Much is (and has been) made
of the Star Trek universe, which, of course, has been around for
more than 30 years. Countless articles have been written; countless opinions
have been put forward, argued, defended, and reshaped; countless Internet
sites and bulletin boards currently feature discussion and debate.
And, it would seem, countless
incarnations of the Trekkian enterprise (no pun intended) will
continue to be produced, in some shape
or form.
Where is this franchise (as many, myself included, tend to call it) going?
For that matter, where has it already gone? And who am I to say?
Welcome to "The Deeper Side
of Trek," a new biweekly SPACE.com series about Star Trek
culture. Every two weeks, this column will explore a topic relating to
the Star Trek world and its satellites, ranging from the themes
underlying the shows and films themselves, to topics of fandom outside
that fictional world.
In this premiere installment,
I'd like to offer a quick overview of what the Franchise "is" -- from one
person's perspective, anyway.
History (the extremely
abridged version)
As most reading this probably
know, Star Trek began in 1966 as just another television show, created
by Gene
Roddenberry, which ran for three seasons (having been canceled and
then barely renewed for its second and third seasons following famous letter-writing
campaigns). At some point that is perhaps difficult to pinpoint, Trek
took on a legendary pop-culture status that was not immediately evident
in the ratings numbers of The
Original Series. The fans' passion is perhaps worth noting, particularly
in light of such things as the letter-writing campaigns and the Trek
conventions that gained
momentum over the years following TOS.
The film franchise launched
in 1979, following years of behind-the-scenes shuffling that had Star
Trek's destination bouncing around among the options of becoming a
TV movie, returning to episodic television, and being released as a feature
film. It finally became the feature Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
The 1977 success of Star Wars and Close Encounters of the Third
Kind had more than a little to do with it.
A few years later, in 1982,
along came the second feature film, The
Wrath of Khan, whose success among the public provided the affirmation
necessary for Trek such that it could (and would) continue right
up until the present.
Looking at more recent, "second-generation"
history, we see that the debut of The
Next Generation in 1987 paved the way for Star Trek in a
new arena -- that of first-run syndicated TV -- which was followed in 1993
by Deep
Space Nine. And in 1995, with Voyager
as the cornerstone, Paramount finally achieved its goal of launching
its own network - something it had intended back when the revival project
that would eventually become the first motion picture was still envisioned
as a TV series.
My point? Well, Star Trek
has logged a lot of hours on the screen, giving us plenty to discuss (and
debate), and with plans
for a fifth series already under way, it seems those discussions will
continue . . . while receiving fresh fuel for the fire. In future columns
I'll address aspects relevant to all the series, but for now I present
their collective sum as the primary entry for The Definition.
The source material, first
and foremost
The Franchise, by
its technical definition, encompasses every consumer product related to
Star Trek licensed through Paramount Pictures Corporation. This
includes the TV shows, the movies, the novels, tons and tons of toys and
other fan trinkets, gourmet
water and any other "official" piece of merchandise relating directly
to Star Trek.
There are of course the unofficial,
unlicensed books and other merchandise, not to mention reams of fan-administered
Web sites, which would not fall under the definition of the Franchise,
but rather the fan-base end of the Trek universe. This fan base
is also a very large and certainly no less important aspect of Trek
culture.
However, for my purposes,
Star Trek mainly refers to the canon material -- that is,
the TV shows and the movies that are officially recognized as part of the
fictional universe. There's a lot of Trek stuff out there, and plenty
I'm surely not even familiar with. But these days, in my corner of the
world, I tend to look at Trek mainly as television and films. As
a Star Trek fan and critic, most of my interest is limited to what
I actually see on the screen -- the "source material" -- even though there
is plenty beyond it. It's only part of the Franchise (which itself is only
part of all of Star Trek culture), but it's ultimately the most
important part in defining what makes Trek what it is.
In looking at what Star
Trek is, it helps to keep things in perspective. Many people
like to talk about Gene Roddenberry's "vision," asking one another what
exactly that vision is or was. Invariably, the answer always comes back
to something along the lines of: "It shows a positive future where humanity
has conquered its problems and now explores moral questions in the vastness
of space."
Beyond the vision
And that's great. On the
bottom line, it's probably true. But it's also the simplified answer, because
Star Trek is also television, having all the ups and downs that
go with that fact.
The notion of Star Trek
has evolved over 30 years, and it needs to continue evolving to remain
fresh and interesting. In this column series, I will look at the progress
the Trek missions have made, as well as the missteps along the way.
The fact of the matter is,
Star Trek, in all its forms, has been written primarily by Hollywood
writers plugging away week after week trying to survive the ratings war
while trying to tell a good story in the meantime. They create what defines
the direction of the Franchise -- the source material we all share.
But once they create it,
it no longer belongs to them, because it belongs to the audience. It's
the audience's to embrace, to reject, to make the connections with what
came before, and what might come after. It filters into the public and
becomes our Star Trek to digest, scrutinize, praise, lambaste.
The bottom line: It's your
franchise. You decide. I'm here merely as an observer. That, and to
comment from the sidelines.
Jamahl
Epsicokhan is a Web site developer for a mid-sized daily newspaper
in the Midwest. He also publishes the Internet review site Star Trek:
Hypertext
What do you think? Send your
comments to the editor.