Book Reviews - Other Books about Star Trek
The Physics of Star Trek
This book by renowned physicist Lawrence Krauss (with a foreword by Stephen Hawking) may not be the first one that poses the question how the concepts of a science fiction universe stack up against real-world science. But it is arguably the most popular take on Star Trek's science, and started a trend in the course of which Krauss published a sequel, Beyond Star Trek: Physics from Alien Invasions to the End of Time, and various other authors tackled topics such as the biology of Trek.
However, although the title suggests otherwise, this is not really a book about Star Trek. Krauss evidently knows the series. But in most chapters he uses references to specific Trek technologies or specific Trek episodes only as a starting point. This is followed by a general comparison of science and fiction, in which we could easily substitute "Enterprise" with "Star Destroyer" or any other starship from any other sci-fi universe, without making a difference. In the chapter on warp propulsion, for instance, Krauss discusses a generic theory of FTL travel without even once mentioning the term "subspace". Of course, subspace is a purely fictional parallel realm or dimension that is not rooted in real science. But whether it is realistic or not, subspace is the key to Star Trek's warp drive, in contrast to the hyperspace concepts of other science fiction. Essentially the same happens in his reflections on the transporter. Krauss presupposes that a human being has to be reduced to bits to be teleported to some other place, although we know that Star Trek's transporter is "analog" and transmits the very matter of an object or person. Overall, Krauss hardly answers any of the often nagging questions if and how the technologies of the series could work.
I concede that from the viewpoint of real physics Krauss is absolutely right, and that there would have been no reason for him to delve into concepts that are flawed from the outset. I would actually wish that he gave certain Trek authors a few repetitional lessons in physics. But the question remains why a book with rather little Trek-specific content and much more generic analysis is called The Physics of Star Trek, rather than "The Physics of Science Fiction". To his credit, Krauss may have simply chosen Star Trek as a casual subject because he is a fan of the series and because Star Trek, rather than most other franchises, covers all facets of fictional science and technology.
It is certainly not the author's intention to disillusion Star Trek fans with his statements that the technology just wouldn't work. But some readers may be disappointed that many innovations shown in the series are still very far away or even physically impossible. It needs a lot more than a couple of decades of research until we get warp or only impulse drive or a transporter to work. Krauss makes very clear how much fuel it would take to accelerate a starship to "only" 0.5c and decelerate again (6561 times the ship's mass!), and what a resolution would be required to beam up a person's atoms from a planet surface (that of a lens as wide as the distance to the planet!).
As I already mentioned, The Physics of Star Trek isn't supposed to spoil our fun of watching Star Trek, and I hope it doesn't have this effect on anyone. So if we keep in mind that Krauss is just talking about general concepts and not about how the technology is actually supposed to work in Star Trek, this is a very good lecture for all who are into Star Trek and for all who like to know more about the limits of physics.
Lawrence M. Krauss, Stephen Hawking (introduction), The Physics of Star Trek, Harperperennial Library, 1996.
"This means something!" Star Trek has succeeded to keep people being interested in it for more than 30 years. So there must be more to it than just pure entertainment. This is the setup for Jeff Greenwald's "Future Perfect", an attempt to explain what is behind people's fascination with Star Trek. So he travels around the world to meet with people and talk to them about the influence Star Trek has on their lives.
Greenwald's initial theory of Trek awakening a collective human yearning to get out into space and explore the final frontier in earnest is proven wrong by the interviewed people. Star Trek instead appears to be a deep and maybe eternal need for something to believe in - something that makes sense. At this point the question Greenwald is asking has changed without him noticing. The question is no longer "what is it?" but "why is it?"- it has become questioning the movens. Greenwald's search for the definition of Star Trek therefore requires a different method to deal with than the chosen one of collecting impressions. Even his description of Trek being a contemporary myth still misses the point, because myth and enlightenment are bound together in a dialectic way (since even the myth is enlightening in it trying to explain what's behind things while enlightenment itself has become mythological to the non-expert). As a form of literature Star Trek has to be regarded as and treated by means of literature. Star Trek makes sense. Sense does not mean to control reality by establishing a mutual understanding what has to be regarded as such at a certain point (that's happening every day and quite trivial regarded from a philosophical point of view). Sense is closely related to surely knowing what really is. If there's one thing characterizing the modern times best, than it's the absence of sense apriori. Sense has to be found or to be set, and this underlines the above question: that's the difference between controlling reality (which is always possible defining things at a given time) and knowing reality (which may be impossible).
