Chuck does TNG "The Outcast"

[VF5SS]

Will Riker and the space lesbians

[Purple]

Is anyone else getting that idiotic scoopaway commercial on his X-Files review?
Even once the obligatory commercial time is over it just keeps playing the sound in the background ad infinitum overlaid over the actual review. It newer ends, loops and can't be shut down at all.

Can anyone offer help or advice?

[Batman]

The problem isn't limited to the X-Files review, 'The Outcast' if nothing else has it too.

[Ahriman238]

I haven't had that problem with nay of Chuck's videos.

Yeah, as a kid I didn't see this as an episode about gays, I thought it was just this weird romance episode with Riker and a sort-of girl. Chuck does have apoint about the gay story being about a guy and a girl.

I gotta say, they missed an interesting opportunity, instead of just citing the Prime Directive, Picard could have asked Riker to consider these people's views. Here is a member of an alien species behaving in a manner that is normal to humans and seen as deviant by their kind. I assume in a multi-species group as large and old as the Federation this problem must have come up a few times. What happens when one species views the norms of others as disgusting? What happens when contact with, or even knowledge that such behavior is normal in the wider galaxy gets around?

Even with another Warp-faring civilization, mere contact with the Federation has caused a small disruption. What happens when it makes a big one? How much good is not meddling in other people's affairs going to do, when your existence and example is causing the problem?

[Patrick Degan]

One of the big problems with "The Outcast" is that it tries so desperately to Make a Statement in the course of a Romance of the Week story and fails miserably at both. The person Riker gets involved with is never going to have a lasting impact on his character or in the series; a one-off who gets forgotten by the next episode. The relationship is facile at best, because in the overall context of Riker's life it's nothing more than a blip. The whole situation is contrived simply to make us care about Soren's plight so deeply supposedly because she's suddenly become important to Riker.

We're really supposed to buy the idea that Riker is going to so suddenly fall in love with an androgynous pixie-girl he'd only just met and so deeply that he will not only break regulations but enlist the aid of one of his junior officers to do so? And when he finds that Soren's been "cured" and is now a goodthinkful little drone, he has maybe a rough hour or two in Ten Forward. By next week, it's as if Soren never even existed either in Riker's life or for us.

The Twilight Zone did a similar story in its fifth season, Charles Beaumont's "Number Twelve Looks Like You". In that one, Collin Wilcox is Barbara, a pretty-enough but plain girl who's being pressured to undergo the Transformation. In her society, beauty has become the sole ideal for all persons to aspire to, not only in appearance but in mind as well; so much so that individuality and genuine emotion is utterly quashed. Her father committed suicide after being forced to undergo transformation and the girl, who shared much with the man, including ideals, wants to remain true to herself and to the memory of the father she loved. For this, she is forcibly incarcerated in the hospital and, in the end, is forced to undergo the procedure. She comes out of it a curvy, vapid little drone who can only smile at herself in the mirror.

The reason why "Number Twelve" has its impact is because Barbara is somebody who is made real to the audience. She is totally alone, without even the support of either her mother or her best friend, neither of whom is capable of understanding why Barbara wants to remain herself. Barbara is the sole focus of the story and the singular figure the audience is drawn to so that, when she is utterly crushed by the forces at work in her sterile, conformist world, it really hits the viewer as well. The same cannot be said for Soren, because the whole Romance of the Week angle gets in its way, and the story becomes transformed from the plight of Soren to the plight of Riker.

Now, suppose the writers dispose of the whole Romance of the Week angle? Soren is simply someone the Enterprise crew get to know, who is facing the prospect of being forcibly "cured" of her own sexuality but the episode is told mostly from her P.O.V., with only a few scenes focussed upon the impressions the Enterprise officers have of her? It is actually possible to tell this story without having to have Riker fall in love with her because, in the end, it's about a person who is being made to become something she is not. This story should have had legs, but the usual Trek conventionalities and contrivances cut them off at the knees.

It might even have been possible to salvage a deeper story out of this episode, even with the contrived romance, but the whole C-plot involving the null zone anomaly around the J'naii star system gets in the way of any attempt at a serious, character-focused story of any sort. I mean, who fucking cares about the space potholes or how they make a shuttlecraft framizstat melt or explode or spontaneously turn into a bowl of petunias? What makes it worse is that null-zones are interchangeable with any technobabble problem hacked out by this show's writers that could be plugged into this script. Really, replace null-zone anomaly with the dying sun conundrum from "Half A Life" or the runaway asteroid from "A Matter Of Time" and what would have been the difference? All these technobabble subplots, in the end, meant nothing except One Big Fucking Waste Of Time, and that was one of the big defects with TNG and why so many of its episodes are just simply dull and pretentious.

