Isn't arguing the best of Trek a bit like arguing over the best flavor of
hot dog in front of a steak restaurant.
Trek has so much *potential* to do great sci-fi, and instead just sticks
with the same trite formulas over and over and over again. I don't have a
lot of time, so let me just sight a few of the more glaring examples:
1) On DS9, there is an episode where Warf goes to Raisa, and briefly falls
in with a bunch of Federation heretics. Spread out over time, this would
have been a wonderful opportunity to actually *question* the tenets of the
Federation, and leave us *thinking* after each episode. Naturally, the
heretics are exposed as hypocrites in time for the one hour happy ending.
2) On Voyager, 7 of 9 once makes a great speech, confronting Janeway with a
tirade that compares the Federation to being just as assimilatory as the
Borg. Again, the questions are raised - only never to be heard from again.
Unfortunately, the same mistakes are being repeated - rumours for the new
series promise more "characther development." Yawn!
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"The point of living in a Republic after all, is that we do not live by
majority rule. We live by laws and a variety of institutions designed
to check each other." -Andrew Sullivan 01/29/01
