Why The Original Series Is Better Than All The Spin-Offs.

By Ceefax the Indignant.

For a start, it was there first. The others couldn't have existed without it.

TOS was a ground-breaking series. It pissed people off on a regular basis, the most notable example being American TV's first interracial kiss (well, almost... in the end, to avoid all the southern states refusing to air the episode (and it was Plato's Stepchildren, so maybe that wouldn't have been such a bad thing) the Powers That Be had Kirk sort of dip Uhura, so she was out of shot when the actual lip-lock happened. But still...). Mr Roddenberry (worship worship worship and I promise to be more restrained in future) also used the show to slip in some subtle and some not so subtle messages about war, race relations, religion, and human behaviour in general. Now, to be fair, I don't watch any of the spin-offs with the religious fervour that I bestow on TOS, but only two spin-off episodes with a similar message spring immediately to mind - the early TNG one with the planet of hermaphrodites where the inhabitants were persecuted for not being completely gender neutral, and the Voyager one about Neelix's home planet and their weapons of mass destruction.

Right, let's deal with one of my (many, I'm afraid) pet peeves, lack of gay people in sci-fi, in direct relation to the aforementioned TNG episode. Now, it was a good episode, which dealt with homophobia in a nicely constructed metaphor which was completely in keeping with the approach TOS used in such episodes as Let That Be Your Last Battlefield and I enjoyed it very much, but it was a bit disappointing that such a carefully inoffensive framework has to be used - the poor tormented heroine of the episode was a female trapped in a hermophrodite's body, who fell in love with Riker (some would say punishment enough), and her people would kill her or something (it's been a while) for such feelings. Which is all very well, but why couldn't the Enterprise just have a gay crew member? Not even a regular, he (or she... well, it's bound to be a she, isn't it? Lesbians are fine but gay men aren't, geez, I wonder why that is...) could just show up one episode and fall in love with a pretty alien. Half the (original) Enterprise's crewwomen did that, for fucks sake (Or the alien fell in love with them...). In fact, I think I'm just going to drop Star Trek briefly and have a general rant.

Why are they no gay characters in sci-fi? There are sympathetic and occasionally even happy gay characters in comtemporary dramas (This Life, Six Feet Under), there are gay characters in soap operas, although they do tend to lead miserable, lonely guilt-ridden lives, gay characters can be the central focus in sit-coms (Will and Grace, Gimme Gimme Gimme), but I can't think of single gay character in a sci-fi show or film... There was a rather masculine-looking bit of stuff that took a fancy to D'Argo in some episode of Farscape, but took pains to point out that she was actually a female, and that's all I can think of. It's not even the lack of gay characters, it's the lack of homosexuality. A lot of shows, even if they don't actually have a gay character will acknowledge that such creatures do exist, even if it's only to joke about it (Blackadder, for example), but in sci-fi they don't even reference homosexuality. Why? If you can acknowledge there are gay people around now, why can't you acknowledge that they might still be around in the future? Moving back to TOS, Gene Roddenberry staffed the Enterprise with a multi-cultural crew, because he believed that in the future, racism would no longer be an issue. So much so that ancient terms of abuse simply no longer provoke a reaction. So why can't we today, in a supposedly permissive society, where discrimination based on sexuality is not legally permissable, see a future where homophobia is no longer an issue? (OK, so there have been a few gay characters in sci-fi books, I'll admit. However, the Baron Harkonnen is the only one that springs to mind, and he's not exactly a pillar of the gay community...)

(Climbs down off soap box) But we were talking about TOS and how it related to the spin-offs... Let's move on from sexuality, because that's an argument no (sci-fi) series is going to win, and look at gender. TOS women rock. Chapel actually has a personality, which is more than you can say for Troi or Crusher, and is Uhura is, quite frankly, the man. She rocks more than many people who have previously rocked. Yes, the women wore mini-skirts, but damned if they didn't look good in the mini-skirts. And, let's face it, the men got the skin-tight, figure revealing velour uniforms; not to mention their shirts off fairly regularly, and you don't hear anyone complaining about that (I know I'm not). None of your concealing black, favoured in the later series'. Besides, let's not forget that in The Cage, the original pilot, where Gene Roddenberry had far more creative control, not only was the first officer a woman, but the women wore the same uniforms as the men, trousers and all.

