I sill like UFO.
I think someone might be listening to your suggestions. startrekrenegades.com/
You can’t have sentient ETs in a series set within the Solar System, if you want to keep it hard SF, because at this point we can be fairly certain there are none, within the Solar System.
Of course, even Bova sometimes bends that rule.
I am an avid science fiction fan, and the Star Trek future is the only one that I would actually want to live in.
Star Trek is set in a utopia and not boring.
A not-at-all-humanoid Starfish Alien would be the most plausible. The challenge would be in making it a character with whom the audience can identify and sympathize.
Science Fiction, more than other genres I think, reflects the general mood of the country when it’s written. The original Star Trek was written during the Cold War and Civil Rights conflicts. The Federation = The US, the Klingon’s = the USSR. Roddenberry tried to create a multi-ethnic crew working together as equals. The Federation was a force for good and order in the Galaxy and would use force if necessary to preserve those values.
By the time of The Next Generation the Cold War was clearly waning. This was reflected in the show by portraying Klingons and the Federation as antagonistic, though working towards peace. Instead of the Federation actively spreading it principles to the frontier, they stayed closer to home handling disputes with diplomacy. The Federation was still the superpower, but lead by example. Force was only used as a last resort.
Then, 9/11 happened. Battlestar Galactica is the first show post 9/11 and captures the sense of loss we felt when we realized that strong government can’t protect us. Later, it reflected our doubts about the War on Terror and other questionable actions that were in the news during the run of the show. Most of the shows that have appeared in the past decade reflect the same sense of doubt, both in the institutions we have, and the actions we take as a country in other countries. We, and therefore our science fiction, are pessimistic.
The only type of optimistic Star Trek style show I could see working in this environment would be one set around the birth of the Federation. The show would need to start with chaos but work towards the Utopia you are seeking. Sort of the reverse premise of Breaking Bad :-). In many ways, it could reflect Roddenberry’s original vision - a crew of discordant ideas that bond to work towards a common goal. Our country is fracturing, so maybe an upbeat show is something people would rally behind again.
As I stated earlier, repeated viewings of STNG show that quite a few of the episodes are boring (IMHO of course). And the Federation Utopia had quite a few plot holes that they just glossed over.
Compelling stories that are set in Utopias are the ones that show the cracks in the Utopia. Or the conflict with outside non-Utopian forces. Stories of people happily going about their Utopian lives are not very interesting.
The boringness of ST-TNG comes from everything working too well, their over the top technical superiority, and that they are well past the point of going where no one has gone before - with a few exceptions they are in an already explored region of space.
Earth was just as utopian in ST-TOS, but the original Enterprise was always operating right at its limit. And they weren’t so damn smug. Q is basically right.
Everyone hates Harry Potter. Roddenberry was reacting to the prevalence of dark stuff at the time, especially in the news. Kennedy had been shot, Vietnam was underway, people were dropping out, no one trusted the government, and things seemed like a mess. During its run there were more assassinations, and the consensus future was that by the year 2000 we’d be in an over-populated polluted wasteland. I can give you tons of examples - for instance nearly every issue of the Jakobsson Galaxy and If.
And ST-TOS had that all the time. You can do that while still having your heroes as people the audience looks up to. They may be flawed, but they are fundamentally decent. ST handled this early by showing a wholly “good” Kirk - who was boring and ineffectual.
As did Joe Haldeman in Marsbound. I recommend it.
So that explains why J.K. Rowling is back on the dole again! No one ever buys her books or watches the movies that inspired them, the poor thing.
E.g., the technological future envisioned by Michio Kaku in Physics of the Future.
Sadly, they tried this and, due to a combination of poor management, poor management, and more poor management, along with a side dash of total incompetence, they came up with Star Trek: Enterprise. The best you can say about it that it wasn’t quite as bad as its own reputation.
I don’t think the Federation of TOS was a utopia as they still had some serious problems. It’s just that it presented a society that seemed to have solved a lot of the big problems that existed in the 1960s. The problem with TNG is that the Federation became a group that was absolutely convinced that their shit didn’t stink.
The most annoying thing about the crappy new Star Trek is that by rebooting the ST universe, it effectively means that all of trek never happened (All of TOS, TNG, DS9 and Voyager reset), with the exception of Enterprise, which remains firmly in the canon.
Way to cherrypick, JJ
Nitpick - it did happen, just in a parallel universe.
nitpick back - you can say that about anything
Q!
.
And already has or will yet, an infinite number of times.