For example, the Federation’s founding members (Tellarites, Andorians, Vulcans, Humans) were the subject of fan theories and “fanon” for many years before the ENT writers made it official. One of the interesting (and fun) aspects of this recent wave of series has been seeing the writers increasingly add nods to fan theories and pieces of fanon lore over the years. What are some good examples of this?

And relatedly: what’s a fan theory, or piece of fanon, that you suspect the current writers believe, even if they haven’t explicitly stated it on-screen?

  • DoctorWheeze@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    I saw this pointed out in an episode reaction thread, but I’m pretty sure “Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow” marks the first time the Federation has been explicitly, on-screen referred to as “socialist”. Fans, of course, have been calling the Federation socialist/communist for a long time. I think it started kind of crystalizing in 90’s Trek, particularly on DS9 and with Picard’s little speech about not using money in First Contact.

    It’s kind of a throwaway moment in the episode, but it feels big to actually use the word? I suppose modern audiences are much more comfortable with the word than they would have been in the 90’s.

    • majicwalrus@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      but it feels big to actually use the word?

      I felt the same way. This reminded me of Discovery’s Admiral Vance openly admitting to ending capitalism being a goal of the Federation.

    • Reva@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Although there is a point to be made that the word is only comfortable to people now that it has been sufficiently diluted to mean “government welfare” or “being nice to minorities” instead of having the entirety of Marxist philosophy, historical & dialectical materialism, revolutionary efforts for another economic system attached to it.

      Since we do not see “Federation corporations”, we can still assume it might be a socialist society, but it definitely does not follow the traditional socialist structures like democratic centralism or having any kind of workers’ control over what is happening. It’s still a representative presidential democracy modeled after the US out of all things, with no regional, local or economic councils to speak of.

    • shawnj2@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think most people in the Federation think of it that way, I think Pelia (somewhat derogatorily) thinks of it that way.

    • Garak@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As a fan / supporter of the “Federation is post-capitalist” theory I actually found that moment a bit disturbing in context. Pelia is ancient and, although clearly eccentric, I think we’re certainly meant to understand her as being a “wise woman,” so for her to comment that the whole post-scarcity thing may just be a “fad” to me came across as questioning more than supporting, although maybe I’m just being a bit defensive.

      • DoctorWheeze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        To be fair, she’s apparently been around more or less for the entire length of human civilization. She’s lived under lots of different economic systems, and from her point of view the Federation was basically founded yesterday. Skepticism makes sense in that context, even if she generally approves. We the audience know that by the time of TNG, DS9, and Lower Decks (I have not watched enough Discovery to know if the far-future Federation is still portrayed this way), the Federation has if anything only gotten more post-capitalist, so I don’t know that we’re meant to read her skepticism as wise. I mostly took it as her being defensive and a bit flippant.