# Minimalism in Science Fiction **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [June 5, 2010, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067 "2010-06-05T15:55:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/21 "2010-06-05T23:03:01Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > Minimalism is when the scale of the setting is underestimated (often horribly) by the authors. [Minimalism](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimalism) is something different. What you’re thinking of is better expressed on the TVTropes page, [Sci Fi Writers Have No Sense of Scale.](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SciFiWritersHaveNoSenseOfScale) Here’s a good example: [_Firefly_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_%28TV_series%29) is set within a single star system (one with many more habitable planets than ours), yet it is recognizably the same kind of story as \*Star Wars \* or _Babylon 5._ ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/22 "2010-06-05T23:06:13Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > While I agree with your ultimate point, I took _Little Nemo_ to mean that there were only a baker’s dozen _Constitution_ class ships in all of Starfleet, not that Starfleet consisted of only those thirteen vessels. When I pick a nit, it stays picked. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/23 "2010-06-05T23:07:39Z")
Ok, but that’s still 261 ships for hundreds of worlds and hundreds of BILLIONs of citizens. It appeared like some of that in ST:NG and DS9. 35 Federation ships at Wolf 359. Slightly larger numbers mentioned in some of the early Dominion war episodes and noted as emptying entire sectors of Fed ships. Mounting up to 600 or so combined (including allies) ships in _Sacrifice of Angels_ and then the supposed 1200 Dominion ships in the Wormhole being a number impossible for the Federation to overcome. Of course, I can only harken back to some other scifi in which _millions of years old_ technology and ships are found and are still functioning normally and still usable. Um, ever heard of a little thing called _metal fatigue_? Oh, I forgot. It’s all run on that special magic called “self-repairing systems” which apparently allow things to last millions of years as if they are a day old. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/24 "2010-06-05T23:12:05Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > Ok, but that’s still 261 ships for hundreds of worlds and hundreds of BILLIONs of citizens. I’ll happily agree that estimates of the Federation being a sixth of the size of the Milky Way are ridiculous, even for Picard’s time. I’d fanwank that one too, but I don’t care enough. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/25 "2010-06-05T23:12:41Z")
> [@KneadToKnow](#): > > When I pick a nit, it stays picked. 😃 261 warships would still be an absurdly small number to control an area that covers on sixth of the galaxy. Precisely how much space the Federation occupies is never clearly stated, but one sixth of the galaxy is billions of stars. Heck, one SIXTIETH of the galaxy would be a few billion stars. It would be like China protecting itself with an army of 261 men. ---
**Author:** ![Kamino\_Neko](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kamino_neko/32/34_2.png) [@Kamino\_Neko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kamino_Neko)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/26 "2010-06-05T23:23:33Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Here’s a good example: [_Firefly_](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefly_%28TV_series%29) is set within a single star system (one with many more habitable planets than ours) That’s more [You Fail Physics Forever](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouFailPhysicsForever) than ‘No Sense of Scale’. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2010, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/27 "2010-06-05T23:28:40Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > 261 warships would still be an absurdly small number to control an area that covers on sixth of the galaxy. > . [insert my patented “Starfleet doesn’t control anything, it’s a social club for people who like to dress up and do dangerous things, made possible by the post-scarcity economy of the Federation” argument here] ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/28 "2010-06-06T00:08:08Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > I think the problem is the opposite - what I’d call “biggism”, in which science fiction writers throw HUUUUGE numbers at the readers in order to distract them from their storytelling deficiencies. For instance, a few years ago I started reading “Consider Phlebas” by Iain M. Banks. Within the first 100 pages, we had a spaceship being attacked by 100,000 missiles, a collection of millions of