Orson Scott Card, who wrote one of my all-time favorite books Ender’s Game, decided to post his thoughts on Star Trek in the L.A. Times (login may be required, that’s why there’s bugmenot). I’m not sure why he’s so negative on Star Trek, but he really didn’t like the series.
The original “Star Trek,” created by Gene Roddenberry, was, with a few
exceptions, bad in every way that a science fiction television show
could be bad. Nimoy was the only charismatic actor in the cast and,
ironically, he played the only character not allowed to register
emotion.
He goes on to propose that the success of the show was based on the fact that few people were reading the really good science fiction available then. That Star Trek was just successful because the public at large hadn’t been exposed to enough good science fiction. So, the series was successful because it gave the audience more of the B-movie cowboy sci-fi they were familiar with from the movies of the 60s and 70s? I find that hard to believe. It seems to me that Card just can’t accept that Star Trek could connect so deeply to its audience without having very complicated story lines, complex characters, or good characters. I think what hooked early fans and kept the series going was precisely that – it allowed fans to contribute to the Star Trek mythos and universe, to imagine themselves in it more readily since it wasn’t as clearly defined.