News flash from DS9: racism is wrong.
Chuck Geary
Fellow Treksters/Trekkies/Trekkers/What-the-hell-ever,
DISCLAIMER: I like DS9. A lot. It beats the crap out of Voyager (and 99% of
all other TV) on a regular basis. But it's not perfect.
Anyway, I hate to base judgment of an unseen episode on the promos (which
usually embellish heavily), but why do we need a DS9 episode about
white-black racism?
Set phasers on "snide" (click-beep-boop).
So Cisko (sp?) somehow time-travels to what appears to be the '40s and gets
pissed on (figuratively speaking). What is the lesson here? That racism is
wrong? That black people have been (and continue to be, to a lesser extent)
mistreated in the 20th century?
Well, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.
Are we seeing this because this is black history month? Oh, I can just SMELL
the flames coming now. But please, read on.
From what I see in the promo, the delivery just appears a bit heavy-handed.
I prefer the more clever approach toward racism that we saw in the original
series episode (I forget the name) where the half-white-faced,
half-black-faced people wipe each other out because one is white or black on
the "wrong" half of the face.
One of the things I like about Trek is that it's set in a time when people
are past all the racial shit and just *live.* So please, Paramount: the rest
of the mass media preaches at me enough; I don't need to see a "who are you
calling 'boy' " message from Starfleet HQ.
ANOTHER DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying we shouldn't continue to educate
ourselves about past and present race problems. But hey, haven't we had the
"racism is evil" message drilled into our heads long enough? Can't we just
say "yes, black people -- not to mention Asians, Irish, Hispanics, etc.,
etc., etc. -- have been (and, to some extent, are still) oppressed" and move
on?
No, I didn't say "forget." I said "move on." Remember past sins so we don't
repeat them, but don't dwell on them, either.
I'll watch the episode anyway and judge for myself, of course. But if
Paramount is trying to sell me more "white guilt," I'm not buying.
Let the flames begin.
Sincerely,
Chuck Geary
Jefferson City, MO USA
================================
To reply, remove the "diespammersdie" from
my e-mail address.
Attention all spammers: Get a real job.
That's as polite as I'll be.
Mike Gasper
Minor SPOILERS...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Although Racism is definitely a them in the episode, the episode is
Prophet invoked, and definitely has hidden meanings in it which have
little to do with racism.
If you watch the episode for details, and then compare the events of
this episode to the events in the next season and a half of DS9, you
will probably find many parallels. And you may just find a hint about
the future of Sisko, Bajor and the Dominion in this episode.
-Mike Gasper.
Dave Roy
I was walking through the park one day when "Chuck Geary"
<cge...@diespammersdie.computerland.net> wrote:
>Fellow Treksters/Trekkies/Trekkers/What-the-hell-ever,
>
>DISCLAIMER: I like DS9. A lot. It beats the crap out of Voyager (and 99% of
>all other TV) on a regular basis. But it's not perfect.
>
>Anyway, I hate to base judgment of an unseen episode on the promos (which
>usually embellish heavily), but why do we need a DS9 episode about
>white-black racism?
Then why do it? Usually promos are light-years away from what the
episode is really about.
Why not wait and see?
>Set phasers on "snide" (click-beep-boop).
>
>So Cisko (sp?) somehow time-travels to what appears to be the '40s and gets
>pissed on (figuratively speaking). What is the lesson here? That racism is
>wrong? That black people have been (and continue to be, to a lesser extent)
>mistreated in the 20th century?
>
>Well, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.
>
>Are we seeing this because this is black history month? Oh, I can just SMELL
>the flames coming now. But please, read on.
That's probably part of it.... that doesn't mean it won't be a good
one.
>From what I see in the promo, the delivery just appears a bit heavy-handed.
>I prefer the more clever approach toward racism that we saw in the original
>series episode (I forget the name) where the half-white-faced,
>half-black-faced people wipe each other out because one is white or black on
>the "wrong" half of the face.
Maybe (I'm saying maybe because I haven't seen it yet either) it's
about how Sisko, a black man from a century where racism no longer
exists, learns just how far his people have come? Maybe it's a
character building episode, and not just a preaching episode.
That's probably not it, but the point is that you don't know until you
see it, *especially* with Paramount's promo machine. So why make a
judgement about it now?
Dave Roy
Roberto Castillo
After a long, hard day of battling the soulless minions of orthodoxy, I came
home just in time to see "Chuck Geary"
<cge...@diespammersdie.computerland.net> writing:
>Fellow Treksters/Trekkies/Trekkers/What-the-hell-ever,
>DISCLAIMER: I like DS9. A lot. It beats the crap out of Voyager (and 99% of
>all other TV) on a regular basis. But it's not perfect.
>Anyway, I hate to base judgment of an unseen episode on the promos (which
>usually embellish heavily), but why do we need a DS9 episode about
>white-black racism?
Why did we need an episode about Morn's supposed death? Just watch the
episode and make up your mind then.
>Set phasers on "snide" (click-beep-boop).
>So Cisko (sp?) somehow time-travels to what appears to be the '40s and gets
^^^^^
Sisko
>pissed on (figuratively speaking). What is the lesson here? That racism is
>wrong? That black people have been (and continue to be, to a lesser extent)
>mistreated in the 20th century?
Well, according to Gene Roddenberry, racism doesn't exist in Star Trek's era
and hasn't existed for a long time. So what would a person from the 24th
century make of such attitudes? In the past, we've seen characters like
Riker smugly dismiss their primitive human ancestors, patting themselves on
the back about how evolved they are.
