cool episode all in all, but are we really back on the 'some beings are fundamentally evil and therefore incapable of negotiating with'?
it just doesn't sit right with me that the story would immediately place moral judgement on an entire species after only one encounter. they* (*edit: the writers) literally named the new species after a word for evil
don't get me wrong, sometimes a story can explore themes of pure evil really effectively. but not like this
isn't one of the main messages of star trek about not judging things by what they first appear to be? star trek never does things in black-and-white, so why was 'life is more complicated than good and evil' immediately dismissed? where's the morally grey area?
let me be clear, I'm not at all saying that violence shouldn't be depicted in fiction. I loveeeee how violence was explored in M'Benga's story arc, that was brilliant! that was star trek at its finest! but, in general, why don't all the starfleet officers get to battle with their own consciences over working for a paramilitary organisation which gives them big guns and expects them to kill people? sentient people?
this is not just about the vezda. I love a good zombie horror, but ethically? zombies are easy! they're scary mindless monsters which aren't actually alive, so our characters don't have to make any difficult decisions in relation to self-defence
and we see it in the way the gorn are presented too. these are beings who seem to act entirely on hunting instinct - they won't listen to reason, so the characters have to kill them because it's the only way!
simply put, snw is telling us that these aliens are the aliens the characters are allowed to kill, guilt free, because they're 'pure evil'
it's not nuanced, it's easy.