Forcibly "curing" people of their own sexuality is wrong: the alleged point of "The Outcast". But in this episode, this theme becomes a footnote instead of its driver. More to the point, though, while Soren's plight is supposedly an analogy for the dilemma of real-life homosexuals struggling with the issue of whether or not to come out in a (sometimes oppressively) heterosexual world, it seems that the writers of this episode have no clue about a person exploring sexuality for the first time. Soren's questions to Beverly Crusher about womanhood seem to focus on the purpose of beauty aids rather than on emotions. They're the questions of a child, not an adult struggling with the deepest truths about herself. Soren is on the precipice of wonder, but also terror, because she knows she is not "normal". Some part of her may even be repelled at the idea, or depressed because it bars her from a conventional life in her society. Even if this is not the case with Soren, she still has plenty of reason to be terrified of coming out because she knows of how her society regards deviants like herself. But none of these deeper themes is expressed in the character of Soren. She basically asks a few questions, admits she's attracted to Riker, shares a kiss with him... then after coming out before the science council lets herself be meekly led off by the sex police after a token protest, and the next time we see her, she's "cured", and Riker has a few sad moments that will have all passed by next episode.

"The Outcast" is dull, facile, and a bit of an insult to real life homosexuals struggling with deep emotional issues. It represents every failure of TNG writing in its later seasons. And the sad thing is that this episode could have been deeper and more textured if the writers had simply not been afraid to tell basic, mature stories about people instead of hashing out cookbook scripts which, in the end, are about nothing at all.

[FaxModem1]

I read in a few interviews Gene saying that there would eventually be homosexual representation in Star Trek. Either his losing the reins of the show due to his failing health or handing it over to Rick Berman, this didn't happen. I was quite young when the Outcast came out, so I didn't understand the episode at all, and my parents' reaction was mixed at best.

A few years later, Rejoined came out on DS9, and it felt more representative of it, but again, it was all done through allegory, with the true gay or lesbian characters not really being there, and it could be pushed that this was only because of the symbiotes that the two were acting this way at all.

Cut to a few years later, there was The Emperor's New Cloak, and in that case, it was the EVIL LESBIANS of the Mirror Universe. Mirror Ezri ended up with Leeta, who was working with Terran Rebellion, but it felt more like one of the odd and wacky things about the Mirror Universe, and still no male representation on the matter. And of course, there would never be actual lesbian or gay relationships that didn't involve alien biology on Trek.

Finally, there was Enterprise, with the episode Stigma. God, again with the allegories, this one about AIDS. By this time I was in high school and felt I was being condescended to and not represented properly. The less said about Malcolm Reed and his orientation the better.

As someone once put it on some website somewhere, Star Trek's vision of paradise is one where gays don't exist. And that hurt, a lot. Due to this site, and the lack of representation, I went through a bit of a anti-Trek phase for a while. Then, funnily enough, I tripped onto Star Trek fanfilms(Hidden Frontier and New Voyages, specifically), and there was representation there. My love of Trek was rekindled, and gays were represented, even if the fan efforts were a bit, well, lacking in quality. It's 2011 now, and Star Trek's TV days are probably gone now, and replaced with the movie series, so time to represent homosexuals in Trek in movies will probably be non-existent, but it could happen.

Anyway, that was my path through Trek and it's attempts at being progressive but still too scared to commit to it. Sorry for the rant.

[DaveJB]

It was only a couple of years ago that I found out that "The Outcast" was supposed to have a gay message. Until then, I'd always assumed it was supposed to be about the conservative oppression of sexuality in general (or something similar).

In any case, Berman-era Trek was most definitely not a gay friendly place. Apparently, Jonathan Frakes decided to stick a same-sex couple in "The Offspring," on which he was making his debut as director - word of this somehow got to Berman before it was shot, and Frakes was told that if he did put a same-sex couple in, he'd be replaced as director on the episode, banned from directing any more episodes, and possibly even get written out of the show when his contract came up for renewal. In addition to that, Guinan was supposed to say that love specifically happens between males and females, until Whoopi Goldberg pointed out that they'd established as far back as TOS that some species had more than two genders, or none at all.

Then there's the infamous "Blood and Fire" episode which was written by David Gerrold, but never filmed. I can't quite remember why it got nixed, although I recall Gerrold recounting how he was on the receiving end of some viciously homophobic abuse from Gene Roddenberry's lawyer, who seized control of the writing staff halfway through the first season of TNG.

