From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Re: Was TOS really that bad? (Re: TOS actors)
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:44:32 GMT

In article <rawdon.715903854@cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>In <1992Sep7.192637.7358@cco.caltech.edu> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>rawdon@colby.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon) writes:

[on Inner Light...]

>A plot show.  (A mostly good plot show, though the technological rationale
>is a bit of a fast one.)  The specific natures of the characters involved
>did not have any real bearing on the show.  I'm also on record as having said
>that "The Inner Light" would have been just as good if the characters (though
>not necessarily the actors) of Data, Worf, Riker, Geordi and maybe Dr.
>Crusher had been in Picard's place.  (In fact, it might have been *more*
>interesting with one of the first two in his place.  If it had been "a Data
>story" instead of "a Picard story" then it *might* have turned out to be a
>character study.)

I disagree with you when you say that any other character would have
sufficed in place of Picard in that episode.  Of all the characters,
Picard seems to be the most realistic and believable.  Above all, his
character is the most noble.  The premise for Inner Light required a
very noble character, one who would adopt the dead culture as his/her
own, be an active contributor.  Active to the point that he would
develop strong bonds with the other characters.  For example, knowing
that Picard is very controlled and rather _a_motional in normal
circumstances, the scenes in which he was shown as close to his wife
were particularly moving.  Would the scene where he comforts her during
her death have worked with LaForge?  With Data or Worf?  I don't think
so.

If find your wish to have seen Data in this role particularly odd.  The
entire story was about emotions.  About how Picard _might_ have lived
his life in a different way, had circumstances been different.  How he
might have had a wife, might have had a family, might have been a loving
father.  None of this would have been possible with, say, Worf or Data.
I think you may have missed the point of the episode.  The episode
wasn't about the sci-fi premise of a dead society transferring knowlege
across the centuries.  If it had been, then yes, Data might have
sufficed.  But it wasn't.  It was about what might have been.



>For that matter, it would have worked fine with Kirk, McCoy, Scotty, Sulu
>or Chekov (though perhaps not Spock).

With Kirk or McCoy, yes.  With Scott, Sulu, or even more laughably
Chekov?  Heh.  No.  In case you didn't notice, in TOS Sulu and Chekov
were mere caricatures.  They never reminded me of real people at any
time.  How forgiving we are of ol' TOS.  How critical of TNG.


>>>TNG's best stories are plot-focused rather than character-focused, 
>
>>I tend to disagree.  "The Measure of a Man", "Darmok", "The Inner Light", and
>>shows of that nature strike me as rather intensely character-focused, and
>>quietly superb.
>
>Well, "MoaM" was a misfire all around, I think.  Character-focused, yes, but
>basically a botch of a story anyway.

Botch of a story?  Phooey.  MoaM was a well thought-out morality play
that got to the heart of some basic ethical issues.  The court room
discussions were thought provoking and interesting.  What else can you
ask of a television drama?


>But I see neither "Darmok" nor "The Inner Light" as being character-focused.

Despite the fact that they both centered on exploring the personalities
and internal drives of the character?  How do you define a
"character-focused" story, then?  It must be a different definition than
I've ever heard.



>>>(Ever notice how Trek Classic had much wittier
>>>and intelligent dialogue than TNG?)

This is a sweeping generalization that can't be defended by either camp.


>>This one I'm taking, Mr. Rooney.  :-)  No, actually, I didn't.  Not when I was
>>in my teens, and certainly not now.
>
>You need to switch on the TV to be able to notice it, Tim. :-)

Ditch the smiley.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Schroeder	                |  Warning: prolonged exposure to this
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov         |  .sig may cause retinal damage and 
Brookhaven National Laboratory  |  blistering skin rashes.