I actually have an excuse for taking so long to update this essay. For a while I was having problems trying to figure exactly how to say what I think "Star Trek's" problem is. I mean, I know the problem, but I was having trouble explaining it on the screen. Then I did something that led me to exactly the focal point I needed to make my case.

Soon after I first posted this essay I posted an "Enterprise" fic on that highlighted all the problems I had with the third season. I got some good reviews, of course, but inevitably also got reviews from brainwashed Trek fans who apparently think I should just post fics that say "I Love Enterprise!" a thousand times in each chapter and mind my business about the Trek creative process. One of them, who calls himself "Zippy", punctuated most of his posts with an invitation to join the TrekBBS forum. I rejected the idea vigorously at first, but curiosity ultimately got the better of me and I did end up joining. (As "Admiral2" for the curious - and it was more laziness than lack of imagination. I have way too many different usernames as it is and I didn't want to have to remember one more). Once I was in and started to participate I realized a couple of things. One was that, in some ways, it wasn't anything like what I expected it to be.

The problem is that in at least one way it is exactly like I expected it to be, in that any time you try to propose any kind of serious change to the franchise, no matter how you frame your argument, the truly zealous will always run screaming back to one of two arguments as to why you can't make the change. I'll name the arguments in the beginning of the next chapter, but I can tell you now that both lead back to the same source, and while with hindsight I realize I knew that source all along, it didn't occur to me to name it as such until I was sitting around trying to figure out how to debate the people on TrekBBS.

But now I know. And next chapter you'll know. And when I get it good and worked out here, I'll post a thread on TrekBBS and they'll know…and then we can all count how many days it will be until I'm kicked off that site.

Before I get to that, though, I want to acknowledge everyone who has reviewed so far (because, frankly, I didn't expect anywhere near this many reviews) and answer them:

RCS and CommandoCody: You both get your wish. I discuss the main problem and my idea for solving it in the next chapter.

Nytewalker: Yes, chimpanzees would put out better product, and would work for bananas, but it's doubtful they'd be let into any Writer's Guild, so Hollywood unions could force them out in favor of the old writers. So we need human beings with a chimpanzee's ability to write.

James Jago: An off-day, yes. We're talking a whole season here. (And I don't get what everyone's problem with the original "Enterprise" theme is. That was one of the things I used to like.)

Max Krugman: "Ha, ha." And it did get worse. It's gotten so bad I'm devoting an entire essay to ranting about it. I'd never have thought of doing that normally, but, well, I described "Damage" in the first installment. After that, I just had to vent my spleen in public.

Namir Swiftpaw: You're exactly the type of person I want to hear from! I'm going to spell out my ideas, but I'm pretty sure most of them will appeal more to males than females. Tell me what you'd like to see specifically that would get you to watch Star Trek without crying in frustration.

Mbwun: "Enterprise" hasn't really shined since the first season. The second had a few great episodes like "Dead Stop", but drifted too far into TNG preachiness for my tastes. For the record, my favorite new era series was DS9 too. The first seasons of "Enterprise" and TOS were better than the later ones, TNG had its moments (when it dropped its more-evolved-than-thou attitude), and the good movies were 2,4,6 and "First Contact". Voyager sucked. Period. It started stupid, ended stupid and was filled mostly with stupid in between. Even Jeri Ryan in the catsuits could only alleviate a tiny fraction of the stupid. Out of seven years of that tripe I can count on the fingers of one hand how many episodes I actually enjoyed (and don't think I'm talking ALL the fingers!)

Ely Whitney: I come not to destroy Star Trek but to save it. Besides, destroying the continuity is no longer an option. "Enterprise" already did that. The Klingons are there, but of a type that we didn't see until "Star Trek: The Motion Picture." The ship itself, Enterprise NX-01, has more in common with the Next Generation ships than the ship its technology is supposed to evolve into (more on ship design later). It's like the whole show is designed as a jumping off point for leapfrogging TOS entirely.

Moril: As you've already read in my response to Mbwun I can't agree with you about Voyager, and I'm willing to give Enterprise's actors a pass since I think the real problems are the writers and producers. But you're right about Trek's credibility, and the worst part of the loss is it's completely self-inflicted.

g21Ito: We're going to keep hearing it as long as there's a trade embargo with Cuba and somebody brags about getting Cuban cigars. Romulan Ale from the Star Empire is the Lazy Trek Writer's equivalent of a fine El Conquistador from Havana. It's the only guilty pleasure the characters are allowed.