Concerning the production of reality the techniques used to control the terms and conditions of its production process are leading to the media involved. Greenwald needs media theory to get closer to his subject but he decides to do without it. Interesting questions are touched but left unanswered. Assumed there is a strong correlation between history and corresponding forms of art making use of media competence, Star Trek could be described as the contemporary modern art it is: reflecting the social state and evolution process of mankind, dealing with contemporary problems but presenting an optimistic solution instead of showing Armageddon. Seeing Star Trek as a visual form of a literary genre would explain why it can not be just black and white like a fairy tale, why time and continuity are so important and how they are achieved. Without media theory acquiring a growing understanding for his subject and linking the different impressions contributed by different people from different cultures is not possible. Things keep being fragmented.
This is the biggest drawback in an very amusing and entertaining book: lacking competence for media it stays anecdotal and does not lead to an understanding what makes Star Trek so desirable besides that it's presenting an optimistic an peaceful outlook to the future without being an utopian idea neglecting life in all is aspects.
So if you are involved in the show and already knowing at least the basics Greenwald's book is very enjoyable reading, but if you're new to it and keen on being told what's Star Trek all about you certainly will be disappointed because the book can not keep its promise to tell the whole truth about the longing called Star Trek.
Jeff Greenwald, Future Perfect: How Star Trek Conquered Planet Earth, Penguin Books, 1998.
Boarding the Enterprise
This book is a multi-faceted collection of essays dealing with the original Star Trek. It combines personal accounts of people working for the show with a look at Star Trek as a media phenomenon, complemented with more or less serious scientific analyses of the fictional technology. The content is so diverse that Boarding the Enterprise deserves to be summarized chapter by chapter.
In the introduction, award-winning science fiction author Robert J. Sawyer who acts as the book's editor emphasizes Star Trek's impact on our pop culture. David Gerrold, the other editor and TOS and TAS writer, carries on with a perspicuous analysis of Star Trek's position in the world of media, the role of its fans and how science fiction is different and has to be different from other literary genres. One of Gerrold's key points, that Star Trek, in his view, often doesn't go further than just showing an innovation without consequences, remains debatable though. Norman Spinrad who wrote "The Doomsday Machine" adds considerations how Star Trek could be established in a world where sci-fi was still seeking its place. His homage to Spock as a completely new type of TV drama character is especially intriguing. D.C. Fontana of "Journey to Babel" fame (among other notable episodes she wrote) remembers her time as part of the staff and particularly how Gene Roddenberry worked out not just the basic framework of the show but also cared about seemingly minor details. Also, everyone joining his team had to prepare to become the victim of one of his notorious practical jokes. In the following essay Allen Steele looks at the show from an author's perspective.
My three favorite essays are those of cultural theorist Eric Greene, author Michael A. Burstein and philosopher Lyle Zynda. Eric Greene goes into great detail linking the original Star Trek to the ongoing Vietnam War. His theory is that while the Federation is quite obviously modeled after the USA in the Cold War era, Kirk embodies John F. Kennedy who always sought peace but was determined to fight for freedom just like the equally vigorous 23rd century starship captain. Overall, in Green's view Star Trek represented rather the official government policy than the counter-culture which was cropping up in the late 60s. He picks out many examples of the classic "cultural intervention" cliché of TOS where, with a couple of notable exceptions, the freedom-oriented position prevails. Although in some cases he may have over-interpreted statements and observations from the series, it is a thought-provoking read. Michael A. Burstein looks at how religion is presented in Star Trek. He comes to the conclusion that the absence of anything religious that would be commonplace in our world (and definitely was in the 1960s) clearly promotes a secular society. Even Edith Keeler, a church social worker of the 1930s, doesn't mention God once in her address to the homeless! While this anti-religious attitude may be attributed to Gene Roddenberry's decided atheism, Burstein takes into consideration that it reflects a general tendency in science fiction and in the American society just as well. "Who am I" is the title of Lyle Zynda's essay which asks the question whether a human "essence" or "soul" in an android body could still be one and the same person - or someone reassembled using the transporter, for that matter. He devises two models, one in which identity requires the presence of a body or soul and one in which it is defined through a pattern that can be duplicated. Zynda examines several occurrences and comes to the conclusion that the evidence is very contradictory.
