The Myth of Roddenberry

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2003-03-19 11:48pm

With all the flack B&B are getting lately, one theme that is being repeated over and over is how Roddenberry would be so offended with their seeming contempt for continuity. The attitude seems to be Roddenberry was very concerned with consistency and that something like Enterprise would never have happened if the old man were still around. I think that's bull.

First take TOS. The Enterprise was usually referred to as an Earth ship and the crew as Earth men. I believe there was even a reference to the Earth government. It was some time before we started to hear about the UFP. There were even implications that there was an Earth Empire (Spock's comparing Vulcan's violent interstellar expansion to Earth's history, a reference to Vulcan being conquered). Then in TMP, there is the fact that the Enterprise insignia has somehow become the emblem for the entire Starfleet, and individual command insignia disappeared. In one of the first episodes of TNG there is a reference to the Klingons joining the Federation, then very shortly later they are just allies. This was when Roddenberry was still around.

These are just a few inconsistencies I could think of off the top of my head. I am not saying that B&B have not ruined Star Trek, and of course there are much bigger problems than inconsistency, like bad writing, bad acting, bad ideas. I'm just saying that Roddenberry worship is misplaced. He was just a television writer who wanted to make money, and had no real concern for consistency. He was no George Lucas.

Now let's see if I get flamed or ignored.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-03-20 12:22am

Well, unless I'm mistaken, Roddenberry didn't have complete creative control over every episode made, nor did he write every episode. He was the series creator, not writer and producer.

Macross · Post by **Macross** » 2003-03-20 12:41am

TOS was the first, and as such it didnt have a 35 year legacy behind it.

You cant really compare a few developmental inconsistancies from Roddenberry to B&B who are openly ignoring and trying to rewrite Star Trek history.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-03-20 12:51am

I don't think anyone here worships him. I think he had good ideas, and bad ideas, and I think it's interesting to note the intent of the writers and compare/contrast against the final product, but I certainly don't think he's beyond criticism.

TOS also faced the challenge that it was a number of different writers that contributed stories, not just a few guys on staff who do nothing but write scripts for Star Trek. Besides, if the story's sound, minor continuity errors are trivial.

But, B&B stories are neither sound nor are their errors minor. Hey, let's say they have limited resources and then turn around and let them manufacture torpedoes and shuttlecraft! Let's give the Romulans a cloak way the fuck before they should have one! Let's make the trip to Qo'noS a pleasant little excursion, as opposed to the long haul it should be for that rather slow ship they have. Hell, they could have turned that trip into a major plot arc in and of itself; it could have been the backdrop for a dozen episodes. But, again, B&B waste the opportunity to do something greater than a 1st grade writing.

But I digress.

There were even implications that there was an Earth Empire (Spock's comparing Vulcan's violent interstellar expansion to Earth's history, a reference to Vulcan being conquered).

What episode was this?

Then in TMP, there is the fact that the Enterprise insignia has somehow become the emblem for the entire Starfleet, and individual command insignia disappeared.

Organizations do change over time.

In one of the first episodes of TNG there is a reference to the Klingons joining the Federation, then very shortly later they are just allies.

Again, what episode? I don't remember this.

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2003-03-20 01:54am

Alas, I am not enough of a fan that I can spout off the titles of all the episodes. The first reference was from "Balance of Terror." When Spock is speculating on the connection between the Romulans and the Vulcans, he states that Vulcan, like Earth, went through an aggressive expansionist phase, and if the Romulans broke off at that time, they would be very dangerous. That is not an exact quote, but if he used different words, the idea was the same. He might have been comparing periods of intra-planetary conflict, but when has earth ever not had conflict between nations? Given that the Vulcans apparently had interplanetary travel at that time to allow the Romulans to leave, it would make sense if the comparison were about interplanetary aggression. Of course, that is a subjective interpretation, but it makes sense to me.

In another episode, Spock is concerned about Kirk's ability to command. He goes to McCoy about it, but the doctor is not at all interested in Spock's fears. He offers Spock a drink, and when the Vulcan refuses, he comments, "Oh yes, I forgot. No wonder your people were conquered, if you can't even enjoy a good brandy." Again, that might not be an exact quote, and I cannot remember the episode for the life of me, but McCoy plainly stated that the Vulcans had been conquered. I wonder if Roddenberry was toying with the idea of making the Federation like the British Commonwealth, a democratized union of former colonies of a defunct Earth Empire. That's just idle speculation really, but the hints are there.

As to the reference to the Klingons being members of the Federation, again I cannot remember the title or story of the episode. It was a throw-away line that stuck in my head because I was still wondering what a Klingon was doing on the Enterprise's bridge. I do not think it was in the pilot, but I am sure it was in the first season.

