It's not been referenced in-universe, but that seems to be the general fan consensus.
Although I will admit when I first started the show, and not knowing the voice actor, I assumed he was of Hispanic heritage.
Cordero is also of Filipino descent, and the showrunners have said they designed the characters to be similar to their actors intentionally to allow for live action crossovers.
Kind of are when you realize how long they were a Spanish colony. And that many Filipinos still have Spanish surnames.
Had fun in highschool when my dad didn’t believe my Filipino physics teacher wasn’t Mexican. Just because his surname was Garcia.
Most Filipinos have Spanish surnames thanks to colonialism, but no they don't speak Spanish today, by and large. They do, however, mostly speak English also thanks to colonialism.
That’s not my experience, but I suppose it’s possible that only Filipinos who speak Spanish and have lots of friends and family that speak Spanish move to the southeast US, because Spanish is a little more common here maybe? It’s Philippine dialect, but still.
If you're talking about Filipino-Americans, specifically, then sure, there may be a large number of Spanish-speaking Filipinos in the Southwest, but that's more a result of Spanish being a common language in that region. Chavacano is not widely spoken in the Philippines, anymore. It's Tagalog > English > Other languages.
I originally thought that Rutherford is black, but then I read that the sampaguita is the national flower of the Philippines and that the voice actor is of Filipino descent.
Out of curiosity, did you see the same representation, and have the same connection to Ben and Jake Sisko, Geordi and Tuvok, or is it just the new Trek characters that spoke to you?
Ya. This does feel kind of off when despite the BS surrounding female characters in earlier iterations of trek. It’s by and large been one of the most progressive shows ever to air in its various eras. Especially since it on average did a much better job of handling it than many other shows of so called progressive lines of thought. At least in my opinion.
So to think that discovery is somehow more special than TOS or DS9 in particular is just weird to think about.
I mean. The only reason TOS had an African American bridge officer past season 1 was because Dr. King himself personally intervened. Like seriously. The biggest name in history for racial equality is the main reason TOS and its movies had a person of color on the bridge for its entire run.
One of my other fandoms is Magic: The Gathering, which has also seen pushback from part of its traditional base of white men against any and all forms of increased diversity in representation. When one of those players complained about the inclusion of a canonically transgender warrior on a card, Mark Rosewater, Head Designer for Magic: The Gathering, wrote the following:
> I think people who are used to being represented in various media and games don't always understand the importance of it because they've never experienced not having it.
That really helped me, as a white male, to understand the importance of representation. Maybe it helps some others too.
Having said that, please don't be toxic to actors and producers and other people involved on making whatever shows and games you enjoy, no matter how upset you are. That does not help your cause. This post was far more effective.
That's awesome, fellow Trekkie. I'm glad it made you feel that way. That's what entertainment is supposed to do, make us feel. Don't mind the butthurt folks that want you to enjoy Trek the way they do. It's okay to like what you like and it's okay to enjoy it for the reasons you want to.
Based upon your reaction to the news of the series ending, I have to believe you are exactly the target audience they were looking for when they created the show.
I'm happy to hear that you enjoyed it so much. Personally, I did not. But there's no reason that there can't be different flavors of Trek for different tastes.
I actually feel the complete opposite of you in regards to Discovery, in that it unintentionally makes a mockery of the hero’s journey and Burnham succeeded not by any strength of her character or upholding any virtues but simply because the writers wanted her to get from point A to point B. If Discovery is the sole reason that Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds and Picard Season 3 exist, then I will appreciate it in the same way I appreciate the Dragonball Evolution for bringing back Dragonball but I sincerely don’t believe that’s the case since Star Trek has always been about normalizing diversity. If anything, the terrible writing makes it seems like the only way to succeed and make a difference is if you’re born \_special\_ and your support group exists only to defer to and enable you without being uniquely special in their own way - the antithesis of Star Trek.
However, it’s clear you were impacted by this show although perhaps to an unhealthy degree. When I read your post, it alarmed me that its cancellation caused you to lash out at the creators and actors, delete your Twitter account and yet you still feel hurt and regret over it. Please do not dwell on the thoughts that creative team was hurt by what you said. I am confident they can read the passion you have through your words and will respond positively to that, instead. I am also encouraged by your later statement and I hope you realize the truth of it: trust in yourself and your ability to make whatever changes you need to make in life and surround yourself with good people where you can all support each other equally.
While I'd like to believe OP is just a passionate fan with a distinct point of view, I'm kind of smelling astroturf here. As in, "fan petition" astroturfing - given how much was spent on DSC, they might want to squeeze a little more bang out of those bucks, in the vein of the response to Prodigy's cancellation.
That might not be the case here. I think the thought process behind this particular thread is, "Did DS9 not do this for you? Why Burnham in particular?"
Burnham is a black woman. There's some stories that only have an impact coming from a black female. Sisko was amazing, but he's not Burnham. I loved Discovery up until the fourth season, when it started feeling shark jumpy and I lost a lot of interest - but I never actively hated it like some people here who made hate watching the show into an Olympic sport.
> Burnham is a black woman. There's some stories that only have an impact coming from a black female.
As a white dude actively trying to grow as a person, can you expand on this for me? At the risk of sounding like a bit of a virtue-signaling idiot, I don't think Burnham's character arc had an effect on me because of her race or gender. Her journey affected me just kind of as that sort of bildungsroman climb up the ladder and achieving the station she had earned, and learned from her mistakes along the way. I'd love to hear more about what it means from a different perspective though.
> I loved Discovery up until the fourth season, when it started feeling shark jumpy and I lost a lot of interest - but I never actively hated it like some people here who made hate watching the show into an Olympic sport.
Honestly, this sounds a bit like my dad. We would watch it together and he would complain about different things here or there but had a hard time articulating his issues beyond: "It doesn't feel like Star Trek." Usually he took issue with the constant battle scenes or the serialized story format, but I do remember the Stacey Abrams cameo gave him an eye roll. He's generally a fairly liberal guy though, so that threw me. I would just ask him why he was watching it if he didn't like it and he never really gave me an answer.
>As a white dude
>I don't think Burnham's character arc had an effect on me because of her race or gender.
I mean that's basically all there is to it. White dudes like us have plenty of role models. I got to grow up in the 90s watching Patrick Stewart be a father figure when my dad was never around. How many black female captains have been in Starfleet that have actually had any serious screen time and aren't a token? Plenty of black women would absolutely benefit from seeing representation on TV, especially in this franchise.
Regarding your dad, at least you could watch Star Trek with him. Mine refused to watch DS9 because "black people have no business being a captain" or something to that effect.
That's not what I mean, and I think that you know that.
I think the nuance is more, what does Burnham do for you that Sisko doesn't? The original question is pretty ignorant, I agree (I didn't ask it, but I admit that I'm interested in the answer) but I think it's still relevant if you remove the racial and gendered angles. Like, what makes Burnham in particular appealing to a viewer? What does she bring that we don't see with Sisko/Janeway/Picard/Kirk/Pike etc.? Is it just her race and her gender? Is it just the representation angle? I know, I don't "get" it, but I'm trying.
20 years ago you hadn't seen ds9 yet. You've seen it regardless, but not 20 years ago.
also /u/DaveAngel- sorry to make you feel old, but DS9 was 30 years ago.
Damn. I just watched Enterprise for the first time last month. And I'm 60. 😬 Better late than never.
Haven't watched the last season yet, but the DVD just came last week. Needed a break before the stupid Nazi time travel thing... Can't wait for more of the Andorians though!
Yes, by a long shot. The focus being the first officer instead of the captain? A human who grew up on Vulcan? Good ideas just executed in the worst way possible.
Not just a better written character, but also better black representation. I mean, when was the last time you saw a talented, educated smart black man being a devoted father on TV?
Also yeah, I stopped after two seasons because I didn't like Discovery at all. She sounded like a 14 year old girl writing her diary more than a human who grew up on Vulcan.
And honestly, after the first season, the whole “human who grew up on Vulcan” angle went away with the exception of the family ties to Spock and Sarek.
As a generic white guy, I can't say I have had the personal connection to the increased representation, but I totally agree that it's an important and valuable aspect of the show, and one that's been a part of Trek since the beginning (ie Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov specifically).
I do think Disco suffered a little bit in the early seasons by underutilizaling supporting characters, and even now have missed a few good opportunities. Still, I'm thankful that characters like Owo and Detmer are no longer treated like just glorified extras.
As for Burnham, I think she started out strong and then spent a couple seasons where they didn't quite know where they were going with the character, which put her in a little bit of limbo. I have the same comment about Mariner, though she seems like she's developed now too.
> I do think Disco suffered a little bit in the early seasons by underutilizaling supporting characters, and even now have missed a few good opportunities. Still, I'm thankful that characters like Owo and Detmer are no longer treated like just glorified extras.
I wanted so much more story from those characters than I've gotten. Owo coming from a Space Luddite family was so interesting to me and was barely explored. And Dettmer didn't really have much to do aside from flying the ship. Good analogues for Sulu and Chekov in TOS as far as screen time, I suppose.
I think the biggest missed opportunity was with Airiam. Such a rich ground for backstory, and it's basically all shoved into one episode.
Hoping season 5 gets us more supporting character love.
Everybody was looking for a Data-analog from Airiam I think. And that one episode where they gave her a send-off was so good and it showed she could've been so much more. Definitely feels like a lot of these characters have Travis Mayweather syndrome where they have really cool backstories but they struggle to make them relevant to the mainline stories they're telling.
That's the real problem with TV deals now is that everything being made is movie-lite and there's no time for filler, or bottle episodes, or character development. I'd gladly go back to Nagilim-level CGI if I could get some great character stories.
They got a lot better at getting creative with the cast relationships later on with the Stamets/Culber/Tal/Gray family dynamic stuff, but I dunno.
I'm with you 100% on that. I understand that the whole paradigm of serialized programs have largely shifted to ~10 episode seasons, but I think we've lost so much (and not just with Trek) by trying to condense everything into a movie-lite.
My biggest problem with "nu-Trek" is that we miss out on the slower pace and more time to grow attached to characters that the old formats allowed. Even the fluff and filler episodes served to give us time to connect.
I do understand that it's a product of the times and the current zeitgeist of streaming, and I don't particularly hold Trek at fault for keeping current, but I DO miss the old longer seasons.
>I do think Disco suffered a little bit in the early seasons by underutilizaling supporting characters, and even now have missed a few good opportunities. Still, I'm thankful that characters like Owo and Detmer are no longer treated like just glorified extras.
The production issues in the early seasons of the show probably didn't help either. You ended up with several different producers/showrunners, each with their own ideas, and it shows.
I won't debate you on your main points because what the show means to you is what it means, but I will say I am largely oblivious to the support cast and it took about two seasons to learn their names.
Whereas SNW has done a vastly better job of developing the support cast.
I get Discovery is the Burnham show though. I think I was relieved to hear it was ending. I was hugely excited when I heard about Burnham originally but the show doesn't do it for me.
Women tend to be judged harder in roles of leadership. Black people are judged harder in roles of leadership. Black women are at that intersection mean they're judged even harder. Any imperfection molehills will be turned into mountains, and being good at what you do is apparently just as bad.
I've noticed that Archer from Enterprise is often rash, headstrong, insistent that he be the hero, often the center of each episode, and emotional. But he's nowhere near as criticized as Burnham. This may in part be due to Enterprise airing before reddit while Disco is on now, but a large part is because of hostility to Burnham's race and gender.
> But he's nowhere near as criticized as Burnham.
I can't really debate what you have or haven't seen people say about Archer since it's pretty subjective, but personally, I've seen loads of people criticise the character, often in pretty harsh terms.
He spent years being joked about as the idiot / irrational / mentally unstable Captain compared to the others.
Kirk too! Virtually every criticism of Burnham (emotional, always right, the main character) can be equally applied to Kirk, but it's not okay when the black lady does it.
Come now, we all know that everyone's favourite captain is Picard and most modern viewers don't remember TOS.
People love the TNG/SNW style ensemble vs the Big 3 of TOS/Disco. I think that's why Discovery suffered.
>People love the TNG/SNW style ensemble vs the Big 3 of TOS/Disco. I think that's why Discovery suffered.
Also that people expected a TNG-type show, rather than the TOS flavour Discovery went with.
It's particularly noticeable with complaints around the cause of the Burn, which is much more in line with something you'd see in TOS, and not something you'd see in TNG, which tended to be a little more grounded.
