You’ve heard of the “Bechdel-Wallace test” and its potential value to some people in measuring various media in a given context.

I propose a measure we’ll call the “Captain and Crew Test”…

I was enduring – yes, that’s the word I’ll choose – an episode of a certain Trek show and found myself thinking that I seem to enjoy Star Trek shows where the captain isn’t the center of attention for the continued story, rather the crew as a whole (including the captain as professionally and relatively required) works together on the story of the day or is portrayed in multiple dimensions without the commanding officer present.

So, here’s my attempt at codifying this “Captain and Crew Test”:

  • The episode/show has to have at least two crew members (i.e. not the captain) essential to the story,
  • who interact with each other without the captain,
  • about the story without specific direction from the captain

I think these “rules” could use some adjustment and addition, but I think you get what I’m proposing/suggesting/inciting.

UPDATE 2024-07-04 04:35:34 UTC: Check out the quick and amazing work by @[email protected] to compile a subset of the percentage of lines for each character in a few Star Trek shows.

  • usernamefactory@lemmy.caEnglish
    11·
    6 months ago

    I’ve seen this complaint a lot with some of the newer shows, but it doesn’t really resonate with me. A good central character ought to be able to carry a show, and I don’t hold Trek as being inherently different in that regard. In fact, I think the original series would have been an example of a show like that if Spock’s popularity hadn’t been taken into consideration by later writers. Even then, I believe it would have a pretty low “pass” rate compared to all the '90s series.

    (Incidentally, since Burnham wasn’t Captain until season 4, Discovery passes on a technicality for most of its run).

    • Indy@startrek.websiteOPEnglish
      2·
      6 months ago

      … Even then, I believe [TOS] would have a pretty low “pass” rate compared to all the '90s series.

      Agreed. I note elsewhere in this thread that I think TOS would struggle with this little “test” and it was THE Star Trek show when it all started.

      (Incidentally, since Burnham wasn’t Captain until season 4, Discovery passes on a technicality for most of its run).

      Indeed it would pass and I think the captains/crew of those seasons were well portrayed and balanced Burnham’s presence as a character as well.

      I’ve seen this complaint a lot with some of the newer shows, but it doesn’t really resonate with me. A good central character ought to be able to carry a show, and I don’t hold Trek as being inherently different in that regard.

      As you say. And to be clear, I’m not taking this too seriously, nor is it meant to be a complaint. Just a measure I noticed in my own mind. I am still watching all the Star Trek made, whether it “passes” this measure or not.

      • usernamefactory@lemmy.caEnglish
        2·
        6 months ago

        All fair, and I appreciate how much you’re trying to avoid Trekkie infighting in this thread. I’m not always so conscientious about that, but it is, after all, just a TV show.