Michael Chabon Talks ‘Star Trek: Short Treks’ And Being Part Of A Writers’ Room

As we’ve been reporting, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Michael Chabon has joined the Star Trek writing team. He co-wrote this month’s Short Treks episode “Calypso” (which premieres this Thursday) and he is part of the writers’ room for the upcoming Picard show. Recently he spoke with J Weekly about jumping into the Star Trek universe.

Watched TOS thanks to a Trekkie babysitter

When asked whether he grew up watching Star Trek, Chabon had tales to tell:

My dad watched The Original Series, I remember that as a small child, but it was on too late for me to watch. It seemed very grownup and incomprehensible. I must’ve been 4 or 5. But I remember his attachment to it. When I was 10, I had a babysitter. The Original Series was on syndication everywhere, and she was a Trekkie, self-described. She turned me on to it. We had it on every time she was over. She would go to conventions and come back with cool stuff. She was my introduction to the show and to fandom all at once.

His path to the CBS Trek franchise

If you’ve wondered how Chabon became involved with the new Trek on TV, it turns out we have a Discovery Season 1 producer to think for that:

I was working on a film project with one of the producers of Discovery and now the Picard project, Akiva Goldsman. They were just starting to assemble possible ideas for these shorts, what became Short Treks, and I was in the room while he was talking about it. I’m a big fan and I had told him I’m really enjoying Discovery. So he was about to ask if I wanted to write this — before the question was out of his mouth, I said ‘yes.’

Michael Chabon - Star Trek: Discovery

Michael Chabon on set for his Star Trek: Short Treks episode “Calypso” (Photo: Instagram/Michael Chabon)

The mysteries of “Calypso”

The November Short Treks episode is titled “Calypso” and it was co-written by Chabon. The mini-episode is by far the most mysterious of the bunch–it’s the only one featuring a totally new character, named Craft, and set in the far-flung future.

It is about a castaway who is rescued by the Discovery, in the far future, and is rescued by the AI of the starship. It’s about the relationship that forms between the mysterious castaway and the AI. And there is a mystery of what it’s been doing for the last millennium. By the end, some mysteries are explained and others remain mysteries.

Aldis Hodge as Craft in “Calypso”

Can’t say anything about Picard series

Of course, the article’s author had to try and ask about the Picard show–who could blame him? He asked Chabon if he could say anything about the themes or the setting of the show. Showing his Trekkie knowledge (likely from his recent boot camp catching him up on the goings-on in the franchise since TOS), he answered with a Trek reference:

I cannot answer either of those questions. I will be abducted by Section 31.

Being part of a writers’ room

Chabon is a novelist, so writing for TV is a very different experience; primarily it’s much more collaborative, since it’s in a room of other writers (and often producers). He elaborated on the differences:

It’s very different. It’s really pleasurable. That’s one of the things I enjoy most about it. It could be a horrible thing if the people were not nice and kind, but this room is full of bright, funny, charming people with great ideas. Solving plot problems by yourself can be agonizing. Sometimes I get into a hole, and I just bang my head against the wall, and it takes weeks or months, and maybe I never solve it. But when there’s this room of smart people, and they all bring their experiences in life and as readers and consumers of media. You can see this unsolvable problem, and then after an hour of conversation it works itself out.

Patrick Stewart and the Picard show writers’ room in September (Photo: Twitter/Patrick Stewart)

 

The rest of the interview is worth a read too.

 


Star Trek: Short Treks are available in the USA on CBS All Access. It airs in Canada on Space and streams on CraveTV. “Calypso” will be released on November 8.

Click the links to see all of the Star Trek: Short Treks and the Untitled Picard Show news and articles here at TrekMovie.

70
Leave a Reply

7 Comment threads
63 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
20 Comment authors
newest oldest

Nobody said a word? Weird… I think Chabon is a terrific writer, and I’m looking forward to both Calypso and his contributions to the Picard show.

And why do I get the feeling Star Trek: Discovery may jettison the U.S.S. Discovery…?

DIGINON

It’s very unlikely they would get rid of the titular ship.

Maybe at the series finale? But I don’t know. Follow the trail:

– Kurtzman says they are going to sync up with canon this season.

– Kurtzman says they will explain why Spock never mentioned Michael.

– Kurtzman says this was the only season they could tell this story with Spock.

– Calypso shows a deserted Discovery in the far future.