On the more light-hearted side (at least so I hope because otherwise it would be defamatory!) writer Don DeBrandt explains why Vulcans are not as logical as they claim to be. Sci-fi author Lawrence Watt-Evans comes up with the weird(?) theory that the 23rd century human society must be based on strictly Darwinian principles, as there could be no other explanation for the lack of very basic safety systems on the otherwise cutting-edge starship USS Enterprise. Robert A. Metzger, in his role as a sci-fi author and scientist, contributes a homage to Scotty - in his view the most important crew member and the only one to know how to create custom Kirks for specific missions and to revive him in the transporter each time the captain is killed on a mission. Praise for Star Trek's role in promoting science, even if it is cheesy at times, comes from astronomer David DeGraff, while author Adam Roberts surmises that sci-fi has become more interesting than the real thing, ultimately killing the space race. Fanfic author Melissa Dickinson explains and justifies why especially female fans irrespective of their sexual orientation come up with slash fiction, and she quotes romantic aspects as the most important reasons - although it is my impression that in many cases it may be the mere sexual desire. Paul Levinson, another award-winning writer, points out how Star Trek taught Paramount and the networks a lesson when it flourished in syndication seemingly against the rules of the television industry. Writer Howard Weinstein concludes the colorful mix of essays with the statement that Star Trek was always about "being better". It is only sad that some of the articles implicitly and this final one explicitly presuppose that Star Trek has degraded in its later incarnations which is simply not true.
Although its general tone is light-hearted and at times ironical, Boarding the Enterprise is anything but superficial for the most part. Several of the essays are at least entertaining, even though their statements are not really new to fans. In other chapters the book tackles philosophical questions and raises sometimes controversial issues. I for one don't read non-fictional books to agree with everything, and here is a nice opportunity to form or change an opinion on a number of things. But most importantly, Boarding the Enterprise is an affectionate contribution to Star Trek's 40th anniversary. Written by knowledgeable fans, it stays true to the series and does not digress like some other non-fiction books with "Star Trek" in the title.
Edited by David Gerrold, Robert J. Sawyer, with Leah Wilson, Boarding the Enterprise - Transporters, Tribbles and the Vulcan Death Grip in Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek, Benbella Books, 2006.
Fan Phenomena: Star Trek
This book is an anthology on the Star Trek fandom, and part of a series that is concerned with Star Wars, Doctor Who, Batman and other fan cultures in a similar fashion. Being a more or less scholarly approach to the cultural phenomenon of Star Trek, Fan Phenomena: Star Trek is written for cultural scientists, sociologists and other researchers in my view, rather than for the fans of the franchise.
The introduction by Bruce E. Drushel provides an overview of the Star Trek fan culture and of the topics that are covered in the book. Most notably it points out that the Star Trek fandom is anything but a monolithic and secluded culture. People around the world become fans irrespective of their age, sex, race or religion, and they establish many links with mainstream culture. These considerations will form the backdrop of the following essays.
Chapter 1 by Elizabeth Thomas is titled "Live Long and Prosper: How Fans Made Star Trek a Cultural Phenomenon". The chapter recounts how letter writing campaigns, fan clubs and conventions not only provided the fans with a powerful voice, but created a form of attachment to the franchise that Gene Roddenberry never would have hoped for. The focus of this chapter is on the first three decades of Trek fandom, and so it acknowledges the development of the online fandom in just one paragraph. In this regard it is unfortunate that the author gets essential facts wrong in this paragraph, because TrekWeb.com is neither officially endorsed by Paramount as she alleges, nor does Paramount exclusively own all Star Trek properties.
