Everyone I Know Seems Divided About Star Trek: Discovery

A debate over Star Trek: Discovery has been raging in my social media feeds. Some Trek fans are euphoric about the way the new season is unfolding, while others proclaim that at this point they are already “hate-watching.”

To be clear, I think it’s much too soon to pass any kind of summary judgment on Discovery. Many shows—most shows—take several episodes if not entire seasons to find their sea legs (space legs?), and Discovery is only at five episodes, two of which encompassed the pilot. All Treks began a bit shakily, and I found Discovery‘s pilot to be exceptional.

Personally, I’m in the euphoric camp: I’d been afraid that the secrecy around Discovery in its build-up meant that it might be a mess, and instead, I’ve been enjoying a finely-acted ensemble drama that’s grappling with the brutal Federation/Klingon war. Characters are ambiguous in their motivations, protocols are suspended, rules are broken for the greater good—but at what cost? Already, Discovery is asking big questions of its audience.

And the show’s dedication to diversity is undeniably thrilling to me. People of color are in almost every scene, important women abound, and we finally have our first LGBTQIA main cast couple, played by Anthony Rapp and Wilson Cruz (which is like a little gift to old school RENT fans like me every time they’re onscreen). Sonequa Martin-Green, in the lead role of Michael Burnham, is riveting, and her Vulcan-trained logic is perfectly matched against Jason Isaacs’ mysterious, many-shades-of-gray Captain Lorca.

Before and right after Discovery premiered, the naysayers I was seeing seemed to come from trollish types, those who were offended that this Trek featured such prominent diversity—where was their Star Trek, they demanded to know. I imagine this was somewhat of the same type that threw fits and threatened to boycott Star Wars when the first The First Awakens posters highlighted Rey and Finn. But the folks I now see wavering on Discovery are not trolls. They’re my friends, from diverse backgrounds, are established Trek fans, and have opinions on media that I’ve come to trust. So what’s going on here?

When one of my dearest friends posted that she was “grumpy” about Discovery, and several of her friends agreed, I asked why. Here’s what she said:

I didn’t really want a grimdark Trek, I don’t like what they did to the Klingons, and there are too many plot beats that go:

“You shouldn’t do that, my scientific expertise says this is a terrible idea” … “But I’M the CAPTAIN, dammit!” (terrible things happen) (rinse-repeat).

Sonequa Martin-Green is fucking great and is trying to carry this show all on her own, and I want her to have a show actually worthy of her, but at least for me it isn’t it yet.

And I guess, I’m a canon nerd here but I just don’t see how you get a universe that looks like this 10 years before Kirk and Spock, and how literally nobody in the Federation but one dead person has any Trek-type ideals at all — and yet 10 years later, folks are supposed to be back to seeking out new life, peaceful exploration, etc etc.

Maybe this is just the most chaotic neutral 12 people in the Federation, but I’m confused about their motivations, even in the world we’re given.

I think that these are totally valid criticisms of the show (I also really, really don’t like what they did to the Klingons and find the endless scenes in perfect Klingon to last a million years). I also agree that we’re already reaching a poor formulaic set-up where one character warns someone not to do something, they do it anyway, and Bad Things happen—this is only lessened sometimes by Discovery surprising you by going somewhere else entirely.

But what it might eventually come down to is that “grimdark” note: you either want a Star Trek that’s currently walking a morally fine line and often pushing it, or you don’t. Nobody’s wrong here; it’s a matter of personal taste. I’m the kind of person who tends to yell “Screw the Prime Directive!!!” at the TV, so maybe it’s more a matter of personality.

While Discovery may feel like it’s part of our current “gritty reboot” culture, at least it’s a gritty reboot done with a considerable amount of thought as to why there’s so much darkness. This is a future at war, and in wartime, most people really are “chaotic neutral” in order to survive and carry out orders. That doesn’t mean they’ll always be this way. One of the strengths of Star Trek has long been episodes that slowly reveal our characters’ backgrounds, families, loves, and losses. No character was ever born into Star Trek whole, and I believe Discovery has done a good job of showing us who everyone appears to be, while promising that there is richness to be mined underneath.

I think what a lot of people are missing right now are those moments of levity that made Star Trek feel like home: poker games with the crew, drinks at Ten Forward or at Quark’s, costume dramas in the holodecks that inevitably malfunction and trap our heroes in a fantasy world within a fantasy world for a while. People smiling at each other. But just because Discovery hasn’t gotten to have much fun yet doesn’t mean it never will. (The end of Sunday’s episode seemed to hint at the Mirror Universe, so there’s that.)

This war won’t last forever, and our new crew is onboard a science vessel that is primed to plumb the final frontier’s unknowns. I think Discovery deserves our attention and a chance to grow and show us what it’s really made of. But I could do without those Klingons.

What do you think?

(images: CBS)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—