superintelligent AIs, a casual genocide of 57 million innocent people, a ringworld, and a fucking Dyson sphere. And at the same time, the writing was _terrible_. I gave up almost immeidately. > > Some wirters think that throwing big numbers (69 million systems? Really?) at readers is somehow impressive. It isn’t. What we want is depth and complexity - that every system be fleshed out and provided some distinction. Anyone can write numbers. For instance: 138 million inhabited systems! My universe is TWICE as awesome as Star Wars! That’s because its realistic. If there was an actual Galaxy-spanning government/civilization it would have tens of millions (probably a billion) inhabited star systems. What’d you want them to? Have the Galactic Empire have five hundred systems or what? ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/29 "2010-06-06T00:11:27Z")
The canonical size of the Federation is 150 full member worlds, and roughly 1,000 colonies “spread over” 8,000 cubic light years. By this phrasing, it is likely that it is not contiguous, but has a central core comprising Earth, Andor, Vulcan, Tellar, and other star systems in our neighborhood and other local groups spread out in whatever direction. A British Empire of the stars, more or less. I can’t speak to the size of Starfleet except to say \*\*KneadToKnow \*\*was right about the Tech Manual (and all books’) canonicity. If it’s not shown on-screen, it isn’t canon. That said, the [**Daystrom Institute**](http://www.ditl.org/index.php?daymain=/pagarticle.php?14) has this to say at the conclusion of an article about this question: \*During TOS it seems certain that there were twelve Constitution class Starships, plus an unspecified number of smaller vessels. The total fleet size is uncertain, but likely to be from one hundred to several hundred. The largest fleet we ever see in TOS was the five Starships gathered for the M5 test program wargame, which would have represented a very powerful force indeed - almost half of all the Starships (as opposed to smaller interstellar ships) in existence. Put another way, it represents roughly the same percentage of the Federation’s total firepower as the six aircraft carriers that the USA sent to Iraq for the gulf war. \*_During TNG the fleet must be considerably larger. The sensible lower limit is 1,000 Starships in total, while 5 - 10,000 is much more likely. A 70,000 Starship fleet seems high, but this becomes much more reasonable if the Federation really does cover anything close to a solid block of space eight thousand light years across. Under these conditions only a few thousand ships would normally be present at the core of the Federation; assembling a fleet of several dozen ships would take a few days, while assembling the thousands or tens of thousands needed for a major war could take anything up to several years._ ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/30 "2010-06-06T00:15:49Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > [insert my patented “Starfleet doesn’t control anything, it’s a social club for people who like to dress up and do dangerous things, made possible by the post-scarcity economy of the Federation” argument here] Except that there are many occasions in which we see Kirk, Picard, and their lieutenants exercising power to control quite a few things. Kirk arrests Harry Mudd. He clearly has genuine authority to decide what will happen with the Klingons wishing to take leave on a Federation (NOT Starfleet) space station. Picard can shut down a terraforming operation. Et cetara. And you can’t tell me that Sisko didn’t have genuine authority. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/31 "2010-06-06T01:03:34Z")
> [@](#): > > If the book you’re thinking of was the Star Fleet Technical Manual, you’ve got some holes in your argument. > > If you have a cite to back up your claim that it was canon, I’ll be happy to concede that point, but as it was first published in 1975, 6 years after TOS went off the air and the a year after the animated series stopped airing new episodes, I don’t see how it could possibly be relevant. Star Trek was dead at that point. A ham sandwich could have been canon and it wouldn’t have mattered. It definitely wasn’t the Technical Manual. I had a copy of the Technical Manual when it came out - it was later than the book I referred to and I noted the expanded Star Fleet roster in that book because I was thinking it was probably a reaction to people like me who though the original thirteen ship roster was ridiculous. I think the book was _The Making of Star Trek_ by Stephen E. Whitfield. But it might have been _The World of Star Trek_ by David Gerrold. I had both books as a young’un. As for it being canon, the author was clear that, along with the interviews with the show’s staff, he was basing his information on the show’s “bible” - which was the guidelines written by Roddenberry and other on the _Star Trek_ staff to describe the show’s setting and characters to potential scriptwriters for the series. So it was canon at its most official - if Gene Roddenberry said Star Fleet consisted of thirteen starships, then that’s that. ---