The next essay, "Not Your Daddy's Star Trek: Rebooting a Franchise and Rewriting a Fandom" by Catherine Coker, is concerned with the impact that the 2009 reboot movie by JJ Abrams has on the Star Trek fandom, and on fan fiction in particular. The author points out that the redefinition of the characters and of their universe imposes challenges on the writers of fan fiction. After the introductory notes on the Abrams movie she explains how fan works always used to link themselves to the official Trek series and movies. Most of the rest of the essay, however, boils down to the specific question how slash stories may work in the new universe. This is where the author loses me, because like 99% of all fans I simply don't care for slash fiction, which in my view is an overrated by-product that has little to do with the actual idea of Star Trek. I am sorry, but I can't take an essay seriously that mentions worries about how Uhura interrupts a "canonical K/S subtext", instead of addressing relevant quality and continuity issues of the Abramsverse.
In Chapter 3, "A Utopia Denied: Star Trek and its Queer Fans", Bruce E. Drushel summarizes the decade-long efforts of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer fans to get acknowledged in canonical Star Trek in some fashion. David Gerrold's "Blood and Fire", featuring a gay couple, was considered for TNG's first season, but never made it to the screen. After many debates with LGBT(Q) fans, Gene Roddenberry said he would show gay crew members on TNG, but this promise remained unfulfilled after his death in 1991. Drushel tells us how Star Trek repeatedly tackled LGBTQ issues in the form of allegories, such as in TNG: "The Outcast" (sexual discrimination) or ENT: "Stigma" (AIDS). But he also quotes LGBTQ activists who would prefer direct references to same-sex relationships over allegories. The essay then switches to George Takei and Zachary Quinto coming out in real life. Drushel closes with considerations (or rather speculation) about cast members that could have been gay, namely Garak, Q and Kivas Fajo -- fortunately without putting them into a slash fiction context!
Chapter 4, "Trek in the Park: Live Performance and Star Trek Culture" by Michael Boynton, is an interesting read, although or just because it is an event of only regional impact (in the Portland area, USA). The author reckons that the main draw of the live performance is the subject of Star Trek, although the audience is not primarily composed of recognizable Trekkies. Boynton analyzes the way that Star Trek is being presented as a live performance in a park, as well as the interaction of the actors with the audience. Comparing "Star Trek in the Park" to something like "Shakespeare in the Park", he sees that the alleged "low culture" of Star Trek is being elevated through this form of presentation. Although it manages to maintain a certain academic distance to the subject, this essay is written so affectionately that I am sad I don't have the opportunity to attend the festival!
The next essay, "Assimilate This! Computer-Mediated Communication and Star Trek Fan Culture" by Kimberly L. Kulovitz, is a sociological study, and as such more scholarly than most of the rest of the book. The study is based on the hyperpersonal model of computer-mediated communication (CMC), a theory that acknowledges advantages of CMC over personal face-to-face communication. One example is that a message meant to start a romantic relationship with a coworker can be prepared more thoroughly in a CMC channel. The author investigates the communication in two forum threads, one from startrek.com and one from trekbbs.com, where she identifies individuals who exaggerate their membership in a certain fan category, as well as groups setting themselves apart. On of the key questions with regard to the hyperpersonal model, however, can't be definitely answered according to the author: Could the same kind of discussions take place in face-to-face communication just as well?
Chapter 6 is titled "Lost in Orbit: Satellite Star Trek Fans". Bianca Spriggs, a longtime fan herself, has interviewed six other individuals that can be described as "satellite fans", meaning devotees who are every bit as knowledgeable as the authors of fan fiction or YouTube videos, only less visible in the community. The result is a broad range of impressions and opinions, but with the common pattern that these people do much more than simply watch the show, even though it ultimately doesn't rule their lives.
