The Meaning of Star Trek: An Excursion into the Myth and Marvel of the Star Trek Universe

by Thomas Richards

"Where does Star Trek come from? Why is it so popular? How does it go about creating a coherent world? Literary critics may take literature seriously, but they often look down on popular forms such as television shows.

"I feel differently. I think the meaning of the series can best be captured by looking at how it successfully creates a coherent universe. Like any great work of art or literature, the Star Trek universe has an integrity and a resonance all its own, a completeness unrivaled by any other kind of science fiction, whether movie, television show, or novel. The unique character of the series, taken not as a group of loosely connected stories but as a viable whole, is the subject of this book."

--From the Introduction to The Meaning of  Star Trek

Star Trek has no equal. Easily the most cerebral show on television, it brought a literary sophistication to the raw material of science fiction and confounded all the formulas of television. By taking classic stories and placing them in strange new contexts, Star Trek became a modern Odyssey in outer space, a set of stories so basic to our culture that they can be told over and over again.

The Meaning of Star Trek captures the essence of this timeless television masterpiece by linking the parallel universes of classical literature and popular culture. Thomas Richards examines its portrayals of contact and conflict with other species and other cultures; its deep explorations of character and identity, and its complex conception of the idea of the individual self; its remarkably rich and varied use of story and myth; and its profound appeal to our shared sense of wonder, a reverence and awe for that which science cannot explain.

Enlightening, provocative, and enormously entertaining, The Meaning of Star Trek is essential reading for even the most casual admirer of the Star Trek universe, as well as a brilliant introduction to the worlds of literature, myth, and science fiction.

This book was not prepared, approved, licensed, or endorsed by any entity involved in creating or producing the Star Trek television series or films.

Genres: Star Trek, Philosophy, Science Fiction, Essays, Pop Culture

208 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1997

Reviews

[Katrice · Rating 4 out of 5]

Am a sucker for pop cultural analysis and this was definitely a well thought out and interestingly presented analysis - and argument - on what makes the Star Trek universe stand out.

[Tom Pintong · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really should be titled The Meaning of Star Trek:TNG and 5 episodes of the other series. Unless you're a serious Trekker, I wouldn't pick up this book. This is not to say that it wasn't entertaining. But unless you really know the episodes and care about the hidden meanings that Mr. Richards finds in many of them, you won't find the book interesting. However, being a pretty devoted Trekker, I enjoyed many of the breakdowns Mr. Richards discussed of the plots and their historical backgrounds from which many of the names of the species and planets are named after. If I ever could find TNG still on the air, I would take the time to look a little deeper into the storylines and meanings behind them.



I really wished that more stories from other ST series could have been touched upon. Also, since none of the literature is considered "canon," none of the novels I have read, which borders on a few hundred, are mentioned at all, which to me seems to leave a hole in the concepts the book postulates. Granted, bringing up more of the stories, episodes, etc, would have made this a much bigger undertaking than Mr. Richards would have liked to put into the book and his research. But focusing on so few moments from the series left me with a feeling like things were left out of the book that should have been included. And some of the theories expounded on the material seemed a little subjective at times, if not reaching. But a decent read overall.

[Kamakana · Rating 3 out of 5]

210910: concentrates mostly on TNG, which he argues is closest to the original vision. identifies the essential optimism, rationality, character development, social world, political subtext. i enjoyed his exploration of a few episodes seen, a few episodes unseen. one episode that captures an entire lost culture and the inner light of its life, elegiac as anything i have read, beautiful sadness, questions of meaning of life addressed on personal level. four episodes that cover the ultimate enemy of individuality- the borg- and how self determination is overarching prime value. how hard it is on families. how the sense of wonder is explored. all in about 50 000 words. a place to start if you want to think of this show.

[C.C. Yager · Rating 2 out of 5]

I bought this book years ago on sale along with another book about the Star Trek world. Thomas Richards, a former English and American Lit professor at Harvard, assumes the mantle of knowing all about what Star Trek means. Initially, I thought it'd be interesting to read his theories, and indeed, the first third of the book is more interesting than expected. But the problem with Mr. Richards' theories is that sometimes "a cigar is just a cigar," i.e. he demonstrates a remarkable ignorance of how TV shows are written. What makes the first third of this book interesting is Mr. Richards' examination of Gene Roddenberry's role in creating the Star Trek universe, his goals for the show, and how those goals were thwarted in the Original Series by network execs (no surprise there actually) but were closer to realization in The Next Generation.

Mr. Richards divides the book into four sections that look at four aspects of Star Trek: Contact and Conflict, Character and Identity, Story and Myth, and The Sense of Wonder. His examination is heavy on Star Trek: The Next Generation episodes rather than the Original Series which was the foundation for everything that came after -- movies and TV shows. But he does include some of the movies in his examination. Mr. Richards claimed that the shows dealt with each of the four general aspects in different ways, but there were always constants such as the comedic turn at the end of each episode, the overarching importance of story, and the consistent violation of the Prime Directive which in his analysis turns out to be an impossible "law" to follow -- how can you have a goal of exploration and making contact with other sentient beings without "interfering" in some way with their civilization? I found this endlessly amusing, actually, because of its truth. But I think the Prime Directive was in place to make Federation officers think before acting each time they encountered a new being. I wonder what Mr. Richards would have thought of the movie Star Trek Into Darkness which begins with Kirk violating the Prime Directive in order to save Spock's life, and showing the after effect of that violation. When Richards published this book, in 1997, Deep Space Nine and Voyager were still on TV, and there was still much, much more to come in the Star Trek universe.

