freckles_and_doubt: (Default)
[personal profile] freckles_and_doubt
I've come late to Star Trek. Neither the original series nor Next Gen was ever on TV when I had access to a TV; the Evil Landlord and I watched some Deep Space Nine when it trickled through to SA, but only in a desultory sort of fashion, and I don't remember much of it. I'm not sure why borrowing [livejournal.com profile] first_fallen's complete STNG set and proceeding to watch it in an unholy gulp over several months should have had the effect of putting me into warp drive in the direction of helpless, geeky fandom, but it has, and there we have it. I knew the die was cast when the simple action of Spock teaching Data the Vulcan nerve pinch caused me an exquisite, inexplicable, fangirly joy. It's over. I'm a Trekkie. Alas.

Of course, the whole thing was more or less sparked by my discovery, over vastly circuitous sf fandom routes (possibly via the Whatever), of Wil Wheaton's blog. I have an unholy fascination for the Wesley Crusher phenomenon: for the incredible outpouring of fan hatred which managed to pillory not only the character, but the unfortunate actor, who seems to be a likeable sort of person who really didn't deserve that. I'm a few episodes into Season 5, and of course Wesley has now left, to "go to the Academy", but really for the shattered teen actor to hie him off into the middle distance and try to regain some sort of self-esteem. It's all rather unfair: being a teenager is a poisonous enough experience without legions of geeky sf fans craning over your shoulder and insisting not only that your character's a dweeb, but that you are.

But I have to ask myself, even in strictly narrative terms - what the hell was going on here? I mean, yes, the writing in the first couple of seasons was really very clunky, and Wesley didn't exactly shine as an example of logical plot decisions, character development or emotional coherence. But then again, nor did anyone else. Honestly, I spent about the first season and a half dropping stitches in my knitting while shouting enraged instructions at the screen - for heaven's sake, beam them out of there! or use your empath! or why the hell are you putting a teenager into that situation? it makes no sense! And I have ranted elsewhere about the dialogue. Good grief. But these generalised problems don't seem to have generated the frenzy of frothing hatred that poor Wesley did. Putting an immature and inexperienced kid, however intelligent, onto the bridge is dodgy, but I think there's more going on here, and most of it is about fan identification.

See, Wesley is a geek. He's written as super-intelligent, accomplished and precocious; he solves problems adults can't. It's not realistic in many ways, but it's no more unrealistic than other aspects of the series, which really abandons all sorts of logic in the pursuit of both story and budget. (The stand-alone episodes drive me crazy: Significant Person or Moment introduced for an episode arc will vanish without a trace with the closing credits, never to be seen again despite the fact that really they should continue to affect the Enterprise and its inhabitants. Like Worf's bonded brother. Bleah). Wesley being a geek shouldn't be any more of a problem than Worf never being able to win a fight, and it particularly shouldn't be a problem given that the bulk of the viewers are themselves geeky science-fondling types. And Wes is not written as an arrogant smart-arse: he's an eager kid, probably intended as a rather endearing point of identification for geeky types whose reaction to the Enterprise would be an identical wide-eyed wonder, because all this spaceship science is just so cool.

And this, I think, is where the problem lies. However badly he's written, the root of the Wesley Crusher problem is not the fact that the character is unlikeable or unrealistic. It's actually a problem of over-identification, not failure of identification. I think too many geeky Trekkies see themselves in Wesley, and they find it excruciating to watch - oh god Wesley is where I would like to be, bumming around on the bridge with an enormous grin on his face, and he's completely dorky and has no right to be there. He both embodies and dramatises the fact of the watcher's own eternal exclusion from the bridge. The revulsion is thus because he represents the watcher too closely, at least the kind of watcher who spends a lot of time at Star Trek conventions. I think it's significant that, at least anecdotally, a lot of female Trek fans seem to really like Wesley. They don't have to watch themselves, and cringe, knowing full well that if given half a chance they'd be babbling just as excruciatingly about the ways in which matter and antimatter could be aligned even more efficiently in Dilithium crystals. (They might well so babble, but at least they're not watching themselves).

I don't like Next Gen as much without Wesley. There's a gap on the bridge, and I'm very aware that the writers partially created it by being really very bad at finding a realistic place for a teenaged geek in Star Trek - but only partially. In fact, the fans created it by being intolerant and incredibly cruel, and that intolerance is directly and slightly unforgiveably about the whole unhappy, marginal geek package - about insecurity. It's sad. I wish it had gone differently. I like Wesley, and he didn't deserve that.

