I Did a Test

Oh cool, I got Guinan:

You can do the test here: http://www.buzzfeed.com/adambvary/star-trek-the-next-generation-recurring-character-quiz

Why the Widely Accepted Reason to Like Star Trek Doesn't Ring True

Disclaimer: This is a stream of consciencesnous while exploring why I tend to actually not like Star Trek. Beware of grammar- and spelling mistakes, irritations, returning irritations and general bile. Apologies for the absence of images. Google "Elim Garak" and you'll find out what my favourite character on DS9 looked like. Good luck!

When asked Trekkers often reply: “Because it shows a positive future; it gives hope.”


I could never agree with that reply. I always felt there was something distinctively wrong with it, but I couldn’t quite put my finger on it. I’ve been thinking about this since last summer, which, quite frankly, is probably an inordinate amount of time for this kind of subject. When I was trying to figure out why the Netherlands went from a republic to a kingdom it at least felt worthwhile.

The last couple of months I spent a lot of time watching TNG and DS9 (Trekkers know what I’m talking about) and rewatching. During most of that time I stuck to watching what I knew I enjoyed, but I did, initially, take the time to watch it all in the right order without skipping any episodes…almost (I skipped a few episodes from DS9 in which the grand nagus took a central role. No regrets.). I couldn’t shake the feeling of disagreement with that overall accepted reason for liking star trek. I suppose it also had a lot to do with me being rather bored during a lot of the episodes, especially a lot of the TNG stuff and the early DS9 stuff. Yet, it did not answer my question why I felt liking star trek had nothing to do with the naïve idea it is because it shows a bright and beautiful future.

The first cracks for me came with the realization the only reason I ever liked star trek, if ever, was because of sentimental reasons. I grew up watching star trek and TNG was what star trek looked like to me. Hell, TNG was what sci-fi looked like to me. I realized I didn’t actually remember any storylines from my initial viewing. However, at first rewatch I was delighted to find I did remember all the crewmembers (except for Tasha, but who cares about her?). To my mild surprise I also realized none of the stories looked familiar to me, which was weird since I watched enough TNG back in my teens to know what it was all about and who all the characters were. And to my great disappointment, rewatching TNG didn’t quite excite me as much as I hoped, but I persevered and watched it all (some listened while cleaning the house).

Since I had set my heart on watching all star trek that is available I set out to watch all of DS9. The first three seasons were a familiar borefest I wrestled my way through, but to my relief it contained more good episodes than TNG and it encouraged me to keep going. I didn’t watch eight episodes in one day like I had with TNG (How did I survive that!?!? How did I do that at all!?!?), but managed to fit in four episodes every evening (This had also to do with more spare time when watching TNG and it reduced to evenings and weekends for DS9). To my delight and relief I found the Dominion war and the accompanying characters rather interesting, so much so I actually looked forward to watching the next episode. Unfortunately, that usually only lasted for a max of six episodes, then it would always and reliably return to the borefest I had come to expect and accept.

So I pointed out I was actually quite bored during a lot of the episodes (unfortunately most). Here come all my complaints about star trek:

1) Characters who always get along with each other are boring to watch. It’s conflict that makes stories interesting;

2) The villains are mainly rather one dimensional since in one episode you can’t quite explore characters. After the one episode they often disappear forever. Though recurring villains are not explored either;

3) Moral dillemma’s are discussed, but never get any breathing space (one episode is really not much) which means most subjects are only superficially explored which sometimes makes for interesting television, but usually just doesn’t quite cut the cake);

4) Since everyone in Starfleet gets along, the Federation citizens have become morons in dealing with people who aren’t quite like them (Quick to judge, talk with relish, ambitious, federation social, skilled in everything but social awareness, with a holier than thou attitude. I hate every episode with Barclay in it, not because of Barclay, but because of the compassionately dead Enterprise crew. To me it only shows human kind has learned nothing in the future….except for Data….which is ironic, because he isn’t even close to being humanoid…which goes to show, because the only thing they know is technology and that is what Data is.);

5) Most of the characters don’t get a real chance to develop and remain one dimensional. Characters hardly every learn anything, which keeps them going on the same level in the same way which makes a character and the stories they’re in predictable and therefore often boring.

It slowly became clearer to me when I read something someone else said when asked what he prefered, star trek or Doctor Who. His reply was Doctor Who, because it was written better. Where Star Trek focused more on the development of technology (as opposed to human kind), Doctor Who focusses more on the dramatic aspect of the franchise. Where Star Trek adopts a holier-than-thou attitude, Doctor Who just wants to entertain.

