test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Vent: Star Trek & The Evolution of Breaking your own Rules
ddesjardins
Member Posts: 3,056 Media Corps
After forty plus years of Star Trek being a part of popular culture, it's hard not to wonder where the franchise is headed. Over time the idealism of Roddenberry's 'Wagon train to the stars' as a guise for social commentary has become a reflection of our own values.
Throughout the first series the Prime Directive was at best used inconsistently, a result of the realities of episodic television more that any real plan. Roddenberry drew his conclusions from the effect of Missionaries had on early culture in our own history and our own evolution as a society.
I don't question the evolution of the IP. With evolution comes opportunity to explore more. The Next Generation expanded that frontier and opened our eyes less with the monster of the week, and more with thoughtful, resonant stories about the human condition. We explored the Prime Directive and dealt with its consequences both good and bad. The values in Star Trek were ones we wanted to have.
This was in my opinion regarding rules, Star Trek at it's best.
Layered storytelling and the exploration of personal belief took us yet again into another direction with Deep Space Nine. What started as a story peppered with notes of religion and terrorism ultimately became a saga ripped by conflict and pain. Captain Sisko's monologue at the end of 'In the Pale Moonlight' still stands as an eery testiment to the conflicts we later lived through.
What was once a story about exploring who we are through other alien cultures became a story of our internal exploration. At the same time we accepted the truth that we would be willing to put aside our values when threatened.
Both the Next Gen and DS9 explored how far we as a species were willing to go to survive. Even genocide as a tool of war was fully acceptable; a virus to kill the Borg Collective, and a virus to destroy the Great Link. While we ban certain weapons (Veron-T disrupters, subspace weapons), we would accept murdering an entire species if our cause was just.
We pretended to have rules.
Voyager did it's best to explore in the best traditions of Star Trek, but it too was hampered by the premise that the ends justify the means. Yes, there was selfless sacrifice. Yes, there was an exploration of what it was to be human. But given that our world had changed, Voyager represented less of what our ideals should be, and where more about what our ideas once were. Voyager ultimately was about going back, not just to Earth but to a time when we could still uphold those values.
In the face of adversity, we shouted 'We have Rules!'. After six years we threw up our hands and promptly broke the Temporal Prime Directive.
Enterprise at least was honest. Lets make mistakes and from those experiences we will make rules. They even had a little fun with it. Regardless of your opinions of the series, it made an effort to show where we came from, our ugly mistakes and ultimately our triumphs.
In Star Trek Online the galaxy is for the most part in a state of Perpetual War. The storyline carefully navigates the IP from multiple series and movies, while deftly sidestepping the alternate timeline of the new movies. For the world of MMO's, this is not a bad place to be. For older fans, this is contrary to the original vision of classic Trek. For the Next Gen 'generation', this is acceptable.
And I think that's where I'm going with this. It's acceptable to break your own rules.
----
It's acceptable for Federation players to use flamethrowers in combat, while in modern combat consider it barbaric. TOS often had references to practices they thought were barbaric, but were commonplace in the real world of the 60's.
As of today it's acceptable to ally ourselves with races that field banned weapons, while in the real world we see it as a pretext for conflict.
----
I think we've come full circle.
(Counting my Zen for a Tharalon Weapon)
My Two Bits,
Admiral Thrax
Throughout the first series the Prime Directive was at best used inconsistently, a result of the realities of episodic television more that any real plan. Roddenberry drew his conclusions from the effect of Missionaries had on early culture in our own history and our own evolution as a society.
I don't question the evolution of the IP. With evolution comes opportunity to explore more. The Next Generation expanded that frontier and opened our eyes less with the monster of the week, and more with thoughtful, resonant stories about the human condition. We explored the Prime Directive and dealt with its consequences both good and bad. The values in Star Trek were ones we wanted to have.
"The Prime Directive is not just a set of rules. It is a philosophy, and a very correct one. History has proven again and again that whenever mankind interferes with a less developed civilization, no matter how well intentioned that interference may be, the results are invariably disastrous." - Picard, Symbiosis
This was in my opinion regarding rules, Star Trek at it's best.
