READ THIS

[fpb]

http://jonathanmoeller.livejournal.com/556661.html?view=1217653#t1217653
It is the most fantastically telling and hilarious deconstruction of a fictional universe (the Star Trek one) I have ever read, and it is followed by a suggestion from superversive that is even better. Absolutely brilliant, and it will light the light of a thousand plot bunnies in any fan's mind.

Comments

[shezan.livejournal.com]

Nope. Do not buy, no, sorry. It bends anything not in the way of its idea and it's generally sloppy thinking. Far from looking down upon the Bajoran religion, the Federation commander buys into it and is revealed as one of its prophets. There's money (latinum) and corporations (The Janus mining corporation, the Cardassian commercial laboratories, and of course the Ferengi). Sisko's father is a chef in a restaurant where patrons pay. Etc. etc.

That being said, plot bunnies do work.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I am not able to argue. You should have placed this response in jonathanmoeller's LJ, where it could have been adequately discussed.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

There ALWAYS is a point arguing something where you believe you are right. Especially since you seem to have missed some excellent criticism by captainpeabody.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

You are wrong. Serious responses have been made, and received, along those lines, on the original post. One reason why I asked people to read it is that it has produced a lot of intelligent debate. Now I hate to do this, but either take these points where they belong (on the debate post) or I will delete this whole entry.

[filialucis]

Hmm.

I have nothing of substance to add to the discussion, so I'll put this here rather than over at the blog you linked to, but I'd be interested to know why exactly you "detest the ST world so much", as you said over there?

I loved Star Trek while I was growing up (I'm talking TOS; never had many opportunities to see the subsequent series and never really caught onto the ones I did see), but despite that the Trek universe as such always seemed rather two-dimensional and sterile to me. And I knew from the word go that there was something seriously off-kilter about Roddenberry when it came to religion (my very first exposure to anything Trek was the book version of ST:TMP, and the line "We all create God in our own image" had me mentally raising an eyebrow and thinking Spockian thoughts about human illogic), regardless of the presence of a chapel on the original Enterprise.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I could go on for a very long time, but the mistaken idea of humanity is at the centre of my issues with ST. Funny you should mention Spock: the very notion of separating emotion from reason is the centre of everything I object to. Add the PC nonsense and you have a serious issue, which is not always made up for by excellent acting and frequent invention.

[kennybhoy.livejournal.com]

fpb writes:

"...but the mistaken idea of humanity is at the centre of my issues with ST"

Indeed. Utopian science fiction drives me to distraction.

"From time to time the belief spreads among men that it is possible to construct an ideal society. Then the call is sounded for all to gather and build it -- the city of God on earth. Despite its attractions, this is a delirious ideal stamped with the madness of logic.

The truth is that society is always unfinished, always in motion, and its key problems can never be solved by social engineering. Yet, man must conquer, again and again, the freedom to see this truth. In the intervals he succumbs to the dream of a mankind frozen and final in its planetary pride. The dream -- utopia -- leads to the denial of God and self-divinization -- the heresy.

I wrote this book to show the reader the truth about utopia and heresy, and the link between them. I cannot hope to rid the world of the utopian temptation; this would be itself utopian. But the book may help some of my more lucid contemporaries to undo their commitment to the grotesquerie of the perfect society of imperfect men."

Preface to "Utopia The Perennial Heresy" by Thomas Molnar (1967)

Grotesquerie indeed...