So, Why Are You A TnT 'shipper?

[Elessar]

In my opinion DS9 had, overall, the best writing and development staff of any of the shows.

Voyager's Jeri Taylor was personally a great writer and was responsible for many of that show's best episodes, but since Braga was involved, the show's overall direction and tendency toward REALLY BAD science and screwy meanderings with canon kinda mucked it all up beyond repair.

Of course Coto was great with Enterprise and I have to say that up until *the_abomination*, Rick and Brannon weren't doing too shabby on their own personal projects and general direction with Enterprise, although I'm not sure what in the hell moved them to believe that going 'episodic' again was a good idea. DS9 showed hugely marked improvement in ratings over Voyager and I think even TNG and DS9 was very serial, versus the old style Trek's episodic, new-stuff-every week. I know the argument is that if you miss one you miss a lot but it's just plain BETTER storytelling, it's more engaging.

And they backtracked and dillied around in Enterprise for a year and a half with no real direction other than that half-cocked TCW. A lot of people have said this so it is surely NOT my original idea, but I think the show would have been on different feet had they transposed the beginning of season 3 onto what was the beginning of season 2, character development and all. I think we all noticed how Trip and T'Pol's relationship, for the most part, developed very quickly into a working professional and moving into the personal realm in Season 1 only to sit and grow mold through Season 2.

Could've seen some AMAZING things in the Season 4-but-really-5 if that'd happened.

[Alelou]

Wasn't DS9 a Berman and Braga baby? Or, wait, it was Michael Piller, wasn't it?

I thought it was good but very dark in a not-very-Star-Trek way and it just didn't hold my interest -- I'm an old TOS trekkie and I like being on a ship in space with Optimistic Starfleet Officers Heroically Saving the Universe, damn it, even if I could do without the little moral gift bow that seemed to end every TOS and TNG episode. Voyager didn't hold my interest either -- another depressing one, I thought. I was pretty burned out on Star Trek at that point and after some initial interest in the Janeway/Chakotay ship, which I soon realized was never going to amount to anything, I made myself watch it for professional reasons for a few years, and eventually I gave up on it entirely. One of these days I should probably go back and try DS9 again.

[Asso]

Wasn't DS9 a Berman and Braga baby? Or, wait, it was Michael Piller, wasn't it?

I thought it was good but very dark in a not-very-Star-Trek way and it just didn't hold my interest -- I'm an old TOS trekkie and I like being on a ship in space with Optimistic Starfleet Officers Heroically Saving the Universe, damn it, even if I could do without the little moral gift bow that seemed to end every TOS and TNG episode. Voyager didn't hold my interest either -- another depressing one, I thought. I was pretty burned out on Star Trek at that point and after some initial interest in the Janeway/Chakotay ship, which I soon realized was never going to amount to anything, I made myself watch it for professional reasons for a few years, and eventually I gave up on it entirely. One of these days I should probably go back and try DS9 again.

Well said!

[blacknblue]

The thing that gives me a bad taste about ST is the disconnect from suspension of disbelief. Like dispensing with money. Granted that the Federation is obscenely rich beyond the wildest dreams of feverish greed, it still is not logical or reasonable to think that they could ever dispense with a medium of exchange. Any society needs a medium of exchange to *keep track of exchanges*. In other words, to keep track of who did what for whom. Without that, the flow of goods and services degenerates into chaos and everything falls apart because *nothing can be coordinated*. Money is not evil, it is necessary. It is a tool that society uses to bind itself together. The lesson states that "the love of money is the root of all evil," not money itself.

But ST seems to think that a wave of the magic wand will change the nature of Humanity. A nature that has been hammered out by trial and error over millennia. That kind of rampant dim wittedness gets on my nerves. At least DS9 was willing to acknowledge that people are probably still going to be people in a few centuries.

[Linda]

I agree, Bnb! And the economy does not run on organized and monitored transactions alone - you need money for bribes and transactions you do not want to pay taxes on. I mean, this under culture also keeps the economy strong, right? You need both the good Ferengi and the bad Ferengi to move economic life forward.

[blacknblue]

This is a valid point. Smuggling is going to occur, because people are going to want things that the government doesn't think that they should have. Even in Trekland. Romulan ale, Orion slaves, politically incorrect literature, whatever it is there will be a market for it. And trading by pure barter system is *clumsy*. There is a reason we stopped swapping bear skins for spear points Lo, those many moons ago. Because using strings of cash, or wampum, or cowrie shells, or amber, or shiny rocks, gives people some kind of standard to go by and is much simpler and more portable to use. Even a tally stick is an improvement over raw barter. If Bobsey Twins, Inc. had ever bothered to pick up a history book, they would know this stuff.

[Linda]

LOL, never let the government stop you from having something if you really want it...accept maybe somebody's head. Well, even then...

[Alelou]

Hey, the no money thing started with Next Generation, not the BBs, and it seemed problematic right from the start if you ask me. TOS had 'credits,' didn't it? In order for money to work cultures have to agree on the underlying value of each other's currency, so in Enterprise they wouldn't have had a system set up with alien races yet.

[Asso]

... so in Enterprise they wouldn't have had a system set up with alien races yet.

You are right!

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

A very interesting essay:

The Economics of Star Trek

[Alelou]

Interesting isn't really the word I would use for that essay.

[blacknblue]

Hey, the no money thing started with Next Generation, not the BBs, and it seemed problematic right from the start if you ask me.

Were they not part of TNG?

[Distracted]

A very interesting essay:

The Economics of Star Trek

Sounds like the guy is right on the money to me. That's why I like "Enterprise" the best of all the series. No Federation yet.

[Kevin Thomas Riley]

^ It would also explain why I'm not that enamoured with the 24th century Trek. The TOS era is fine for the most part. But, like the author, I have to wonder what happened between TOS and TNG.

[blacknblue]

A very interesting essay:

The Economics of Star Trek

Bullseye!

Like the author, I too have had the misfortune of actually reading Karl Marx's drivel. Argh...

He is correct. TNG is Karl Marx's vision brought to life on the tv screen. And it is just as believable on tv as it was on paper, i.e not at all.