Layered storytelling and the exploration of personal belief took us yet again into another direction with Deep Space Nine. What started as a story peppered with notes of religion and terrorism ultimately became a saga ripped by conflict and pain. Captain Sisko's monologue at the end of 'In the Pale Moonlight' still stands as an eery testiment to the conflicts we later lived through.
"At oh-eight-hundred hours, station time... the Romulan Empire formally declared war against the Dominion. They've already struck fifteen bases along the Cardassian border. So, this is a huge victory for the good guys! This may even be the turning point of the entire war! There's even a "Welcome to the Fight" party tonight in the wardroom!... So... I lied. I cheated. I bribed men to cover up the crimes of other men. I am an accessory to murder. But most damning of all... I think I can live with it... And if I had to do it all over again... I would. Garak was right about one thing ? a guilty conscience is a small price to pay for the safety of the Alpha Quadrant. So I will learn to live with it...Because I can live with it...I can live with it. Computer ? erase that entire personal log." Sisko, In the Pale Moonlight
What was once a story about exploring who we are through other alien cultures became a story of our internal exploration. At the same time we accepted the truth that we would be willing to put aside our values when threatened.
Both the Next Gen and DS9 explored how far we as a species were willing to go to survive. Even genocide as a tool of war was fully acceptable; a virus to kill the Borg Collective, and a virus to destroy the Great Link. While we ban certain weapons (Veron-T disrupters, subspace weapons), we would accept murdering an entire species if our cause was just.
We pretended to have rules.
Voyager did it's best to explore in the best traditions of Star Trek, but it too was hampered by the premise that the ends justify the means. Yes, there was selfless sacrifice. Yes, there was an exploration of what it was to be human. But given that our world had changed, Voyager represented less of what our ideals should be, and where more about what our ideas once were. Voyager ultimately was about going back, not just to Earth but to a time when we could still uphold those values.
In the face of adversity, we shouted 'We have Rules!'. After six years we threw up our hands and promptly broke the Temporal Prime Directive.
Enterprise at least was honest. Lets make mistakes and from those experiences we will make rules. They even had a little fun with it. Regardless of your opinions of the series, it made an effort to show where we came from, our ugly mistakes and ultimately our triumphs.
In Star Trek Online the galaxy is for the most part in a state of Perpetual War. The storyline carefully navigates the IP from multiple series and movies, while deftly sidestepping the alternate timeline of the new movies. For the world of MMO's, this is not a bad place to be. For older fans, this is contrary to the original vision of classic Trek. For the Next Gen 'generation', this is acceptable.
And I think that's where I'm going with this. It's acceptable to break your own rules.
----
It's acceptable for Federation players to use flamethrowers in combat, while in modern combat consider it barbaric. TOS often had references to practices they thought were barbaric, but were commonplace in the real world of the 60's.
As of today it's acceptable to ally ourselves with races that field banned weapons, while in the real world we see it as a pretext for conflict.
----
I think we've come full circle.
(Counting my Zen for a Tharalon Weapon)
My Two Bits,
Admiral Thrax
Post edited by ddesjardins on
0
Comments
I'm just commenting on the justification (or lack thereof) in having a banned weapon. They could have easily called it a 'Enhanced Plasma Pulse' to avoid allowing a banned weapon by name.
I sense that subspace weapons will be available in the next release, and agonizer booths to be added to all Starfleet ships in the next release
I'd like one of those. For sure.
War does that.
You must be speaking in the royal "we" I pressume?
I challnege the very notion of the prime directive as anything other than a drama generating storytelling device.
The very idea of assumming that the best thing to do in every case is to not interfere because the consequences will "always" be worse to be nothing but nonsense. We are thinking beings are we not? Presumably from an always moving forward society, if the best we can do when faced with moral dilemmas is to turn away every time then we?d be no better than unthinking machines.
Am I the only one that finds the prime directive as hard rule to be obeyed at all cost (as oppossed to a guideline to keep in mind) to be anything but insulting?
"Rules are meant to be broken"
This certainly seems true of Government these days, so it's not a stretch to assume that this would be true in the future as well.
Also, it didn't start to become part of popular culture, till the mid to late seventies.
Agony Booths would be a strange addition to the game, but quite possible since the Mirror Universe does exist in the game.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
No...