That’s what I love about Doctor Who: “It knows it’s silly, and it doesn’t do anything to redeem it. Yet, it manages to make sense in moral issues and sometimes even in character development.”

That’s what I dislike about Star Trek: “They adopt a holier-than-thou attitude, but don’t quite have the chops to support nor justify that attitude.”

Doctor Who doesn’t have an attitude and therefore doesn’t need to live up to one. Star Trek has an attitude and often fails to live up to it. That’s very annoying.

Also, I believe sci-fi should say something about us; that’s where it’s added value lies. The technological development is just a display of what human kind wishes for and what might be possible in the future. However, when I come back home from work and turn the tv on, I’m not interested in reading the technology catalogue and accompanying manuals. History also shows the best loved stories are the ones where a character goes on a (mental) journey and all the technology caters to the story of the character. Technology itself, unless it’s about Data (generalized, obviously), is not what’s interesting, it’s what human kind does or doesn’t do with it. Technology doesn’t make stories, people do. Inanimate objects, which a replicator is no matter how much it chats, aren’t interesting. However, computers that come to life might be interesting. But there it is again, animation, life, but I digress.

Though having spouted this (without spell- nor grammar check), I have to admit I really enjoyed DS9. Ironically, it was never the Starfleet people, or “the good guys” as captain Sisko would call them and himself, that made DS9 interesting. It were the Cardassians, it were the founders, it was that weasel Weyoun. I believe it’s because they were more human than all the humans on that station (Though the only Cardassian on the station was Garak). It was because the Cardassians had all kind of colours; they weren’t just black and white, they had all kind of interesting shades of grey. And the most beautiful thing about it was, secretly we understood so well why they choose to do certain things (or I did anyway). Which brings me back to the Federation: For a people “so advanced”, they’re so moronic in their social behaviour and empathy, it not only makes me want to throw things at my tv, but worse, it undermines the whole idea of Star Trek. Plus, the quality of too many stories was piss poor.

That’s why I hate Star Trek.

Limburgish Expressions

You know what I miss most about Limburg? Some of the expressions.

Just two of them:
 Expression: "Doa is gein kip kepot?"
Freely translated it says: "There's no chicken broken".
It means: "There's no-one there."

Expression: "Doa wil ich noch neet kepot gevonje weare."
Loosely translated: "There I wouldn't want to be found broken".
Meaning: "I wouldn't ever want to go/be there."

Expression: "Klein pötjes hebbe groeëte oère.

Some kind of translation: "Small jars have big ears."
Meaning: "Children are listening in on grown ups."

Wanna See Something Creepy?

This is not much of a post, it should be a tweet, but it's not.

I'm sure I once mentioned Gail Schuler in relation to Brent. Or should that be, not in relation to...?

Gail has her own website on which she outlines her life with(out) Brent (and some others) in detail. Knowing she has never even attempted to really meet Brent, I'm not so worried about her though her actions and state of mind are embarrasing in some cases.

What really creeped me out is that someone(s) is updating a wiki about her: http://crazygail.com/Timeline

When you look into her world, it's impossible to tell what's real and what's make belief/fiction/wishful thinking. Well, some of it is easy to tell apart, but other parts, like who's writing what, is slowly getting lost in the chaotic pile that is Internet.

Oh, and the reason why I'm adding is, it's hard to miss it. Even if you try really hard to ignore it, if you're interested in Brent and are trying to stay updated, you're bound to come across her.

I was just scrolling through the timeline and my brain decided to read this: "She begins sending Brent Spiner videotapes of herself." I literally went in squeaky voice: "Ahh!" then locked my pc and went for a break.

All Doctor Who Stories

There are worlds out there where the sky's purple.

The sea’s asleep and the rivers dream.

People made of smoke and cities made of song.

Somewhere there’s danger.

Somewhere there’s injustice.

And somewhere else the tea is getting cold.

Come along, come along, we’ve got work to do.

From the fantastic Babelcolour

Better Not

Today I decided to write about everything I’m not, which is a whole lot. Actually, I did narrow it down to professions I once had a fleeting thought about.


I’m not a very ambitious person; I work because I need money. That doesn’t mean I don’t put in the effort, or that I don’t set goals to reach a certain level of experience and skill. I might not be very ambitious, but I am a perfectionist and I want to work at a high level, operations wise. In other words, I do set goals for my personal development.