[Crazedwraith]

A few years later, Rejoined came out on DS9, and it felt more representative of it, but again, it was all done through allegory, with the true gay or lesbian characters not really being there, and it could be pushed that this was only because of the symbiotes that the two were acting this way at all.

Rejoined was quite a bit better than Outcast on this front. As there's an actual lesbian couple in it. (Jadzia and Lenahara Khan) and no-one ever states an object to this based on the fact its same gender just because it goes against Trill culture as far as the symbiotes are concerned.

[Patrick Degan]

Apparently, Jonathan Frakes decided to stick a same-sex couple in "The Offspring," on which he was making his debut as director - word of this somehow got to Berman before it was shot, and Frakes was told that if he did put a same-sex couple in, he'd be replaced as director on the episode, banned from directing any more episodes, and possibly even get written out of the show when his contract came up for renewal. In addition to that, Guinan was supposed to say that love specifically happens between males and females, until Whoopi Goldberg pointed out that they'd established as far back as TOS that some species had more than two genders, or none at all.

Damn. I've often observed how increasingly dull and listless Will Riker became as a character in TNG as the series wore on. This explains a lot; Frakes had to have gotten progressively cynical and demoralised after that sort of tirade and after that, he was punching in the clock and collecting his paycheque. By contrast, observe the relish he put into voicing the character of David Xanatos in Gargoyles.

Then there's the infamous "Blood and Fire" episode which was written by David Gerrold, but never filmed. I can't quite remember why it got nixed, although I recall Gerrold recounting how he was on the receiving end of some viciously homophobic abuse from Gene Roddenberry's lawyer, who seized control of the writing staff halfway through the first season of TNG.

James Cawley's ST:NV group produced it last year as a two-parter, with David Gerrold directing. One feature involves a definitely graphic depiction (albeit PG-level) of gay romance between his two protagonists —Lt. Alex Freeman and (changed for the TOS era) Peter Kirk, Capt. Kirk's grown nephew and now a serving ensign in Security aboard the Enterprise.

[Cesario]

Unfortunately, the forward-thinking openmindedness that characterized TOS was effectively spent by the time TNG rolled around. No one in charge wanted to take real risks by that point, so none were taken.

It's a wonderful thing to imagine a future devoid of prejudice, where we've actually become the better people that Trek claims over and over again that they are, but when you get down to it, prejudice really is a fundamental force of human nature. Once we get over one, we roll right over on some other poor slob. Someone we've been leaning on suddenly isn't an acceptable target anymore, so we start leaning on the next one in line.

What I find particularly odd is that TNG era writers did a better job on pedophilia than they did on homosexuality. (See: Kes.)

[Baffalo]

Is now the time to point to Ambiguously Gay Helmsman Hawk? I don't remember where I heard that term (might have been in Chuck's review of First Contact). Apparently, that's the best we get. A man who may or may not be gay who ends up assimilated by the Borg and then gunned down by Worf. Apparently, you can be gay so long as you understand that at some point, you're going to die a horrible death and no one will lament your sacrifice.

[neoolong]

Apparently according to the Star Trek: Starship Creator, Hawk actually survived being assimilated and then shot. Yay!

[Ahriman238]

Is now the time to point to Ambiguously Gay Helmsman Hawk? I don't remember where I heard that term (might have been in Chuck's review of First Contact). Apparently, that's the best we get. A man who may or may not be gay who ends up assimilated by the Borg and then gunned down by Worf. Apparently, you can be gay so long as you understand that at some point, you're going to die a horrible death and no one will lament your sacrifice.

Starfleet is just generally not a safe place for security staff or other extras. Or the love interests of main characters. Or any civilizations that come into contact, or could conceivably be saved by main characters.

[Baffalo]

For some reason I keep imagining this conversation at Starfleet HQ:

"The numbers prove it. Anytime the Enterprise goes anywhere, something goes horribly, horribly wrong and people end up dying for no reason. Sometimes only a handful, sometimes by the millions. If this keeps up there won't be anyone out there to meet."
"Well, look on the bright side. At least they're out there and not back here."

[Crateria]

For some reason I keep imagining this conversation at Starfleet HQ:

"The numbers prove it. Anytime the Enterprise goes anywhere, something goes horribly, horribly wrong and people end up dying for no reason. Sometimes only a handful, sometimes by the millions. If this keeps up there won't be anyone out there to meet."
"Well, look on the bright side. At least they're out there and not back here."