And in broader terms, the whole Trek thing's bloody annoying. Now I'm going to have to re-watch the recent Star Trek movie and see if I actually like it any more than I did now that I'm all Trekkified. Phooey.

Open Flailing Channel

Date: Thursday, 2 September 2010 09:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pinkthulhu.livejournal.com
I remember watching STNG at home during high school in the early 90s. I was a massive fan. Wesley was certainly annoying, but no more than the pompous Riker or the wishy-washy Counsellor Troi.

I remember also being annoyed when Doctor Pulaski briefly replaced Doctor Crusher in Series 2, I believe. She didnt last long, fortunately.

Have you seen the "Star Trek" episode of Family Guy?

http://www.familyguy.ws/2009/08/02/not-all-dogs-go-to-heaven/

Also, did you know that Yaphet Kotto was originally a candidate for the role of Picard, and Denise Crosby (later Tasha Yar) was considered to play Troi..? It could have made things interesting. :-)

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2010/08/star-trekcasting.html

Re: Open Flailing Channel

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 07:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
I rather liked Doctor Pulaski, she was a tough lady! but I infinitely prefer Beverley, and was glad when she returned. No Riker-dissing on my blog, I like Riker, too. In fact, I think I'm enjoying the series as much as I am because I fundamentally like all these people. The script screws them over relatively often, but the actors are great and the interactions feel real more often than not.

Borg

Date: Thursday, 2 September 2010 09:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pinkthulhu.livejournal.com
I forgot to say that Star Trek First Contact is, imho, by far the best Star Trek film. Alice Krige oozes sensuality and cunning.

Re: Borg

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 07:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
I just bought the boxed set of all the Next Gen movies, because I fell over it in Loot and it was ridiculously cheap. I shall watch them all when I've finished the series :>. I rather enjoyed First Contact, as I recollect. The Borg are very effective bad guys.

Captain Kirk is climbing the mountain

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 05:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wolverine-nun.livejournal.com
Okay, okay, even I know that Kirk is hardly the new generation, but I stumbled on this minutes after reading your blog post, so thought I'd share.
http://www.epbot.com/2010/09/and-now-musical-interlude.html

Re: Captain Kirk is climbing the mountain

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 07:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
Good lord. That was ... extremely lateral. I'm baffled. Amused, but baffled. Also, "Captain Kirk ... is climbing the mountain" will be going round and round my head all day.

Re: Captain Kirk is climbing the mountain

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 08:58 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] strawberryfrog.livejournal.com
And he is rather hairy.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 07:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] herne-kzn.livejournal.com
There's a difference though between other problematic characters and Wesley. The others were OK concepts problematically executes. Wesley was a terribly concept indifferently executed.

I found the character insulting, but not remotely for the reasons you suggest. The heavy handed "identification pandering" was an insult to my sophistication as a viewer.
Similarly, he grated in an analogous way to the way fanfic grates.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 07:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
No, see, that's entirely a matter of taste. I like Wesley. I don't think he was any worse a concept than any of the other characters - he's better developed, for example, than poor old Tasha was, and that actor lasted an even shorter time in sheer frustration.

And I also don't think your response is very far from the fan response I'm identifying: if you're reading it as "heavy handed identification pandering" then you are recognising something of yourself in him, and resenting it - I think you're just more self-conscious about the process than the majority of Wesley-hating geeks. In a sense, what you're responding to is the writers' stereotyping of the geeky fans; same problem from a different angle.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 07:55 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] confluence.myopenid.com (from livejournal.com)
I really need to rewatch TNG, because I can't remember if I found Wesley annoying and if so how much. I know a lot of female writers who speak the fanfic lingo have described him as an enormous Sue. I don't know how fair that is.

You should totally watch Deep Space Nine because it's the awesomest Star Trek evar because it has Jake Sisko, a recurring teen character somehow done in a way which didn't piss anyone off*. He gets to grow up on the series. He does go away for a bit and come back, but he comes back properly and has a significant role later in the series.

Of course Jake Sisko is a different character to Wesley in a lot of ways. We find out later that [SPOILER] he doesn't actually want to go into Starfleet, something his father had always just kind of assumed he would do, and eventually becomes a writer. Which I guess could make him a Fanfic Writer Sue. ;) [/SPOILER] He also has a good friend his own age since either the pilot or something very close, and maintains that friendship throughout the series -- unlike Wesley, who is a lone teen surrounded by adults (and sometimes, I think, children a lot younger).

