The more I've had time to digest the matter, the more uneasy I've become with what Star Trek: Discovery is doing. It is not simply a clean reboot - Rather, it wants things both ways. To be original, or at least modern, while grafting itself onto existing canon and therefor forcing those who might have issues to shut up, and like it.
Like I said. When I watched both seasons, it became clear, there are really two different TV series here.
The body of Star Trek Canon is, everything from The Cage, all the way up to Star Trek: Nemesis. Anything that comes after, and is not pushing the time line forward is, at best supplemental.
The jury, of course remains seated, and hearing the case, where it comes to Star Trek: Picard. Is that simply pushing the time line forward, or will it also be supplemented by things Star Trek: Discovery adding new context to The Next Generation?
Artistically, in regards to pop culture, this is indeed highly disturbing. Rewriting history, by skewing a body of works historical context, with modern - Agenda, is almost Stalinist in its revisionism.
Would Gene Roddenberry, be OK with Michael Burnham, a HUMAN foster sibling being grafted onto Spock's history? I'm not so sure... He was not even keen on Sybok, and let me state, Sybok, as a character makes more sense as a contrast to Spock, than Michael Burnham does from a story telling standpoint. It literally makes sense, Sarek would have had a pre-Amanda Grayson, purely Vulcan coupling, given what we know about Vulcan history and culture.
Is it ethical, to do this?
I'm not attacking here, I'm sincerely ASKING.
Is it?
No comments:
Post a Comment