My thoughts: the U.S.S. Discovery will leave the mid 23rd Century at the end of the season. Maybe the series will timejump, with the crew in the far future. Alternatively, the U.S.S. Discovery will be “lost,” and we will follow its crew moving forward in their original period, and Spock not mentioning Michael (and the reason his story couldn’t be told next season) has to do with something else. Thoughts?

Starch Wreck

Kurtzman also said we wouldn’t see Spock or the Enterpeise.

Kurtzman also said John Harrison Wasn’t Khan.

As far as I recall, Kurtzman never said we wouldn’t see Spock. He said they wouldn’t want to recast the part. But that’s not as definite as saying Spock would never be seen.

About the Enterprise, I don’t recall he saying it wouldn’t show up. Quite the opposite; in After Trek, he said the plan was to end up meeting the Enterprise at the final episode of the season.

About John Harrison not being Khan, I can understand why the team was misleasing.

But to the point: which of Kurtzman’s current statements do you think are false and why?

Trekboi

I don’t know of it was Kurtzman but somebody on the production team clearly said there would be no spock. I saw the interviews & articles but don’t remember who it was- maybe Goldsman

jako

Burnham will be erased from Spocks Memories.
To solve his “depression” and make him the logical being we know. Somehow they will make some mindmelding and let him forget her. Just a guess!

DIGINON

I could see them lose the ship at the end of the series, but not before.
As for jumping Discovery and its crew into the far future, I don’t really see that happening either, although it’s not completely out of the question. They set Discovery in the 23rd century to cash in on nostalgia for TOS. Similarly, the new show will feature Picard, relying on nostalgia for the TNG era and Patrick Stewart’s fame.
By jumping DSC into the far future they would lose all familiar elements (except for Discovery itself and its crew) and would basically have to introduce a whole new universe. This would create a big creative and financial risk which I don’t think they would take.
Just losing the ship but keeping the crew also seems unlikely to me. They may lose it temporarily (like when the Federation lost DS9 for some time) but not for good. Like I said, it’s in the name of the show.

Tiger2

I agree with this. I said this before but I think what they are trying to do now is use DIS to build more on past TOS era canon while using the Picard show to expand on TNG era canon. It makes sense because both of these shows can appeal to both fan bases (while maybe bringing in new fans) while also using old characters from both eras. DIS seems to be doing this more next season with Pike and Spock. And I see plenty of that happening on the Picard show, especially since they have a bigger pool of characters. Not just TNG but also DS9 and VOY if they choose to do it.

But it’s this reason I don’t see DIS going anywhere. I think the Picard show is to feed a lot of the fanbase who has been wanting a post-Nemesis show forever now, so DIS can just stay where it is and deliver on 23rd century stories. It’s the best of both worlds now for the overall fanbase (excuse the pun ;)). And future shows can just go farther in the future (26 century on) if and when it happens.

That said it doesn’t mean DIS can’t end up some place new from time to time but I have a feeling it will stick around its era for the most part.

Afterburn

If they ever do a time travel episode I would love to see some characters from the TNG era (even if they’re new characters) time travel to the Discovery, or vice versa.

I always felt Enterprise missed a huge opportunity by not doing a crossover with say, Voyager, DS9, or TNG, in a mind-bending time travel story. We’ve seen tricksy ways of doing crossovers (Flashback, Trials, Relics, Generations etc) but I would have loved to have seen a straight up time travel crossover, and Enterprise would have been a great opportunity for it.

Discovery is another opportunity, and I hope they grab it.

Tiger2

I have always believed if the final Enterprise episode was actually a time travel based story with either Riker and Troi showing up in the 22nd century (via Titan) or Enterprise ending up in the 24th, then it would’ve had a very different reception and even huge fan fare because we could’ve saw our heroes interacting together instead of Riker of just playing holodeck with them.

And of course I find it funny as much as people claim they are sick of time travel stories those are usually the most popular episodes and even movies. It’s hard pressed to find a time travel episode most fans hate considering how many they done in all the shows. Obviously some are better than others but most are really popular because they are fun. And yes time travel crossover stories are even more fun like how it was done in Trials and Tribbulations and the first Kelvin film. People just love that stuff.

And I have said I have no problems if the Picard show and Discovery crossed over. They may not do it but the temptation probably has to be big, especially if the Picard show can make DIS feel more relevant for people who doesn’t see it as canon or say it’s in another universe. I would love to see it personally. Fingers crossed.