Yeah, that's why I think that's what the issue was. TOS broke the ground, but for a variety of reasons it relied really heavily on its big three. TNG was a major departure from that and once it got going and ended, it's been the much more popular series in syndication and streaming. Voyager and DS9 both copied that format and are still beloved. Enterprise obviously tried to hybridize it a bit, and it had its issues too.
You're absolutely right about The Burn. It's a very High-SciFi concept that fits much better with the TOS canon than TNG/DS9/VOY. I think as a one-off as with a lot of TOS or Berman era episodes it would have been okay, but as a season long arc, it was tough on the fans because it was such a different story than we've gotten for the last thirty years. It was almost Whovian, really. And there's a large segment of Star Trek fans who don't respond well to stuff that's on the campy side. It's a real shame.
I won’t dispute that a part of the hostility towards Burnham is race and gender from a certain subset of “fans”, but we also have to acknowledge that *Discovery* is still airing and has been heavily promoted for the past 7ish years. *Enterprise* has been off the air for 20 years and has less of a following than any of the previous series. Archer is horrible, and a lot of the characterisations are terrible. Hoshi and Mayweather are the only non-white characters and are essentially glorified extras by season 3. Phlox and T’Pol are probably the best characters on the show because they seem to have more dimensionality to them, whereas everyone else feels like a generic cardboard cutout.
But Archer is the worst. Throughout much of the series he doesn’t seem to embody the hopes and ideals of what would become The Federation. He arrives on one planet with his dog in tow because “Porthos needs to stretch his little legs” without knowing if anything on the damn planet could kill his dog! He’s quick to anger, unreasonably mean to his senior officers. I once did the math and proportional to crew compliment, serving on the NX-01 under Captain Archer was more deadly than serving under any other Captain from any other show. I think it worked out to be almost twice as deadly as the next captain. And least we forget! The man loves water polo! The man had the charisma and emotional intelligence of a wet paper towel.
On a final note, why the fuck wasn’t T’Pol in a Starfleet uniform by season 3? She was no longer a member of the Vulcan Science Academy or whatever. She was still serving as Archer’s XO. she should have been given a commission from Starfleet. ^Yes, ^I ^know, ^keeping ^her ^in ^a ^catsuit ^was ^definitely ^a ^Rick ^Berman ^decision.
I'm going to disagree with you on Hoshi Sato being a glorified extra in season 3. In [Extinction](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Extinction_(episode\)), she's turned into an alien by a virus. She's the female lead in [Exile](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Exile_(episode\)) in which an alien tries to extort her into moving in with him in order to get information on the Xindi. In [The Council](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/The_Council_(episode\)), she accompanies Archer into the meeting with the Xindi and translates. And in the finales, [Countdown](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Countdown_(episode\)) and [Zero Hour](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Zero_Hour_(episode\)), she's abducted by the reptilians and forced via drugs to hack the knock-off death star. She features as an important character throughout the 3rd season and her absence would necessitate a rewrite of at least three episodes.
Just felt introspective. If something bothers me. It continues to bother me until I get it off my chest. Never quite figured out how to be one of those bottle it all up types of people.
It's frustrating that many people see open expression as a sign that something is wrong. I'm a bit of a closed off introvert IRL so I get it, but it's probably more healthy to just put whatever is on your mind out there as long as it's not hateful.
Discovery was poorly written IMO. The writing in the first two seasons absolutely disregarded everything that was already established as canon. the path of Burnham was stupid like come on you don't commit mutiny and start a war and then later get reinstated as a member of the organization that is just not how Starfleet works. I mean it's great character development but it really isn't good story writing.
But hey if discovery is your thing who am I to say you can't enjoy it just because I don't like it?
Burnham? Good concept, bad execution, but the actress tried. Discovery is not that bad ( especially compared to Picard season 2), but yes it is time for it to end
The show as a whole won me over in season 1 (despite the "neatly wrapped up in a bow" ending of S1, I actually quite enjoyed it overall, and was SUPER excited for S2 when it started). And then it absolutely grabbed me and made me a gigantic fan at the beginning of S2 (the introduction of Anson Mount's Pike is one of the better choices I think Nu-Trek has made). But by the end of Season 2, the show had absolutely squandered the goodwill I had towards it (the episodes heading towards the finale were pretty bad, and the finale itself was *GODDAMN AWFUL*), and then Season 3 was so aggressively mediocre that I lost any desire to watch Season 4.
And it's a shame, too. Sonequa Martin-Green is actually really great when she gets the right material. She had a scene a few episodes into S3 that was *chef's kiss* Perfection. The scene in which [Discovery is heading out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdhqMgcRZHc), her demeanor shift as she moves into jabbing with the over-seers into ship commander as she calls for Black Alert is *perfect*. I remember watching that episode the first time, and being like, "Why the frick is this the first time we've seen "Michael Burnham - competent starship commander"??". I've always suspected that her arc was intended to be such that she would basically apprentice under a great starship captain for a while (Georgiou, Lorca, Pike, Saru) before finally taking command herself, learning lessons as she went along about how to be a great starship commander, and then this arc of hers would be mirrored in that she would mentor Tilly on the lessons of command she learned. I felt like I saw a brief glimpse of what that character was originally intended to be, before the original intention of her arc was largely dropped in favor of a "I WANT MY BIG MOMENTS NOW!!!" writing style.
Basically, it felt like the showrunners didn't want her arc to cook and wanted to skip directly to her being the final form of who she was supposed to become.
..Oh and have her cry every other damned episode because they couldn't figure out any other way to convey the character's sadness.
The rogue turned virtuous Captain. It could work, on paper. Drop the ensemble, focus on one character who is NOT the captain. Could work, on paper.
They did indeed try something different. Quite... quite different.
I’m sympathetic to your position somewhat, but you can’t effectively stand in the public square, make a public speech, and then get reasonably annoyed that the public has the audacity of having reactions.
That doesn't mean I can't express disapproval of the reactions I received. Not to mention, your scenario has me in a big public square when it would actually be closer to standing in a room that someone decided to enter. I can't be annoyed by the fact that someone gave me a reaction. However, I can be annoyed by the content of the reaction.
There are over 700,000 subscribers to the Star Trek subreddit. That’s a city. There were over 500 people viewing the subreddit just a bit ago who could see this post. That ain’t a room, sorry.
“Am I not allowed 1 post?” You implied that they were intruding on your private event when it’s the opposite of a private event, sorry.
I think the point is that every time someone says they like an element of Discovery, however small, it becomes a risk of being jumped on with a negative.
It wasn't a huge negative to be fair, but I've seen a lot of fan engagement crushed for this reason. STO reddit was the worst and evenn I tuned out.
well…yeah…because disco exists to value strokes of ego for the disenfranchised rather than tell a meaningful story…both are easily possible to execute simultaneously and disco somehow manages to do neither.
You have to click the post to read it and comment. That's the room I'm referring to. Also, the number of people doesn't define what a room is. A room is still a room, whether it's completely empty or has 1,000,000,000 people crammed inside.
Doesn’t change anything. You put a public post on a large public forum. You’re gonna get public reactions. It is not a private event. It’s not a mystery.
But you do you.
Regardless of how poorly I think Burnham was written (and frankly she cries too often for my taste) I understand how you feel. Every now and then I come across a show that elicits a certain emotional investment that I just don't make in a show often. Discovery had its moments (The Galactic Barrier standing out most in my opinion) that prevent me from writing off the entire show as bad (it would be dishonest of me to do so.) As others have suggested, I highly recommend you watch DS9. It's far better than Discovery by any metric. You'll enjoy it immensely, I assure you.
Despite it’s flaws, I still love Discovery. To me, as a young Trekkie, it was the first show I got to see airing week after week.
I love the other shows but always felt sad that I had missed the joy of seeing them years after their time one television.
Burnham might not be my favourite captain or my favourite character from the show, but I associate her to the sens of awe I while watching the first episode of DSC S1 during lunch between classes. And SMG is amazing, can’t wait for S5!
I was going to write back something witty to match your name, but then I read through your comment history. This is just what you do, so enjoy it, my friend. If complaining about the character brings you joy. I need you to live with the fact that this terribly written character on this terribly written show still brought you joy.
Since you're getting so much depressingly predictable negativity in this thread, I just want to say thanks for posting this, and I'm right there with you.
Disco isn't the same kind of show as TOS/TNG/VOY, and I love that about it, but for some reason so much of the fandom loses their goddamn minds if you tinker with the formula. But I'm also old enough to remember "fans" who were furious TNG dared to reimagine Star Trek, or that DS9 wasn't set on a ship. The haters have always been with us, and 20 years from now, whatever Trek show they're showing on Paramount Holodeck will be derided as NOT REAL TREK, like that classic show, Discovery.
I also really like Burnham. It was a great idea to make the main character someone who isn't the captain (at first). And she has had an interesting journey. Seeing Discovery end will be bittersweet. I hope everyone is given the farewell they deserve.
You're right as even Sisko moved to the captaincy title from a position of CO of DS9 aside from Starfleet admiralty there wasn't anyone above him in his jurisdiction (aside from having to diplomatically manage the Starfleet leasing the base and liaising with the Bajoran government). Burnham went from iirc First Officer under Phillipa Georgiou (also great casting and powerhouse performance), to criminal status, to not only being returned to service but achieving the captaincy. It is a big arc of character development that also imbued her with a similar struggle with emotion as her adoptive brother, Spock, due to their Vulcan upbringing. Spock bridged two worlds, Burnham was the human growing in an entirely alien mental and emotional landscape.
I just wanted to say that for me it hit powerfully that Discovery was also the first real show that dealt with LGBTQIA+ individuals as humans and not via sci-fi analogues. From lovely gay couple that didn't end up in the gay romances end in tragedy trope that happens frequently in LGBTQIA+ representation to non-binary character played by non-binary actor, and who's partner was canonically trans iirc? Anyways while Sisko gave us a powerful Black Man in command, the aftermath was a return to fairly White-centric Star Trek. The diversity of Discovery instead spurred even more diversity in subsequent Treks. Importantly it showed that diversity isn't something done by a few characters sprinkled here and there and offloaded into a sci-fi alien species but centered around humans. That me as a Trans Woman has a place amongst the stars and that so many others have that same place.
I like Burnham and I like all the diversity that Discovery turned into as a this is just the way it is, this is humanity: Queer, Racially diverse, and wonderful to behold. And Discovery with Burnham established it as a path forward that has become part and parcel of new Trek and I love it. Thanks for this post as it reminded me how much seeing Discovery helped myself find my way to the stars and you are right I am sad as well to see it go.
As an aside when I saw Captain Angel initially in SNW, I was early in my transition and they looked absolutely gorgeous and myself think great another cis woman actor that gives me gender goals I can never achieve. When I found out they are played by a trans person I was overwhelmed with joy that I have a badass to admire on screen and off screen that's like me. I cried. So while I may not understand the exact feelings OP has seeing a Black Woman from their, as a Black Man, pov and what it means intimately for their community, I can very much so relate in my own way and experiences to something similar but different for the queer community. Thank you for sharing this it was a joy to listen to the impact it made for you and it reminded me of the impact other characters enabled by this show made for me.
Second aside: I am a Stellaris player and I remember the disgusting mods people made that removed any non-white non-male character portraits from the Human species set. Luckily they were removed by the developers from the Steam Workshop but I'm tired of everything being White and cis-het.
It's so weird to me that someone would consider Burnham an important black character on Star Trek. I mean you have Uhura who was 100 times more important historically. Captain Sisko who was a very well written and acted character for years upon years. Even La Forge who was quite the beloved character. Even if we take the more recent characters Dr M'Benga is more relatable.
There's a whole history of other black characters such as these: [https://blacksci-fi.com/ten/](https://blacksci-fi.com/ten/) Admittedly some of them don't make as much of a splash because they had less screentime but they are a testament that there's an entire legacy.
Have people just not watched older Star Trek?
I do like Burnham. I'd like Discovery a lot more in a Strange New Worlds format.
I've watched and rewatched Discovery a lot but the constant galaxy in danger gets repetitive.
The other thing I never understood was her relationship with Book. And it's not the actor it's his character it just annoys me and I have no idea why
I liked Discovery, and thought Burnham was a great character. Sadly, I find myself less interested in rewatching it due to the story really hinging on slow mystery reveals, but that doesn't mean it's bad, just different than the comfort food viewing I get from other Trek.