Richards does an interesting comparison of the two Enterprise captains, Kirk and Picard. I enjoyed this comparison very much, as well as his assessments of other characters such as Spock, Data, Riker, Bones, and Dr. Crusher (I love the doctors' names -- Crusher of bones!). Where Richards lost me eventually was when his tone turns didactic and he ascribes a lot more literary thought to writing the TV show episodes than I suspect was actually there. I do believe that writers of the shows were committed to Roddenberry's vision, and it's no surprise that a lot of the science is fiction in this universe, but there is still science that isn't fiction, and some universal truths about human behavior. I've always liked Star Trek and its vision because of its optimism and recognition of human flaws.

I was not a huge fan of the Original Series, either when it first aired or now. I loved Star Trek: The Next Generation because of the writing and the cast, although it had its share of silliness, too. Deep Space Nine interested me for the first few years, then lost me because I got tired of the intrigue that seemed repetitious. And Voyager captured my imagination for a while, but that too waned. I enjoyed Star Trek: Enterprise for a while, but was disappointed that it really didn't break any new ground. The movies have been of varying quality, and the re-boot movies have proven to be great fun and very loyal to the tone of the Original Series. I hope that the filmmakers will eventually return to the thinking behind The Next Generation and add more thoughtfulness and stillness to what is essentially an action adventure series as it stands now. So, Richards' book is dated when put in the light of all these other developments in the Star Trek universe since 1997.

I'm not sure I'd recommend this book. It might be interesting to Star Trek fans, of course, and is certainly of interest as far as historical considerations. However, it's far from being definitive whether or not you would agree with Mr. Richards' conclusions or not. And with Star Trek continuing to evolve, this book may be only an interesting curiosity in the end.

[Adam Neve · Rating 1 out of 5]

Space, this book is good at taking it up. These are some half-assed essays about the starship Enterprise. It's foundering mission: to write a book about Star Trek without actually watching it, to skim the surface of five or six episodes from one series, to boredly go where no one has wanted to go before.

[Ana Gutierrez · Rating 1 out of 5]

This was a very disappointing and frustrating read with brief moments of insight. Not only does the author clearly not get the meaning of Star Trek, he miss quotes and bungles the plot lines of several of his example episodes and characters. The only reason you should read this is if you want to write a full and complete rebuttal.

[Derek · Rating 3 out of 5]

In 2017, the era of Peak TV and hot takes and tweets, it does not seem odd at all that a Harvard English professor would be writing what essentially amounts to a literary analysis of a significant piece of pop culture; in 1997, I imagine it might have seemed a bit more out of place, which makes this twenty-year-old discussion slightly more remarkable by its nature.

Thomas Richards spends two hundred pages analyzing Star Trek through the lens of four major themes: contact and conflict; character and identity; story and myth; and the sense of wonder. Each section is broken into smaller portions in which he uses examples from several different episodes to make his points.

Well, he mostly analyzes The Next Generation, which he deems to be the fullest realization of Gene Roddenberry's vision. He admits the limited scope of his discussion as a result of this decision in his introduction, though I tend to think that simply admitting it does not necessarily excuse it, even though I think I agree that it was necessary and perhaps even beneficial to do so. At any rate, Richards uses examples of a significant portion of TNG in his discussion to make his points, along with oblique references to The Original Series, the eight movies then in release, the then not-yet-complete Deep Space Nine, and the nascent Voyager.

His arguments are mostly well-informed, though I think at times that he overstates his case as things that Star Trek "always" does even if that might not be the case. I cannot think of any point at which I could conjure a specific example that contravened his points, but I continued to feel as though I might be able to were I to think more intently on the matter. I did find myself often in agreement, but I would not be as assertive as he was.

The main issue I had with the book, other than those relatively minor quibbles with scope and overconfident statements, was that I found it to be somewhat poorly composed at points. There were many instances in which information such as the title of an episode was unnecessarily repeated in an introduction, throughout the section, and in the transition to the next section. It felt as though the pieces had been composed separately and pushed together without consideration for flow in the final product. It is, admittedly, itself a minor issue, but I found it to be a distraction nevertheless.

That said, much of what Richards says is very well-informed and well-stated, and I often found myself able to anticipate his arguments based on my own knowledge of the series. His discussions are valuable insofar as they allow fans and non-fans alike to have a unique insight into the mindset of The Next Generation, and this is a book that I would recommend for anyone who wants to engage in this kind of analysis of the Star Trek universe.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

Requirement for reading this book: Star Trek nerd or literary geek.

Being a bit of both, although most certainly the former, I loved Richards' take on the meaning of Star Trek. Broad and thought-provoking, Richards' did an incredible job of showing how truly intertwined the many incarnations of Star Trek are. Although this book focuses primary on Star Trek: The Original Series and Star Trek: The Next Generation, its principles are incredibly sound and can be observed across the various series and movies.

[JP · Rating 3 out of 5]

I watched enough Star Trek that a philosphical interpretation would be interesting. Richards explores the philosophical meaning of the most meaningful episodes throughout all the series and movies. He focuses in particular on the role of gods and monsters, the balance of power in the universe, the changing attitude toward the Prime Directive, the individualism of the entire cast, and the underlying implications of the techonology represented.

[Gcoritsidis · Rating 3 out of 5]

An academic pontificating on Star Trek (mostly TNG). The interesting points are outweighed by tedious repetition of unconvincing arguments. Book focuses on 1) Contact and Conflict; 2) Character and Identity; 3) Story and Myth; and 4) The Sense of Wonder.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good if somewhat dated look at trek