Afterburn

The thing that really gets me in hindsight (20/20 of course) is that Trek had one of the first interconnected “universes” of shows, 3 different series running at the same time in the mid 90s (TNG movies, DS9 and VOY on TV), and yet only ONCE did they ever do a full crossover, in the TNG 2-parter “Birthright” and even that only had Bashir interacting with Data briefly.

Yes, VOY took place on the other side of the galaxy, but it’s sci-fi– perhaps a big 3-part episode involving Braxton bringing together the Enterprise, the Defiant, and Voyager, to stop a time-travelling threat.

Just such a missed opportunity.

Tiger2

Actually if Nemesis didn’t bomb as badly as it did Brent Spiner said the next film would’ve been a combination of TNG, VOY, DS9 and ENT. And obviously a time travel element of some kind. That might have been a bit too fanboyish but I would’ve gone multiple times to see it lol. And it might’ve just been a few characters from each show.

As for the shows, I think the attitude was they wanted them to have their own identity and not go too crazy with the crossovers. TNG and DS9 is really the only two shows that crossed over the most, especially when you add Worf to the mix. VOY had a few TOS and TNG characters but yes never a full on crossover story. But yeah I LOVE that stuff personally. I know I’m not overly thrilled with Pike and Spock coming on DIS, but its not because I don’t want to see them per se, its just feels more like fan pandering since the season essentially sounds like its a stunt to get TOS fans onboard who didn’t like the show’s first season.

But I am actually excited to see what they do with them. And if Picard, Crusher or Geordi show up on DIS third season, got no issues with it. Whatever it takes to get people to watch. ;)

ML31

I think you got it right when you said the attitude among the Trek shows was to mostly be their own thing. Dropping a character in briefly is one thing. But to interconnect on such an incestuous basis was probably deemed too much. Of course, if the shows were done today I imagine the attitude would be quite different.

They always could make a Pike spin-off to keep it cashing on TOS, and take Disco somewhere else… I suspect they wouldn’t cast all those iconic roles for a few guest appearances (and that may well have played with their decision of “to recast or not to recast” for Spock.

Marja

@Salvador Nogueira
Exactly.

slider

I hope they jettison the show.

Afterburn

Keep hoping! Thoughts and prayers are so effective, you know.

Jonboc

With Netflix not wanting to buy the “shorts” and, from what I understand, worldwide interest lacking to the point that CBS is having to pony up the financing themselves for season 2…and that there was a mandate to do what producers said would never be done, bring in Spock and change the series’ tone and direction…I’d say the chance to jettison the Discover is very real, if not likely,,,especially when Picard’s series starts airing,

This is not true. Netflix paid for Discovery’s season 2.

Tiger2

I’m confused do you mean cancelling Discovery or just getting rid of the ship?

I guess I don’t really understand what is the argument for getting rid of the ship itself? Why would they even feel the need to do that? Especially when it has the spore drive on it, the biggest story telling device any Trek show has ever had. And what would putting them on another ship accomplish?

Trutrek

That would be the way to recanonize inexistence of the spore drive in TOS forward: at some point the mycelial network inevitably takes over and jumps the ship home to the other side of the galaxy/universe/whatever…

Marja

Or, the DASH Drive becomes exclusively a Section 31 and Temporal Whatsis Organization project, and is never mentioned in the “regular” Trek timeline because it is a Super Secret Project.

Trutrek

Yes there has to be some connection to Section 31 and this massive technological development that simply blinks out of Federation history. but there are problems with this interpretation: There are countless times in TOS forward where sporedrive would have been critical, but it was never available. Imagine what sporedrive would have meant against the Borg… and what would have happened if they had assimilated that technology. However why would S31 not brought it out during times like that when the very existence of the Federation was threatened? They couldn’t have been saving it for a bigger threat after events like Wolf 359 where the Federation nearly imploded!

ML31

I think it obvious that ultimately it doesn’t work. That is part of the problem with prequels. You come up with this idea that really is too far advanced for the time period you set the show in. If it is not a reboot then the audience knows the tech is not available in the future. Therefore, it ultimately does not work.

Danpaine

Excellent points, Trutrek. For whatever’s left of canon and continuity to be salvaged, the technology aboard Discovery must be ‘lost’ somehow at some point prior to TOS. I simply don’t buy the spore drive simply wasn’t used later on because it was secret.