Chapter 7, "Star Trek Fans as Parody: Fans Mocking Other Fans" by Paul Booth, is the perhaps most interesting one in the book. The author points out how specifically Star Trek fans bear the brunt of prejudices against fans of science fiction. He examines how fans are being mocked in two films, "Galaxy Quest" (1999) and "Fanboys" (2009). In "Fanboys" the Star Wars fans are being portrayed as obsessive, but they are outclassed by a group of "Trekkies". In a similar fashion, "Galaxy Quest" features a boy who is an ardent fan of the old TV series of the same name, while the aliens in the movie, the Thermians, are totally hyperreal, meaning that they can't distinguish at all between TV and reality. The author concludes that the depiction of fans in the two movies is insidious, because it invites fans to dissociate themselves from the extreme forms of fandom, thereby only reinforcing the stigma.
In the next chapter, "Lieutenant Sulu's Facebook: 'Professor' Takei and the Social Networking Classroom", Nathan Thompson and Kenneth Huynh investigate the activity on George Takei's Facebook page. The veteran actor frequently posts memes in the form of funny pictures but also clear political statements on gay rights, as well as on racial discrimination. Takei doesn't receive only positive feedback. In fact, some visitors complain that he goes over the top with name-calling when he criticizes what he sees as bigotry. The authors of the article see Takei's Facebook page as a big classroom, and Takei as a professor who ultimately wants to reach everyone with his "lesson", and not only those who would agree with him anyway.
The final chapter is titled "The Borg: Fan Pariah or Cultural Pillar?". Here Charles Evans Jones, Jr asks the question whether the Borg are really the embodiment of evil. He describes the Borg Collective as governed by moderate-act consequentialism, meaning that they always choose the alternative that produces the best results. He quotes a number of fans who vote against hunting down the Borg, or who appreciate the idea of achieving perfection by linking together individuals. Charles Evans Jones investigates the episode TNG: "I, Borg", in which Hugh was separated from the Collective and regained his individuality. While this example demonstrates that the Collective consists of more than mindless drones and that it may not be right to kill all of them, it doesn't really address the question what the driving force of the Borg Collective is. I could name half a dozen Borg episodes that may have illustrated the author's theory better.
As already mentioned in my introductory note, fans are not the target readers of Fan Phenomena: Star Trek. However, as a fan I enjoyed most of the articles, although some of them are rather academic and may not have been meant to be entertaining in the first place. For me, reading this book with its overall respectful and sometimes affectionate external view of the fandom was a pleasant departure from the usual way I look at Star Trek and at myself as a fan.
Edited by Bruce E. Drushel, Fan Phenomena: Star Trek, Intellect Books, 2013.
Star Trek: A Cultural History
In the introduction, Booker describes how The Original Series (TOS) came to pass in the 1960s, in a time when high-profile science fiction was something unheard of. It is easy to notice that he is a fan of the series; it initially sounds like he idealizes Star Trek, as if the series had always been immensely popular as well as commercially successful. But that is only a first impression. Booker will differentiate further in the following chapters.
As some sort of preface for this review, it may seem unfair that I go through the chapters a bit like in "checklist mode". I will focus on a couple of things that I feel a need to comment on or that I think are missing from the book, not necessarily on what the author deems particularly important. While I certainly want to give an impression of the book contents, it would be boring to just recount common knowledge that already the author himself could only recount.
Chapter 1 looks at "Star Trek and the History of Star Trek". Curiously, after some of the history of TOS was already covered in the introduction, this chapter starts with The Animated Series (TAS). This feels a bit like the author puts the cart before the horse, especially since TAS heavily references characters and events from TOS, as well as the concept of the Prime Directive. These are introduced in the book as late as TAS is discussed. Anyway, Booker gets his point across that the alleged children's series (which won an Emmy for Best Children's Series) actually continues to tell mature stories just like in TOS. It is especially interesting how the rebellion of the machines in "Once Upon a Planet" has a conciliatory ending, quite unlike the one in the film "Westworld" that was produced at the same time. It is noteworthy how Booker always finds examples in other media that constitute parallel developments and sometimes antitheses to Star Trek.
