Drex Files tipped me off to a great
CSI episode, "A Space Oddity." (Considering that blog's
much wider readership you probably got the tip too. Old news. Old News . . .)
I've long been a fan of
CSI and it's various incarnations, but recently have fallen out of the habit of watching it. But that clip motivated me to catch the episode onDemand. If you're a fan of
CSI,
Star Trek, or both it's an episode worth watching.
Check out the full episode on FanCast here.
There's a nice summary and review over at
CSI Files, with a nice explanation of the connections between this episode and
Battlestar Galactica (a series I simply know nothing about personally). But there's no doubt that the fictional
Astro Quest is primarily a
Star Trek metaphor.
What pleasantly surprised me was that this was not just a parody of the general themes of
Star Trek (along the lines of
Galaxy Quest). The episode contains very specific references to specific scenes in specific episodes of
Star Trek, most notably "The Gamesters of Triskelion" and "The Cage," but also more subtle riffs like a throw away line near the end of the episode with a distinctly "A Piece of the Action" flavor. (They viewed what book as the basis of their culture?) I also enjoyed Jon Wellner's portrayal of lab tech
Henry Andrews as a Spock/Data-like character, which droopy inverted Vulcan lobes and that distinctive android head tic.
But beyond all the
Trek trivia this episode is very timely on the eve of the release of the new
Star Trek movie. I've steered clear of most spoilers, and would prefer to do so until I see the movie myself. Here on my blog I've hesitated to voice too strong of an opinion on the controversial film. I would very much like to reserve judgment until I see it myself. But "A Space Oddity" serves as a fitting metaphor for the crossroads the Star Trek franchise has reached.
In this episode we see an exaggerated view of both sides - the over the top (even insultingly stereotypical) portrayal of fiercely loyal fans who demand the purity of their mythology
and the creator of
Astro Quest Redux who has re-booted the show into an outrageously distorted version of the original.
Then we have the scarred soldier who explains to an initially dismissive Nick Stokes why
Astro Quest appeals to him. This character is probably more representative of reality. There is something about these stories that has resonated in a meaningful way with people for decades. That understandably stirs feelings of loyalties to certain interpretations of this body of work.
How far can that interpretation be modified before it becomes disrespectful of the original? And at the same time, how rigid are we going to be in our interpretation?
Assuming it fills the basic appeal the stories have always had, is there room for something more in the
Star Trek universe - or perhaps in the soon-to-be, multiverse? We will find out. Maybe not all at once, maybe not in reaction to one single movie. But we will find out.
As many debates over canon there have been, never has the face of
Trek changed so significantly as it is about to. This really is
Star Trek: Redux. Where does that leave fans of the past 40-some years? A friend of mine who is at best casually acquainted with
Star Trek recently asked me if I was excited about the new
Star Trek movie. He quickly added, "It seems like it's too cool for you."
It was a good natured comment, if slightly insulting, but his observation is telling. He recognizes that the trailers he has seen are a major departure from anything he knows as
Trek. He sees it as potentially enjoyable summer entertainment (with - in his words - "cool monsters") but not "real"
Trek.
Now I intend to see the movie and suspect I will enjoy it on some level. I guess the question is, on
what level? I really hope it can have a respectable place in the
Star Trek mythos. But I have to admit I'm nervous about it. What does it mean for the future of
Star Trek?
The original series spawned several series and a number of motion pictures. But how often has a motion picture spawned a television series and succeeded? Can we really expect this movie to bring
Star Trek in a straight line back to the small screen?
In the forward to one of the
Strange New World anthologies it was argued that short stories are an excellent format for
Star Trek because television shows are essentially short stories. Most of
Star Trek's strongest moments are in these individual episodes - stories told in about 40 minutes. And yet these individual moments also carry an emotional weight because following the series over many episodes allows for an emotional investment in the characters that
cannot be accomplished in just an hour or two.
On the other hand the format of motion pictures, while creating some very entertaining
Trek adventures, hasn't always captured the kinds of moments that really make
Trek work. (For example, "The City on the Edge of Forever" is not a summer blockbuster, but is one of the most celebrated moments of
Star Trek history.) At the same time constant concerns of accessibility to the general public leads to awkward re-introductions to long established aspects of
Trek lore or character background.
So my concern basically is this: Cosmetics and canon aside - and I have those concerns as well - is the future of
Star Trek being consigned to a format that has never served the stories as effectively as the television format?
The best case scenario is that this film really will introduce a new generation / new demographic of people to the characters that are the touchstone for the whole mythos we as fans have come to love. If that can happen, and the re-imagining isn't too extreme, then maybe there can be a series of movies that starts to accumulate the emotional and intellectual momentum the characters and concepts of the
Trek universe deserve
.
In any event I think it will be a long time before
Star Trek fans are completely comfortable with a multiplicity of Kirks (like the multiplicty of Superman and Batman incarnations for example). It just has never been done before, not in this universe.
If there are future series and books in what I will call the new
Star Trek universe, or in
other new
Star Trek universes, and those persist for another 40 years, perhaps
we will reach that point where the differences are of less consequence then the entertainment value of an enlarged family of stories to choose from
.
If there was one thing that this episode of
CSI made clear it is this: no matter how many iterations our favorite show(s) go through, no matter how much we might love each new generation of stories, there will
always be something special about the originals, the classics. At least it will always be special to those of us who grew up on the originals (or re-runs of the originals - or pseudo originals like
TNG). They will be the stories we return to, the DVD collections that friends gather around the same way the CSIs do at the end of the episode.
I finally saw the new Star Trek movie tonight. While I take time to collect my thoughts on the new film as a whole let me comment on one little aspect of it - matters of translation.