ML31

Yep. Me too. Classifying such a mindbogglingly useful tech that WORKS makes zero sense. Ultimately, the spore drive cannot work unless the show is a reboot. There just is no other way.

kitbashcanon

Danpaine, have you ever heard of “Unacknowledged Special Access Projects” (USAPs)? Tesla’s main discoveries (from early 1900s) have been locked up for over a century (after his death in the 40s).This has happened to a lot of inventors, and this could be Section 31’s main preoccupation, and would reflect real-World geopolitics…which maybe we don’t want to go there yet? Did you know that the Roswell Incident (UFO shot down with Unacknowledged scalar weaponry developed from Tesla’s work, and where the World’s only atomic bomber squadron was located), the separation of the Air Force and the Army into two separate services, and the creation of the CIA, all happened within a few months of each other, in 1947 (also the year of Adm. Byrd’s Antarctic Expedition)?? Dr. Steven Greer could write an excellent backstory for this…even throwing in the theme that Section 31’s main task is to keep Star Fleet and the Federation on a permanent war footing, for “humanitarian interventions” of course, to satisfy the special interests of some powerful, malevolent “Secret Society” types still preying upon Federation society (perhaps in league with Orion Crime Lords?). Real life is weirder than fiction.

Tiger2

Interesting, so both Craft and the ship will already be in the far future. I thought it just transported there. Wow, even more exciting now! Can’t wait.

I Khan Believe it's Not Butter

Yawn.
This mess should be declared non canon.
Its mental fart of an alternate universe as created by gummy bears and Alka Seltzer.

Tiger2

Clearly not a DIS fan. ;)

I’m just going to ask, but what would it need to do for you to consider it canon? It’s no secret I have many issues with the show but I do consider it canon. And it looks like next season they are trying a bit harder to make it feel closer to the prime universe, especially the Klingons. So you have to give them SOME credit, they’re trying to make it right for the fans.

Trekboi

I think those attempts are very superficial & they have a basic agenda to subvert much of what Star Trek was to make it their own show for a different (Imagined) audience.

Tiger2

But that’s only based on what we actually know so far. We have to see where the season actually goes and how well they tie in old canon with new before we can call it superficial. But IMO (so far) most of the changes at least seems to be for the better. And of course I can feel differently when the season actually starts.

Afterburn

No argument there, but it doesn’t make it “not canon.”

DeanH

SOME of the canon complaints have merit but considering the amount of plot and storyline discrepancies seen in the three seasons of TOS alone, these complaints IMO have little or no influence on my enjoyment of Disco. Some of the numerous character, uniform, production, and story-line inconsistencies in the three years of TOS are so huge, you can shoot a cannon ball through them, but of course most of us fans choose to ignore them – because they (like the Disco issues) are not that important to most of us.

Tiger2

Well obviously I was asking this to the other poster since he doesn’t even view it as canon. And that seems to be the case with a lot of people. Obviously you have no issues with it. And I think your point is valid. If you don’t care about the canon stuff or don’t see it as a big discrepancy then it’s probably not an issue.

But to compare TOS to today is not really a fair comparison. TOS was 50 years ago when they just thought they were making a budget science fiction show they assumed no one would even watch anymore once it was cancelled. No one put the emphasis on continuity back then like today either because audiences weren’t as sophisticated as they are now. And that doesn’t mean ‘dumb’ just not invested or knowledgeable of that universe as people are today. And even then they still had a reputation for being preoccupied with canon. They just didn’t write the show off like how some do now. Because it was all new. They were still establishing a lot of it then and people understood that.

Now it’s fifty years of well established canon with 5 previous shows and multiple films. You can’t compare DIS with TOS that was made up on the fly and limited time and money. DIS has the hindsight of knowing what’s came before and after it not to mention way more time and money to get it right. It’s a very different world today.

DeanH

All good points and I appreciate the perspective. Even though TOS is full of plot holes and inconsistencies, pointing that out is really an unfair fight and far too easy a way to dismiss SOME of the naysayers.

ML31

And I think it worth mentioning that most would not focus on the canon inconsistencies if the show were just better. Notice please how the defenders of STD mostly blow off the canon issues and those who find the show below par tent to point them out. For me, the canon issues are harder to ignore the worse the show gets. The better the show, the easier they are to ignore. WOK is exhibit A for that conclusion.