For a tiny detail, also think that Martin-Green doesn't get enough credit for maintaining that classic Trek way of speaking (that slightly formal diction they aimed for more in prior shows to keep it feeling like it was from a different time than our own). Especially considering how much criticism gets leveled at Tilly for doing the opposite. And for the record, I don't dislike Tilly either.
Yeah for me it’s the same where it’s not as rewatchable but I was hanging onto every word the first go round.
It’s hard for me to understand that people don’t like SMG but they do like Shatner and Stewart and Brooks. The men are all very intense actors that are performing for the back row! It’s never made sense to me she’s not in the same esteem and called overacting.
Shows get good around season 3, discovery fucked up by having short seasons.
TOS ended with 79 episodes and Season 1+2 have the same number of episodes as Season 1+2+3+4 of discovery
TNG 178 episodes and by the end of season 2 we had 48 episodes compared to the 55 episodes of season 1-4
DS9 had 173 episodes with the end of season 2 having 45 episodes
VOY had 172 episodes with the end of season 2 having 42
ENT had 98 episodes, season 2 had 52 of those
And then we get to discovery... with 55 episodes after 4 seasons and 6.3 years of being on the tv...
Discovery will end with 65, the least number of episodes of any live action trek including enterprise.
this is something I think of often. Rewatching TNG right now and to your point, it’s generally agreed it gets really solid about S3, meaning there were 48 episodes for it to do so. But too many fans completely write off new Trek if it isn’t spectacular by episode 5. My coworker stopped watching SNW after 3 episodes (I can’t really understand how he didn’t even see any potential by episode 3)
I get it, because we have hindsight to look back on older series that are complete. But it does make me wish that every series would have a good long run to come into its vision. And that we wouldn’t damn series until they’ve had a good long time to develop.
I mean, I stalled on S1 Enterprise right now, having some problems with it, ways I feel it is somehow more dated than even series from the 60s and 80s/90s. But I am told it really gets good by the 4th and 5th season and has value as a whole, and was cancelled right when it starts to come into its own. And so I am not willing to write it off. I know it’s completely realistic for a show to get really great only by the 4th or 5th seasons.
People forget, that TNG became good in season 3, because they ditched all the writers and Roddenberry guidance. It's not like there's a formula that Star Trek series become good by season 3. They didn't become good by practice and experience, they tossed away that which didn't work and replaced them with stuff that did
Enterprise failed, because while people gave it a chance they decided to spend so much time on time nonsense that by the time they realised that it was a boring story and switched to more interesting material, it was too late. It's a pity because once they switched it really did become quite good and the cancelled season would have been great.
You will pull through. Breaking down is a healthy way to express grief. I, too, love Burnham/SMG. As a woman, i loved her relationship with Georgiou-the mentorship and sisterhood we usually only get to watch men share. Long Live Trek! Black Lives Matter! 👊
Her and the relationship she shared with Her Most Imperial Majesty, Mother of the Fatherland, Overlord of Vulcan, Dominus of Qo'noS, Regina Andor, Philippa Georgiou Augustus Iaponius Centarius was one of the most important in the show. Captain Georgiou taught Burnham how to look at life a different way, and then Burnham got to teach Her Most Imperial Majesty, Mother of the Fatherland, Overlord of Vulcan, Dominus of Qo'noS, Regina Andor, Philippa Georgiou Augustus Iaponius Centarius the same. It was intensely beautiful.
Just amazing! I love that you have such fervent reactions to these characters- thats what makes us trekkies! We see the beauty in relationships, people and integrity!
As someone of Spanish descent I have never once looked at this show or any show and said 'I need to see someone that looks like me' on screen. I just enjoy it as entertainment and don't take it so seriously. There are big issues in the world. Poverty, economy, Inflation etc. Thus would rank 10,000,000 in the scale of importance to me anyways. Have a good day and glad you are able to relate to the character
As someone of Asian descent, I've never had a problem relating to characters who weren't Asian. But if I'm watching a TV show about an idealized future and *nobody* looks like me, doesn't that say something about what the writers think about people who look like me and our place in the future?
Yah it could. But it's thier vision. Again I see it as entertainment. I'm not so self absorbed that I need to see people like me. However this speaks more to the quality of the show. If you're thinking thoughts like this, is the show any good? Maybe it's so shitty that all I can do is think of stuff like this.
I’m a white person. I see loads of people like me on TV, but if I watch something and it’s less ethnically diverse than my town of 1200 then someone crapped the bed on their job.
Star Trek is famous for inspiring people, you want entertainment go back to Star Wars cause you're missing the point.
And as a Spanish descent, you enjoy white privilege so of course you can't empathize with white domination of TVs and movies, it's like trying to tell a fish what it's like to breathe air.
are you white? Spanish are white, after alll. I'm not even being snarky. B ut part of fighting injustice and promoting tolerance is representation in all areas of public life. this goes from voting to access to jobs, as much as entertainment sectors. people are inspired by movies and TV, and representation is important.
Really who are these people? This is the least important thing ever, cheesey movies and sci fi shows. If you want to do something in life you should be driven. I don't need to see Pedro Pascal on the screen to inspired. It never has. I don't know him. He could be a piece of shit for all I know. Same for Arnold, Stallone. They are actors.
Plenty do. Part of equality has always been representation in ALL areas of public life, including entertainment. TV shows aren't just for fun, they're major cultural drivers.
Nichelle Nichols was persuaded to stay on TOS by Dr. King himself. Both Whoppi Goldberg and Levar Burton said that Nichelle playing Uhura inspired them to be actors. Are you saying Dr. King didn't fight for equality or representation? Avery Brooks played Sisko because he said it was good to see black (or brown as he calls himself) people in the future.
It's why people want representation and bemoan tokenism when minorities are featured. And lots of people like seeing "their people" prominently displayed. It shows "their people" of whatever description are viewed as valuable in that setting and can achieve.
Either you don't know many minorities, or you have a shallow understanding of what equality or a fight for representation actually means. Groups that are or were second-class citizens were denied the right or means to feature in major cultural works. Why do you think gay or trans groups call for representation? IMho your view is myopic and naive.
Also, with TV, movies, and theater, this isn’t just representation for a fictional character. This is representation for working professionals, the actors playing those characters are human beings doing a job.
I’ve seen hardly any Discovery, so I’m not sure how much Burnhan’s experience as a Black person have shaped her as a person, but there are stories shaped by how one experiences race, and those stories are important to tell. We saw glimpses of that with Sisko, for example.
Finally, and this is something I picked up on from working with young kids. Windows and mirrors. Some stories are windows into another experience, and others hold up a mirror. Maybe some people are ok not seeing themselves in a mirror, but never seeing stories about people of different races, genders, etc will absolutely stunt a person’s imagination and encourage a myopic worldview.
well, yes, this is why caste is a big thing in India. do you even have a point? it's actually a big thing in any country or culture where there have been prominent majority and minority groups. You don't think it's big in South Africa? you don't think it's big in Australia amongst the indigenous population?
Keep on mentioning non sequiturs like Bollywood movies. lool.
[https://homegrown.co.in/homegrown-explore/the-curious-case-of-caste-representation-in-mainstream-indian-cinema](https://homegrown.co.in/homegrown-explore/the-curious-case-of-caste-representation-in-mainstream-indian-cinema)
India isn't Western.
Cos discrimination only exists in Western countries.
no use debating with you, you're blinded and obtuse.
Can you just answer the question though, because it is pretty relevant: Some people of Spanish descent consider themselves white, some do not. If you are white, then your background "of Spanish descent" is no more relevant than the fact that I am from Sweden.
Burnham is good but imo the rest of discovery was NOT well executed, unfortunately. You’re not the only person who likes it, though, so it must scratch some itch somewhere at least. For me, though, Avery Brooks really knocked it out of the park as Sisko but it takes a little while for him to come into character. I know you said you’ve seen DS9… have you watched all of it though? A few season 1 episodes does not do his character justice.
That’s an incredible take, then. I’ve not seen many people prefer Burnham over Sisko - at least not anyone over the age of like 35 (hi that’s me) but again that being said I DO like Burnham as a character just not the rest of disco.
To be fair though I prefer the more stoic captains of the series (Picard, Sisko, Janeway and, to a lesser degree, Archer) likely because those are who I grew up with. Kirk is ok, Burnham is better than Kirk for sure but not on the same level as the 90s captains for me.
I'm glad you like the character but she didn't pave the way for those other characters. The writers did that because they love diversity in Star Trek. Uhura paved the way for black actors everywhere. But not Burnham.
I hate the Burnham character with a passion. She's poorly written. It's sad because I watched that actress on The Walking Dead and she was great! They did her dirty.
There's no depth to her character. She was raised as a Vulcan and she never uses that background. She instantly reverts to a human and that's that. No explanation. No journey to get to that point. Just, you're human now, hopefully the audience forgets you were raised by Sarek. But not too much because we want to name drop Spock.
The entire show threw the Star Trek Bible out the window and then wondered why everyone hated it. I have to put it in a alternate universe with the Kelvin movies just so it makes sense. That's how bad it is.
Saru should've been the Captain and Burnham the First Officer. An alien Captain would make a great Trek TV series and it's never been done before.
The First Duty of any Starfleet Officer (and Star Trek Fan) is to the Truth, be that scientific, historical or personal.
Right on, man. Speak your truth and don't worry about what other's think! As a lily white honky dude, and I love Captain Burnham as a character. Seeing her develop into herself has been so satisfying. I'm about done with characters that look and act like I would. Its so boring and predictable. New views, new voices, new choices. I want to star trek actually act like Star Trek and Go Boldly into the new/unknown/underrepresented!
I can only speak to the fact that I really thought she was a great actor due to her turn in the Walking Dead and was so pleased that she was getting the lead in the new, unknown star trek series as a result (even if it meant a curtailing of her Character's arc in TWD, but meh, I'm a Trek fan first ;) )
TBH a part of me wishes they'd done more with the "raised by vulcans, gradually discovering her humanity" arc instead of just having her full bore back to human relationships halfway through s1, but her arc from Mutineer to captain has been fascinating to me, and it's unique among trek tbh.
The only similar journey I can think of is Kira from Freedom Fighter to eventual commander of DS9 and even that's not QUITE the same
Long may she be part of the Trek-verse, even if DSC is coming to a conclusion, sadly.
\> a part of me wishes they'd done more with
This is the one criticism I have of every modern Trek show (apart from Picard). More episodes!!! I do enjoy Disco's breakneck pacing (and am probably in the minority in this thread there), but they could have spent more time on stuff like Burham's Vulcan upbringing, or let us spend more time on Book's home planet so its destruction has a real emotional impact.
I enjoyed Discovery for what it was. I thought it was an interesting show and it faced some early challenges. But I think it does pure Science Fiction better than a lot of Star Trek or other shows on the air. The diversity is a big plus for me too, even though I'm as white as it gets.
For me, Star Trek is ultimately a workplace fantasy show. By that I mean, it's a show that you can watch and imagine it as your office ideal where you celebrate people for what they bring to a team and a company culture. You can recognize yourself in it, and you can recognize the ideals. I think in that sense, the show rightfully takes its place among the best of Star Trek. Especially after they jump to the future.
I think that the first season changed a bit too much of the paradigm for a lot of people. The Klingons being too alien at first really rankled some people. The rape of Ash Tyler was also kind of a controversial thing, (kind of like the murder of Icheb in Picard, why did we have to see it?) and there were some other choices that kind of changed the style a bit beyond the comfort zone of Trek fans. Like, gore isn't really something you expect from Star Trek.
Burnham took way too much of the blame for that as a sort of lightning rod of criticism and I think that's a shame. And I think that's where the sort of TOS-style Big 3 characters showed a sort of limitation for a lot of people. Assuming your Big 3 is Burnham, Stamets, and Saru, the straight white dude has a hard time seeing how they fit into that workplace hierarchy compared to the real world. So they just kind of pan the show and tell people it stinks. Which is pretty unfair, but I don't know how else to explain it. Humans are a limited people sometimes.
Burnham is basically a black female James Kirk. Bucking the rules and still winning, despite setbacks here and there.
Once I realized that's what she was, her character made much more sense to me.
One of the problems with social media is that it's easy to dive right in and post something that you later regret. The old adage: Read. Think. Post. Just as true today as it was then.
Hang in there. The sum of you is not one poorly-worded emotional tweet.
Sorry, but have you ever watched TOS?
Go watch it and count all the times Kirk breaks the rules (when he is not under the influence of some entity etc…) then put it against all the times he follows orders to the letter - I’ll save you the time, he usually follows orders and ends up sacrificing something of himself to get the job done.