Booker carries on with Roddenberry's other endeavors in the 1970s, namely the two pilot movies for "Genesis II" and the one for "The Questor Tapes", all of which had something of Star Trek in them in his analysis. They all failed, but they may have paved the way for the continuation of Star Trek. The Star Trek comics may have been successful but the author surmises they were never very profitable for Paramount and were licensed mainly to keep the franchise on the pop culture radar. The novel spin-offs of the franchise had a particularly slow start but saw a very positive development up to the most recent series that ties into Star Trek Discovery.
Among the sequels on TV, TNG stands out as the most memorable series. Booker refers to fans who see this version as the "real" Star Trek, rather than TOS, and he speaks of "the most successful American science fiction television series in history". In his view, the series manages to rediscover the recipe of TOS and character-oriented stories, ironically only after Gene Roddenberry's death. DS9 with its stationary setting, on the other hand, seems to be a departure from that recipe. Booker, however, quotes Winrich Kolbe who once said that DS9 is "Gunsmoke. It's the town that everyone comes to." By this definition, DS9 definitely belongs into the same "Wagon Train to the Stars" category as TOS and TNG. A DS9 character of particular interest is Dr. Bashir, "Star Trek's first Arab officer", who lets genetic engineering appear in a good light for the first time in the franchise. On the downside, the greedy Quark embodies an existentialist view of alien characters, in which all members of a race share common characteristics, although he fortunately shows honor and compassion in the course of the series, as Booker has to concede.
Unlike DS9, Voyager is a controversial series according to Booker's analysis. He quotes writer Ian Grey who calls Voyager "the most despised object of fanboy loathing in the franchise's nearly 50-year history." Booker himself speaks of Voyager as an "outlier". At this point, I really wonder where Grey and Booker have been in the past fifteen years. Voyager's having been an "outlier" or even an object of "fanboy loathing" is at most a small historical side note in the light of the even more controversial prequel Enterprise, let alone the two franchise reboots that followed and created a real schism. (At least, Ian Grey wrote this in 2013, long before DIS was announced.) Booker tries to find the reasons why fans, in his view, don't like Voyager, and it boils down to a "feminist emphasis" of the show. This is a rationale that I can't follow. Since the series was on air, it has become customary to decry it for Janeway's sometimes questionable leadership, for Seven of Nine's role as "ship's babe" or for the deconstruction of the Borg, rather than for Janeway being a feminist figure. As the author himself notes, Voyager was made with a stance of "clearly regarding the notion of a female captain as normal and natural", so this issue remains unresolved.
The section about Enterprise too leaves me a bit dissatisfied. I disagree about the author's impression that Enterprise is a departure from what Star Trek (more precisely, 24th century Star Trek) used to be about. The retro look and feel he mentions, such as the dark and industrial looking corridors of the ship, are not "un-Trek-like" but an essential ingredient to establish that this series is set in the past. And rather than alienating fans, for most of us the changes are, on the contrary, not extensive enough for a prequel in which the Star Trek we know is supposed to be "not yet there". Booker generally ascribes to Enterprise a "dark tone that often outstrips even that of DS9". In fact, in the first two seasons the stories were not any "darker" than the kind we know from Voyager. The actual problem of Enterprise was that they were too much like in Voyager, often being clear rip-offs, rather than legitimate prequels. After this original recipe was exhausted, the Xindi conflict in the third season, only a quarter of the series, is like Booker describes Enterprise on the whole. His conclusion regarding Enterprise, on the other hand, is spot on. The series failed because of low ratings, whether these are because of lacking fan approval or not.
Booker addresses the issues of J.J. Abrams's Star Trek reboot regarding the continuity, redesign, the unlikely plot coincidences, the focus on action and even the lens flares. But he acknowledges that this was done for this movie to become a blockbuster for a general audience.
