My partner is into DS9 and suggested we watch some last night. For some reason episode 1 was not available on Amazon Prime.(?) We watched Past Prologue and A Man Alone. As someone who is only barely familiar with the Star Trek universe, here are my thoughts:
-
Sisko is a fantastic leader and also terrifies me. His smile makes me uneasy. “Go over my head again, and I’ll serve yours on a platter.”
-
Kira’s morality is super questionable and I’m amazed they didn’t kick her off the station after episode 2.
-
Bashir is a dork and also needs to take a hint and leave Dax alone. Clearly they aren’t interested.
-
I do love Dax as a sort of early mainstream media conversation starter on gender. The Trill overall are just a brilliant way to frame the idea of how gender and sex work.
-
It’s rough seeing Odo so accustomed to hatred. When he just dips behind a glass door to watch as a mob call for his death…
I’m surprised by the level of dysfunction in the crew. I sort of always saw Star Trek as a bunch of Space Paladins that always did the right thing but in DS9 everyone has their own motives and interests and it’s super interesting to watch them come together. I think I’ll keep watching and see where things go.
You must log in or # to comment.
I think you’ve really pointed out a lot of why I think it’s one of the best, if not the best ST series. The characters are not as homogeneous, have more agency, and seem more “human” and complex. While I do think it still has a bit of the “rose-tinted glasses” perspective that has been part of Star Trek since its creation, I think it’s for a lot more grit to it and it’s more willing to go to darker places and examine moral ambiguity than other series did.
Not that the optimism seen in the other series is bad, just nice to sometimes have series that seem more genuine and relatable examples of the human experience rather than escapism.
I am usually on the other side of this argument, in that my main enjoyment of Star Trek is the exploration of ideas and morality plays that we get from TOS, TNG and the early seasons of Voyager. The utopian setting and unrealistic morality of all the main characters in TNG especially are what makes an episode exploring the nature of individuality or whatever topic work so well.
I enjoy DS9 for what it is, but it also set the stage for modern Trek which is so obsessed with “realism” and galaxy-spanning plotlines in a way that I do not enjoy. If I want to watch just an episode or two, I always reach for TNG or Voyager, but if I want to do a longer re-watch then DS9 is definitely my preferred choice.
Episodic is not always a bad thing, and sometimes it is actually a very important feature! I wish modern TV writers and producers would have the same perspective about serialization, but in reverse.
I’m on that side too :D I like both but am a bit of a sucker for tragedies and non-utopian fiction.
I do, however, agree with your thoughts on the narrative direction. DS9 did indeed open the door for less-Treky series that I don’t think necessarily benefitted the ST universe and probably would have been better as independent sci-fi series in their own settings.
I think what makes DS9 work is its core premise, and the problem with some of the newer stuff is they’re trying for that tone without that premise to back it up. As Sisko says early on, it’s easy to be a saint in paradise, but DS9 isn’t paradise; they’re at a backwater that’s been ravaged by decades of military occupation and is struggling to get by. On Earth, people can just replicate whatever they need for free, but Bajor doesn’t have a post-scarcity economy and they often need to make hard choices. Half the crew also isn’t from the Federation and doesn’t have that strong sense of morality ingrained in them from birth.
Completely agree. The first two seasons are criticized for using leftover TNG scripts. While I think a lot of that is due to the nature of episodic TV production in the 90s, I also think those seasons are incredibly necessary to establish the context of the Federation and how that differs to other cultures in the galaxy (and even on the fringes of the Federation itself). The connection to TNG and the overlap with Voyager also goes a long way to establishing the ethos and morality that the rest of the DS9 story is commenting on.
Take away that foundation and backstory, and you just have another generic space opera.
That level of dysfunction is exactly what I love so much about DS9. These are PEOPLE! They just met! Everyone there is desperately trying to rebuild from a massive war and just trying to hold everything together as long as possible… There isn’t a single team that would be fully functional under all of that. They get better as crewmen as they get to know each other better which is exactly how teams work in real life too. It’s great!
