FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-18-2003, 11:01 AM   #41
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the land of two boys and no sleep.
Posts: 9,890
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Friar Bellows
No, not at all. I'm merely suggesting that there should be diversity. I don't see much diversity in Klingons, or Ferengi, or Romulans. I see a lot of it in Humans, though.
Fair enough. I'm not sure I agree, simply because I don't really see it in the humans in ST. But in watching a particular episode last night, I heard a couple of comments that made me cringe, so maybe there is truth in what you say. I still think it was a far more progresive show than most of what was on at the time.

Quote:
This comment smells of sarcasm. Like I should have watched this movie or something.
Not that you *should*, just that your comment made it sound like you were unaware of them. Either way I'm just busting your chops.

Quote:
Sorry, but fantasy movies is something I left behind in my adolescence.
I love the fantasy genre - a much-needed break from reality (where heroes can be heroes...and nobody thanks Jesus!)

Quote:
Eventually, I stopped watching what marketing companies told me I should watch, and discovered a whole new world of cinema, mostly independent, and almost totally ignored by the mainstream. It's kept me busy ever since.
Independant cinema is a mixed bag for me. I totally agree with your take on blockbuster marketing, but I would also argue (re: indie cinema) that it can be a turn-off being told what movies are *really* good, but I'm too dumb to know it.

I do plan to see Ararat and Atanarjuat: the Fast Runner.
Wyz_sub10 is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 12:18 PM   #42
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: arse-end of the world
Posts: 2,305
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Wyz_sub10
Fair enough. I'm not sure I agree, simply because I don't really see it in the humans in ST. But in watching a particular episode last night, I heard a couple of comments that made me cringe, so maybe there is truth in what you say. I still think it was a far more progresive show than most of what was on at the time.
But be aware I'm relying on memories of the show from the early to mid 90's and I did not watch more than maybe 1/3 of the shows from any particular season. This is "Star Trek: The Next Generation" I'm talking about. These are merely impressions I got from the show. I wouldn't call it a rigorous analysis!

Quote:
I love the fantasy genre - a much-needed break from reality (where heroes can be heroes...and nobody thanks Jesus!)
Each to his own.

Quote:
Independant cinema is a mixed bag for me. I totally agree with your take on blockbuster marketing, but I would also argue (re: indie cinema) that it can be a turn-off being told what movies are *really* good, but I'm too dumb to know it.
Yeah, definitely it's a mixed bag. Mostly mediocre. But there are some real gems out there, often ignored by so-called film critics, even the "refined" ones. OK, now we're way off the subject area of the forum so I'll shut up!
Friar Bellows is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 12:36 PM   #43
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
Default

From "Brain Bugs" on StarDestroyer.net:
Quote:
Klingon Vikings
In the original series, the Klingons were an aggressive military superpower with expansionist ambitions. In the Cold War politics of the time, they obviously represented the USSR, while the Romulans just as obviously represented Red China. They appeared little different from us; they could be violent, aggressive, sly, cloying, or deceptive, just like us. But at the end of "Errand of Mercy", Kor reflected wistfully upon the grand battle that never was: "it would have been glorious!" Oh, from such humble beginnings did such a vast mythology grow ...

For some 20 years, it was widely understood that the Klingons were symbolically Russian communists, and throughout even the TOS movies, this theme remained clear. Kor's single line of dialogue did not figure too prominently in the fans' assessment of Klingon culture. But the TNG writers got it in their heads that Cold War politics were no longer appropriate in the politically correct 1990s, so they decided to rewrite the Klingons. What did they base the rewrite on? Kor's single line of dialogue. Kor mentioned his wistful desire for a "glorious" battle royale, and the ancient Vikings believed that death in battle was "glorious". That's enough of a connection for a brain bug; the writers decided that the Klingons had a similar history to our own, and that there were ancient Vikings in their past too. Naturally, the fans went along for the ride.

Time for this brain bug to start growing. In "Heart of Glory", Worf ran into Korris, a Klingon social reactionary who wanted to return to the bygone era of ancient warrior values. No big deal, right? This brain bug has grown as far as it's going to grow, right?

