Recently, I listened to the latest episode of “To the Journey,” a “Star Trek: Voyager”-focused podcast, and in this particular episode called “Representation Matters,” the hosts talked a lot about… well, obviously representation, but more specifically about representation on “Voyager” and how that legacy, as well as the legacy of “Star Trek” being built and billed around representation and the exploration of ideologies and ideas, might translate over into the upcoming 2017 “Star Trek” show, something we as fans are all very excited about.
I talked a bit about representation and its continued importance a while back, relating it to “Star Wars: The Force Awakens’” own use of it, but I think my comments about representation being crucial to today apply even more to “Trek.” “Trek” has been more about representation and progressive ideas, so it seems a given that such exploration would happen in the 2017 show. The hosts of the “To the Journey” podcast brought up what they’d like to see in this show in terms of representation of different cultures and people of different walks of life: a gay character (surprisingly, there’s never been one in the lore before) and a woman of color captain.
Both great ideas, but I think also the new show, which I’ll remind you we know little to nothing about at this point, should perhaps also be about exploring how the legacy of “Trek” and the ideals of the franchise have changed now that we’re in the 21st century. We might no longer want to see a loveable Ferengi barkeep who is also a blatantly sexist pig; there would probably be far more outrage than there already was concerning Seven of Nine’s infamous uniform; and so forth. Tackling issues such as trans studies, modern drone warfare, the ever-present juxtaposition of human frailty and human arrogance, how “minorities” are beginning to have a stronger voice in mass media today, all of that is open to be explored here. And “Star Trek” is just so perfect to tackle those themes, those questions.
Now, obviously, “Trek” has also faced heavy criticism, not all of it unjustified, for being too idealistic, for being progressive only in so far as the Western ideal is concerned, and the ‘60s show is dated now not just in terms of effects but also in its treatment of women and people of color and I don’t think any of that should be excused. But this new show offers the opportunity to make up for a lot of these flaws. A diverse cast would go a long way towards rectifying a lot of that, I think, and not just racially diverse either, but diverse in gender, ability, sexual orientation, political views (can of worms), or even religion (even bigger can of worms that the two hosts of the podcast talk about!).
Circling back to “Voyager,” I think this new show should take many of its good qualities as the podcast hosts point to, certainly, but I also think it should learn from what “Voyager” in particular did wrong or now quite right; for example, turning the Prime Directive, the mandate for Starfleet to not get involved in pre-warp civilizations, into impregnable and immovable dogma, or almost never allowing the captain of the ship to make mistakes. With network television far more rich and complex in terms of storytelling, characters, and thematic overtones than it ever was in the ‘90s, these mistakes and missteps are easily avoidable though dangerously sneaky still.
This 2017 “Star Trek” show has a real chance of making the franchise relevant again on the small-screen, where frankly I think it’s always belonged, and of bringing to light current issues the world over that other shows might not be tackling. We as fans want this new show to be good, but we also want it to be important. And there’re myriad ways to make it so.