As a Dramatic License, it was used by the writers of the shows to imagine the consequences of situations in which the characters Did or Did Not obey it...
Its purpose being, to enable the viewers to judge for themselves the right or wrongness as it was presented in each particular situation.
In my opinion, I rather doubt Star Fleet/The Federation would use it as a hard and steadfast rule in every circumstance...
There will always be occasions in which the situation will not be precisely Black & White ...
One would hope that those involved in judging the situation, would also be able to see the Shades of Gray around the edges.
I Was A Trekkie Before It Was Cool ... Sept. 8th, 1966 ... Not To Mention Before Most Folks Around Here Were Born!
Forever a STO Veteran-Minion
Here's 5000 Zen. Give me a Genesis torpedo! :cool:
Rest in Peace Brothers
Think of all the cultures that has been wiped out like the indians while building the US.
That's where the word visionary comes into play. To us it's hilarious to even think of a world where we aren't invading and killing innocents for resources.
The vision is one of total non interference and in addition to applying it to world politics and economics I see it easily applied it everyday situations too.
Think of a kid that gets bullied at school he has his natural development corrputed or how people are forced on to social media or into passive desk jobs that hands out discus prolapses left and right.
When the food industry in the US gets monopolized into fast food and spreads an obesity epidemic it applies.
The people in power or the people with the ability to effect others large or small scale have a responsibility is all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CsLhNxzwK1Y
P.S. "In the Pale Moonlight" is one of the best Trek episodes, and I am not even a big DS9 fan.
Its a bloody GAME!
Where is the facepalm meme when you need it!
I agree. It's acceptable to break the rules - the Prime Directive, for example, along with the banning of certain weapons, etc.
Star Trek broke the rules numerous times. But you have to think, why? Why did they break the rules? To laugh? No - they did so to prove a point. Whether that be a philosophical, personal, ethical, religious, societal point, it was a point that they were trying to impress upon its viewers. And that's one reason why Star Trek was successful; it could tackle those issues in an environment that is foreign to the audience.
Star Trek Online now allows the Thalaron weapon to be used. Even in "Mind Games", Thalaron weapons were a red-texted option to use against animals. We saw animals get turned into stone. But is there a point? Not really, other than to prove that Sela was evil.
The Thalaron weapon onboard the Scimitar Dreadnoughts. Is there a point to prove? Other than if you die from it, your ship sucks; no. No point to prove, no eye-opening concept from this weapon.
And that is why there is opposition. Not because it's banned and it breaks the rules. Because there is no point to prove in breaking the rules. And that is what alienates STO from Star Trek.
Missing the good ol' days of PvP: Legacy of Romulus to Season 9
My List of Useful Links, Recently Updated November 25 2017!
STO is not a Star Trek game. It's a generic Science Fiction MMO with Star Trek window dressing in order to milk fans for money.
This should have been obvious when you racked up a higher body count than all 40 years of televised and filmed Star Trek in your first hour of play.
Cryptic will put anything into the game that they think they can get people to buy (except swim trunks, because it would just be silly to be standing on the bridge of your Jem'hadar carrier with Borg weaponry and a Red Matter core in swim trunks, your Breen and Liberated Borg and Romulan Bridge Officers would laugh!), they only look at 'Star Trek' as a source for naming the new toy to sell.
rustisword, You an escort captain? You know what? The head designer has said that cannons are doing too much damage. They need to be balanced. Let's reduce that base damage by 20%? Oh heck let's make is 33% just to be sure. We can do some data miner for a few months and may adjust it some more. What's that? No. We shouldn't do that? Why not? You'll rage quit? Why? After all, it's just a game.
I don't know that matters to you in the game rustisword. The above example was just a shot in the dark. If it applies to you then you know how I. If not, maybe you can try to understand that other things then game play matter to players. Lore and cannon within Star Trek and the game matter to player like me and other.
My take on the Prime Directive.
Sometimes you have to break the rules to show why they are obsolete. Sometimes the rules were made for a different time, under different circumstances. And there are more than enough times where a politician back on comfy Earth can't see, hear, or experience the situations out in deep space that require you, the Captain, to break that rule for the greater good.
I AM THE SWORD OF THE RIGHTOUS!