Wrong. Nobody seemed to notice that Korris was a dinosaur even among his own people. They noticed only that this was a cool new aspect of Klingon culture, so the writers grabbed this assumption and ran with it. They proceeded to construct an entire society around the notion that the Klingons were futuristic Vikings. The Viking contempt for a "straw death" became the Klingon contempt for a straw death (peaceful death away from battle). The Viking glorification of death in battle became the Klingon glorification of death in battle. The Viking raider ships became the Klingon Birds of Prey (which rapidly became the Klingons' principal combat vessel). Valhalla, the great hall of Viking warriors in the afterlife, became Stovokor, the great hall of Klingon warriors in the afterlife. The great feasts in Valhalla became the great feasts of Stovokor. They somewhat liberalized Klingon government (in which the Chancellor's daughter took control of the Empire in ST6) reverted to the Vikings' strict patriarchal society in which women were treated as chattel and not permitted to hold rank or power (the only two that tried were the Duras sisters, who were naturally portrayed as evil). The Vikings' patriarchal religion, with its patriarchal pantheon, became the Klingons' patriarchal religion (albeit mutated to conform to Judeo-Christian values, so it centred on a lone male prophet). The militarization of their society became so exaggerated that their battle armour became everyday clothes; while Klingon dignitaries wore leather in ST6, Klingon politicians wear full military body armour even in the highest offices of their own government in TNG.

The writers even resurrected the Vikings' primitive melee weapons, arming Klingons with large, gleaming bladed weapons that became more and more prominent in their fighting style until they seemed to constitute the Klingons' primary combat weapon by the time of DS9. Even the animism associated with some of the ancient Nordic pagan rituals returned. The Klingons were transformed from civilized people into animalistic predators who ate raw meat, growled ferally during lovemaking or when threatened, and treated the act of hunting not as a method of gathering food or as a sport, but as an eroticized ritual. Their appearance, altered for the TOS movies in order to make them look more alien, was altered again, in order to further this sub-human characterization. Look carefully at the teeth of Klingons in the TOS movies ST3 and ST6; they look just like human teeth, don't they? But in TNG, they began to look more and more like the teeth of wolves: sharp, jagged, and pointed every which way. From one scene in ST6 where a Klingon eats something with his hands (something which is entirely appropriate today with certain types of foods, and which can be easily chalked up to cultural awkwardness), the writers decided that Klingons are feral eaters too, and TNG-era Klingons eat the way my dog would, if only he had opposable thumbs.

What started as an enemy superpower with a mysterious but familiar alien culture became a farcical one-note alien society concocted around comic-book interpretations of ancient Norsemen and a not-so-subtle, rather disturbing white supremacist theme of subhuman, dark-skinned uncivilized savages. Before too long, it became a caricature of itself: Worf's pathetic obsession with the most garish aspects of Klingon history became the entirety of Klingon culture. It got so bad that we eventually saw the leadership of the entire Klingon Empire decided by a knife fight! I personally nominate this particular brain bug as a strong competitor for the Jeffries tubes' position as the most powerful brain bug in Star Trek.
Seems pretty accurate.
tronvillain is offline  
Old 02-18-2003, 01:20 PM   #44
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the land of two boys and no sleep.
Posts: 9,890
Default

The bottom line for me (and I'll close on this note) is the writters were damned either way.

If you make the Klingons like humans, then you run the risk of being called ethnocentric, and assuming everything else has to be and act like we do because it's the "right way".

If you make the Klingons decidedly different, then you run the risk of being called racist, and assuming nothing else can compare to us because we do things the "right way".

Whenever you create a society from scratch (be it elves or Klingons or orcs or vampires) you need to define some values and characteristics in order to give them some identity.

We have two places to draw these characteristics - human societies and animal bahaviour.

Of course you are going to assign some traits which are unfavourable. Of course you are going to have people looking for the "real world" Klingons.

But really, what's the option? ST does a good job at creating societies that are pretty damn imaginative. But the Borg wear thin, and you cannot have a 7-year story around a race of beings that value canasta above all else.

I've heard it said that living things have four primary instincts - feeding, fighting, fucking and fleeing. (argue amongst yourselves)

It seems reasonable to try and tie these instincts to created cultures. (feeding=Ferengi, fighting=Klingons, fleeing=Romulans, fucking=Federation)

We get the "self-preservation" instinct because it is more morallay palatable to us than the other three (and really, how many Klingons actually watch TNG?).

I'm not saying that racism in the characters does not exist. Just that, one way or another, someone is going to cry foul.
Wyz_sub10 is offline  
Old 02-24-2003, 10:55 AM   #45
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Anytown, USA
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Friar Bellows
I'm quite familiar with cultural characteristics. What I also know is this: humans have many different cultures, and each culture has a lot more than just one single characteristic.



LOTR = Lord of the Rings, right? I read that book when I was a kid, about 20 years ago! Can't remember much about it. Sorry.
Do you live in the woods or something? I watch alot of independant films, and love them, but there are a few mainstream movies worth watching and the two that have come out are worth watching.
Zentraedi is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:13 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.