Yes, organizations change, but you have to admit that it is strange that, within just a few years, they abandoned the individual command insignia system and made the insignia of one particular ship the emblem for the entire organization. Not absolutely impossible, but rather improbable. I do not recall ever hearing a good explanation for it. You'd think at the very least at some point Kirk or Scott would make some smug comment.

I would like to point out that I did not say that Roddenberry was as bad as B&B. I believe I specifically charged them with bad writing and bad concepts. In fact, that post was inspired by a discussion I was involved in today. A friend and I were talking to another friend about why Enterprise is so bad. We were complaining about the inconsistencies and ruination of Star Trek cannon history, when my friend started going on about how Roddenberry was so much better and he took such care to establish and maintain a credible history and background for the Star Trek universe and so on, and I started arguing with him about that. Many Trekies go on about how terrific Roddenberry was and how much he cared about Star Trek, and it gets on my nerves.

I think that Roddenberry has become something of a myth for too many fans. Yes, B&B have ruined Star Trek. I never said they didn't, and I am not trying to exonerate them. Their disregard for established history is what makes Enterprise unwatchable for me. I could tolerate mediocre writing and acting, but when the Romulans had not only a cloaked ship, but an entire bloody minefield, not to mention when T'pol identified them as Romulans, well that did it for me. All I am saying is that Roddenberry was not like George Lucas.

Star Wars is Lucas' baby. It is his dream and magnum opus . Star Trek was a neat idea that Roddenberry came up with, and when it was over, he wanted to move on to other things. I have read and heard many times that he was a bit reluctant to resurect the series in the 70's. At first he was not pleased that he would be stuck with Star Trek for the rest of his life. He did not take a hands-on approach in any of the productions, and I believe he hired a ghost-writer for the novelization of TMP. He came up with a great idea, and should be commended for the way he wanted to used the series to teach lessons about humanity's potential, and I think if he were still around and in control things would be better, but I do not think that he would totally disapprove of B&B's approach to cannon. He might be little better about the big things, but from what I have read and heard, he was more concerned about telling a good story and selling it than about the integrity of the story itself. In fact, things might be much better, because I am sure there would be much better writing.

Alright, I'm done ranting.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-03-20 02:06am

I agree that Roddenberry is overrated, and that his day-to-day influence was exaggerated. However, he is still head and shoulders above B&B.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2003-03-20 03:06am

Going by the old ST encyclopedia (Which has no cannocity value) and many of the books (Which are also not canon) Vulcan was Concured, and liberated by the Earth/Alpha Centari colony alliance leading to the breaking of the Orion Pirate Syndicates, and the establishment of Federation control of the Rigel sector. (The Orion syndicates + Andorians declared war on the Vulcans, and won, but lost to the more aggressive humans)

Sabastian Tombs · Post by **Sabastian Tombs** » 2003-03-20 03:19am

Johonebesus wrote: As to the reference to the Klingons being members of the Federation, again I cannot remember the title or story of the episode. It was a throw-away line that stuck in my head because I was still wondering what a Klingon was doing on the Enterprise's bridge. I do not think it was in the pilot, but I am sure it was in the first season.

It was a throwaway line spoken by Wesley Crusher to Captain Picard while they were alone in a shuttlepod. The episode was in the second season and titled Samaritan Snare.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-03-20 06:59pm

He might have been comparing periods of intra-planetary conflict, but when has earth ever not had conflict between nations?

Probably some time between the 20th and 23rd centuries.

seanrobertson · Post by **seanrobertson** » 2003-03-20 09:49pm

Sabastian Tombs wrote:
Johonebesus wrote: As to the reference to the Klingons being members of the Federation, again I cannot remember the title or story of the episode. It was a throw-away line that stuck in my head because I was still wondering what a Klingon was doing on the Enterprise's bridge. I do not think it was in the pilot, but I am sure it was in the first season.
It was a throwaway line spoken by Wesley Crusher to Captain Picard while they were alone in a shuttlepod. The episode was in the second season and titled Samaritan Snare.

I don't remember that one, but I do recall that, in "Heart of Glory," the renegade Klingons chided Worf for serving on a "human Starfleet vessel" rather than a "Klingon one," or words to that effect. There was also a lot of suggestive talk about living under Federation laws, "lying down with the prey" and such things.

Also, when a Klingon battlecruiser came after the renegades, the KBC's bridge was adorned with the tri-dagger emblem of the Klingon Empire on one side and the Federation seal on the other side of the captain's seat. It reminded me a bit of someone flying a state and national flag in the U.S.

So early on in TNG, the implication was that the Klingons had joined the Federation, yeah...and now that you mention it, I *do* remember that quote from "Samaritan's Snare." Both other than those two episodes, I can't think of anything else that ever actually had the Klingons living as Federation members.

