Cultural Vandalism | The Ruin of Star Wars and Doctor Who

As I pointed out in my Is It Ethical to Recontextualize Star Trek Canon?, this is a dangerous road we are going down here.

IT IS UNETHICAL, there are proper moments for retcons, but doing so in the service of a political agenda is evil and dangerous.

There's no reason whatsoever to remove William Hartnell as the First Doctor. NONE beyond doing so in a "What if..." none canon violating dream experiment ratings grab. 

I said it before, and I will say it here. This is Stalinist in its bold revisionism of the past and should be soundly rejected by all true Geeks across all fandoms wherever it comes about.

Be it in Doctor Who, Star Trek, or Star Wars, and ever other place in-between.

When I say this. I want you to keep something in mind. I write almost exclusively female protagonists. But they are protagonists in their own right do not exist to rip down the history of male figures. Oh they are also usually (very) flawed. However, we won't talk about the profusion of Mary Sues just now.

For me this is about the preservation of history, as it existed. Spock never had an adopted sister but he does have a half-brother, yes even Gene Roddenberry was wrong to try to paper over Sybok and George Lucas was wrong to stop Han from shooting first. 

Is It Ethical to Recontextualize Star Trek Canon?

Let me state upfront. I have no problems with a hard reboot, that takes elements of existing Trek Canon, and remixes them. Provided its clear, that yes, its a reboot with a new creative force driving it.

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?

Star Trek: Picard

I want to make it clear, there will be spoilers here.

I'll get this out of the way This is not Star Trek. Not too much about this enthuses me.

So what is this?

Apparently its a platform for Sir Patrick Stewart to preach at the world about Brexit and the election of President Trump. And does not do it very artful either which only makes watching it unfold more tedious.

Look, as an actor, I like Patrick Stewart. I could do without his blatant political commentary.


Do the producers of this show, know the United States is not StarFleet, and in reality is a sovereign nation without unlimited tech like replicators? Oh and the Romulan Star Empire is supposed to be a an EMPIRE which kind of implies a functioning military able to move people and resources around.

An empire does not fall just because of one planet being blow up. the Romulans are paranoids. They would never place all their eggs in one basket and, they would also have sufficient resources all by themselves to relocate their populace. Never mind the Vulcans would never abandon their brethren, even if the Federation (They keep talking about StarFleet) would ever act in such an out of characteristic manner. 

It does not even fit the nature of what the United Federation of Planets is. Its sort of a UN. Earth is sovereign entity within its body, yet is not the whole of the UFP, or StarFleet. Somewhere in recent Star Trek these related but not monolithic entities have become a mush.

An alliance of planets is not going to ever do, what Star Trek: Picard, tells us it did. There are a whole host of reasons this Romulans as refugees fails as story point and metaphor.   I blame Sir Patrick Stewart for this more than anyone else. When it comes to creative input where Star Trek stands he has a terrible track record.

Speaking of. Not only does this show seem to play loose with TNG, it also ironically enough rides over JJ Abrams 2009 Star Trek movie. The nova that blew up Romulus wasn't their own sun but another faraway star going nova.

Not here. The Romulan's own sun blew them up.

Do you know how stupid that is?

Oh and I guess Bruce Maddox is the big bad guy of the series. Did Patrick Stewart watch Measure of a Man? Yeah Maddox began as the heavy of the episode by by the end of it things were all kosher and he was on Team Data.

Making Bruce Maddox a terrorist for Synthetics rights, to "Own President Trump" is going to fall flat.

Huh?

Somehow they have managed to ruin Noonian Soong without even mentioning his name...

Its hard for me to cover just how badly they have handled Data and what Data actually is. The writers have no understanding of what a Soong-Type Android is, or what went into their construction.

We can now... Clone them. What?

Oh its like they don't get the joke of B4, and have forgotten all about Lore. Hint B4 was the prototype and Lore and Data were the perfected models - Each in their own turn. The writers don't seem to grasp this.

Why are they ripping off Battlestar Galactica and Blade Runner?

By the way. Does the Federations (They oddly only talk about StarFleet these days in Kurtzman Star Trek) novel ban on "synthetics" apply to holograms?

I am sure Robert Picardo's EMH is pleased he's been outlawed. Providing they are consistent about what it means to outlaw synthetics and this is just not some poorly thought out emotional manipulation on the part of those involved.

Speaking of off screen characters, who are poorly treated. Do you know, Dr. Beverly Crusher is dead?

Why? Why do that? Is Gates McFadden retired? If is OK. But still DON"T KILL A LEGACY CHARACTER OFF -- OFF SCREEN.

Enterprise-E, what's that? Guess Secret Hideout didn't licence it, even though it would have made more sense. However the D is more a memberberry.