Beside that, since I have to be at work for eight hours a day, I might just as well try to make the best of it, without upsetting myself that I’m not operating at a high level. I think, that’s my lifeline.

Looking back at what I’ve done so far in my professional life, I’m not best of the class, I’m not worst of the class, I belong to the higher level of moderately tagging along. In other words, I have a lot to improve on, but my colleagues and my manager have all faith in me. That’s good, but it nags somewhat at my mind while I’m not ambitious enough to actually do something about it except for following the slow path upward always a few steps behind the people at the top of the team.

Anyway, enough of me whining about my slow descent into insanity.

When I was a kid, about eight years old, I always wanted to be a teacher. Actually, I never wanted to be a teacher, I thought I did, because that was a profession I knew and gave me some direction at what I was learning for.

Later when I was about twelve/thirteen, I said I wanted to be a nurse. I remember one of my older cousins being impressed about my, apparently, strong conviction of what I wanted to do when I was grown up. Of course, I never really wanted to become a nurse. My first real step towards a professional life was in that direction, social didactic services. I very quickly found out I was not remotely interested in trying to help people on that level.

Throughout my whole life I wrote. Stupid, small little stories. Stupid, a bit longer little stories. I got some good grades on writing at school, but so did I for art lessons in which we had to make a study for a painting. A teacher once gave me an A+, because, he claimed, he couldn’t have done it better himself. I only once won something for my writing, I won for my drawing quite a bit. However, I don’t really see myself as a painter. I never even considered that profession. I did consider becoming a writer, but got discouraged.

I grew up in a house where you don’t even talk about becoming an artist. Now I come to think of it, we never even talked about art, except for popular music, and that was limited to me and my brother. Anything artsy fartsy was considered a social thing which you shouldn’t do as a profession. Even fleeting thoughts about it were quickly put down, usually by my mother. Art, in her opinion, doesn’t have any real value. I agree for most artists it’s hard to butter their sandwich, but calling art not very useful is a big mistake. I learnt, and my Dutch teacher laid the foundations for that belief, that stories and art can be very valuable. But I’m digressing again.

When I was younger being a musician always seemed very attractive to me. However, I quickly found out I was not talented enough. I for one can’t keep any rhythm. Another profession I’ve been wondering about it acting. Not to become an actor, I’m quite sure I don’t have the courage, nor the will to go through rejection after rejection (I also believe we have enough actors and actresses). What I’d like to find out if I’ve got the core skills to do it. With music I know I don’t, tried it out, failed. With acting, I never really tried anything, I never explored the different sides of acting, so I have no clue. Certainly something I would love to explore.

Reminds me, best advice for aspiring actors and actresses, and on which I’m actually following up: “If there’s anything else besides acting you could do, do that. If you can be discouraged to act, don’t go there.” Incidentally, that advice came from Brent. I’m not sure I’m more impressed by how good that advice seems to me, or that it was an actor giving it. Of course he also managed to give advice on that subject that does nothing for me: “Learn to type.” Yeah, these days, in any case, learn to type. So, never mind about that one.

To confuse you I will now start talking about marketing.

I followed a marketing course when I was studying. My last internship was in the marketing department of an organization. My mentor there was very eager to have me employed there. I remember him listing all the things he would teach me. A friend of mine is in marketing and I sometimes listen to whatever she’s been doing, though I haven’t heard from her for a long time. And with social media becoming more and more important in marketing, and big data and such, it sounds like another option.

Social media expert is another option I still have. At the organization I work for now, I have a colleague with whom I once planned to do presentations about social media and how to use it. It never came of it. I also went off the social media a bit. I always go off things that suddenly become very popular. Also a little flaw of me.

I am none of those things. I’m in IT, collecting information and writing specifications and I still don’t quite understand how I ended up here. I’ve never been very interested in technology, but I do like what you can do with it. I’m more interested in the inner workings of people, though psychology is not only complicated and hard, but also supplies you with templates I don’t want to work with. Neither can I be called very social.

All these things come forward in job tests. I did a few to find out what to do next. The results always say I should do something with technology and IT, and definitely not with people. I should do something in services, something were I can indepently work on something.

Wow, a lot of things I’m not.

So Far for the Sunglasses

This is what happened when I tried to add a caption. Thought it was funny, maybe it's not.

No, it really is funny. It suits him too. Ooh, suits...Njaah, never mind.