**Author:** ![Pushkin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ee59a6/32.png) [@Pushkin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pushkin)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/32 "2010-06-06T01:08:35Z")
[Minimalism in Star Trek.](http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/68/68startrek.php) ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/33 "2010-06-06T01:23:10Z")
Roddenberry also didn’t like many of the movies, and didn’t consider them canonical, and was once said to consider large chunks of TOS non-canonical after he started producing TNG. He may have been the creator of the franchise, but he doesn’t declare canon by fiat. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/34 "2010-06-06T01:27:02Z")
> [@Aesiron](#): > > Roddenberry also didn’t like many of the movies, and didn’t consider them canonical, and was once said to consider large chunks of TOS non-canonical after he started producing TNG. He may have been the creator of the franchise, but he doesn’t declare canon by fiat. I’ve only ever heard of him declaring ST V apocryphal, an opinion shared by many fans. 🙂 As for the canon issue, it’s probably silly to try to declare a canon for TOS. There was not the emphasis on story arcs in tv back then; few episodes directly refer to any other episodes. There was no episode introducing Chekov; there was no episode writing out Rand, or noting Spock’s promotion from Lieutenant Commander to Commander. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/35 "2010-06-06T01:34:13Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > That’s because its realistic. If there was an actual Galaxy-spanning government/civilization it would have tens of millions (probably a billion) inhabited star systems. What’d you want them to? Have the Galactic Empire have five hundred systems or what? I think in this case it’s the idea of a **Galactic** Empire that is considered a tad unrealistic :). ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/36 "2010-06-06T01:34:17Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > I’ve only ever heard of him declaring ST V apocryphal, an opinion shared by many fans. 🙂 > > As for the canon issue, it’s probably silly to try to declare a canon for TOS. There was not the emphasis on story arcs in tv back then; few episodes directly refer to any other episodes. There was no episode introducing Chekov; there was no episode writing out Rand, or noting Spock’s promotion from Lieutenant Commander to Commander. It’s referenced (and cited) in the Star Trek Canon article on wiki. The sources are Paula Block, a Senior Director of Licensed Publishing, and Richard Block, who was a research analyst on TNG. I’ve also read about his unhappiness with the later movies in various books, and how he was pretty much ousted from ST:VI because he wanted another time travel movie that would have been about Kirk saving JFK from assassination. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/37 "2010-06-06T01:36:49Z")
> [@Aesiron](#): > > It’s referenced (and cited) in the Star Trek Canon article on wiki. I’ve also read about his unhappiness with the later movies in various books, and how he was pretty much ousted from ST:VI because he wanted another time travel movie that would have been about Kirk saving JFK from assassination. I bow to your superior knowledge on this topic, though I do not and shall not concede that you match my level of nerditude in general. ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/38 "2010-06-06T01:38:48Z")
No worries, **Skald**. I recognize you as the bigger nerd, by far. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/39 "2010-06-06T19:38:39Z")
> [@Aesiron](#): > > No worries, **Skald**. I recognize you as the bigger nerd, by far. I am trying to decide whehther :mad: or 😃 is more appropriate here. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2010, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067/40 "2010-06-06T19:51:51Z")
Star Trek minimalism hit its peak with the costuming of [Orion slave girls](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.beertripper.com/startrek_images/bp-ENT-Orion_Slave_Girl_Bobbi_Sue_Hot.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.beertripper.com/startrek_chart/star_trek_number_22_ENT_Orion_Slave_Girls.html&usg=__XbwGmXMs5luwLz3KHFp4cjbNiSw=&h=480&w=366&sz=42&hl=en&start=7&itbs=1&tbnid=gc5TOwb4lR9AEM:&tbnh=129&tbnw=98&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dstar%2Btrek%2Bcostumes%2Borion%2Bslave%2Bgirl%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/minimalism-in-science-fiction/542067.md?page=3)