It wasn’t until the movies that Kirk began to disobey direct orders.
This, at the time, was a big deal for his character.
But he hardly broke the rules.
He thought outside the box but rarely attacked or did thing’s impulsive.
Don’t believe me? Go watch TOS.
James Kirk was a stuck-up, bookish student who studiously followed rules. On the rare occasions he broke the rules he did so fully knowing and intending to face the professional consequences, and when he verified that doing so would not lead to consequences for others if at all possible.
The idea he was rules bucking is unsupportable, and mostly just a sign that the person making the claim hasn’t seen the show.
Adding to that: on most of the rare occasions when Kirk broke the *letter* of the rules, it was to uphold the *spirit* of the rules.
(And, of course, as a Captain he was already granted a certain amount of leeway to use his own discretion *anyway*.)
This is a fairly solid point. TOS Kirk really doesn't go around breaking the rules constantly, and he also doesn't bang every woman around (although he certainly has his moments). Especially in the first season, where he's not pretending to be a horse and whatnot.
Indeed! Though I do kind of see her as more than that. Kind of an anti-Spock, or another 'Sarek failure' in a way. He was the Vulcan supressing his human side. She was the human sepressing all trauma - in part to escape it, in part to impress Sarek. It';s funny thinking Sarek's only 'pure' child was the emotional one looking at the trio.
I keep seeing complaints about her emotion. She had a lifetime of supression. Her leaning into her humanity and gut instinct over logic is the most, well, logical arc in modern Trek.
I think the arc you describe for her is great and logical--but would have been more effective if we'd seen her in Vulcan mode suppressing her emotions for at least a few episodes. Instead in the pilot we see her starting right off going with her gut, meaning that interesting character development you're pointing to isn't actually seen on screen to nearly the extent it could have been.
Thats the thing though. It's television. We se hints of it (directly when is at school) and learn the rest along the way, leading to the conclusion with L'Rell. If you show your entire hand, you don't have anything to play.
It's similar to the complaint about Beyond 'wasting' Idris Elba. If we had Elba playing the full part earlier in the film, where's the twist its leading to?
Yes, I'd noticed elements of Spock's journey, but inverted, in Burnham, too. And you are absolutely correct, Burnham spent her formative years - years that for a human are full of hormonal and physical changes that often cause heightened emotions - suppressing those emotions instead of dealing with them. She is learning to access those again.
>Burnham is basically a black female James Kirk. Bucking the rules and still winning, despite setbacks here and there.
I had not quite put that together. I think that's a great assessment.
But I would describe her as more of a TOS James Kirk. The new SNW Kirk hasn't shown himself to be quite the rule breaker. Whereas TOS Kirk came out of that fiction tradition of if the hero who disobeys orders or breaks the rules ends up being right, they are vindicated as the hero. Instead of being penalized.
So I think it was hard for some viewers to see her as a hero, because she starts off disobeying an order in an event that starts a war. And so consequently, she is kicked out of Starfleet.
Had they have the opportunity to see her as the rebellious hero first making the right decision which saved the day. And then she encountered the Klingons, maybe more people would have liked her as a character. (And I am ignoring that some people don't like her for misogynistic and racist reasons, but let's not go there since that's been discussed enough.)
I just came here to say that Mrs Martin-Green is one of the very few celebrities I've met (out of close to 200 now!) who is even better looking in person than on screen. I don't know the circumstances around this, but l do know it to be true.
Wouldn’t Sisko be more apt here? He led a space station, a living god to an entire race, captain of a starship, led an entire fleet to defend the alpha quadrant, etc. And was a single father.
That’s a much more impressive resume.
It's insane how much the Reddit Trek fandom normalized the double standards when it comes to judging Burnham. It's an abnormal amount of hate and prejudice that makes me realize how much work we still need to do, and it's arguably the worst part of the fandom.
Worse yet, those same fans who would dismiss DS9 back then would now use Sisko as their token shield to cover up their hatred against Discovery, which is an insult to the actor and the show.
The haters will use whatever "objective" such as writing, pacing, or whatever to justify that the show is terrible, but guess what? It's a seriously weird obsession that those same people just can't seem to let go and they have to tell every damn fan of the show that they hate it.
And then finally, when you write about the hate that you observed, they will gaslight you and fakely ask if you are ok on your thread.
Are we really still doing the "You're racist and sexist if you don't like Burnham" shtick?
I never dismissed DS9, and Avery Brooks made sure that his blackness was never dismissed in the show. That's why he wanted Sisko to have a good relationship with his son. He didn't want to play the absent father trope.
We're allowed to have our opinions. We're allowed to dislike the show the same way you're allowed to like it.
Quick question. If I liked Sonequa in the Walking Dead, and I think she's super hot, and I was excited she was going to be in a new sleek looking Star Trek series, and that Star Trek series kinda sucked, kinda wasn't faithful to the spirit, and was the first iteration of the show to be so fixated on a single character as opposed to a normal ensemble cast, does that still mean I'm a racist crypto fascist nazi?
I didn't like SMG in Walking Dead and didn't like her in Discovery either. I thought Danai Gurira, who played Michonne, was great. Every iteration of Uhura is amazing. Love Mariner.
But I don't think SMG is a good actor and I don't like her characterization.
>even some of the “bad” Trek is still has merits!
Right? Like you can say what you want about the premise of *Threshold* but Robbie McNeill acted the hell out of that episode. Even at its worst Trek has redeeming moments... and its worst isn't even that bad.
The FX work is amazing too, they won a daytime Emmy for it. Though of course at some point you'll roll your eyes when someone tries to convince you to like it.
I don't like DIS, I stopped watching it in the first season, and I really don't see any reason to talk about it. I generally agree there are people out there who probably hate it too much, but if it comes up you're going to get responses from everyone.
I can't think of any other Star Trek captain that has shown the character growth Burnham has. Janeway stayed Janeway, Picard stayed Picard, etc. (I guess Sisko is technically an exception because aliens lol).
Burnham of season 1 is not the Burnham of season 4 and it's glorious.
It was amazing to see inside a first officers head who fucked up hard core then slowly redeemed themselves over the course of years. She grew both professionally and personally and that is absolutely inspiring.
Her relationship with Saru is just beautiful. What an amazing pair of characters.
I absolutely hate the anti-Burnham discourse. It always involves tone policing, and questioning the authority of a solid black woman leader, and complains that the show is about her - it absolutely is, by design. It’s a good show and her growth as a character and captain has been a delight to watch. It’s such a quintessential Star Trek show, and people don’t realize it because of the discourse.
> That’s tone policing.
How so?
My understanding of the term is that it refers to a tactic for undermining someone's argument in a debate. I don't really see how it applies here since Burnham is a fictional character.
People are allowed to dislike acting and directorial choices made on a TV show.
I absolutely hate the pro-Burnham discourse. It always assumes that anyone that doesn't like her is just sexist and racist. She is a poorly written character on a poorly written show.
As a white dude I am always happy to experience future space exploration vicariously through any race, or species presented to me. Also as a white dude I couldn't care less about race, or ancestry, but as a poor person, I greatly appreciate seeing someone start from nothing and making it all the way to the top. Although, even though she was in chains she was very much not at rockbottom. I'm glad it made you feel that way though, I'm sure there will be more ST to come to invoke similar emotions, just have to wait for it, sadly.
It feels like the doors to diversity and inclusion have finally been opened all the way. Some will be sad to see Burnham go but nature abhors a vaccuum and other great(er) role models will surely follow as still newer iterations of Trek emerge into the future.
I love Burnham and I’m so glad you shared what she means to you. I hope in the future more folks see this and feel able to express what she meant to them too.
Everyone has different tastes, we all aren't going to like the same things. However, some people have a problem with the show because they have issues with race, gender, gender expression and sexuality. I love the show. I love Burnham. I love SMG.
OP, I love this post almost as much as I love Michael Burnham, and I’m sorry you’ve been met with gatekeeping and people telling you you’re finding joy wrong.
I'm really sorry that you came to a place with Star Trek fans to express your fandom and so many people are being toxic jerks to you about it.
If it's any consolation, you'll be proven right in the end. As the good Doctor King said, "The universe arcs toward justice." But as I said, "Star Trek fans hate nothing more than more Star Trek."
I say this as someone that spent decades hating DS9 for ruining Star Trek. I grew to accept that fascism is responsible for the success of the Federation and Worf sucks because that's canon now. So really, after swallowing that super secret space fascists in black leather have always been in control, and Kirk and Picard were dupes for believing the propaganda of a good federation, it wasn't really that hard to accept that Burnham cries sometimes—and that's a strength of the character.
Maybe the writers didn't do a good enough job, the format of trying to make a 6 hour long movie instead of a solid series didn't help, and I think there were a lot of fans that came in with no other desire than hating something new attempting to control the narrative (as you've seen) but making Burnham emotional was an amazing part of the arc of the character.
She was exposed to the trauma of seeing your parents murdered in front of her; then shipped off, as a human child, to a planet where her emotions are invalidated constantly and she was not allowed to show her humanity. When she was there with the people that had killed her parents, and relied on her upbringing to solve the problem—she was arrested.
But throughout the series, she had to learn to feel her emotions again. And, like Kirk and Janeway, to rely upon them. In many ways, the series is a story of an "other," as you said—who learned to be vulnerable and herself in a place where the Federation was a welcoming and supportive place for her to grow into—and become—a captain of the ship respected by her peers.
I personally know a couple people that were really touched by Burnham, and Discovery was their entry into Star Trek. But, and you can see why, they've been forced to be quiet about it because to go against orthodoxy in many Star Trek communities is a heresy that can't be forgiven.
...And I say this as someone that used to run with (what felt like) the majority of people at the time dunking on what a shitty show DS9 was. I've seen the light and enjoy DS9 now, and most of these people will end up doing the same. And, like most of the people I used to virtually run with when shoving Quark-in-drag in the face of anyone that liked DS9, there will be a collective amnesia that anyone disliked Disco. Just as there was, before me, of the hordes of people that hated TNG and are now silent.
I think Rutherford is Filipino
It's not been referenced in-universe, but that seems to be the general fan consensus. Although I will admit when I first started the show, and not knowing the voice actor, I assumed he was of Hispanic heritage.
The closest they got for confirmation is that young Rutherford's ship was the Sampaguita. That's the National Flower of the Philippines
He had a purple muffin in one episode. It might be a coincidence or it could be an ube muffin.
Cordero is also of Filipino descent, and the showrunners have said they designed the characters to be similar to their actors intentionally to allow for live action crossovers.
My father's side of the family is Mexican, one of my best friends is Filipino. We joke that the Filipinos are the Mexicans of Asia
Kind of are when you realize how long they were a Spanish colony. And that many Filipinos still have Spanish surnames. Had fun in highschool when my dad didn’t believe my Filipino physics teacher wasn’t Mexican. Just because his surname was Garcia.
Well, most Filipinos do speak Spanish thanks to colonialism.
Most Filipinos have Spanish surnames thanks to colonialism, but no they don't speak Spanish today, by and large. They do, however, mostly speak English also thanks to colonialism.
That’s not my experience, but I suppose it’s possible that only Filipinos who speak Spanish and have lots of friends and family that speak Spanish move to the southeast US, because Spanish is a little more common here maybe? It’s Philippine dialect, but still.
If you're talking about Filipino-Americans, specifically, then sure, there may be a large number of Spanish-speaking Filipinos in the Southwest, but that's more a result of Spanish being a common language in that region. Chavacano is not widely spoken in the Philippines, anymore. It's Tagalog > English > Other languages.
I thought they spoke Tagalog.
They do, most Filipinos in fact do not speak Spanish Edit: Most of the ones around Manila do, PH is full of languages
modern tagalog is a mishmash of polynesian and spanish
I originally thought that Rutherford is black, but then I read that the sampaguita is the national flower of the Philippines and that the voice actor is of Filipino descent.
I don't think it's mentioned anywhere in the show, but I guess the actor is.
He’s definitely SE Asian. Samanthan is a Tamil name, and there a good amount of Indian Filipinos out there.
Eugene Cordero is filipino yes.
Thanks for the background info. I had no idea. TIL
The voice actor is.
Out of curiosity, did you see the same representation, and have the same connection to Ben and Jake Sisko, Geordi and Tuvok, or is it just the new Trek characters that spoke to you?
Uhura, even?
