Star Trek Picard—review and commentary

 

Ryan in Trek

Then and now— Seven of Nine


Star Trek
is an integral part of American culture
and a controversial view of the future of humanity. It began with Gene Roddenberry’s concept for a serious science fiction television series, a novel idea in the early 60s, and it has continued to evolve for fifty years. As America has changed, as science fiction has changed, as television has changed, Star Trek has changed, too.

Picard is set two decades after the feature film, Nemesis, and is based upon the series Star Trek The Next Generation, which ran for seven years on television. Later, four of the feature films were based upon the characters from TNG series. Picard has ten episodes in season one, but the second and third seasons are planned for CBS All Access, which is how hubby and I watched the first season.

This made for the web series has very high production values—the sets and effects rival feature films. Sir Patrick Stewart is still an amazing actor, although the pace of the series (slow!) seems to be partially dictated by the age of its principal character. Viewers who prefer space battles and fisticuffs will probably be a bit disappointed. Casual viewers may also find the editing, with its rapid cuts from scene to scene, confusing. Honestly, I don’t like that aspect at all, but this is apparently in line with Picard‘s sister show, Star Trek Discovery.

Spoiler alert—

We both thought the first few episodes were confusing and lacking in characters, apart from Jean Luc Picard himself, with whom we could empathize. The writers made a good decision in embracing the age of the main character. Anything else would insult the viewer, as Patrick Stewart looks and sounds old. For us, as fans of Star Trek Voyager, the show got better when Jeri Ryan pops in, as an older and less “Borg” version of Seven of Nine. Ryan is still riveting to watch, even without the cat suit that made her fodder for lots of magazine pictures in the late 1990s. In the seventeen years since her character graced the small screen, Seven has become much more human—in her speech pattern, in her attire, and in part due to suffering losses associated with years of living in a deteriorating society.

A key word here is suffering. One of the better aspects of Trek in its first few decades was  its optimistic view of the future of humanity. Although Roddenberry sought to put serious science fiction onto television, and therefore into lots of living rooms, his vision was seldom dark. However, much of serious science fiction—in print, in film, in gaming, and even in graphic forms—has embraced the dystopian view of the future of humanity. A utopia is an idealized society in which social and technical advances serve to make all things better for humanity. Yes, I did say it was idealistic! A dystopia is the polar opposite, in which “advances” in society and technology make things worse. For some examples of dystopian literature/film, think of Orwell’s 1984 or the film Blade Runner, based upon the work of Phillip K. Dick.

Alas, Picard‘s greatest weakness isn’t its slow pace or its rather confusing editing. Nor is it the “flashbacks” in which the characters look just as old as they do in the current timeline, no doubt due to the unforgiving nature of high def photography. Nope, the core problem for many fans of Star Trek will undoubtedly be the dark vision of the future embraced by the writers. Picard is a dystopia. Beloved characters from the previous Trek series will suffer, and some will die. New characters suffer and some of them die, too. And, by and large, those deaths may very well be without purpose, meaning, and certainly without honor.

Star Trek Picard has some strengths, including dazzling cinematography, a rich background of material from which the writers can draw inspiration, and an aging but talented main character. Guest stars include characters from TNG and Voyager, and the development of Seven of Nine, the former Borg, works well. Enjoy the series, but temper your expectations. This is post-modern Star Trek.

 

Why Fair and Square Pricing Fails

Purple and White Speech Bubble Clothing Logo-2I like for the price to be the price. But, I must be one of the few people who think that way. Fair and square pricing works for me: I can budget for what I need to purchase, and know when it is okay to splurge a bit. However, I have a dear friend who won’t buy anything unless she negotiates a better price. This practice is downright embarrassing at times. Recently, we were in a charity thrift store and she saw a large ceramic vase filled with fake flowers. (I know, taste varies.) Anyway, it was priced fairly, but she stood in line to ask a harried clerk to lower the price by $5. The clerk said, “The price is the price.” My friend walked away. “It’s a charity,” I reminded her. As we got into the car, my friend made up some excuse about the quality of the item. But, I know her. No discount, no sale is her motto.

I’ve sold items on eBay for almost a decade. But, recently, I’ve been rather frustrated with the “Buy it now or best offer” feature on eBay. As a seller, I prefer to list an item at the price I want for it, and my potential customer can pay for the item and the shipping (which isn’t free, so I never pretend that it is) or not. However, if sellers don’t activate “best offer” when creating the listing, eBay will do it later, and before long, I start getting half price offers. Yep, the default “best offer” setting is literally half price. I hate telling customers, “no.” And, I have learned that counter offers seldom result in a sale. Lately, I have been listing items a couple of dollars more than I normally would ask, then setting the best offer for the real price. Yes, the whole thing bothers me, but many, many shoppers want to feel that they got a discount, especially on really low priced items. I’ve literally gotten an offer of $2 on a genuine leather designer handbag.

And, this gotta have a discount mentality is not just for used items, such as the pre-owned books and garments that I generally list in my eBay store (The Alternative Article.) Remember the absolute disaster of “Fair and Square” pricing at J.C. Penney? Although I am not particularly fond of that merchant, I really liked their pricing when that experiment was underway. Apparently, I was alone, however. J. C. Penney customers stayed away in droves until the management jacked up the prices and paid newspapers to print coupons so customers could “save” 40% off.

It’s psychology. And it sucks.