sisko and Avery Brooks have every right to express their dissatisfaction about. But they’re just supposed to ignore it and go along with the game because everything is better now. And yes, things may be better in the 24th century, but they certainly weren’t in 1999 and they aren’t now - this is some arrogant Francis Fukuyama end-of-history nonsense. If there’s one thing we’ve learned painfully in the last decade it’s that these issues are never, ever settled for good. It’s perfectly possible for racism, sexism, homophobia etc to be worse again in the 24th century. You know what? Avery Brooks is right. Any Star Trek series should address social justice with relevance to today and the past, because that’s the only way it’ll be relevant to the future we all aspire to. [/QUOTE]

Verification