They seem to forget all about the Enterprise-E while making indirect references to Star Trek: Nemesis, without outright doing so. And that is because who owns what and how the deal which was made between Bad Robot and CBS that got us to where we are today has been written.

The movies are owned by Paramount.

Did I mention, this is too contemporary? Not only in how it looks but in how people behave and talk. Its like Millennials glanced at a wiki entry for TNG and tried to recreate it without very many visual references or an understanding of what they were remaking.

My understanding is, this is all going to go off the rails by the 4th episode and CBS is bracing for the backlash. I don't need to even see that much, since all the signs are there for where this is going and I am sorry.

This is not Star Trek, though its dressed up in vague The Next Generation clothes to try to fool a few people. It will briefly succeed in fooling those people. Either because it affirms their political biases, or they've been caught up by nostalgia watching Patrick Stewart play a Picard-like figure for the first time in a long while.

Star Trek: Picard, is bland and is only going to go downhill from here.

Joker [And Our Unhinged Media Elite]

Let me begin by saying. I think those who worked on this movie's first purpose was to create a breakdown of what makes Batman's greatest villain, who and what he is.


I don't think the purpose was any sort of agenda, beyond taking a microscope to the Joker himself. However by accident much more outside the realm of the film itself has been revealed.

What?

Our Media is unhinged and cannot handle ANYTHING no matter how docile or even within the bounds of normalcy that even hints running against the grain of their approved narrative.

Its not so much that I like the Joker. But I do enjoy what its done to our Elite Media.

The fallout (mostly among the Twitter Elite Entertainment Media) at Joker's Oscar nominations is almost more fun than the movie that they are overreacting to. It proves none of these people should be taken seriously about much of anything, yet specifically in the case of what should and should not be included in our entertainment.

Me. I usually ignore movie reviewers. This only confirms that I have been correct to do so, and shall carry on doing so.

Doomcock has a video about Joker and the Oscar nominations. Go watch!

Our Broken Science Fiction Establishment

Formally titled: More on Sci-fi Fandom.

I began this point in my post: Boobs and Dragons: My Disenchantment With Modern Sci-Fi, and feel I need to expand it.


First. Yes every once in awhile I stumble upon a gem in modern Sci-Fi fandom, and genre which does not present itself as if it exists with the singular purpose of telling me how awful I am for being a White heterosexual Male. Or overtly seeks to stomp on things which I used to love. It happens, not too often, but sometimes.

Like I said, I rather enjoyed Jupiter Ascending and I am fairly sure, The Wachowskis meant for it to be some radical take, with a Leftward slant. But the actual movie, does not play out like that.

Frak! I even enjoy Rogue One, its superior in every way to The Last Jedi and more respectful of its source material.

But my big issue and disenchantment with the genre and professionally produced material is its primary goal now seems to have an SJW agenda, and entertain by accident, if at all. Being 'Woke' now seems to be the Science Fiction genre's first function.

Lets talk about the Aftermath books for a second. They are bad, because Chuck Wendig chose to write them in a bizarre style, and unlike any Star Wars fiction ever written before. Its odd use of tense, is off putting and distracting.  That there are LGBT people in them is besides the point - Wendig's artsy style actually hurts, and does no service to the "Progressive" point he thinks he's making.

Look Dude, (Chuck) I sat and enjoyed four seasons of Battlestar Galactica, which had openly homosexual characters in it, this didn't bug me in the slightest. Ronald D. Moore handled this topic in a far more professional and mature manner than you and Disney appear able to do. This is not why your Aftermath books suck. The writing style is painful to read. Oh, and thanks to the clusterfrak which was The Last Jedi, are basically meaningless filler.

About those Hugo Awards - Or more to the point, Tor Books which as far as I tell is a prime epicenter of the SJW infection which pervades the Science Fiction genre. During the first Sad Puppies uprising I got my first glimpse into the sordid underbelly and levers of power which control Science Fiction fandom. What I discovered when reading many of these executives and their stable of approved authors and talent on social media and in the context of The Hugo Awards was, they hated me. Many, including public figures which I once viewed as iconic, HATED ME, simply for the sin of not thinking in their approved manner.

Why would I want anything to do with people, who clearly despise me?

Its not like things have improved since that first clash at The Hugo Awards, the entrenched power structure, rewrote the rules as a means to marginalize an insurgency within its ranks. I stopped paying attention to that battle after the second Sad Puppies and reached the conclusion, its just better The Hugo Awards die since its clear they now exist only to push the Social Justice Warrior agenda. Typically a Hugo call out on a book WARNS me away from it.