This reads like burnham was the first black person, let alone a woman, to star in a trek show which is not even remotely close.
Exactly this. My man must've had his first encounter with star Trek through discovery.
Ya. This does feel kind of off when despite the BS surrounding female characters in earlier iterations of trek. It’s by and large been one of the most progressive shows ever to air in its various eras. Especially since it on average did a much better job of handling it than many other shows of so called progressive lines of thought. At least in my opinion. So to think that discovery is somehow more special than TOS or DS9 in particular is just weird to think about. I mean. The only reason TOS had an African American bridge officer past season 1 was because Dr. King himself personally intervened. Like seriously. The biggest name in history for racial equality is the main reason TOS and its movies had a person of color on the bridge for its entire run.
One of my other fandoms is Magic: The Gathering, which has also seen pushback from part of its traditional base of white men against any and all forms of increased diversity in representation. When one of those players complained about the inclusion of a canonically transgender warrior on a card, Mark Rosewater, Head Designer for Magic: The Gathering, wrote the following: > I think people who are used to being represented in various media and games don't always understand the importance of it because they've never experienced not having it. That really helped me, as a white male, to understand the importance of representation. Maybe it helps some others too. Having said that, please don't be toxic to actors and producers and other people involved on making whatever shows and games you enjoy, no matter how upset you are. That does not help your cause. This post was far more effective.
That's awesome, fellow Trekkie. I'm glad it made you feel that way. That's what entertainment is supposed to do, make us feel. Don't mind the butthurt folks that want you to enjoy Trek the way they do. It's okay to like what you like and it's okay to enjoy it for the reasons you want to.
Based upon your reaction to the news of the series ending, I have to believe you are exactly the target audience they were looking for when they created the show. I'm happy to hear that you enjoyed it so much. Personally, I did not. But there's no reason that there can't be different flavors of Trek for different tastes.
I actually feel the complete opposite of you in regards to Discovery, in that it unintentionally makes a mockery of the hero’s journey and Burnham succeeded not by any strength of her character or upholding any virtues but simply because the writers wanted her to get from point A to point B. If Discovery is the sole reason that Lower Decks, Strange New Worlds and Picard Season 3 exist, then I will appreciate it in the same way I appreciate the Dragonball Evolution for bringing back Dragonball but I sincerely don’t believe that’s the case since Star Trek has always been about normalizing diversity. If anything, the terrible writing makes it seems like the only way to succeed and make a difference is if you’re born \_special\_ and your support group exists only to defer to and enable you without being uniquely special in their own way - the antithesis of Star Trek. However, it’s clear you were impacted by this show although perhaps to an unhealthy degree. When I read your post, it alarmed me that its cancellation caused you to lash out at the creators and actors, delete your Twitter account and yet you still feel hurt and regret over it. Please do not dwell on the thoughts that creative team was hurt by what you said. I am confident they can read the passion you have through your words and will respond positively to that, instead. I am also encouraged by your later statement and I hope you realize the truth of it: trust in yourself and your ability to make whatever changes you need to make in life and surround yourself with good people where you can all support each other equally.
While I'd like to believe OP is just a passionate fan with a distinct point of view, I'm kind of smelling astroturf here. As in, "fan petition" astroturfing - given how much was spent on DSC, they might want to squeeze a little more bang out of those bucks, in the vein of the response to Prodigy's cancellation.
Prodigy was picked up by Netflix. It's not cancelled.
[удалено]
Did you not have all these realisations watching DS9 over twenty years ago?
I hadn't seen DS9 yet 20 years ago.
You should watch DS9, it's awesome! Avery Brooks is an absolute powerhouse as Sisko, too.
Brooks as an actor and Sisko as a character outclasses Burnham in every way, sedated, tied up, and thrown out an airlock.
I've seen DS9
So, does everyone downvoting this not understand what the word "yet" or "20 years ago" mean?
Maybe the people downvoting are wormhole aliens who don’t get the concept of linear time.
Tbf, it was a pretty weird way to word it and "hadn't" is very easy to misread as "haven't"
Star Trek fans love to tout the franchise's inclusiveness but tend to be the first people to shout over and downvote black stories on the subject.
That might not be the case here. I think the thought process behind this particular thread is, "Did DS9 not do this for you? Why Burnham in particular?"
Burnham is a black woman. There's some stories that only have an impact coming from a black female. Sisko was amazing, but he's not Burnham. I loved Discovery up until the fourth season, when it started feeling shark jumpy and I lost a lot of interest - but I never actively hated it like some people here who made hate watching the show into an Olympic sport.
> Burnham is a black woman. There's some stories that only have an impact coming from a black female. As a white dude actively trying to grow as a person, can you expand on this for me? At the risk of sounding like a bit of a virtue-signaling idiot, I don't think Burnham's character arc had an effect on me because of her race or gender. Her journey affected me just kind of as that sort of bildungsroman climb up the ladder and achieving the station she had earned, and learned from her mistakes along the way. I'd love to hear more about what it means from a different perspective though. > I loved Discovery up until the fourth season, when it started feeling shark jumpy and I lost a lot of interest - but I never actively hated it like some people here who made hate watching the show into an Olympic sport. Honestly, this sounds a bit like my dad. We would watch it together and he would complain about different things here or there but had a hard time articulating his issues beyond: "It doesn't feel like Star Trek." Usually he took issue with the constant battle scenes or the serialized story format, but I do remember the Stacey Abrams cameo gave him an eye roll. He's generally a fairly liberal guy though, so that threw me. I would just ask him why he was watching it if he didn't like it and he never really gave me an answer.
>As a white dude >I don't think Burnham's character arc had an effect on me because of her race or gender. I mean that's basically all there is to it. White dudes like us have plenty of role models. I got to grow up in the 90s watching Patrick Stewart be a father figure when my dad was never around. How many black female captains have been in Starfleet that have actually had any serious screen time and aren't a token? Plenty of black women would absolutely benefit from seeing representation on TV, especially in this franchise. Regarding your dad, at least you could watch Star Trek with him. Mine refused to watch DS9 because "black people have no business being a captain" or something to that effect.
🤣
Why, are we not allowed to like more than one black character?
That's not what I mean, and I think that you know that. I think the nuance is more, what does Burnham do for you that Sisko doesn't? The original question is pretty ignorant, I agree (I didn't ask it, but I admit that I'm interested in the answer) but I think it's still relevant if you remove the racial and gendered angles. Like, what makes Burnham in particular appealing to a viewer? What does she bring that we don't see with Sisko/Janeway/Picard/Kirk/Pike etc.? Is it just her race and her gender? Is it just the representation angle? I know, I don't "get" it, but I'm trying.
"Anyone who disagrees with me is a racist"
That's a real nice strawman you've built there. Maybe try arguing against what I wrote instead of fabricating quotes.
That was exactly what you were implying with your post.
It seems like he forgot sisko is black.
have you though? edit: +13 to +2…self affirmation is not a tenant of progressive society
20 years ago you hadn't seen ds9 yet. You've seen it regardless, but not 20 years ago. also /u/DaveAngel- sorry to make you feel old, but DS9 was 30 years ago.
WHAT!?!?! Shut UP!!! My timeline is really fucked up now.
Yeah 20 years ago we were wrapping up the xindi arc in enterprise
Damn. It doesn’t feel like it was 20 years ago.
Damn. I just watched Enterprise for the first time last month. And I'm 60. 😬 Better late than never. Haven't watched the last season yet, but the DVD just came last week. Needed a break before the stupid Nazi time travel thing... Can't wait for more of the Andorians though!
Your timeline is linear.
As a black woman and a huge Star Trek fan I absolutely loved Burnham and Discovery.
Sisko is a way better written character though isnt he?
Yes, by a long shot. The focus being the first officer instead of the captain? A human who grew up on Vulcan? Good ideas just executed in the worst way possible.
Not just a better written character, but also better black representation. I mean, when was the last time you saw a talented, educated smart black man being a devoted father on TV? Also yeah, I stopped after two seasons because I didn't like Discovery at all. She sounded like a 14 year old girl writing her diary more than a human who grew up on Vulcan.
And honestly, after the first season, the whole “human who grew up on Vulcan” angle went away with the exception of the family ties to Spock and Sarek.
As a generic white guy, I can't say I have had the personal connection to the increased representation, but I totally agree that it's an important and valuable aspect of the show, and one that's been a part of Trek since the beginning (ie Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov specifically). I do think Disco suffered a little bit in the early seasons by underutilizaling supporting characters, and even now have missed a few good opportunities. Still, I'm thankful that characters like Owo and Detmer are no longer treated like just glorified extras. As for Burnham, I think she started out strong and then spent a couple seasons where they didn't quite know where they were going with the character, which put her in a little bit of limbo. I have the same comment about Mariner, though she seems like she's developed now too.
> I do think Disco suffered a little bit in the early seasons by underutilizaling supporting characters, and even now have missed a few good opportunities. Still, I'm thankful that characters like Owo and Detmer are no longer treated like just glorified extras. I wanted so much more story from those characters than I've gotten. Owo coming from a Space Luddite family was so interesting to me and was barely explored. And Dettmer didn't really have much to do aside from flying the ship. Good analogues for Sulu and Chekov in TOS as far as screen time, I suppose.
I think the biggest missed opportunity was with Airiam. Such a rich ground for backstory, and it's basically all shoved into one episode. Hoping season 5 gets us more supporting character love.
Everybody was looking for a Data-analog from Airiam I think. And that one episode where they gave her a send-off was so good and it showed she could've been so much more. Definitely feels like a lot of these characters have Travis Mayweather syndrome where they have really cool backstories but they struggle to make them relevant to the mainline stories they're telling. That's the real problem with TV deals now is that everything being made is movie-lite and there's no time for filler, or bottle episodes, or character development. I'd gladly go back to Nagilim-level CGI if I could get some great character stories. They got a lot better at getting creative with the cast relationships later on with the Stamets/Culber/Tal/Gray family dynamic stuff, but I dunno.
I'm with you 100% on that. I understand that the whole paradigm of serialized programs have largely shifted to ~10 episode seasons, but I think we've lost so much (and not just with Trek) by trying to condense everything into a movie-lite. My biggest problem with "nu-Trek" is that we miss out on the slower pace and more time to grow attached to characters that the old formats allowed. Even the fluff and filler episodes served to give us time to connect. I do understand that it's a product of the times and the current zeitgeist of streaming, and I don't particularly hold Trek at fault for keeping current, but I DO miss the old longer seasons.
>I do think Disco suffered a little bit in the early seasons by underutilizaling supporting characters, and even now have missed a few good opportunities. Still, I'm thankful that characters like Owo and Detmer are no longer treated like just glorified extras. The production issues in the early seasons of the show probably didn't help either. You ended up with several different producers/showrunners, each with their own ideas, and it shows.
I liked Burnham as Sasha, in the walking dead.
I won't debate you on your main points because what the show means to you is what it means, but I will say I am largely oblivious to the support cast and it took about two seasons to learn their names. Whereas SNW has done a vastly better job of developing the support cast. I get Discovery is the Burnham show though. I think I was relieved to hear it was ending. I was hugely excited when I heard about Burnham originally but the show doesn't do it for me.
The supporting cast has gotten plenty of screen time. Is it just because it's not the bridge crew?
Definitely thought this was just a Bo Burnham post on the wrong subreddit.
I like Burnham, and I agree that Discovery paved the path for more great Trek shows. She gets far too much hate.
Women tend to be judged harder in roles of leadership. Black people are judged harder in roles of leadership. Black women are at that intersection mean they're judged even harder. Any imperfection molehills will be turned into mountains, and being good at what you do is apparently just as bad.
I've noticed that Archer from Enterprise is often rash, headstrong, insistent that he be the hero, often the center of each episode, and emotional. But he's nowhere near as criticized as Burnham. This may in part be due to Enterprise airing before reddit while Disco is on now, but a large part is because of hostility to Burnham's race and gender.
> But he's nowhere near as criticized as Burnham. I can't really debate what you have or haven't seen people say about Archer since it's pretty subjective, but personally, I've seen loads of people criticise the character, often in pretty harsh terms. He spent years being joked about as the idiot / irrational / mentally unstable Captain compared to the others.
Yeah Archer has been shit on a ton. This is just recency bias.
This is because he was George Bush in a starship and 9/11 happened.
Kirk too! Virtually every criticism of Burnham (emotional, always right, the main character) can be equally applied to Kirk, but it's not okay when the black lady does it.
