4 ms·

I would argue that the main reason Star Trek has had such enduring popularity in spite of its failings is that it is a rare example of utopian science fiction i

by wtracy 8y ago

I would argue that the main reason Star Trek has had such enduring popularity in spite of its failings is that it is a rare example of utopian science fiction in television. (Deep Space 9 took a dystopian detour by focusing on several alien societies that were held up as "bad" examples. I'm also withholding judgement on Star Trek Discovery.) As for written science fiction, I really can't think of anything recent other than the already mentioned Banks novels. There's plenty from the fifties and sixties, but not all of it holds up well today.

nreilly 8y ago
Thanks. I think this might be the motivation to give watching Star Trek a go.
- krapp 8y ago
  The thing to remember about Star Trek is that it was never that Utopian except on paper. The original series wasn't much at all, it was basically the US Navy in space. It does have a lot of moralizing and positivity, but the future depicted is also very much a product of its time. I wouldn't describe it as Utopian because the Federation as depicted is still clearly not intended to be seen as ideal. TNG was a constant struggle between Gene Roddenberry to showcase his Utopian ideals and the writers to actually have some human drama (which he forbade, because humans were supposed to have evolved beyond that,) so it's the most optimistic of the series, most of the time, sometimes (IMHO) to its own detriment. One of the most hated characters in Star Trek, Wesley Crusher, was Gene Roddenberry's vision of the Ubermensch, but he came across as an insufferably perfect Gary Stu. Further series deviate from the Utopian vision with... mixed results. I personally think DS9 is the best of them because, being an arc-driven series, it gets to flesh out its characters and cultures to a degree other series couldn't. However it's also a series about how a self-described Utopian society can abandon its ideals and morals when faced with a brutal adversary. I think it's best to approach Star Trek as sci-fi (light on science more often than not) drama first and morality play second.
mirimir 8y ago
Greg Egan is pretty upbeat too.
ctchocula 8y ago
Trekonomics is a nice non-fiction book about the utopian ideas presented in Star Trek and especially TNG. It talks about Gene Roddenberry's ideals for a better future once post-scarcity (symbolized by the replicator) has been reached. In the Federation, there is no poverty and no one spends their life hoarding wealth other than the Ferengi. The show presents a clear answer to a popular criticism to UBI: what is to prevent everyone from staying home to play video games and leeching off society? The optimistic answer is that once society can produce enough goods for everyone, the traditional value system of society (material wealth => proxy for contributions to society => virtue) loses meaning and will be overtaken by new ones (contributing to society => virtue). Of course in the Star Trek universe, they only got there after nuclear apocalypse (WW3) and rebuilding society, but the value system is appealing and IMO something we ought to strive for.

by wtracy 8y ago

nreilly 8y ago

Thanks. I think this might be the motivation to give watching Star Trek a go.

krapp 8y ago
The thing to remember about Star Trek is that it was never that Utopian except on paper. The original series wasn't much at all, it was basically the US Navy in space. It does have a lot of moralizing and positivity, but the future depicted is also very much a product of its time. I wouldn't describe it as Utopian because the Federation as depicted is still clearly not intended to be seen as ideal. TNG was a constant struggle between Gene Roddenberry to showcase his Utopian ideals and the writers to actually have some human drama (which he forbade, because humans were supposed to have evolved beyond that,) so it's the most optimistic of the series, most of the time, sometimes (IMHO) to its own detriment. One of the most hated characters in Star Trek, Wesley Crusher, was Gene Roddenberry's vision of the Ubermensch, but he came across as an insufferably perfect Gary Stu. Further series deviate from the Utopian vision with... mixed results. I personally think DS9 is the best of them because, being an arc-driven series, it gets to flesh out its characters and cultures to a degree other series couldn't. However it's also a series about how a self-described Utopian society can abandon its ideals and morals when faced with a brutal adversary. I think it's best to approach Star Trek as sci-fi (light on science more often than not) drama first and morality play second.

mirimir 8y ago

Greg Egan is pretty upbeat too.

ctchocula 8y ago

Trekonomics is a nice non-fiction book about the utopian ideas presented in Star Trek and especially TNG. It talks about Gene Roddenberry's ideals for a better future once post-scarcity (symbolized by the replicator) has been reached. In the Federation, there is no poverty and no one spends their life hoarding wealth other than the Ferengi. The show presents a clear answer to a popular criticism to UBI: what is to prevent everyone from staying home to play video games and leeching off society? The optimistic answer is that once society can produce enough goods for everyone, the traditional value system of society (material wealth => proxy for contributions to society => virtue) loses meaning and will be overtaken by new ones (contributing to society => virtue). Of course in the Star Trek universe, they only got there after nuclear apocalypse (WW3) and rebuilding society, but the value system is appealing and IMO something we ought to strive for.