Marja

But EVERY Trek show and movie has inconsistencies, plot holes and so on.

I’m sure there may be a few canonistas who would be able to document every single inconsistency and serve on a writers’ room staff to correct every flippin’ dramatic decision because it doesn’t agree with something Picard said in Season 3 episode 18.

[flings up hands]

Tiger2

Glad you agree DeanH!

And to make it clear I’m not saying people should just ignore TOS plot holes, but it’s not the same comparing it with today’s shows and films that are already part of a very established universe.

And the other thing is a lot of TOS were really just production and writing mistakes like any TV show has. With DIS, the canon differences are deliberate. They knew from day one some things didn’t fly with canon, they just wanted to go a different direction. And again, fine, IF your audience is willing to accept that direction. But I think they learned it’s not enough who are and making course corrections because of it. How big and accepting those will end up being I guess we’ll have to see.

Afterburn

Most of the canon changes are minor and unimportant. They are retcons to make the series stronger for 2018.

Enterprise did the same in 2001. Retconning is as old as time.

Tiger2

And why a lot of people don’t like prequels. They basically just end up retconning a lot of things. Look how upset STID made so many people with how it retcon Khan and that was literally in another universe. This reason alone is why I wish they went forward instead of backwards. That said of course they can still retcon things in later time periods but it’s not as direct the way prequels can.

ML31

I never saw any of the KU films as retconing anything. There was no need. It was just an alternate time line. Nothing to retcon there.

Tiger2

Yes technically you’re right ML31 but with Khan it was basically a retcon because they told us over and over and OVER again everything that happened pre-Nero stayed the same canon wise as the PU. AGAIN, if the KU was a straight up reboot then I think he would’ve been fine as Khan. I still wouldn’t have loved him like Montalban’s version but I could’ve accepted it at least.

But they went against their OWN rules in the second freaking movie. This is what bothered people like me. All I care about is consistency and logic in ANY story. And if you break that, fine, but then you have to explain it in some fashion. That’s the entire reason why STID had the issue it did. It’s also part of the reason DIS is having its problems now. The difference with DIS is it’s a TV show so they have all the time in the world to either make it consistent or simply explain why it isn’t, ESPECIALLY when (once again) you go on and on and on it’s all happening in the same universe. Fans can be fickle but all most are asking for is clear continuity, basic story writing 101. You don’t have to just be an uptight Trek fan to care about that.

ML31

OK But, and I can’t believe I’m defending STID here… (That movie was not good) But everything before Nero’s arrival still works in STID. Khan is still asleep in the BB out there. Marcus gets wind of of it this time and decides to wake him up before the Enterprise can. The only thing that is inconsistent is an Indian character originally played by a Latino is now played by a British actor. Personally I find such a thing to be very very small compared to the other, bigger, things I found wrong with that movie. It would be like I would have no problem with the new Bond being played by Idris Elba. STID doesn’t work for me because to many story elements didn’t play out well. Not because an actor of a different race played an old character.

Marja

DeanH,
You have a BINGO! sir.
Plot holes a mile wide, inconsistencies out the wazoo, but still we love it because it’s TOS. Or TNG. Or DS9. Or VOY. Or ENT.
Or … [GASP!] DISCO!

Marja

@ KhanButter
Canon is whatever is on film.
Like it or not.
I doubt a for-profit entity [CBS] is going to declare a Trek show non-canon just to please certain “fans”

I Khan Believe it's Not Butter

“@ KhanButter
Canon is whatever is on film.”

So since it’s shot on digital video it’s Not Canon!!!
Meaning it’s little more then a poorly printed coloring book.
Thanks for clearing that up.

ML31

And the posts above are exhibit B.

Support Your Local Salt Vampire

One of the major reasons for the first two seasons of TNG being subpar relative to the superb series it became was endless upheaval of the writing staff. Hopefully a stabilized and happy writing team will result in great Trek going forward. You could see the vast improvement in quality of Discovery from the uneven first nine episodes to the fun and exciting Mirror Universe arc.

kmart

Whereas I thought the mild promise of a few of the early episodes gave way to overwhelming disappointment with the MU arc and then the insanely stupid wrapup back ‘here.’

For me TNG’s best year was s3, which was as calamitous in terms of writer turnover and no time to finesse scripts as the early two, just with different people. I think not having the time to rewrite the scripts actually resulted in better shows in s3, because the material was decent to begin with.