Baron Mordo · Post by **Baron Mordo** » 2003-03-21 10:18am

Johonebesus wrote:He offers Spock a drink, and when the Vulcan refuses, he comments, "Oh yes, I forgot. No wonder your people were conquered, if you can't even enjoy a good brandy." Again, that might not be an exact quote, and I cannot remember the episode for the life of me, but McCoy plainly stated that the Vulcans had been conquered.

McCoy and Spock had a very confrontational relationship. He frequently compared Spock to the devil, and was always sniping at his logic-based philosophy. They didn't conquer the Vulcans. McCoy was being abrasive and crotchety.

Batman002 · Post by **Batman002** » 2003-03-21 10:28am

Most of the problems with all the contradictions in Trek is The writing staff know one ep. said something can or can't do a thing and make it do the opposite later because they don't care as long as it helps tell the story. I read that in an issue of the Star Trek The Magazine once.

They are aware of the flaws but put them in anyway as long as it goes along with the story. Along with that in an up coming ep. of Enterprise Archer and his crew are going to face a Borg survivor from the Movie First Contact.

From Star Trek.com-
SCHEDULING UPDATE: UPN has slated repeats of Enterprise throughout March. New episodes will resume April 2 with "The Crossing." The current airdates are listed below.

The Enterprise-E should've stuck around for a more thorough clean-up operation. The aftermath of "what really happened" during the events of April 2063 are explored in an episode that brought out set pieces and costumes not seen since the end of Star Trek: Voyager, and features John Billingsley's wife in one of the key guest roles.

Remember in "Star Trek: First Contact," Captain Picard's crew followed a small Borg sphere through time and blew it to bits over 21st-century Earth. Well, what happened to all that debris? That's the premise behind "Regeneration." In the story, written by Mike Sussman & Phyllis Strong, an arctic research team in 2152 discovers fragments of an alien ship buried in the glacial terrain, along with the frozen corpses of two cybernetically enhanced humanoids. Except they aren't really corpses — once they're allowed to thaw they come back to life and put their nanoprobes to work. They abduct the scientists and hijack their transport ship, modifying it for higher warp speeds. That's where the NX-01 comes in. Captain Archer's crew gives chase, and learns what an insidious threat these cybernetic beings pose.

How's that for screwing up the time line? Was Picard's crew the only ones that didn't know of them?
Did Starfleet know of the Borg and for some reason never told anyone about them? MMMMMMM

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2003-03-21 03:21pm

Batman002 wrote:How's that for screwing up the time line?
Was Picard's crew the only ones that didn't know of them?
Did Starfleet know of the Borg and for some reason never told anyone about them? MMMMMMM

B&B don't give a damn about continuity. Especially pre-B&B continuity.

As to the second it appears that way. Kind of makes you wonder what's going on behind the scenes at starfleet don't you?

Johonebesus · Post by **Johonebesus** » 2003-03-21 05:45pm

Baron Mordo wrote:McCoy and Spock had a very confrontational relationship. He frequently compared Spock to the devil, and was always sniping at his logic-based philosophy. They didn't conquer the Vulcans. McCoy was being abrasive and crotchety.

That does not really make sense. Crotchety would be, "It's a wonder you were never conquered" or some such. It's one thing to make snide comments or call him names, it’s another to make a flat statement that is not true. It is simply an inconsistency, like Wesley stating that the Klingons had joined the Federation. Of course, McCoy did not say who conquered Vulcan. Yosemite Bear's explanation could fit.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-03-22 12:33am

According to the TNG two-parter "Reunification", you can conquer Vulcan with 2000 men. I'm sure it was just a matter of figuring out who would conquer Vulcan first.

Grand Moff Yenchin · Post by **Grand Moff Yenchin** » 2003-03-28 04:05am

Stormbringer wrote:
B&B don't give a damn about continuity. Especially pre-B&B continuity.

As to the second it appears that way. Kind of makes you wonder what's going on behind the scenes at starfleet don't you?

A big Trekkie over here where I live always rants about B&B "Creating Trek in their own image." B&B screws the Borg first with FC, then we get an Akiraprise, and here comes the Degeneration Borgs, plus a whole shitload of screwups, it wont be a wild guess that Q will undoubtly show up in Boobyprise. (And forget those other Uber-beings in TOS, like the Squire of Gothos, Metrons or those guys who gave powers to Charlie X)

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2003-03-30 04:39am

One thing that has to be remembered that strict episode-to-episode continuity simply was not a factor in the consideration of any writing/production staff for any television series throughout the 60s and 70s. All that mattered was putting out X-number of episodes per season and doing as good a job as possible on them while bringing the whole show in on budget. That TOS was able to avoid monumental glitches and contradictions in its three seasons speaks to a far greater degree of creative discipline among a diverse collection of writers and producers than the present Berman Braga dictatorship which has misruled the Franchise for nearly fifteen years now.

