This post is periodically updated with direct links to new essays in my rewatch series.
Given that there are now two seasons to digest, how well does Star Trek Picard hold up to a rewatch? Was I overly charitable? Too uncharitable? Are there plot holes that I ignored the first time through? Are there plot holes I remember existing that actually are explained in the series and I simply missed them?
First impressions:
Overall I have enjoyed Star Trek Picard, although not uncritically. I, like many, was troubled by some of the darker themes and the implication that the Federation, especially in season one, had backslid into something more intolerant and disinterested in the values that the characters routinely ascribe to it and that I, in turn, project onto it. Whether this is fair or not is something that partly motivates me in undertaking this rewatch. It is also a topic I am exploring in a related set of essays, specifically the “Did Picard Turn the Federation into a Dystopia?” series. (essay format)
My memory of the show is one in which it starts strong, makes some questionable decisions in the middle, and then ends with a satisfying if somewhat contrived way. My sense of the show is that in both seasons but especially the first, the showrunners mismanaged the various strands of the show’s storyline, kept adding more storylines, and ultimately resolved some of them in rather ad hoc ways that create internal continuity problems.
I stress "internal" because I am moderately permissive of continuity issues across series, less permissive within the same series. I treat Star Trek and other franchises that have spanned generations and produced this much content as more like oral traditions or mythologies and less like a tightly edited, extensively footnoted "history of the future."
A few complaints that exist in my head that I will be exploring: (Spoilers start here)
Season one questions:
How justified or not was the Federation in becoming more isolationist and failing to help the Romulans evacuate their homeworlds?
To what degree did the Federation become a darker, more dystopian place in Star Trek Picard?
How plausible is the Zhat Vash conspiracy?
What are Soji and Dahj in technical terms? To what degree are they like Data, i.e. androids, and to what degree are they a new form of organic life?
How do I feel about the show aesthetically? Does it feel like Star Trek? If not, how is Star Trek supposed to feel? Is the show better or worse if I try to distance myself from my preconceived expectations about “Trekkiness”?
Was the ending “rushed?”
Season one Rewatch Essays:
Meta commentary:
What is gained and what is lost by leaning into "realism"
The Sad Mutant Elephant in the Room: Depression, Defeat, and the Narrative Significance of Battling Enemies Within Instead of Without.
How and why did the Federation fail the Romulans (and itself)?
Is it "Real" Star Trek? What does that even mean? In which I try to take the question seriously rather than flipping the table because it disagrees violently with STO or my headcanons.
S1E2 "Maps and Legends"
Mars, 9/11, and Ruminations on Trauma & Rage: putting the Federation on the couch and examining its psyche.
Did the Federation accidentally reinvent racism? Grappling with the Synths and the behavior of Utopia Planitia workers.
S1E3 "The End is the Beginning"
Deconstructions of the Raffi "Controversy"
Classism? In MY Star Trek?! Analyzing a bad first impression.
Being Miserable in Paradise: The Ethics and Implications of Poor Mental Health in a Utopia.
Raffi Before the Fall: What can we reasonably infer about Raffi's fitness to serve and what made her a candidate to be aide to camp to a legend?
General observations:
Raffis and Jiuratis: A Star Trek fandom personality test
How to Squickly Mangle a Theme: Missed Opportunities and Subversions of Otherwise Noble Themes
S1E4 "Absolute Candor"
The Map is Not the Terrain: Institutional Power in Star Trek Picard
Harm Reduction or Abdication: Balancing Autonomy and Care in Picard's Federation.
Four episodes later: thoughts on the metaplot, Trekkiness, and rewatches
S1E5 "Stardust City Rag"
Reconsidering a "bad" episode or how much of a difference three years makes in experiencing drama.
Seven's Joker Problem: Stardust City Rag's trolley problem made me VERY uncomfortable.
Season 2:
Lingering questions:
What is Q’s agenda? Really?
Are there possible timeline consequences for Queen Jiurati running around in the background for several centuries?
Which model of how time works is Picard using? Linear or many worlds?
Based on her behavior in season 2, should Raffi have been cleared to return to duty after the events of season 1 or ought a wellness exam have caught that her "breaking point" is not where it probably ought to be for Starfleet? Is describing her behavior as unreasonable itself unreasonable?
How well executed was the theme of communication, personal growth, intimacy etc.?
Social commentary: was Picard's social commentary distracting and immersion breaking or appropriate and in keeping with the Star Trek legacy?