The infection is only getting worse. Disney Star Wars, was a bellwether, and the Marvel Cinematic Universe is soon to follow. Considering Marvel Comics is already so 'Woke' I'm shocked its taken this long.

We're not going to even bother talking about the state of modern Star Trek... I'm afraid its demise was sown, at least since the inception of The Next Generation, where Gene Roddenberry decided to go Radical Utopian.

Boobs and Dragons: My Disenchantment With Modern Sci-Fi

My friend wonders, and constantly asks, why I show no enthusiasm of TV series like Game of Thrones. On paper, I should be. My own fiction, is literally filled with boobs, babes, and guns.

Yet I'm not, and it hes less to do with the series, which yes looks awesome, and I will say I did watch at least two full seasons. But over time, my energy to go out and find it, ebbed greatly. All because, George R. R. Martin clearly demonstrated during the Sad Puppies Hugo Awards blowup, that he really wanted nothing to do with anyone who does not share his political views.


George R. R. Martin, writer of blood, gore, boobs, dragons, and rape proved himself to be a complete Social Justice warrior.

No thanks! I'm not going to reward that.

Of course, over the course of Game of Thrones, series run, the SJW infection has invaded almost all Science Fiction, and entertainment, in general.Now nearly every professional product, be it original material - Or adaptions, and updates of classic franchises have become SJW platforms.

I'd rather watch reruns, and reread books I already own. Modern creators, those in control of the Entertainment Industry, and Sci-Fi in particular have made it clear they aren't making their product for me.

Will this change in the future? Who knows.

Books I Like: Only Superhuman by Christopher L. Bennett

WARNING: THIS IS GOING TO BE A VERY WEIRD POST...

But first...

The Blurb: 2107 AD: A generation ago, Earth and the cislunar colonies banned genetic and cybernetic modifications. But out in the Asteroid Belt, anything goes. Dozens of flourishing space habitats are spawning exotic new societies and strange new varieties of humans. It’s a volatile situation that threatens the peace and stability of the entire solar system. 
Emerald Blair is a Troubleshooter. Inspired by the classic superhero comics of the twentieth century, she’s joined with other mods to try to police the unruly Asteroid Belt. But her loyalties are tested when she finds herself torn between rival factions of superhumans with very different agendas. Emerald wants to put her special abilities to good use, but what do you do when you can’t tell the heroes from the villains?



A brief internet search tells me, not many people liked this book, and by the end of this post you might doubt, I liked it, despite the post title.

Lets get this out of the way. I hate the phrase 'Hard Science Fiction' its a contradiction in terms. This book does one of the things, which reinforces why I hate the phrase - Like much "Hard Sci-fi", it uses that label to gloss over its fantastical elements, while trying, and failing to sell itself as being a close representation of 'reality' or what is scientifically possible.

Everything in this book would work far better if it just embraced its Space Opera, and Superhero roots and went from there.

One of the best parts of this book is when I stumble across the web and see this sort of burgeoning (At the time) SJW reaction to it from Kirkus Review:

"On the surface, Only Superhuman sounds like a good read, right? The Book Smugglers weigh in on Max Gladstone's ' Three Parts Dead .' Unfortunately, Christopher L. Bennett's Only Superhuman perpetuates the same ridiculous hyper-sexualized, do-me doll stereotypes that have become so prevalent (and so nauseating) in superhero fiction."

Reviews like that, from Kirkus - Actually encourage me to recommend this book more, despite its flaws.

A book with a fiery, gorgeous redhead as its heroine? Sign me up! However there are moments when it takes itself way too seriously.

I recall loving the use of genetics and cybernetics as enhancements. The Transhuman aspect of this book was awesome, and actually for me ended up being more of a callback to Star Trek's Eugenics Wars, than anything superhero like. This book works when it embraces its Space Opera heritage.

And now let me tell you the weirdest thing about this book, and I am still not sure if this was intentional or not. Please keep in mind what I am about to say is based only on my impressions I had while reading this and nothing the author has asserted.

The two main male characters, are literally Presidents George W. Bush, and Barack Obama. And this was at the time, my biggest reaction to this book, when I had that insight, it sort of killed some of the more interesting things about the book for me. But years later I can sort of forgive this.

More so, since its clear that as a work of fiction, at the time of its original release, it proved triggering to nascent SJWs offended by sexy heroines with boobs, that can pound a bad guy to pulp.

I know it probably seems like I didn't like Only Superhuman, but I assure you, I did enjoy it, despite its flaws, or more to the point its unwillingness to embrace its true nature, while pretending to be 'Hard Sci-fi' frustrated me when if it had just owned its origins, things would have come across as better.

If you like Space Opera, and booblicious heroines, you'll enjoy this book. Read it just to annoy a Social Justice Warrior!