TNG women suck. They have no personalities and they were relegated to caring roles only. Tasha Yar showed promise, but was swiftly killed by the blob and buried in teletubbyland. Not the most dignified of endings. DS9 women were better. Kira shouted at things and Dax shagged things, not to mention they were second and third in command of the station. I also approve of Janeway and Torres (but not Seven), in an uninterested kind of way, and I'll hold off on making judgements about Enterprise until I've seen enough of it to be fair, but to all those ignorant bastards out there who constantly bring up the mini-skirts as 'proof' that TOS was sexist, I'd just like to point out T'Pal's (really should find out how to spell her name at some point...) nipples. Or rather, I would point them out, but they're very very hard. To miss (heh heh, sorry...).

But all of these deep and meaningful issues aside, I think what it really comes down to in the end is the sense of fun TOS had, which is something that seems to be missing in the spin-offs. I think DS9 managed humourous episodes quite well, although that's possibly just because a) it being my favourite of the spin-offs, I've seen more of it, or b) the large amounts of Ferengi. Look at the Magnificent Ferengi for example. That's a bloody hilarious episode (my poor, beautiful, wonderful Keevan... they kill him, turn him into a remote control zombie and leave him to walk into walls forever. It's a testament to how good that episode was that I still love it to peices. Um, the episode, not the reanimated corpse of Keevan. Ew. Bad brain). Now, although there are some laughs to be had in the spin-offs, there's barely an episode of TOS goes by where there's not something to giggle at, even if it's only the atrocious stunt doubles (I don't know why stunt doubles were so poor in the sixties... Wait, yes I do, it's because nobody had VCRs in the sixties, and there was no such thing as nitpicking, so all you had to do was convince people once for a few seconds, and you were sorted. The march of time makes fools of us all), and that was because of the characters. They interacted in the way that real people do when they're mates - they take the piss, they gossip, they argue, they complain, and it's all great fun to watch. Moving on, and I'm perfectly aware that Gene Roddenberry was responsible for this, but I'm going to complain about it anyway - TNG and the lack of arguing. I know he wanted the human race to have out-grown arguing, but I really like arguing. Both to witness and to take part in. If arguing was a sport, then there'd be a faint possibility of me liking a sport. DS9 and Voyager were better, it has to be said (with the arguing, not generally. I'm not making any judgements about that. Personally, I prefer DS9, but I'm not even going to attempt to argue that case).

To digress briefly, I understand why Gene Roddenberry wanted to create a beautiful, peaceful future, showing that humanity was capable of positive and muture progress; and it is a wonderful hope for the future, but it's not anything that any of us are going to see in our lifetimes, and it doesn't make for good TV. To have plot, you need problems to solve.

I much prefer the way character development is handled in TOS. We know almost nothing about the crew's back stories except what (very) occasionally comes up in conversation (Spock's parents and Kirk's brother are the exceptions to this, but the relationships aren't gone into in too much detail), but we do know what their personalities are like, simply because they are so well drawn out. We know how they will react to situations, not because we just spent the last episode exploring their relationship with their mother, but because we know them. We've spent time with them, and we've therefore got to know them. And we really aren't interested in knowing their life stories, because they're just as interesting as the life stories of real people (not at all) as have every bit as much bearing on the situation.

There's a similar situation with the world in general, as presented in the different series. Aside from Enterprise, the other three spin-offs are all set in the same time period, so I feel quite justified in lumping them together for this particular argument. From TNG onwards, there is this terrible suffocating undercurrent of tip-toeing political correctness. Now, I'm not usually against political correctness (why? Because, as far as I see it, political correctness is an attempt not to offend people. What's so wrong with that?), but TOS had this wonderful sense of excitement and adventure (and the odd really wild thing to boot) and it felt like they actually were discovering new things, which Kirk promptly went and fucked up beyond all recognition, safe in the knowledge that he was doing the right thing. Whereas Picard et al over-thought every little thing, and even did things according to the rules, which all felt a bit too... safe (Sisko at least had an excuse, he had to live there and take the consequences). TOS was about going against the rules, because the rules sucked, and were thought up by manky old bastards who didn't have to live in the real world. That's a great message. The spin-offs were about how the rules are really there for everyone's good, so you should obey them at all times. It's all rather sad, really. Our generation rebels against our parents values by supporting the government and joining the army. Not to mention a nationful of students bending over and taking tuition fees. Not that I'm bitter, or anything...