A moderately long aside: Ethically, I generally consider myself a strong advocate of a lot of what I view as core values of Star Trek (watch this space for more discussion about this) but at the same time, I do not have an unlimited amount of tolerance for pedantic social commentary, oversimplifications, or bad arguments for good ideals.
I believe there is only so much value to be gained from being incredibly mistrustful of your audience and their ability to grasp nuance. If a subset of the audience is likely to misunderstand your message, then making the message more explicit can guard against incorrect readings at the cost of cheapening the art.
Its not a perfect analogy because season two doesn't really have much in the way of villains who embody the concepts the series is raging against, but a comparison can be made to a problematic subset of the "Breaking Bad" or "Joker" fandoms.
I understand and appreciate the desire to avoid a “Breaking Bad” or “Joker” situation where a subset of the audience is so thoroughly enamored with the villain and the power fantasy the villain represents that the audience fails to recognize that they ought not to be uncritically worshiping the villain.
I just tend to think taking too many pains to avoid incorrect readings can cross a threshold into breaking immersion and just generally being annoying. When this happens, I am annoyed not because I disagree with the message but because I agree with the message and the more it's dumbed down, the more I feel pandered to and that my intelligence is being insulted.
Season Three Reactions, Analysis and Speculation SPOILERS
Episode Two: Disengage
In which I wish Picard would uphold the genre conventions its discarding and discard the genre conventions its discarding. (But I actually did like it overall.)
In which Star Trek Morality Plays are my favorite subgenre.
Episode Three: Seventeen Seconds
In which I wish Space Dad and Space Cool Uncle would stop fighting and Worf and Raffi embark on the best buddy cop saga Star Trek has ever seen.
Episode Four: No Win Scenario
Star Trek exposes its painfully earnest moral core in a beautiful way that made me want to stand up and cheer.
Episode Five: Imposters
Misfits belong in Starfleet. Finding their place in Starfleet is another story.
Episode Six: The Bounty
The character I wanted to hate makes me want to bond with him over nerding out over ships.
How Star Trek Picard S3 is about intergenerational healing and allowing the young to be independent agents.
Episode Seven: Dominion
Maybe don't write so many war stories that can only be resolved by a ultra nationalists attempting genocide.
Episode Eight: Surrender
I don't often yell at the screen over cliffhangers....
Episode Nine: Vox
Is "Picard" trolling the "get off my lawn" side of the fandom?
How Picard should end: my personal preferences (emphasis on personal and preferences) for how to wrap up the various arcs and storylines.
Seven of Nine's ethical nature is not compatible with Starfleet and that's okay.
Episode Ten: The Last Generation
I laughed, I cried, I cheered, I'm not free of conflict
Themes of Autonomy vs Institutionalism in Picard
Narrative style and reactions to fan reactions to Jack Crusher
Embrace the old and the new: A wishlist for Star Trek Legacy
From Syfy’s “queerest moments of 2018″ (and can I just say how much I’ve come to despise the word queer, it just makes me flinch every time I read it).
Were we watching the same show, syfy?
Delle Seyah was kidnapped by Aneela’s followers, knocked out, and forcibly impregnated with Jaq. Then she decides to keep the baby, leading to a whole mystical pregnancy trope that lasted midway into season 4 (i’m aware the actress was pregnant, but ‘magical alien pregnancy’ is a cliche). Yes, she was still a badass during and after the pregnancy, but that still doesn’t excuse the use of a misogynist trope. Delle Seyah was completely unable to give consent, so her bodily autonomy was violated, and the narrative plays it off as a net positive.
Also, great job playing into the psycho predatory lesbian trope. There was no evidence that Aneela had any plans to forcibly impregnate Delle Seyah. She created a way to combine a female’s DNA with a male’s outside of the womb, aka basic in vitro fertilization. Yes, she convinces her to keep the baby, but I’m not excusing that either. There’s nothing progressive about making the lesbian characters a couple of raging psychopaths.
With the pregnancy, though the plot allows Delle Seyah to remain active in other story lines, in this one she is just a vessel without any say in what will happen to her body. It’s an example using of a woman’s loss of control over her own body to advance the plot with no real care given to the psychological and physical effect on the pregnancy will have on her. It’s misogynistic and exploitative, and shouldn’t be praised as any sort of positive portrayal.
If it was Delle Seyah’s choice and she agreed to the pregnancy, I would have less of a problem, it would still follow the mystical pregnancy trope, but at least it would be the woman’s choice. I enjoyed Killjoys a lot, but this plot line still angers me.