These are PEOPLE!
Out there, there are no saints!
You’re in for a really good experience. Gene Roddenberry had a very specific vision for Star Trek. The federation was his vision for humankind. He wanted us to be those people - at least, to want to be those people. So the federation became something of a Mary Sue. It’s something I really love about the show - it’s good to have a Lancelot around
DS9 has two things that set it apart from previous (and some subsequent) Treks. First and foremost, there’s a full story arc that travels throughout the series. It does have some more episodic, us, episodes, but it was the first Trek with a storyline that wasn’t about exploring the galaxy. TNG had some multipart episodes and some plot lines that ran across the better part of a season, but the entirety of DS9 takes place against a continuous plot line. The fact that they’re (generally speaking) not Boldly Going anywhere is kind of a metaphor.
It also explores some much darker themes than the other Treks, including colonization, genocide, terrorism, and what we might give up when we believe the ends can justify the means. It’s a side of the federation that Roddenberry wanted to reject, but I think having it throws his vision of what humans can be into even sharper relief.
Like with the other Treks, it takes about a season or so before the writers and actors settle into the characters. I happen to agree with you about Sisko. He’s the most military-like of any Trek captain I’ve ever seen. I’m not going to say anything else because you’re going to love watching everything unfold.
But keep an eye on that tailor.
I like the contrasting vibe of station vs. ship that the show presents. The adventure, the unknown and unpredictable, all that comes to them instead of them seeking it out. That gives it different stakes, makes the characters themselves feel less in-control of what happens and when. Great stuff.
I actually didn’t realize the series was at a space station at first, which is goofy of me in hindsight since that’s the entire title screen. But I do agree that it really changes the dynamic of the show. It feels like I’m people-watching at a space mall. I’m a little worried the singular location will be stale but I’m sure they have ways to keep it fresh and find excuses to go other places here and there.
Oh believe me, nothing gets stale on this show. You’re in for a great time.
TNG had some multipart episodes and some plot lines that ran across the better part of a season, but the entirety of DS9 takes place against a continuous plot line.
“Entirety” is doing a lot of work in that sentence, IMO. While there is a general setting and eventually a serialized plot, it really doesn’t get to the point where there’s a continuous story until at minimum season 3 and in practice doesn’t stop being episodic until even later.
Even once the main baddies are introduced–which does not actually happen until the final episode of season 2–there are still multiple self-contained episodes that have nothing to do with any kind of ongoing story or character development.
Don’t get me wrong, compared to TNG and even Voyager or Enterprise, DS9 definitely had a story in mind that took multiple seasons to tell, but it’s not like things were carefully known from the beginning. Lots of details change or are quietly retrofitted to fit better once the writers knew where things were actually headed. And that’s fine, by the way! There is still a great story to be told.
But keep an eye on that tailor.
Oh I forgot to talk about Garak! I really like how expressive he is, something about him reminds me a lot of Robin Williams. The bit where he tells Bashir to buy a suit at precisely 2055 and Bashir just totally doesn’t get it… I’m hoping the doctor grows on me but he’s probably my least favorite so far ha.
Bashir definitely gets better. There are a few episodes that recontextualize his character and each one makes him come across much better. He also just grows a lot.
On my first rewatch now and I can say that season one Bashir threw me for a loop because of just how obnoxious he is!! His interactions with any female character, or O’Brien… I guess I forget that the writers had to lay the bedrock of an annoying character in order to cover his later transition into a character we were excited about 🤣
Garak is arguably my favorite character in all of Trek, especially after reading “A Stitch in Time” which fleshes out his background considerably.
I don’t think this is much of a spoiler but >!Garak basically becomes a regular without Andrew J. Robinson’s name appearing in the opening credits. I don’t have exact numbers but it feels like he appears in later seasons as much as Jake does!<.
It literally changed me
If you can stand its horrible interface, get Paramount Plus because it has the full series. Or just get them on DVD actually. Sadly no Blu Rays yet of the series