* Mind you, this could be because so many Trekkies hated DS9 as a whole that not enough watched it to develop a significant hater base for Jake.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 08:02 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
Yes, of course he's a Sue. I still think he could have worked if he was better written. And you're absolutely right, the lack of peer interaction is one of Wesley's huge problems and has been bugging me throughout. So much that could have been brilliant about Next Gen was basically torpedoed by budget. Sigh.

I find it weird that I really don't remember most of the DS9 I watched on TV - I remember the Babylon 5 stuff vividly. The name Jake Sisko is familiar, but I can't say any more than that.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 08:33 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous)
DS9 was pretty good; better than Voyager. I guess ecause it wasn't hurtling through space, it didn't need a monster-of-the-week, and could take time to develop characters, politics, and cultures.

I particularly liked the weaselly Cardassian character.

ST

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 09:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] first-fallen.livejournal.com
I have all the movies up to Nemesis, if you want to watch the earlier ones (Khaaaaaaaaaaan!!! Whales!!!).

I watched the new movie after I watched all of TNG and most of DS9 and I still didn't like it. It's too actioney and not intelligent enough. For me ST was always about intelligent commentary on stuffs. Meh, I obviously just don't like change :).

But you should re-watch DS9 so you can see the whole political plot arc, it's a very good series. TNG will always be my first love (because it was the first ST I watched, when it was on TV in the 90's) but DS9 comes a very close second. I love Bashir and Worf gets really awesome. Also, I kinda love Gul Dukat. Maybe it's a forehead thing.

Then, you can watch all my Voyager! It's somewhere between the two previous series, it's on a spaceship but has lots of long story arcs. Also, 7 of 9 and the Doctor ftw.

And don't say Trekkie like it's a bad thing.

Re: ST

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 11:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
The "alas!" about my newfound trekkiedom was more or less ironic. I am no stranger to fangirling. Alas.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 10:28 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] strawberryfrog.livejournal.com
(The stand-alone episodes drive me crazy: Significant Person or Moment introduced for an episode arc will vanish without a trace with the closing credits, never to be seen again

This is pretty much what put me off Farscape

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 02:16 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] confluence.myopenid.com (from livejournal.com)
Farscape had pretty good continuity. Are you thinking of something in particular? (OK, I'll give you the "Look at the Princess" trilogy. Unless you count the comics.)

Date: Saturday, 4 September 2010 08:17 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
I tend to agree with Confluence: I didn't find that Farscape offered that particular problem to any particularly obtrusive extent. But I think we've had this argument before, Frog...

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 12:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] dicedcaret.livejournal.com
Maybe I'm feeling particularly misanthropic today, but I reckon it's just dumb herd mentality. "Oh, to be a cool Trekkie geek you have to hate on Wesley. I can earn loads of geek XP by doing the same."

Just look at boingboing comments. Some of the posts are just naff, but inevitably you'll get a stream of "Just look at it!" parroting. Anything else gets slapped down by the fascist moderators because anyone not following the herd must be trolling.

Whatever the reason, I agree it comes down to a security issue. I'm not sure that being insecure is a notably geek characteristic though. We're social animals. Blame our primate ancestors.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 12:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
Well, yes, everybody's insecure, but only geeks are insecure about being geeks. And herd mentality, fine, but someone's got to have originated the original "shut up Wesley" meme, for everyone else to join in with, and this is my theory as to what motivated it. Which is my theory, which is mine. Which, interestingly, mostly male commenters are disagreeing with. Hmmm.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 01:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bend-gules.livejournal.com
Thanks for the heads-up about WWdN. I had a vague idea he had a life after Trek, but didn't realise it was a complete actual career. He seems to have survived much more sanely than many child stars.
At the same time, he still trades on having been Trek actor (even one everyone hated), with books and podcasts about Trek memories. It's perhaps just a more down-to-earth post-Trek life than most Trek actors, condemned to the con circuit.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 01:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
These days he self-identifies as a writer before an actor, although he's doing a fair amount of TV and web-series guesting; his blog is fascinating because because he's deliberately and systematically re-created himself through the blog community. You can watch, over time, his slightly paranoid awareness of his Trek fame decrease - portrait of a man coming to terms with a negative experience. You have to respect the process, there are, as you say, a plethora of child stars who've crashed and burned spectacularly on a basis of far less negativity than the Wesley experience.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 05:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] queenanthai.livejournal.com
I love you forever for this.

Date: Friday, 3 September 2010 08:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] extemporanea.livejournal.com
Supporters of poor maligned Wesley, represent!

Tags

Page generated Thursday, 10 July 2025 10:52 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style Credit