And then there was the issue of humanity's place in the universe. In TOS, the galaxy and beyond has been explored, albeit a little sketchily, and now they're filling in the gaps. The Federation is having an on-again-off-again war with the Klingon Empire, and a cold war of sorts with the Romulan Star Empire. However, ever other planet the Enterprise encountered is home to a god-like alien or race of aliens, who (like the Enterprise crew themselves) didn't see anythng wrong with interfering in the affairs of inferior species' - the Organians stopping the Federation and the Klingon Empire from going to war being probably the most far-reaching example. Odd how that never showed up again... All of this served to give the general impression of humanity (and the other Federated races, of course. Poor Spock, he really did have to put up with a lot) as the baby of the universe, alone, helpless, and at the mercy of the many many superior races that they came across. In the spin-offs, much of the galaxy is unexplored, and god-like aliens are few and far between. There's the odd one here and there, to be sure (and, of course, there's always Q), but the overal picture is of the Federation as benevolent protector to the little, underdeveloped races of the universe. Take Voyager, for example. They reach an unexplored section of the galaxy, and the immediate worry is to prevent all the little grubby delta quadrant species from getting their hands on Federation technology because they'd just go and start wars with it. Yes, the Federation is now daddy.

And finally (because I suppose I'd better stop this and do some work at some stage) let's talk about sex. TOS is just full of lovely lovely men (see above comments about tight uniforms and lack of shirts), and the show was repeated constantly from when I was approximatly 9-15. Draw from that whatever conclusion you will. And I'm not completely qualified to discuss the women on the show, but I'm reliably informed that they served a similar purpose for those who like that sort of thing (although, to be honest, even I'd sleep with Nichelle Nichols if she offered... As previously mentioned, Uhura the man). Now, maybe it's just age and cynicism, but although the spin-off casts are inhabited by good-looking people (naturally, as ugly people don't exist on American TV), they seem to me to be just average-pretty, not tongue-lolling-limply-on-floor pretty. Which is very opinionated and biased, I know, but for me it's a major argument. Sorry.

One last thing. The extreme probability is that I only like TOS so much because it's the one I grew up watching. TNG was on at the same time, but I didn't take to it at all. Now, I know people who grew up watching TNG, and they love it to peices, but don't have much time for TOS (of course, maybe if they tried watching it, instead of just dismissing the whole thing...).

Actually, that brings me onto another point. Sorry to give you false hope of an ending, but I don't plan these out, you know (in case that's not blindingly obvious). I want to talk about the Forgotten Semi-Regulars. Now, everyone thinks they know all about TOS, because it's become a cultural icon. Everyone knows that the guy with the red shirt is gonna die, everyone can do the Bill Shatner impression (with the pauses in the wierd places, which I still can't see at all in the show, I like Bill Shatner. As an actor, I've never met him or anything), everyone knows 'beam me up, Scotty' (never said in the show, but never mind), everyone knows 'he's dead, Jim' (said all the bloody time in the show), so everyone thinks they know Star Trek. Most of these people have never watched the show. Mention Kyle to them, see how much they know. Mention Riley. Mention M'Benga. Tell them Chekov wasn't even in the first series. OK, so some of them know Yeoman Rand, but not nearly as much as should do, considering that everyone knows everything they need to about Star Trek. They may know the movies OK, but the movies (which I love dearly, but not nearly as much as I love the series) are not nor will ever be the series. Ignorance and disdain abound, because people don't feel that they are ignorant. Therefore they don't even try. Therefore they remain ignorant. And then they act all superior, because the shows they like are just obviously so much better, the worthless bastards...

This really is the absolute last thing, and it's not relevant to anything, but I though I'd bring it up anyway - Welsh people. Similar situation to gay people. Obviously Wales in going to sink fairly soon, as there are no Welsh people in the future (There was a Welsh guy in Survivors, though, so the Welsh are better represented than gay people so far). Taking Star Trek specifically, you have your token posh wimpy English guys (Kyle, Bashir, that guy off Enterprise whose name I forget), you have your token lovable Irish guy (Riley, O'Brien), you have your token drunk bagpipe-playing Scottish guy (er... Scotty), but no Welsh guy. And they are all guys as well, obviously the British Isles are somewhat short of women by the 23rd century. Sigh. Speaking of nationality (absolutely last thing I completely promise), TOS was better for having non-Americans. The other shows prefered to just have several different varieties of American to fulfil the ethnic quotient.

That's it, I'll shut up now.

(Update: I bow to the creators of Lexx for aknowledging homosexuality, thereby undermining my point somewhat. I'll just slink back into the corner...)