Thinking of Deep Space Nine as "the Dark Star Trek" without digging into what made Deep Space Nine work is so reductive. Like when people discuss Star Trek being "dark" now people bring up "DS9 was Dark and you loved that! Trekkies would hate it now!"
Deep Space Nine didn't work bc it was Dark and it wasn't Dark out of nowhere. Deep Space Nine is intimately tied to TNG in a way no other series is with another (Voyager could've been just as rooted in DS9, but. Y'know. Wasn't). Not only in characters, but that the show is so devoted to exploring deep cuts from TNG: the Bajorans, but also the Ferengi, long dismissed as failed villains, and the Trill, one-off aliens-of-the-week who DS9's writers turned into one of Trek's major species. The central thesis of DS9 isn't that the Trek Universe Is Fucked Up Actually. It's that things get more messy and complicated when Starfleet has to stick around and not dash off to another planet at the end of the episode
DS9 is darker than other Treks, yes, but DS9 is also the warmest, with the most grounded, human characters, not in spite of the fact that two-thirds of the cast are aliens but because of it. The writers treat alien characters as not representatives, but individuals. They treat everyone as individuals, with foibles and flaws, not as perfect, straitlaced future people. DS9's dark episodes are darker than other Treks, but also it's more willing to get silly and emotional. Only DS9 could do the "Sisko confesses to a conspiracy to get the Romulans in the war" episode, but also only DS9 could do the "a holographic lounge singer tries to get Odo and Kira together" episode right after it. Boiling the entire series down to "Deep Space Nine was the Dark Star Trek! Grimdark!" is...just not it
The central thesis of DS9 isn't that the Trek Universe Is Fucked Up Actually. It's that things get more messy and complicated when Starfleet has to stick around and not dash off to another planet at the end of the episode
Emphasizing this because there seem to be a lot of people who have only watched DS9 and are missing the point: they think that DS9 presents the Federation as an evil expansionist imperialist power no different, no morally better, than the Cardassians or the Romulans or even the Borg or the Dominion -- the only difference is that they conquer with bribes of resources and the promise of protection from the other powers. (Nice planet you got there; it’d be a shame if something happened to it...) They seem to think that the Federation is just the 20th/21st-century US/ NATO/ The West with better technology, with the same dishonest self-interest and cultural arrogance, without having learned anything or done any work to live up to its ideals.
You will not understand DS9 if you don’t understand that it also believes in the ideals of TOS and TNG, but has a more realistic view about how hard it is to maintain and fight for those ideals in a complicated world. It is NOT trying to make the point that the Federation and the vision it stands for are “Fucked Up Actually.”
I think it’s important to remember that DS9 was the first truly serialized Trek. It bridged TV’s transition from mostly episodic shows to longer-form narratives. That kind of storytelling didn’t really exist in TV, before.
I don’t even really think of DS9 as being particularly dark. It’s just that it’s the first Trek that got to follow up on things that would have been one-episode plots on earlier shows. DS9 was able to show us the cost and the consequences of Federation idealism, because it had a structure that made those stories possible to tell.
Keeping in mind I have seen VERY few episodes of DS9 and know TNG like the back of my hand (except for whatever episode Im' watching right at that moment, apparently, then suddenly I'm a total noob >.>)
...The way I always viewed it is this: Remember what Kirk said in "A Taste of Armageddon"?
"It's instinctive. But the instinct can be fought. We're human beings with the blood of a million savage years on our hands, but we can stop it. We can admit that we're killers, but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes. Knowing that we won't kill today."
TNG is all about fighting those instincts in one way. DS9 fights them in another.
TNG isn't naive for having a more isolated episode structure and a group of characters who are hopping from issue to issue on a weekly basis without examining the long term consequences too much (although I feel the need to note: it's not entirely devoid of THAT either. There ARE issues in TNG that rise up to bite them all in the butt later on: *gestures wildly at Commander Sela*).
And likewise, DS9 isn't overly DARK just because it gets to do what TNG didn't: aka actually show those consequences. Sometimes those consequences were bad, and sometimes the consequences were good, but they were always consequences we didn't always get to see.
TNG boils issues down to what is happening right NOW. It is pure ethics and philosophy confronted. Because that's the reality we often have before us and we do not always have time to consider the future. With that in mind, we can only do what we feel is right in the moment. And that's true both in universe, and when you look at it from a meta perspective.
It presents the crew with a choice they HAVE to make while knowing they probably won't be around to see how it turns out. When there are no hypotheticals about what could be or should be, when you HAVE to make a decision, without knowing everything that might happen in the future as a result of it.
“I know, Professor, “What if one of those lives I save down there is a child who grows up to be the next Adolf Hitler or Khan Singh?” First year philosophy students have been asked that question ever since the earliest wormholes were discovered. But this is not a class in temporal logic… It’s not hypothetical, it’s real. Can’t you see that? A man’s life, his future, hinges on each of a thousand choices. Living is making choices.”
It boils down to that one behaviour: instinct. Doing what you believe is RIGHT and how that matters, whatever the consequences. it's both a valid and true philosophy and also a perfectly good reason for Sisko to start TNG frickin' hating Picard, because even while we know what happened wasn't Picard's fault, we know he was making choices in the best way he and his crew could in an impossible situation... even knowing all that, Sisko's wife is still dead. The people we admire and trust and rooted for indirectly led to the rage and pain of a man we're now expected to follow for several more seasons.
I can see why some people found that a tough pill to swallow, tbh.
We're not supposed to view TNG and DS9 as conflicting pieces of media. They're pieces of media that would not exist without each other.
TNG is the Star Trek series that answers TOS's command: it looks up and decides it will not kill today.
DS9 is the consequence of that choice tomorrow, whatever the outcome may be...
And then, the funny thing is, they still have the make the same choice. And so often... they make the exact same one as TNG did before.




