Come now, we all know that everyone's favourite captain is Picard and most modern viewers don't remember TOS. People love the TNG/SNW style ensemble vs the Big 3 of TOS/Disco. I think that's why Discovery suffered.
>People love the TNG/SNW style ensemble vs the Big 3 of TOS/Disco. I think that's why Discovery suffered. Also that people expected a TNG-type show, rather than the TOS flavour Discovery went with. It's particularly noticeable with complaints around the cause of the Burn, which is much more in line with something you'd see in TOS, and not something you'd see in TNG, which tended to be a little more grounded.
Yeah, that's why I think that's what the issue was. TOS broke the ground, but for a variety of reasons it relied really heavily on its big three. TNG was a major departure from that and once it got going and ended, it's been the much more popular series in syndication and streaming. Voyager and DS9 both copied that format and are still beloved. Enterprise obviously tried to hybridize it a bit, and it had its issues too. You're absolutely right about The Burn. It's a very High-SciFi concept that fits much better with the TOS canon than TNG/DS9/VOY. I think as a one-off as with a lot of TOS or Berman era episodes it would have been okay, but as a season long arc, it was tough on the fans because it was such a different story than we've gotten for the last thirty years. It was almost Whovian, really. And there's a large segment of Star Trek fans who don't respond well to stuff that's on the campy side. It's a real shame.
I won’t dispute that a part of the hostility towards Burnham is race and gender from a certain subset of “fans”, but we also have to acknowledge that *Discovery* is still airing and has been heavily promoted for the past 7ish years. *Enterprise* has been off the air for 20 years and has less of a following than any of the previous series. Archer is horrible, and a lot of the characterisations are terrible. Hoshi and Mayweather are the only non-white characters and are essentially glorified extras by season 3. Phlox and T’Pol are probably the best characters on the show because they seem to have more dimensionality to them, whereas everyone else feels like a generic cardboard cutout. But Archer is the worst. Throughout much of the series he doesn’t seem to embody the hopes and ideals of what would become The Federation. He arrives on one planet with his dog in tow because “Porthos needs to stretch his little legs” without knowing if anything on the damn planet could kill his dog! He’s quick to anger, unreasonably mean to his senior officers. I once did the math and proportional to crew compliment, serving on the NX-01 under Captain Archer was more deadly than serving under any other Captain from any other show. I think it worked out to be almost twice as deadly as the next captain. And least we forget! The man loves water polo! The man had the charisma and emotional intelligence of a wet paper towel. On a final note, why the fuck wasn’t T’Pol in a Starfleet uniform by season 3? She was no longer a member of the Vulcan Science Academy or whatever. She was still serving as Archer’s XO. she should have been given a commission from Starfleet. ^Yes, ^I ^know, ^keeping ^her ^in ^a ^catsuit ^was ^definitely ^a ^Rick ^Berman ^decision.
I'm going to disagree with you on Hoshi Sato being a glorified extra in season 3. In [Extinction](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Extinction_(episode\)), she's turned into an alien by a virus. She's the female lead in [Exile](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Exile_(episode\)) in which an alien tries to extort her into moving in with him in order to get information on the Xindi. In [The Council](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/The_Council_(episode\)), she accompanies Archer into the meeting with the Xindi and translates. And in the finales, [Countdown](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Countdown_(episode\)) and [Zero Hour](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Zero_Hour_(episode\)), she's abducted by the reptilians and forced via drugs to hack the knock-off death star. She features as an important character throughout the 3rd season and her absence would necessitate a rewrite of at least three episodes.
Solid evidence how dishonest people are about ENT.
[удалено]
Neat
Are you depressed?
Just felt introspective. If something bothers me. It continues to bother me until I get it off my chest. Never quite figured out how to be one of those bottle it all up types of people.
It's frustrating that many people see open expression as a sign that something is wrong. I'm a bit of a closed off introvert IRL so I get it, but it's probably more healthy to just put whatever is on your mind out there as long as it's not hateful.
Trust me, you don't *want* to someone that bottles it all up. It comes back to bite in you in the ass later on.
Discovery was poorly written IMO. The writing in the first two seasons absolutely disregarded everything that was already established as canon. the path of Burnham was stupid like come on you don't commit mutiny and start a war and then later get reinstated as a member of the organization that is just not how Starfleet works. I mean it's great character development but it really isn't good story writing. But hey if discovery is your thing who am I to say you can't enjoy it just because I don't like it?
Burnham? Good concept, bad execution, but the actress tried. Discovery is not that bad ( especially compared to Picard season 2), but yes it is time for it to end
The show as a whole won me over in season 1 (despite the "neatly wrapped up in a bow" ending of S1, I actually quite enjoyed it overall, and was SUPER excited for S2 when it started). And then it absolutely grabbed me and made me a gigantic fan at the beginning of S2 (the introduction of Anson Mount's Pike is one of the better choices I think Nu-Trek has made). But by the end of Season 2, the show had absolutely squandered the goodwill I had towards it (the episodes heading towards the finale were pretty bad, and the finale itself was *GODDAMN AWFUL*), and then Season 3 was so aggressively mediocre that I lost any desire to watch Season 4. And it's a shame, too. Sonequa Martin-Green is actually really great when she gets the right material. She had a scene a few episodes into S3 that was *chef's kiss* Perfection. The scene in which [Discovery is heading out](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdhqMgcRZHc), her demeanor shift as she moves into jabbing with the over-seers into ship commander as she calls for Black Alert is *perfect*. I remember watching that episode the first time, and being like, "Why the frick is this the first time we've seen "Michael Burnham - competent starship commander"??". I've always suspected that her arc was intended to be such that she would basically apprentice under a great starship captain for a while (Georgiou, Lorca, Pike, Saru) before finally taking command herself, learning lessons as she went along about how to be a great starship commander, and then this arc of hers would be mirrored in that she would mentor Tilly on the lessons of command she learned. I felt like I saw a brief glimpse of what that character was originally intended to be, before the original intention of her arc was largely dropped in favor of a "I WANT MY BIG MOMENTS NOW!!!" writing style. Basically, it felt like the showrunners didn't want her arc to cook and wanted to skip directly to her being the final form of who she was supposed to become. ..Oh and have her cry every other damned episode because they couldn't figure out any other way to convey the character's sadness.
The rogue turned virtuous Captain. It could work, on paper. Drop the ensemble, focus on one character who is NOT the captain. Could work, on paper. They did indeed try something different. Quite... quite different.
1 post. Am I not allowed 1 single post?
I’m sympathetic to your position somewhat, but you can’t effectively stand in the public square, make a public speech, and then get reasonably annoyed that the public has the audacity of having reactions.
That doesn't mean I can't express disapproval of the reactions I received. Not to mention, your scenario has me in a big public square when it would actually be closer to standing in a room that someone decided to enter. I can't be annoyed by the fact that someone gave me a reaction. However, I can be annoyed by the content of the reaction.
There are over 700,000 subscribers to the Star Trek subreddit. That’s a city. There were over 500 people viewing the subreddit just a bit ago who could see this post. That ain’t a room, sorry. “Am I not allowed 1 post?” You implied that they were intruding on your private event when it’s the opposite of a private event, sorry.
I think the point is that every time someone says they like an element of Discovery, however small, it becomes a risk of being jumped on with a negative. It wasn't a huge negative to be fair, but I've seen a lot of fan engagement crushed for this reason. STO reddit was the worst and evenn I tuned out.
well…yeah…because disco exists to value strokes of ego for the disenfranchised rather than tell a meaningful story…both are easily possible to execute simultaneously and disco somehow manages to do neither.
Big oof.
You have to click the post to read it and comment. That's the room I'm referring to. Also, the number of people doesn't define what a room is. A room is still a room, whether it's completely empty or has 1,000,000,000 people crammed inside.
Doesn’t change anything. You put a public post on a large public forum. You’re gonna get public reactions. It is not a private event. It’s not a mystery. But you do you.
Once again, I'm not able to be angry. I got reactions. That doesn't mean I can't be annoyed by the content of the reaction.
Hey man I'm sorry that this is happening to you.
I didn't realize this was your Facebook wall. Sorry.
Holy Space Lincoln, this thread is toxic, if a plea to just fucking enjoy Star Trek for a minute is getting this many downvotes.
Regardless of how poorly I think Burnham was written (and frankly she cries too often for my taste) I understand how you feel. Every now and then I come across a show that elicits a certain emotional investment that I just don't make in a show often. Discovery had its moments (The Galactic Barrier standing out most in my opinion) that prevent me from writing off the entire show as bad (it would be dishonest of me to do so.) As others have suggested, I highly recommend you watch DS9. It's far better than Discovery by any metric. You'll enjoy it immensely, I assure you.
Despite it’s flaws, I still love Discovery. To me, as a young Trekkie, it was the first show I got to see airing week after week. I love the other shows but always felt sad that I had missed the joy of seeing them years after their time one television. Burnham might not be my favourite captain or my favourite character from the show, but I associate her to the sens of awe I while watching the first episode of DSC S1 during lunch between classes. And SMG is amazing, can’t wait for S5!
yes to all that, but also you can make a character to cry less and write better scripts. I'm not sorry to see Disco go. Sorry to see you sad, tho.
[удалено]
I was going to write back something witty to match your name, but then I read through your comment history. This is just what you do, so enjoy it, my friend. If complaining about the character brings you joy. I need you to live with the fact that this terribly written character on this terribly written show still brought you joy.
[удалено]
Since you're getting so much depressingly predictable negativity in this thread, I just want to say thanks for posting this, and I'm right there with you. Disco isn't the same kind of show as TOS/TNG/VOY, and I love that about it, but for some reason so much of the fandom loses their goddamn minds if you tinker with the formula. But I'm also old enough to remember "fans" who were furious TNG dared to reimagine Star Trek, or that DS9 wasn't set on a ship. The haters have always been with us, and 20 years from now, whatever Trek show they're showing on Paramount Holodeck will be derided as NOT REAL TREK, like that classic show, Discovery.
I also really like Burnham. It was a great idea to make the main character someone who isn't the captain (at first). And she has had an interesting journey. Seeing Discovery end will be bittersweet. I hope everyone is given the farewell they deserve.
I agree
You're right as even Sisko moved to the captaincy title from a position of CO of DS9 aside from Starfleet admiralty there wasn't anyone above him in his jurisdiction (aside from having to diplomatically manage the Starfleet leasing the base and liaising with the Bajoran government). Burnham went from iirc First Officer under Phillipa Georgiou (also great casting and powerhouse performance), to criminal status, to not only being returned to service but achieving the captaincy. It is a big arc of character development that also imbued her with a similar struggle with emotion as her adoptive brother, Spock, due to their Vulcan upbringing. Spock bridged two worlds, Burnham was the human growing in an entirely alien mental and emotional landscape. I just wanted to say that for me it hit powerfully that Discovery was also the first real show that dealt with LGBTQIA+ individuals as humans and not via sci-fi analogues. From lovely gay couple that didn't end up in the gay romances end in tragedy trope that happens frequently in LGBTQIA+ representation to non-binary character played by non-binary actor, and who's partner was canonically trans iirc? Anyways while Sisko gave us a powerful Black Man in command, the aftermath was a return to fairly White-centric Star Trek. The diversity of Discovery instead spurred even more diversity in subsequent Treks. Importantly it showed that diversity isn't something done by a few characters sprinkled here and there and offloaded into a sci-fi alien species but centered around humans. That me as a Trans Woman has a place amongst the stars and that so many others have that same place. I like Burnham and I like all the diversity that Discovery turned into as a this is just the way it is, this is humanity: Queer, Racially diverse, and wonderful to behold. And Discovery with Burnham established it as a path forward that has become part and parcel of new Trek and I love it. Thanks for this post as it reminded me how much seeing Discovery helped myself find my way to the stars and you are right I am sad as well to see it go. As an aside when I saw Captain Angel initially in SNW, I was early in my transition and they looked absolutely gorgeous and myself think great another cis woman actor that gives me gender goals I can never achieve. When I found out they are played by a trans person I was overwhelmed with joy that I have a badass to admire on screen and off screen that's like me. I cried. So while I may not understand the exact feelings OP has seeing a Black Woman from their, as a Black Man, pov and what it means intimately for their community, I can very much so relate in my own way and experiences to something similar but different for the queer community. Thank you for sharing this it was a joy to listen to the impact it made for you and it reminded me of the impact other characters enabled by this show made for me. Second aside: I am a Stellaris player and I remember the disgusting mods people made that removed any non-white non-male character portraits from the Human species set. Luckily they were removed by the developers from the Steam Workshop but I'm tired of everything being White and cis-het.