Chapter 2 is titled "Star Trek and the History of American Science Fiction". The author begins with the question what is so special about science fiction, which he answers by quoting Darko Suvin, who suggested that the genre creates "cognitive estrangement". In other words, it is intentionally designed to be uncomfortable. According to M. Keith Booker, however, Star Trek gives the viewer some comfort back because of its focus on well-known characters. He categorizes Star Trek as a space opera, which would be defined by "swashbuckling action", but he thinks that it is overall serious and sophisticated. Star Trek visits several sub-genres such as "time travel" and "alien invasion" for which the author gives several examples. He also works out how such plots were influenced by and linked to the Cold War and other real-world events of the 1960s.
Regarding science fiction TV series, it is interesting to note that during the late 1960s Star Trek was in good company with Lost in Space, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea and the short-lived Time Tunnel. However, as opposed to the "adult" Star Trek, Lost in Space came across as rather cutesy and conventional according to Booker. Paradoxically, Lost in Space seems to have attracted more viewers over 50 than Star Trek that was more successful with a young audience. The author concludes this section with the finding that science fiction on television was not important during the 1970s and 80s until the advent of TNG.
"Fahrenheit 451", "2001" and "Planet of the Apes" are three notable science fiction films that came out at about the same time as TOS, and Booker compares all these very different approaches. "Fahrenheit 451" is marked by its criticism of mindless entertainment as opposed to literature. Yet, Star Trek makes its stand in Booker's view not only because it is pro-literature but also because the series proves that TV does not have to be dull but can be thought-provoking. He then outlines the two poles of science fiction movies: "2001", which demonstrates that science fiction can be art, while "Planet of the Apes" proves that political issues can be addressed to a mainstream audience. TOS has something of both in his opinion. Because of its plot similarities with "Planet of the Apes", the author then picks "The Omega Glory" as an example of how the American Way of Life is a literally universal concept that even overrules the Prime Directive and that unfortunately also gives rise to racism.
Booker continues with a look at science fiction literature. The "Golden Age" lasted from the 1930s to 1950s, it was dominated by pulp stories and had led science fiction into what he calls a "cultural ghetto inhabited mostly by adolescent fanboys". (I actually know people who still think like that today. It's not hard to find them in a country like Germany.) Anyway, there was a movement to make science fiction more complex, more mature and more accurate. This "New Wave" in the late 1960s coincided with the arrival of TOS. And contrary to what some scholars state, Booker believes that Star Trek has a lot in common with literary science fiction. He only briefly outlines the further development of the genre, the rise of cyberpunk and how TNG essentially counters the widespread criticism of modern technology. Finally, he cites The Orville as a proof of a lasting influence of Star Trek, as a show that he perceives as "Trekkier" than the series with the Star Trek brand name.
In Chapter 3, Booker looks at "Star Trek and American Political History". As already foreshadowed in the previous chapters, in his view TOS is much a child of its time, of a profound crisis of the American society with racism, the Vietnam War and the Cold War being the principal issues. He states that Star Trek does not overtly support Vietnam protests and that it at most provides an ambivalent stance as evidenced by "The City on the Edge of Forever" and "A Private Little War". And perhaps the stories of TOS were even more closely linked to real-world events than one might think. Booker explains that "The Omega Glory" aired four weeks after the Tet Offensive of the Viet Cong, and according to H. Bruce Franklin the story warned that America could suffer a disastrous defeat. The Cold War was more directly addressed in TOS than the Vietnam War, a trend that culminated in TNG.
The diversity of Star Trek has long been a defining quality, with Spock being the arguably most diverse character of TOS. Booker argues that while McCoy can be racist, it makes his friendship with Spock an even more powerful statement. In Booker's view, Star Trek evolves from a universe dominated by white men to an increasingly inclusive vision. The author notes that a major step backward in this regard was to turn the Klingons of Discovery into "grotesque, violent, bigoted religious zealots". Other problems can be found in episodes where "the others", meaning aliens, were shown using orientalist stereotyping, especially in the depiction of women. After looking at TOS in detail, Booker just summarizes the more recent developments, which seems justified considering that diversity was not such a special quality of the recent shows than it was in the 1960s. It is only a bit sad that he dedicates just one paragraph to gay characters.