Not even John Nathan-Turner managed to fuck up Doctor Who as badly as Trek's been done.

Also, TOS was produced in the era when home video was an utterly unknown concept and when syndicated reruns were the only way of viewing one's favourite programmes on a continual basis —and syndication runs often were subject to long breaks to avoid burning up the rights too quickly.

In terms of internal continuity, TOS is nowhere near as screwed up as, say, M*A*S*H, with its wildly varying time setting within the Korean War period, the differing names of Col. Blake's wife, the radically different personalities of Radar, the changing sex of Col. Potter's horse, and a hospital building the internal geometry of which in no way conforms to the buillding's exterior.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-03-30 01:44pm

I hate to say it, given the current state of Trek, but I actually liked Trek better when Berman took over. I don't recall if this included TNG but I liked DS9 even from the begining because it had dropped all the PC touchy-feely crap that I had overdosed on coming from TNG. Maybe Berman got a swelled head from his "success" or maybe he just shouldn't be mixed with Braga

but other than basic premises I've never been a huge fan of Roddenberry.

I don't suppose it helps that Harlan Ellison (sp?) goes off about him from time to time. It also would have been nice if ST:TMP wouldn't have been a (boring) big movie version of a TOS episode. It didn't make me believe in Roddenberry's ability to come up with story ideas.

I've actually been a bit more impressed with Roddenberry's creative side since adding the origins of Earth Final Conflict and Andromeda to his resume. Once again, he has the basic premises for some good sci-fi. I think they all could have been followed through better but what has happened with E:FC and Andromeda have almost nothing to do with Roddenberry.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-03-30 04:00pm

Tsyroc, Berman had nothing to do with DS9.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-03-30 06:56pm

It didn't make me believe in Roddenberry's ability to come up with story ideas.

Roddenberry didn't write the TMP story; IIRC, that was Alan Dean Foster. Roddenberry just wrote the novelization for that.

I don't think any of the movies were Roddenberry stories (one of his ideas was the Klingons going back in time to try and assassinate JFK), and in fact it seems to me he had very minimal input on the movies.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-03-31 07:11am

HemlockGrey wrote:Tsyroc, Berman had nothing to do with DS9.

Wasn't he still listed as the producer? I know he had nothing to do with it later on but I thought he was involved somewhat when it started.

It's been awhile but I still think my feeling at the time was that I liked TNG better after Roddenberry was essentially out of it. Although, I should point out that I don't have any knowledge about the behind the scenes goings on of TNG and DS9 from around that time.

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-03-31 10:53pm

Except for a couple of episodes, I mostly hate seasons 6 and 7 of TNG. It's just bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. You want touchy-feely crap? There it is. Seasons 6 and 7. Hell, I think the first season is better than 6 and 7... at least it had more of an adventurous feel to it.

And where would Berman's influence on TNG most show?

Seasons 6 and 7, of course, some time after the series creator had died. IMO, all 6/7 have going for them are better lighting.

Tsyroc · Post by **Tsyroc** » 2003-04-01 12:28am

Uraniun235 wrote:Except for a couple of episodes, I mostly hate seasons 6 and 7 of TNG. It's just bullshit, bullshit, bullshit. You want touchy-feely crap? There it is. Seasons 6 and 7. Hell, I think the first season is better than 6 and 7... at least it had more of an adventurous feel to it.

And where would Berman's influence on TNG most show?

Seasons 6 and 7, of course, some time after the series creator had died. IMO, all 6/7 have going for them are better lighting.

Good point. I really hated that crap. I was so glad when DS9 got going (boring or not) I just felt the people were more believable. Still, it's been pointed out that Berman didn't have anything to do with DS9 so I guess I'm not a big fan of either him or Roddenberry.

kmart · Post by **kmart** » 2003-04-04 02:04pm

Uraniun235 wrote:
It didn't make me believe in Roddenberry's ability to come up with story ideas.
Roddenberry didn't write the TMP story; IIRC, that was Alan Dean Foster. Roddenberry just wrote the novelization for that.

Foster's story is actually based on a Roddenberry concept, though. It was called ROBOT'S RETURN, and was for his unproduced GENESIS II series. It was still a ripoff of THE CHANGELING to some degree, even back then.

As for the VULCAN BEING CONQUERED LINE, i think somebody is misremembering. Spock mentions once that Vulcan has not been conquered in a VERY long time when explaining why that ship full of vulcans that gets eaten by the big amoeba (IMMUNITY SYNDROME) couldn't believe what was happening to them.

The only stuff I can think of that suggests otherwise was in an early unused draft of CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER (written before all the details of earth, federation, vulcan, etc had been worked out) that has Kirk mentioning how Earth got to space two centuries ahead of the vulcans and also implies that earth might have conquered them. NOTHING from the actual series suggests anything of the sort.