Admiral Rupert: As another avid Star Trek fan, I respond to your nitpicks:

1) I'm not being unreasonable. The only reason Enterprise has phase cannons is because Tucker and his people built them from scratch using materials already at hand.("Silent Enemy") I would say a Directed Energy Weapon is pretty darn complex, wouldn't you? And If I'd really wanted to nitpick I could have mentioned that according to the TNG Technical Manual a "warp coil" isn't part of the reactor anyway; it's part of a nacelle, and if "Damage's" writer had bothered to flip through the Warp Theory chapter of the book he might have known that, and we'd have been spared the whole piracy bit since both nacelles have a bunch of coils in them. (They're the blue lights on the outer flank of each nacelle, in case anyone is wondering.) They could have just bypassed the bad one. Instead, the warp coil became a reactor part the ship couldn't do without, just so Archer could act torn about having to steal one. Finally, transport inhibitors have typically been used only when the people doing the inhibiting know a hostile transport is imminent. If Archer had played nice long enough for somebody to beam the part out of there the only problem would be the target's. Archer specifically said he didn't want to just beam the part out because that would kill the other crew faster. "Transport inhibitors" had nothing to do with it.

2) Doesn't invalidate the point. Her reason for doing it is ultimately meaningless, because it doesn't change two facts:

a) She willingly injected a substance that MAKES VULCANS GO CRAZY!

b) She got her supply from stores set aside to keep her ship from being morphed into a pretzel twist!

You'd think someone who comes from a culture that made a religion out of Total Emotional Control and Relentless Adherence to Logic could figure out that the above circumstances would make shooting up Trillium-D a very bad idea. The fact that she didn't is totally out of character for her. If this had been introduced in a fanfic the first twenty reviews would have been twenty different versions of "T'Pol wouldn't do that! That's Stupid!" The only thing that saves the writer of "Damage" from a similar fate is that he already got paid for it, and thus doesn't have to care what anyone thinks of it anymore, especially not those of us dumb enough to watch it! This is more than just "dumb" writing! This is insulting writing! This is the writers of Star Trek saying "You'll believe anything we say no matter how asinine it is because we're gods and you're dumb, so 'Nyah, nyah'!"

3) A story arc is not automatically a good idea. It involves even more attention to detail than a single episode. DS9's writers paid attention to at least most of the details. "Enterprise's" writers don't. And in an anthology a single bad episode rarely affects the whole season. In a story arc, a single bad episode can ruin the whole season, because it's only one chapter of the total story. (And, as you stated, there have been several bad episodes.) The fact that they "took a good cue" in creating a story arc yet didn't also take along the necessary writing skills doesn't impress me.

And I never said I found "only" four problems. They were just the most glaring problems for that particular episode. The writers' deficiencies are pervasive franchise-wide.

Rem: That's just what I was thinking when I watched "Doctors Orders" from ENT: Season 3! It's like they just lifted a Voyager ep word for word and just changed the characters! There is a huge dearth of imagination in the Trek creative team right now. I don't think giving ENT another season was the way to address it, though, but Paramount didn't ask my opinion.

Phoenix-Pen: Wait, let me work up my Kerry impression: (Ahem!)

"I actually liked 'Enterprise' before I didn't like it…"

Seriously. I'm probably that one person you know who liked "Enterprise", Phoenix. It didn't really begin to tick me off until the whole Xindi War arc thing. You are right about the characters, though. T'Pol is eye-candy, and I have a much less flattering opinion of Reed than "stereotype" after his little hissy-fits with Major Hayes. (It rhymes with "wussy".) Of course, it's possible that you may also be right about the "USA gone large" aspect of the show, but if you'd read anything else of mine on this site you probably realize I wouldn't have much of a problem with that. I agree with you on DS9, though, but as you've read I can't agree on Voyager. Seven of Nine was brilliant? Seven of Nine was T'Pol's eye-candy mentor. And being a guy I don't mind eye-candy now and then, but let's call a spade a spade, shall we? Seven of Nine only existed because Neelix's girlfriend wasn't hot enough to bring in fan boy viewers. No matter how much depth and gravitas they tried to add to her character as the show went on, she was still just the hot Borg in the catsuits.

And don't worry about writing a lot about what you think in the review. The whole point was to figure out what others were thinking.

INTP: If they could take a hint ENT: Season 4 wouldn't be premiering this week. But I do intend to send this to TPTB when I have it fully written out…for all the good it will do.

Kritaya: The problem is that Paramount can't give up this particular cash cow for any significant length of time. It doesn't really have any other kind of sci-fi empire, and if it wants to compete with other studios like Fox (Star Wars), Warner Bros. (Matrix), MGM (Stargate), et. al, for a piece of the sci-fi market, Trek is the only thing it can put up. Taking a break may be a good idea creativity wise, but business-wise if Star Trek takes a break, it might as well be gone for good. It would be different if there were nothing else out there for people to flock to, but there is, so in the absence of a series or a movie the audience may disperse to other genres or go "nostalgic" and just cling to DVDs of their older favorites and reject anything new out of hand when it finally shows up. No, if Star Trek is to be saved it has to be changed into something more competitive and that has to be done ASAP. If nostalgic fans scream bloody murder, so be it. Hopefully the changed Trek will drew a big enough audience of newcomers to compensate.

Okay, I think that's everybody. If I missed you let me know, and in the meantime, Read On.