You must fight the terrorists Enterprisists over there so you won't have them fighting over here!

It slightly disturbs me to think how many casualties have occurred on or have been the result of an action by any ship named Enterprise. I wonder if the ship line was cursed.

[Baffalo]

For some reason I keep imagining this conversation at Starfleet HQ:

"The numbers prove it. Anytime the Enterprise goes anywhere, something goes horribly, horribly wrong and people end up dying for no reason. Sometimes only a handful, sometimes by the millions. If this keeps up there won't be anyone out there to meet."
"Well, look on the bright side. At least they're out there and not back here."

You must fight the terrorists Enterprisists over there so you won't have them fighting over here!

It slightly disturbs me to think how many casualties have occurred on or have been the result of an action by any ship named Enterprise. I wonder if the ship line was cursed.

I wouldn't go so far as to say cursed... just certain numbers. B we never saw anything happen with except that rescue mission and C actually helped stop a war with its sacrifice. But you are right that the others (orig, A, D and E) are all responsible for major atrocities. That's not to say nothing good ever came from their actions but I'm wondering what would happen if you tallied up the good actions with the bad actions. Voyager was pretty bad about it too, letting some species die while fighting tooth and nail to preserve others. I'm starting to wonder if it's not the ship's line but rather the camera. All those sacrifices made so the story would be a little more interesting.

[Purple]

This said, how did he get the information that this episode was actually related to the issue of homosexuality?
I mean, was it officially stated to be such or something? Having watched it many times I have to say that before I saw his review that would never have occurred to me.

[Baffalo]

This said, how did he get the information that this episode was actually related to the issue of homosexuality?
I mean, was it officially stated to be such or something? Having watched it many times I have to say that before I saw his review that would never have occurred to me.

It's mostly what Rick Berman said in his interviews on the subject.

Like "The Host", DS9: "Rejoined" and ENT: "Stigma", "The Outcast" was one of the few episodes of any of the Star Trek series which brushed on the subject of homosexuality in an allegorical manner. Of the episode, producer Rick Berman said in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Companion, "We thought we had made a very positive statement about sexual prejudice in a distinctively Star Trek way, but we still got letters from those who thought it was just our way of 'washing our hands' of the homosexual situation." The "situation" arose continuously through the run of Star Trek: Enterprise and still does today, with some alleged homophobia on the part of former Star Trek producers.

Rick Berman tried not to let perceptions of what the public would find acceptable "influence us too much" in the choice of Riker's opposite, adding "but having Riker engaged in passionate kisses with a male actor might have been a little unpalatable to viewers." (San Jose Mercury News, Grapevine, March 14, 1992) Nevertheless, Jonathan Frakes felt otherwise and would later criticize the decision to cast women in the roles of the J'naii, as a love affair apparently shared between two men would have made the statement of the episode stronger.

Two lines of dialogue were cut from the final release: Noor explaining to Riker that the J'naii are by all measurements an enlightened race and Riker asking "Then how is it that Soren has no choice about her sexual orientation?"

Sexual inequalities were also explored, though secondarily, in "The Outcast", in which Dr. Crusher apparently struggles to recall a time when women were considered to be "weak and inferior". She would assert that those sentiments hadn't been an issue in "a long time", though Worf's statements about a weak hand contributing to a "Woman's Game" of poker might cast some doubt on that...at least from a Klingon perspective. (The dialogue in question is further complicated by statements from Worf, earlier in the series, that "Klingons appreciate strong women.")

[Patrick Degan]

Also, the analogy to the claims of Fundamentalist Christian groups that homosexuality can be "cured" presented in the episode is a rather obvious one.

We thought we had made a very positive statement about sexual prejudice in a distinctively Star Trek way

No, the statement was made in the distinctive Rick Berman way: meaningless, clueless, and gutless.

[Uraniun235]

I read in a few interviews Gene saying that there would eventually be homosexual representation in Star Trek. Either his losing the reins of the show due to his failing health or handing it over to Rick Berman, this didn't happen.

He may have been lying, too. The man would tell you almost anything you wanted to hear if it made you think better of him.

[Uraniun235]

Damn. I've often observed how increasingly dull and listless Will Riker became as a character in TNG as the series wore on. This explains a lot; Frakes had to have gotten progressively cynical and demoralised after that sort of tirade and after that, he was punching in the clock and collecting his paycheque. By contrast, observe the relish he put into voicing the character of David Xanatos in Gargoyles.

To be fair, the whole series seemed to grow increasingly dull and listless. I don't think you're necessarily wrong, but I think there's other things happening too.