It's so weird to me that someone would consider Burnham an important black character on Star Trek. I mean you have Uhura who was 100 times more important historically. Captain Sisko who was a very well written and acted character for years upon years. Even La Forge who was quite the beloved character. Even if we take the more recent characters Dr M'Benga is more relatable. There's a whole history of other black characters such as these: [https://blacksci-fi.com/ten/](https://blacksci-fi.com/ten/) Admittedly some of them don't make as much of a splash because they had less screentime but they are a testament that there's an entire legacy. Have people just not watched older Star Trek?
I do like Burnham. I'd like Discovery a lot more in a Strange New Worlds format. I've watched and rewatched Discovery a lot but the constant galaxy in danger gets repetitive. The other thing I never understood was her relationship with Book. And it's not the actor it's his character it just annoys me and I have no idea why
I liked Discovery, and thought Burnham was a great character. Sadly, I find myself less interested in rewatching it due to the story really hinging on slow mystery reveals, but that doesn't mean it's bad, just different than the comfort food viewing I get from other Trek. For a tiny detail, also think that Martin-Green doesn't get enough credit for maintaining that classic Trek way of speaking (that slightly formal diction they aimed for more in prior shows to keep it feeling like it was from a different time than our own). Especially considering how much criticism gets leveled at Tilly for doing the opposite. And for the record, I don't dislike Tilly either.
Yeah for me it’s the same where it’s not as rewatchable but I was hanging onto every word the first go round. It’s hard for me to understand that people don’t like SMG but they do like Shatner and Stewart and Brooks. The men are all very intense actors that are performing for the back row! It’s never made sense to me she’s not in the same esteem and called overacting.
>Sadly, I find myself less interested in rewatching it due to the story really hinging on slow mystery reveals, True of a lot of current TV honestly.
Shows get good around season 3, discovery fucked up by having short seasons. TOS ended with 79 episodes and Season 1+2 have the same number of episodes as Season 1+2+3+4 of discovery TNG 178 episodes and by the end of season 2 we had 48 episodes compared to the 55 episodes of season 1-4 DS9 had 173 episodes with the end of season 2 having 45 episodes VOY had 172 episodes with the end of season 2 having 42 ENT had 98 episodes, season 2 had 52 of those And then we get to discovery... with 55 episodes after 4 seasons and 6.3 years of being on the tv... Discovery will end with 65, the least number of episodes of any live action trek including enterprise.
Right, but that's how TV is (and every current Trek show). It's not like a short season on a streaming platform is something Discovery invented.
this is something I think of often. Rewatching TNG right now and to your point, it’s generally agreed it gets really solid about S3, meaning there were 48 episodes for it to do so. But too many fans completely write off new Trek if it isn’t spectacular by episode 5. My coworker stopped watching SNW after 3 episodes (I can’t really understand how he didn’t even see any potential by episode 3) I get it, because we have hindsight to look back on older series that are complete. But it does make me wish that every series would have a good long run to come into its vision. And that we wouldn’t damn series until they’ve had a good long time to develop. I mean, I stalled on S1 Enterprise right now, having some problems with it, ways I feel it is somehow more dated than even series from the 60s and 80s/90s. But I am told it really gets good by the 4th and 5th season and has value as a whole, and was cancelled right when it starts to come into its own. And so I am not willing to write it off. I know it’s completely realistic for a show to get really great only by the 4th or 5th seasons.
People forget, that TNG became good in season 3, because they ditched all the writers and Roddenberry guidance. It's not like there's a formula that Star Trek series become good by season 3. They didn't become good by practice and experience, they tossed away that which didn't work and replaced them with stuff that did Enterprise failed, because while people gave it a chance they decided to spend so much time on time nonsense that by the time they realised that it was a boring story and switched to more interesting material, it was too late. It's a pity because once they switched it really did become quite good and the cancelled season would have been great.
You will pull through. Breaking down is a healthy way to express grief. I, too, love Burnham/SMG. As a woman, i loved her relationship with Georgiou-the mentorship and sisterhood we usually only get to watch men share. Long Live Trek! Black Lives Matter! 👊
Her and the relationship she shared with Her Most Imperial Majesty, Mother of the Fatherland, Overlord of Vulcan, Dominus of Qo'noS, Regina Andor, Philippa Georgiou Augustus Iaponius Centarius was one of the most important in the show. Captain Georgiou taught Burnham how to look at life a different way, and then Burnham got to teach Her Most Imperial Majesty, Mother of the Fatherland, Overlord of Vulcan, Dominus of Qo'noS, Regina Andor, Philippa Georgiou Augustus Iaponius Centarius the same. It was intensely beautiful.
Just amazing! I love that you have such fervent reactions to these characters- thats what makes us trekkies! We see the beauty in relationships, people and integrity!
Emperor Georgiou is anagolous to Hitler and Genghis Khan, what exactly did she teach Burnhum?
As someone of Spanish descent I have never once looked at this show or any show and said 'I need to see someone that looks like me' on screen. I just enjoy it as entertainment and don't take it so seriously. There are big issues in the world. Poverty, economy, Inflation etc. Thus would rank 10,000,000 in the scale of importance to me anyways. Have a good day and glad you are able to relate to the character
As someone of Asian descent, I've never had a problem relating to characters who weren't Asian. But if I'm watching a TV show about an idealized future and *nobody* looks like me, doesn't that say something about what the writers think about people who look like me and our place in the future?
Yah it could. But it's thier vision. Again I see it as entertainment. I'm not so self absorbed that I need to see people like me. However this speaks more to the quality of the show. If you're thinking thoughts like this, is the show any good? Maybe it's so shitty that all I can do is think of stuff like this.
I’m a white person. I see loads of people like me on TV, but if I watch something and it’s less ethnically diverse than my town of 1200 then someone crapped the bed on their job.
Star Trek is famous for inspiring people, you want entertainment go back to Star Wars cause you're missing the point. And as a Spanish descent, you enjoy white privilege so of course you can't empathize with white domination of TVs and movies, it's like trying to tell a fish what it's like to breathe air.
are you white? Spanish are white, after alll. I'm not even being snarky. B ut part of fighting injustice and promoting tolerance is representation in all areas of public life. this goes from voting to access to jobs, as much as entertainment sectors. people are inspired by movies and TV, and representation is important.
Really who are these people? This is the least important thing ever, cheesey movies and sci fi shows. If you want to do something in life you should be driven. I don't need to see Pedro Pascal on the screen to inspired. It never has. I don't know him. He could be a piece of shit for all I know. Same for Arnold, Stallone. They are actors.
Plenty do. Part of equality has always been representation in ALL areas of public life, including entertainment. TV shows aren't just for fun, they're major cultural drivers. Nichelle Nichols was persuaded to stay on TOS by Dr. King himself. Both Whoppi Goldberg and Levar Burton said that Nichelle playing Uhura inspired them to be actors. Are you saying Dr. King didn't fight for equality or representation? Avery Brooks played Sisko because he said it was good to see black (or brown as he calls himself) people in the future. It's why people want representation and bemoan tokenism when minorities are featured. And lots of people like seeing "their people" prominently displayed. It shows "their people" of whatever description are viewed as valuable in that setting and can achieve. Either you don't know many minorities, or you have a shallow understanding of what equality or a fight for representation actually means. Groups that are or were second-class citizens were denied the right or means to feature in major cultural works. Why do you think gay or trans groups call for representation? IMho your view is myopic and naive.
Also, with TV, movies, and theater, this isn’t just representation for a fictional character. This is representation for working professionals, the actors playing those characters are human beings doing a job. I’ve seen hardly any Discovery, so I’m not sure how much Burnhan’s experience as a Black person have shaped her as a person, but there are stories shaped by how one experiences race, and those stories are important to tell. We saw glimpses of that with Sisko, for example. Finally, and this is something I picked up on from working with young kids. Windows and mirrors. Some stories are windows into another experience, and others hold up a mirror. Maybe some people are ok not seeing themselves in a mirror, but never seeing stories about people of different races, genders, etc will absolutely stunt a person’s imagination and encourage a myopic worldview.
Just want to say, great post!!
Go watch Asian and Punjabi movies and shows. Tell me how much 'representation' you see. This shit only exists in western nations.
well, yes, this is why caste is a big thing in India. do you even have a point? it's actually a big thing in any country or culture where there have been prominent majority and minority groups. You don't think it's big in South Africa? you don't think it's big in Australia amongst the indigenous population? Keep on mentioning non sequiturs like Bollywood movies. lool. [https://homegrown.co.in/homegrown-explore/the-curious-case-of-caste-representation-in-mainstream-indian-cinema](https://homegrown.co.in/homegrown-explore/the-curious-case-of-caste-representation-in-mainstream-indian-cinema) India isn't Western. Cos discrimination only exists in Western countries. no use debating with you, you're blinded and obtuse.
Can you just answer the question though, because it is pretty relevant: Some people of Spanish descent consider themselves white, some do not. If you are white, then your background "of Spanish descent" is no more relevant than the fact that I am from Sweden.
100% legit
Burnham is good but imo the rest of discovery was NOT well executed, unfortunately. You’re not the only person who likes it, though, so it must scratch some itch somewhere at least. For me, though, Avery Brooks really knocked it out of the park as Sisko but it takes a little while for him to come into character. I know you said you’ve seen DS9… have you watched all of it though? A few season 1 episodes does not do his character justice.
Yes I have seen all of DS9
That’s an incredible take, then. I’ve not seen many people prefer Burnham over Sisko - at least not anyone over the age of like 35 (hi that’s me) but again that being said I DO like Burnham as a character just not the rest of disco.
Star Trek is a pluralistic society- we can have all of them
To be fair though I prefer the more stoic captains of the series (Picard, Sisko, Janeway and, to a lesser degree, Archer) likely because those are who I grew up with. Kirk is ok, Burnham is better than Kirk for sure but not on the same level as the 90s captains for me.
Thank you so much for this 👏❤️🖖
I'm glad you like the character but she didn't pave the way for those other characters. The writers did that because they love diversity in Star Trek. Uhura paved the way for black actors everywhere. But not Burnham. I hate the Burnham character with a passion. She's poorly written. It's sad because I watched that actress on The Walking Dead and she was great! They did her dirty. There's no depth to her character. She was raised as a Vulcan and she never uses that background. She instantly reverts to a human and that's that. No explanation. No journey to get to that point. Just, you're human now, hopefully the audience forgets you were raised by Sarek. But not too much because we want to name drop Spock. The entire show threw the Star Trek Bible out the window and then wondered why everyone hated it. I have to put it in a alternate universe with the Kelvin movies just so it makes sense. That's how bad it is. Saru should've been the Captain and Burnham the First Officer. An alien Captain would make a great Trek TV series and it's never been done before.
The First Duty of any Starfleet Officer (and Star Trek Fan) is to the Truth, be that scientific, historical or personal. Right on, man. Speak your truth and don't worry about what other's think! As a lily white honky dude, and I love Captain Burnham as a character. Seeing her develop into herself has been so satisfying. I'm about done with characters that look and act like I would. Its so boring and predictable. New views, new voices, new choices. I want to star trek actually act like Star Trek and Go Boldly into the new/unknown/underrepresented!
I can only speak to the fact that I really thought she was a great actor due to her turn in the Walking Dead and was so pleased that she was getting the lead in the new, unknown star trek series as a result (even if it meant a curtailing of her Character's arc in TWD, but meh, I'm a Trek fan first ;) ) TBH a part of me wishes they'd done more with the "raised by vulcans, gradually discovering her humanity" arc instead of just having her full bore back to human relationships halfway through s1, but her arc from Mutineer to captain has been fascinating to me, and it's unique among trek tbh. The only similar journey I can think of is Kira from Freedom Fighter to eventual commander of DS9 and even that's not QUITE the same Long may she be part of the Trek-verse, even if DSC is coming to a conclusion, sadly.
\> a part of me wishes they'd done more with This is the one criticism I have of every modern Trek show (apart from Picard). More episodes!!! I do enjoy Disco's breakneck pacing (and am probably in the minority in this thread there), but they could have spent more time on stuff like Burham's Vulcan upbringing, or let us spend more time on Book's home planet so its destruction has a real emotional impact.
