Why Star Trek Fans Need To Chill Out And Cut Discovery Some Slack
With the newest installment of Star Trek just finishing up its run - its time to reflect on how it measures up to its predecessors
I am a Star Trek fan. I have been my whole life – or at least as long as I can remember. I grew up watching TNG episodes that were recorded on VHS tapes from TV and every show from DS9 onwards while it aired. There’s a “funny cause it’s true” joke in my family that within 5 minutes I can identify any episode of the five main series. And I have upsetting news for all my fellow fans out there – Star Trek has always been of hit-or-miss quality. It was never and will never be the perfect show the internet seems to want Discovery to be.
Heresy? Probably. But that doesn’t mean it’s not true. Let’s ignore the rampant misogyny of TOS – it was a product of its times after all – and focus on the second generation of series. Remember that multi-episode plot in Next Gen where weird parasitic aliens were taking over the bodies of Star Fleet command? Or that time everyone in Deep Space 9 got sucked into a board game, Jumanji-style? Or Seska, the Maquis fighter who was secretly a Cardassian and stole Chakotay’s DNA to impregnate herself on Voyager? All things that happened – although I wouldn’t blame you if you blocked it out.
But that’s not what makes Star Trek great, or why it has achieved mythological status. Because for every one of those episodes, there is something like Measure of a Man, where the nature of sentience and life are debated. Or In the Pale Moonlight in which Sisko weighs the compromises one makes in times of war. Or even The Chute, which shows the strains and bonds of friendship in adverse situations. Those episodes are what we love and remember Star Trek for.
Star Trek Discovery's first season had 15 episodes while the previous series mostly had 26-episode seasons. Think about that. 26 episodes a season. That’s between two and three seasons of streaming or prestige cable these days. And only Enterprise and TOS went for fewer than seven seasons.
So the newest series in the franchise is stuck in an awkward position. Not only are its predecessors mythologized, but it is trying to cram a traditionally sprawling and slow-burning franchise into a prestige-era TV season. It was inevitable things were going to get cut, and others sacrificed on the altar of plot. Personally, I would have loved more time building and enjoying the Stamets-Culber and Tyler-Burnham relationships before the season ended. I’m sure others want to know more about Saru’s people, or details of the Klingon War, or to have “planet of the week” episodes. The series would have had a much better start – albeit a different set of criticisms – if it had a longer season and hadn't had to force so much plot in so few episodes.
If at the end of the day, Discovery is just not your cup of tea (presumably Earl Grey, hot) then you have every right not to watch it, or rag on it. But if your issue is that this Discovery is worse than its predecessors, or somehow an unworthy successor to the Star Trek legacy, I suggest you re-watch the first 15 episodes of literally any of the other series and try to rate that chunk without nostalgia glasses. And if you want to complain about lack of character development, let me know what Geordi’s personality is, beyond being Data’s sidekick. Seven seasons, four movies and two decades of watching and I’m still unclear if he has one.
Star Trek Discovery is being held to an impossible standard, and one that literally no Star Trek series could possibly meet and, honestly, has never met. So to all my fellow fans out there, take a deep breath, relax, and try to just enjoy the ride.
Become a Community Contributor.
