I've been watching quite a bit of television series scifi recently. I've watched three seasons of DS9, four of SG1, and one of Atlantis. This doesn't count my re-watching of TNG, Voyager, and Firefly. Oh, and let's not forget the wonderful show that is BSG. This all leads me to believe, without a doubt, that
I have a problem. (And no, that problem is not a lack of B5 or Fascape or Doctor Who or whatever.)
Regardless, when you watch lots of programming in the same vein, you can't help but notice the patterns... start comparing and contrasting... it's what we do. The one thing that I'm stating to find irritating is the general portrayal of humanity presented in these futures. There are plenty of examples (or so it seems) of us, as a species being one of two extremes. Either we're intergalactic do-gooders, or we're arrogant, corrupt, meddlesome beings.
The former is the essence of the Roddenberry vision that permeates much of Star Trek. It's easy to see why this has infected much of scifi, certainly on television. The glorious human race with it's high-minded directives and whatnot swoop in to save the day time and time again. Anyone who shows hints of bias or lesser thinking is either an alien or someone to be despised as the villain of the episode. While I'm all for an optimistic outlook, sometimes it's taken so far that it makes the actions of the characters just seem so unbelievable... and that's where you see the heavy hand of the writers trying oh so desperately to make a point.
Now, the latter tends to make for some interesting shows, but in the end it feels like the same thing in the opposite direction. The whole Firefly world is a corrupt one, and nearly every series has the episode where humans try to play god or whatever. Mankind tries to force their values down everyone else throats... like
all the freaking time it seems. Okay, we get it... we're flawed creatures... and we've got tons to learn. I don't think we need a human population of pure evil to drive the point home.
I guess what I'm getting at is that the subtlety just isn't there. I don't know why I'm surprised, because that tends to be how science fiction is written. Extrapolation and exaggeration are par for the course in scifi. It all comes down to those two little words: "what if?". It just feels like the TV writers like to scrawl those words on a bat and beat us all senseless with it.
Also, the whole simple good versus evil bit works so much better in pure fantasy where the suspension of disbelief is in full effect. I feel that scifi has to at least feel remotely feasible, otherwise some of that "hey, what if this happened at some point?" message gets lost... or at the very least muddled. Maybe that's why I've found BSG very compelling: it's tries to be realistic and its overflowing with moral ambiguity and grey areas.
Oh, which reminds me... why does the military feature so prominently in a lot of science fiction? I suspect it has something to do with the fact that action sells and the military brings the action. Regardless, it seems oddly prevalent.
I guess I should follow this whole thing up with a giant [citation needed]. I do have some choice episodes and trends in mind when I talk about this. I just wanted to avoid this becoming a ten page paper (I'd do it too). It's obviously flavored by my admittedly limited expose and probably focuses too intently on American TV scifi. Oh well... yall can deal.
Labels: scifi, television