As much as Star Trek promotes the utopia of the Federation, like notably Picard does in TNG: "The Neutral Zone", it also criticizes overly utopian concepts on several occasions. Booker thinks that Star Trek is realistic enough to recognize that "perfect" societies are actually dystopias, such as in "This Side of Paradise" and "Return of the Archons" as the earliest examples.
Chapter 4 is concerned with "Star Trek and the History of Technology". The author mentions the ICBM as a technology that could destroy the world and communication satellites that could link the world together as two sides of the medal at the time TOS was created. In Star Trek, technology is to the benefit of the people, it enables affluence. Booker further surmises that, rather than predicting specific devices, the merit of Star Trek is that it has inspired us to let technology help us. He also thinks that science fiction took the place of Western to "convey mythic energies", which could explain why Star Trek was most successful after the end of the space race.
Star Trek is traditionally skeptical of computers and robots. They lead to trouble if they are too advanced. Booker explains how this changes in TNG and with Data, fostered by the microelectronic revolution that had taken place since TOS and that had made the technology more relatable. He outlines how computer games inspired the introduction of the holodeck and how the movie stereotype of the nerd became popular, leading to the character of Wesley Crusher. Finally, Booker mentions how Star Trek dealt with environmental concerns. TNG: "Force of Nature" is the most notable story in this regard. Regarding global warming, the author is concerned how the USA, under the current government, play the same role as the Ferengi, who would not take part in a coordinated effort to avoid subspace damage.
Chapter 5, titled "Star Trek and the History of Star Trek Fandom", aptly begins with a look at Futurama's ultimate fandom episode, "Where No Fan Has Gone Before", in which Star Trek has gained the status of a religion. In the following, Booker looks at the history of the Star Trek fandom in a very matter-of-factly format. As a fan, I am grateful that he doesn't rate the fandom. Still, he could have written more about how the general public perceives Star Trek fans and their endeavors. He includes fanzines, fan stories (fortunately with just a single paragraph on slash), conventions, merchandise, computer games, documentaries such as "Trekkies" and "Get a Life!" and finally fan films. What he totally disregards is the online fandom, although it exists since the early days of the internet and has given rise to countless newsgroups, forums, RPGs, fan databases, blogs and Memory Alpha as the biggest fan-made online encyclopedia. Fan websites and communities have been crucial in the popularization of the franchise for almost half of Star Trek's lifetime. It is an even more serious omission, since the internet links together fans from all over the world in an unprecedented fashion. The author may have wanted to focus on cultural phenomena in the USA, also because he is most familiar with them, but in an increasingly globalized culture that is not an excuse to ignore international developments.
I don't want to turn this review into a rant because that would be absolutely disproportionate, considering that this is a competent book with solid research, quite obviously written by someone who actually cares for Star Trek. Although I sadly miss the online fandom in a book about Star Trek as a cultural phenomenon, Star Trek: A Cultural History is otherwise as complete as it could be (plus a TOS episode guide with ratings that feels a bit out of place though). Overall, while the emphasis is on TOS, the author doesn't neglect the later incarnations of the franchise like it seems to be customary elsewhere in cultural science. I like the categorization as given by the chapters, although it leads to a doubling of some facts and findings. M. Keith Booker keeps his recount as chronological as possible, which facilitates the perception of a variety of single developments as a history. Of special interest are his comparisons of Star Trek with real-life events and with other media productions of the time, and how these constitute either a common trend or show Star Trek as something that is unusual.
This book is compelling where M. Keith Booker draws his own conclusions, even if I disagree with him, such as in the assessment of VOY and ENT. It is good reading where he cites other research on Star Trek, especially if it provides an "outside view" of the franchise. Other passages of the book, on the other hand, are not so interesting for me because they just recount what happens (in an episode, in other media, in the real world) and come to obvious conclusions. It should be noted, however, that I'm writing this as someone who has spent the last 25 years researching Star Trek, so I am definitely hard to please when it comes to telling me something exciting and new about it!
M. Keith Booker, Star Trek: A Cultural History, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2018.