Support Your Local Salt Vampire

Season 3 is when Michael Piller finally pulled together a good writing team and the rewriting impulses and general control of Roddenberry receded. Season 2 was partly in chaos because of the writer’s strike.

The critical opinion of Discovery seems to be all over the map. I loathed the show and stopped watching it after the first nine episodes. I just watched the last part of the season and found the Mirror Universe arc far groovier that I expected.

Trutrek

There seem to be three phases of Disco: Fuller’s (misbegotten, weird, failed metaphor SarcophagusKlingon-centric from a guy who has now been fired from every project he was involved with) direction in the first few episodes; the last part of S1 where they pulled a 180 and tried to bring it all back in line with “conventional” canon; and now Kurtzman’s Hail Mary where it is “no one really gives a darn about Burnham, so let’s bring in the most famous scifi character in history to boost ratings”. It is all a shoehorning to try and salvage Moonves’ ambition for CBS-AA… while we are on the subject of fired people…

albatrosity

Disco in the far future…that’s a tantalizing idea. I kinda assumed if it was in the future it’d be a totally different setting. I guess they really do only have the Disco sets to work with, tho.

Trekboi

They should have set the show in another time period, they wanted to capitalize on TOS era, marketed that then did their best to change everything & just aliented existing Star Trek fans.

jako

oh… poor star trek fans. we got alienated.
lets all hug and cry a little.

albatrosity

I agree, Disco being set in the TOS era would’ve been the perfect opportunity for a face-lift of the TOS aesthetic, but instead we got a complete transmutation into something barely recognizable. But that’s alright with me. The uniforms aren’t my favorite, the ships aren’t my favorite, the stories aren’t my favorite, but…it’s gonna get a second chance to get it better

Danpaine

Discovery jumping forward into the distant future would be excellent, imo. A great opportunity to truly explore new worlds and civilizations, and the ship theoretically has the ability to achieve it, either by malfunction or mistake. But I agree with those who say the showrunners are too afraid of losing whatever viewers they have to the unknown. Which tells me they have little faith in their new characters, instead leaning on the historic names (Pike, Spock) we already know.

Honestly, this show is so far off my radar at the moment it’s barely a blip. The Walking Dead is on, and my list of other shows to binge is so long, I have no idea when I’ll get back to CBSAA and Discovery. Bring on the Picard show, and I’ll get a lot more excited.

Afterburn

That’s a common logical fallacy: that because someone supports A it means they they don’t support B.

Just because they want the likes of Spock, Pike, and the Enterprise to bring in older/longtime Trekkies doesn’t mean they don’t have faith in the new cast of characters.

Mark Calcagno

Yeah, I agree with you Afterburn; I think they have a lot of faith in the Disco crew, otherwise they wouldn’t be doubling down on Disco with Short Treks and mostly the same crew. It seems that whatever the original reason was for a 23rd century show, the reason after Fuller left was to have the original 1701 and Pike show up.

I’m going to trust the creative staff on this one. Pike is a cool character in Greenwood’s hands, and what we’ve seen of Mount looks great. They inherited Fuller’s ideas last time, but now it’s all theirs, and with (hopefully) good changes to the staff, we’re in for a solid season of Trek!

Marja

And there are canonistas who will reject any new Pike’s Enterprise show while other more open-minded types will enjoy it thoroughly.

There are folks who dislike and will not watch Discovery. There are folks who like and enjoy it.

Hmmm. Who has more fun. Hmmm.

ML31

What that comment tells me is that your definition of “open minded types” means people will enjoy whatever is put in front of them be it fantastic or garbage. And is evidence to support the old saying that ignorance is bliss.

Mark Calcagno

Before this gets too heated, because both you and Marja just slammed each other, let’s approach this with cooler heads.

Marja, the comment at the end, while meant in jest, surely will anger some people on this site. The term, “canonistas,” is a word that dismisses their point of view, and it just happens to be that they don’t enjoy Discovery, a viewpoint that I don’t share, but understand completely. I have to agree with ML31, by using open-minded types in this way, you showed that you aren’t, at least in your writing.

ML31, it’s so annoying when people use, “open-minded,” to describe their side, but I don’t think what you said was particularly kind either. Marja was passive aggressive, you were just aggressive, calling them ignorant and a purveyor of garbage. I don’t see why you felt the need to get hostile. They expressed their opinion, at the expense of yours, but I don’t think that warranted a response like that. That being said, you have every right to hold Star Trek to a high standard. It’s a series of great shows, for the most part, and if you don’t think STD is up to those standards, and in my opinion, it often isn’t, you should be able to say it every day until it’s better or gone.