Judging from the previews for "Far beyond the Stars," this won't be an
option for Sisko. He may actually have to learn how to fit into and work
within this system. If it's done well, we could wind up with a classic
episode. The "Past Tense" two-parter in season three, had similar ambitions
and didn't quite make it, but it came close especially in Part II. I guess
we'll have to watch to know for certain.
>Are we seeing this because this is black history month? Oh, I can just SMELL
>the flames coming now. But please, read on.
?
>From what I see in the promo, the delivery just appears a bit heavy-handed.
It doesn't look too bad to me.
>I prefer the more clever approach toward racism that we saw in the original
>series episode (I forget the name) where the half-white-faced,
>half-black-faced people wipe each other out because one is white or black on
>the "wrong" half of the face.
That wasn't clever at all. "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield" was about as
subtle as a sledgehammer (great title though). We saw a dynamic similar to
that which I described above with our heroes watching mystified as these two
enemy races killed each other off, secure in the knowledge that a similar
thing could never happen to them, since racism no longer exists on Earth.
If you want a truly subtle approach towards racism in TOS, try reading
between the lines of "The Galileo Seven." Look at the way Spock's crew
reacts to his decisions and imagine how they would react if these decisions
had been made by Kirk or by some other human commander. I think you'll find
a completely different story buried under that shows plot.
>One of the things I like about Trek is that it's set in a time when people
>are past all the racial shit and just *live.*
I like that too but that's just the sort of thing that can make an episode
like this so special if they manage to pull it off. Because Trek is set in a
time where racism is a thing of the past, seeing a character return to a
time where racism is very much a real thing, can tell a great deal about
that character and about how far humans have come in the 24th century.
>So please, Paramount: the rest
>of the mass media preaches at me enough; I don't need to see a "who are you
>calling 'boy' " message from Starfleet HQ.
This episode is set in the past. From what I've read, Sisko gets sent back
in time courtesy of the Wormhole aliens (aka the Prophets, aka the Bajor's
gods who've decided to make Sisko Bajor's spiritual leader). So you've got a
lot more going on here than a simple "racism bad, political correctness
good" message (hopefully TPBP will leave that task up to the Clinton
administration).
>I'll watch the episode anyway and judge for myself, of course. But if
>Paramount is trying to sell me more "white guilt," I'm not buying.
Who asked you to? Save your outrage for something that you've had a chance
to see already.
--
"I am First Omet'iklan, and I am dead. As of this moment, we are all
dead. We go into battle to reclaim our lives. This we do gladly, for
we are Jem'Hadar. Remember, victory is life."
-- Omet'iklan
"I am Chief Miles Edward O'Brien. I'm very much alive, and I intend
to *stay* that way."
-- O'Brien
"I'm worried about Bart. Today, he's sucking people's blood,
tommorrow he might be smoking."
-Marge Simpson
Roberto Castillo
University of Illinois at Chicago
E-Mail: rca...@uic.edu
http://www2.uic.edu/~rcasti1/rcasti1.html
Jeff Barrus
From what I can gather about the episode (having not seen it), the point
is for us to *finally* learn just how racism was done away with by the
time of Star Trek. To do that, I assume they're going to pick a
particularly bad time for blacks in the 20th century -- the 1950's -- and
shunt Sisko into it to show how things were, and eventually explain how
they've changed.
I'm pretty excited about it myself (especially since the actor who plays
Sisko's dad, Joseph Brock [I think that's his name] is coming back for the
episode), and have a hard time respecting anyone's critcisms about a) an
episode they haven't seen, and b) a show they obviously don't watch, since
they mispell Sisko's name (but to their credit, seem to be aware of the
misspelling).
-Jeff
Brian Barjenbruch
> I'm pretty excited about it myself (especially since the actor who plays
> Sisko's dad, Joseph Brock [I think that's his name]
Brock Peters.
Brian
Ouroboros
Chuck Geary wrote in message <6bot8e$l35$1...@news.cland.net>...
>Fellow Treksters/Trekkies/Trekkers/What-the-hell-ever,
>
>DISCLAIMER: I like DS9. A lot. It beats the crap out of Voyager (and 99% of
>all other TV) on a regular basis. But it's not perfect.
>
>Anyway, I hate to base judgment of an unseen episode on the promos (which
>usually embellish heavily), but why do we need a DS9 episode about
>white-black racism?
>
The episode is NOT bout racism..it's about struggle. The struggle that Benny
had to go through was racism..but that's NOT Sisko's struggle. But they do
tie in..watch the show before you comment. You might be surprised.
And damn it...it's SISKO...not Cisko! :)
It's been 6 years how could anyone not spell it right at this point.
Victor
Luvhomescl
>Anyway, I hate to base judgment of an unseen episode on the promos (which
>usually embellish heavily), but why do we need a DS9 episode about
>white-black racism?
No flames from me... you don't have to duck:-) BUT-- I'm gonna say I think
this ep was great. Not heavy handed. It made perfect sense.
The Dominion/Fed war IS all about racism . There is racism (specieism?) between
the Bajorans and Cardassians. The Klingons aren't the most non-racist people.
Watch the Worf Wedding episode.
And most of all, the dominion...Go listen to the Female Changelings words to
odo in the war arc stories.
The prophets were trying to communicate with Sisko, who was about to quit the
war. They, as usual, pulled images up from his own mind in order to communicate
with him. In this case, they took what would have been distant history to him,
and used it to relay themessage that he must not give up the fight.
Despite a touch of overacting on Brooks' part, this was an excellent episode. I
really enjoyed it. One of the best.
It was touching, pointed, emotional... and sometimes, despite the heavy
message-- fun.
-m