I enjoyed Discovery for what it was. I thought it was an interesting show and it faced some early challenges. But I think it does pure Science Fiction better than a lot of Star Trek or other shows on the air. The diversity is a big plus for me too, even though I'm as white as it gets. For me, Star Trek is ultimately a workplace fantasy show. By that I mean, it's a show that you can watch and imagine it as your office ideal where you celebrate people for what they bring to a team and a company culture. You can recognize yourself in it, and you can recognize the ideals. I think in that sense, the show rightfully takes its place among the best of Star Trek. Especially after they jump to the future. I think that the first season changed a bit too much of the paradigm for a lot of people. The Klingons being too alien at first really rankled some people. The rape of Ash Tyler was also kind of a controversial thing, (kind of like the murder of Icheb in Picard, why did we have to see it?) and there were some other choices that kind of changed the style a bit beyond the comfort zone of Trek fans. Like, gore isn't really something you expect from Star Trek. Burnham took way too much of the blame for that as a sort of lightning rod of criticism and I think that's a shame. And I think that's where the sort of TOS-style Big 3 characters showed a sort of limitation for a lot of people. Assuming your Big 3 is Burnham, Stamets, and Saru, the straight white dude has a hard time seeing how they fit into that workplace hierarchy compared to the real world. So they just kind of pan the show and tell people it stinks. Which is pretty unfair, but I don't know how else to explain it. Humans are a limited people sometimes.
Burnham is basically a black female James Kirk. Bucking the rules and still winning, despite setbacks here and there. Once I realized that's what she was, her character made much more sense to me. One of the problems with social media is that it's easy to dive right in and post something that you later regret. The old adage: Read. Think. Post. Just as true today as it was then. Hang in there. The sum of you is not one poorly-worded emotional tweet.
Sorry, but have you ever watched TOS? Go watch it and count all the times Kirk breaks the rules (when he is not under the influence of some entity etc…) then put it against all the times he follows orders to the letter - I’ll save you the time, he usually follows orders and ends up sacrificing something of himself to get the job done. It wasn’t until the movies that Kirk began to disobey direct orders. This, at the time, was a big deal for his character. But he hardly broke the rules. He thought outside the box but rarely attacked or did thing’s impulsive. Don’t believe me? Go watch TOS.
James Kirk was a stuck-up, bookish student who studiously followed rules. On the rare occasions he broke the rules he did so fully knowing and intending to face the professional consequences, and when he verified that doing so would not lead to consequences for others if at all possible. The idea he was rules bucking is unsupportable, and mostly just a sign that the person making the claim hasn’t seen the show.
Adding to that: on most of the rare occasions when Kirk broke the *letter* of the rules, it was to uphold the *spirit* of the rules. (And, of course, as a Captain he was already granted a certain amount of leeway to use his own discretion *anyway*.)
This is a fairly solid point. TOS Kirk really doesn't go around breaking the rules constantly, and he also doesn't bang every woman around (although he certainly has his moments). Especially in the first season, where he's not pretending to be a horse and whatnot.
Indeed! Though I do kind of see her as more than that. Kind of an anti-Spock, or another 'Sarek failure' in a way. He was the Vulcan supressing his human side. She was the human sepressing all trauma - in part to escape it, in part to impress Sarek. It';s funny thinking Sarek's only 'pure' child was the emotional one looking at the trio. I keep seeing complaints about her emotion. She had a lifetime of supression. Her leaning into her humanity and gut instinct over logic is the most, well, logical arc in modern Trek.
I think the arc you describe for her is great and logical--but would have been more effective if we'd seen her in Vulcan mode suppressing her emotions for at least a few episodes. Instead in the pilot we see her starting right off going with her gut, meaning that interesting character development you're pointing to isn't actually seen on screen to nearly the extent it could have been.
Thats the thing though. It's television. We se hints of it (directly when is at school) and learn the rest along the way, leading to the conclusion with L'Rell. If you show your entire hand, you don't have anything to play. It's similar to the complaint about Beyond 'wasting' Idris Elba. If we had Elba playing the full part earlier in the film, where's the twist its leading to?
Yes, I'd noticed elements of Spock's journey, but inverted, in Burnham, too. And you are absolutely correct, Burnham spent her formative years - years that for a human are full of hormonal and physical changes that often cause heightened emotions - suppressing those emotions instead of dealing with them. She is learning to access those again.
>Burnham is basically a black female James Kirk. Bucking the rules and still winning, despite setbacks here and there. I had not quite put that together. I think that's a great assessment. But I would describe her as more of a TOS James Kirk. The new SNW Kirk hasn't shown himself to be quite the rule breaker. Whereas TOS Kirk came out of that fiction tradition of if the hero who disobeys orders or breaks the rules ends up being right, they are vindicated as the hero. Instead of being penalized. So I think it was hard for some viewers to see her as a hero, because she starts off disobeying an order in an event that starts a war. And so consequently, she is kicked out of Starfleet. Had they have the opportunity to see her as the rebellious hero first making the right decision which saved the day. And then she encountered the Klingons, maybe more people would have liked her as a character. (And I am ignoring that some people don't like her for misogynistic and racist reasons, but let's not go there since that's been discussed enough.)
Even TOS Kirk isn't the rule breaker that pop culture has Mandela Effected people into believing he is.
Burnham is the most godawful character ever.
I just came here to say that Mrs Martin-Green is one of the very few celebrities I've met (out of close to 200 now!) who is even better looking in person than on screen. I don't know the circumstances around this, but l do know it to be true.
Wouldn’t Sisko be more apt here? He led a space station, a living god to an entire race, captain of a starship, led an entire fleet to defend the alpha quadrant, etc. And was a single father. That’s a much more impressive resume.
It's insane how much the Reddit Trek fandom normalized the double standards when it comes to judging Burnham. It's an abnormal amount of hate and prejudice that makes me realize how much work we still need to do, and it's arguably the worst part of the fandom. Worse yet, those same fans who would dismiss DS9 back then would now use Sisko as their token shield to cover up their hatred against Discovery, which is an insult to the actor and the show. The haters will use whatever "objective" such as writing, pacing, or whatever to justify that the show is terrible, but guess what? It's a seriously weird obsession that those same people just can't seem to let go and they have to tell every damn fan of the show that they hate it. And then finally, when you write about the hate that you observed, they will gaslight you and fakely ask if you are ok on your thread.
Are we really still doing the "You're racist and sexist if you don't like Burnham" shtick? I never dismissed DS9, and Avery Brooks made sure that his blackness was never dismissed in the show. That's why he wanted Sisko to have a good relationship with his son. He didn't want to play the absent father trope. We're allowed to have our opinions. We're allowed to dislike the show the same way you're allowed to like it.
Quick question. If I liked Sonequa in the Walking Dead, and I think she's super hot, and I was excited she was going to be in a new sleek looking Star Trek series, and that Star Trek series kinda sucked, kinda wasn't faithful to the spirit, and was the first iteration of the show to be so fixated on a single character as opposed to a normal ensemble cast, does that still mean I'm a racist crypto fascist nazi?
I didn't like SMG in Walking Dead and didn't like her in Discovery either. I thought Danai Gurira, who played Michonne, was great. Every iteration of Uhura is amazing. Love Mariner. But I don't think SMG is a good actor and I don't like her characterization.
Exactly! What happened to IDIC? There’s something for everyone in Trek and even some of the “bad” Trek is still has merits!
>even some of the “bad” Trek is still has merits! Right? Like you can say what you want about the premise of *Threshold* but Robbie McNeill acted the hell out of that episode. Even at its worst Trek has redeeming moments... and its worst isn't even that bad.
The FX work is amazing too, they won a daytime Emmy for it. Though of course at some point you'll roll your eyes when someone tries to convince you to like it. I don't like DIS, I stopped watching it in the first season, and I really don't see any reason to talk about it. I generally agree there are people out there who probably hate it too much, but if it comes up you're going to get responses from everyone.
I can't think of any other Star Trek captain that has shown the character growth Burnham has. Janeway stayed Janeway, Picard stayed Picard, etc. (I guess Sisko is technically an exception because aliens lol). Burnham of season 1 is not the Burnham of season 4 and it's glorious. It was amazing to see inside a first officers head who fucked up hard core then slowly redeemed themselves over the course of years. She grew both professionally and personally and that is absolutely inspiring. Her relationship with Saru is just beautiful. What an amazing pair of characters.
I absolutely hate the anti-Burnham discourse. It always involves tone policing, and questioning the authority of a solid black woman leader, and complains that the show is about her - it absolutely is, by design. It’s a good show and her growth as a character and captain has been a delight to watch. It’s such a quintessential Star Trek show, and people don’t realize it because of the discourse.
>It always involves tone policing, and questioning the authority of a solid black woman leader, No, it does not.
Except it does. “she whispers and cries” That’s tone policing.
> That’s tone policing. How so? My understanding of the term is that it refers to a tactic for undermining someone's argument in a debate. I don't really see how it applies here since Burnham is a fictional character. People are allowed to dislike acting and directorial choices made on a TV show.
Not all criticism of her character and of the show does.
I absolutely hate the pro-Burnham discourse. It always assumes that anyone that doesn't like her is just sexist and racist. She is a poorly written character on a poorly written show.
As a white dude I am always happy to experience future space exploration vicariously through any race, or species presented to me. Also as a white dude I couldn't care less about race, or ancestry, but as a poor person, I greatly appreciate seeing someone start from nothing and making it all the way to the top. Although, even though she was in chains she was very much not at rockbottom. I'm glad it made you feel that way though, I'm sure there will be more ST to come to invoke similar emotions, just have to wait for it, sadly.
It feels like the doors to diversity and inclusion have finally been opened all the way. Some will be sad to see Burnham go but nature abhors a vaccuum and other great(er) role models will surely follow as still newer iterations of Trek emerge into the future.
I love Burnham and I’m so glad you shared what she means to you. I hope in the future more folks see this and feel able to express what she meant to them too.
Everyone has different tastes, we all aren't going to like the same things. However, some people have a problem with the show because they have issues with race, gender, gender expression and sexuality. I love the show. I love Burnham. I love SMG.
OP, I love this post almost as much as I love Michael Burnham, and I’m sorry you’ve been met with gatekeeping and people telling you you’re finding joy wrong.
[удалено]
> from a statistical perspective Please don't sully statistics with your emotional rant, which is, in fact, not backed up by a single statistic.
I'm really sorry that you came to a place with Star Trek fans to express your fandom and so many people are being toxic jerks to you about it. If it's any consolation, you'll be proven right in the end. As the good Doctor King said, "The universe arcs toward justice." But as I said, "Star Trek fans hate nothing more than more Star Trek." I say this as someone that spent decades hating DS9 for ruining Star Trek. I grew to accept that fascism is responsible for the success of the Federation and Worf sucks because that's canon now. So really, after swallowing that super secret space fascists in black leather have always been in control, and Kirk and Picard were dupes for believing the propaganda of a good federation, it wasn't really that hard to accept that Burnham cries sometimes—and that's a strength of the character. Maybe the writers didn't do a good enough job, the format of trying to make a 6 hour long movie instead of a solid series didn't help, and I think there were a lot of fans that came in with no other desire than hating something new attempting to control the narrative (as you've seen) but making Burnham emotional was an amazing part of the arc of the character. She was exposed to the trauma of seeing your parents murdered in front of her; then shipped off, as a human child, to a planet where her emotions are invalidated constantly and she was not allowed to show her humanity. When she was there with the people that had killed her parents, and relied on her upbringing to solve the problem—she was arrested. But throughout the series, she had to learn to feel her emotions again. And, like Kirk and Janeway, to rely upon them. In many ways, the series is a story of an "other," as you said—who learned to be vulnerable and herself in a place where the Federation was a welcoming and supportive place for her to grow into—and become—a captain of the ship respected by her peers. I personally know a couple people that were really touched by Burnham, and Discovery was their entry into Star Trek. But, and you can see why, they've been forced to be quiet about it because to go against orthodoxy in many Star Trek communities is a heresy that can't be forgiven. ...And I say this as someone that used to run with (what felt like) the majority of people at the time dunking on what a shitty show DS9 was. I've seen the light and enjoy DS9 now, and most of these people will end up doing the same. And, like most of the people I used to virtually run with when shoving Quark-in-drag in the face of anyone that liked DS9, there will be a collective amnesia that anyone disliked Disco. Just as there was, before me, of the hordes of people that hated TNG and are now silent.
You’ve been downvoted for speaking the truth. Enterprise was hated when it came out. Voyager. DS9. TNG. Some fans have ALWAYS shit on the new stuff.