Why am I writing all of this, a passerby may think. Truthfully, I love this site, but we’re living in this increasingly polarizing culture of, “If you’re not with me, you’re against me.” So I wanted to say my piece: STAR TREK ISN’T SPORTS, and if you disagree with someone, that doesn’t mean you have to be nasty. Both of you went there. Let’s draw the line here.

Danpaine

Good post, Mark.

ML31

Actually I didn’t even see her as responding to me. I just felt the comment was slamming anyone who didn’t care for STD as being closed minded. Personally I feel it is one thing to like or dislike something as subjective as STD. It’s quite another to insult those who do not conform to one’s personal opinion of it. I just felt the need to point that out in no uncertain terms. It was not a personal rip on Marja. Who has made opinions rather clear but I’ve never seen her go that far before. But I felt pointing out that the comment was too over the top was warranted. Even if in an over the top way itself.

Afterburn

Excellent post. We need more people like you here. Please do post more often, even if to hold me to account.

Danpaine

Well, I watched all of season one and overall, did not enjoy it. So, that wasn’t a whole lot of fun. I do think (and sincerely hope) season two will be better. High hopes.

ML31

That is a logical fallacy only if one presents it with nothing to support the reasoning. Danpaine drew a logical and reasonable conclusion based on the public facts as well as TV history in similar situations. Even if the conclusion turns out to be false (which I personally doubt very much) the logic would still be solid.

Afterburn

You are committing two more logical arguments in that response. The first is called “burden of proof” (look it up). The second being “tu quoque”. I mean really, nothing to support the reasoning? Are you willfully ignoring the evidence just because you don’t want to hear it? As Mark did, I could use as evidence that they renewed the show for season 2 and are producing Short Treks, and have brought back the entire cast, as evidence they still have plenty of faith in the Disco crew (they could have cancelled it and started a Pike show, or replaced characters/actors they felt weren’t working). The addition of Worf to DS9 for example was not an indictment of that show’s cast (far from it), only it’s ratings. As we have discussed, the “ratings” for DSC (however that is calculated in streaming) was good but not great. The evidence here suggests to me that the addition of Spock and Pike (for a specific story and not long term) is simply a way to draw more eyeballs to what they believe to be an already strong show, just as Worf was added to DS9. It’s newsworthy, it’s buzz worthy, and will surely get audiences attention. After all, how many GREAT shows have we seen cancelled before their time simply because the audience wasn’t big enough to keep it going? There was a rather famous one that was cancelled in 1969 and resurrected in 1979 as a series of films after people discovered it in syndication. Another popular show that continually struggled in the ratings in the late 90s even had cross promotion with a popular wrestler named The Rock to try to boost ratings, and guest spots from previous shows in their franchise, but that certainly didn’t mean they didn’t believe in their… Read more »

ML31

You are showing you are not reading or comprehending what is said here. “Burden of Proof” does not apply here because I have never claimed what I, or others have said is indeed 100% factual. I’ve said over and over it is theory. But a pretty solid one. “tu quoque” does not apply either as it means I would have had to avoid the criticism. I didn’t. I defended it. Danpaine did indeed provide reasoning. You just ran to your fallacy book instead of digesting what he wrote. You are the one willfully ignoring it. Not me. You are concluding that there is but one possible reason for the short Treks and S2 of STD. That is a formal fallacy. One might think a person who spouts off logical fallacies would know better. Adding Worf to DS9 is not an appropriate comparison for a multitude of reasons. It does not apply here. You also have no idea how many eyeballs were actually on STD. Only CBS knows that. And we do know their subscriber totals were nowhere near what they had hoped it would be. It is not unreasonable to conclude that STD did not bring in the viewers they hoped it would. This evidence suggests that the addition of Spock (who they previously insisted would never show up) and Pike is more of a desperation move to get more eyeballs on an underperforming show. As a general rule, shows that are doing well on their own do not resort to this sort of stunt. Especially so early in their production. Worf showed up AFTER DS9 was firmly entrenched. He was added more for story purposes than it was to get a few more TNG viewers over. Although I’m sure that was a happy side effect. Guesting “The Rock” (or… Read more »