I started reading this book and found that it was not for me. I didn't think it was right to review a book that I didn't finish.

A fascinating insight into the classic world of Star Trek that this Trekkie was very entertained by.

As a loving '60s nerd, I found Star Trek in a time when I immersed myself in The Beatles, Bewitched, and fashion. I found myself excited when each of these interests and more were mentioned in "correlation" with Star Trek. I feel that this book was very focused on North American - more specifically American, cultural phenomenas. Of course this makes sense, as Star Trek would definitely have been influenced by its home/American cultures. I liked how the authors sought to explain every single part of each Star Trek series, and created detailed explanations on the characters paired with their broken boundaries.
Although, I did notice that the authors did not openly denounce the many administrations that have knowcked down people of colour and LGBTQ2S+ people. As both a brown person and a pansexual, I found this to be somewhat eyebrow-raising (and yes, I did just use a Spock reference to prove a point). Even though I do not regularly enjoy biographies that place their own bias inside a non-fiction narrative, I do wish that the authors had provided some of their own opinions to provide some context.
I think this book serves as not just a Star Trek guide, but a cultural guide to the world of the past and present. I'm thankful to the publisher and NetGalley for the copy of this book, and I cannot wait to read it once again!

The Voyages of Star Trek by K.M. Heath and A.S. Carlisle, explores how the various Trek incarnations — TV shows, movies, comics — mirrored (or not) the culture of the time, beginning with the original series (TOS) and ending with Discovery (Picard was released too late and is only mentioned as existing). The book grew out of an undergraduate anthropology course, and you can see some of that in their explanation of their methods (taking random “snapshots” of shows, for instance to assess the prevalence, or lack thereof, of non-white or women characters), but the target is the popular audience. Their main claim, as they put it, is that “Star Trek has survived across five decades in the face of rapid cultural change because it adapts to the times while staying true to its core mission: humanity’s hope for a better future.”

For those unfamiliar with all the various versions of Star Trek, the book delves into TOS, Star Trek: The Next Generation (TNG), Deep Space Nine (DSN), Voyager, Enterprise, Discovery, the animated series, all the movies, the comics, and Star Trek fandom/conventions. Each chapter offers up a brief look at the times based on historical events, pop culture, and more. Then there’s an examination of how the show reflected or conflicted with the reigning time, followed by a specific quantified look at the portrayal race and gender on the show. Their methods were to:

randomly select 15 percent of each of the thirty seasons of the six television shows … In addition, we viewed 100 percent of the thirteen movies. We used snapshots techniques … at five-minute intervals for episodes and about ten-minute for movies, we recorded behavior for all individuals observed with a five-second time frame … record [ing] the age, sex, and race of each actor … and group identity.

The Voyages of Star Trek looks at how the show, and its spin-offs into movies, the written word, and fan-created works, intersects with America’s changing views on feminism, gender, homo and bi-sexuality, capitalism, foreign policy, and other subjects. Some of the specific elements covered include that infamous Kirk-Uhura kiss from TOS (the first interracial kiss on TV), the TOS “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” episode that not-too-unsubtly pointed out the absurdity and inevitable result of racial hatred, the TNG episode “Outcast” which focused on gender identity, DS9’s use of the Ferengi (an alien race) as a means of critiquing contemporary capitalism/greed and the “Past Tense” episode that looked at homelessness (a highly topical subject at the time), Voyagers exploration of mixed-race identify through Torres’ half-human/half-Klingon background, particularly in the episode “Lineage”, and finally (for the shows), how Discovery “normalizes same-sex relationships” via it’s matter-of-fact/taken for granted portrayal of several on the show.

To be honest, I wasn’t expecting to learn much about most of the creative works discussed. After all, it’s been 50 years since TOS, and decades since the other shows, and so there have been, to use an academic term, a gazillion papers, books, documentaries, etc. exploring the shows and films individually, as a series, or as an ongoing phenomenon. So mostly I was hoping for some still-interesting recaps of familiar territory and then a more-interesting dive into the very recent: Discovery, Picard, and the reboot movies, and maybe a glimpse of the new animated series, Lower Decks (I assumed it was too recent for discussion of particular episodes but I thought there might be a look at its genesis and development). Well, as mentioned, Picard was only mentioned, and the same was true of Lower Decks, while Discovery didn’t get much page time. I would have been disappointed then with an in-depth going over of familiar ground but could have lived with that (I am a fan of the series, after all).

But in-depth isn’t the descriptive phrase I’d use here. The depth was, again to be honest, sorely disappointing in fact, with mere cursory and surprisingly shallow looks at the time period and the various shows’ intersection with them. Certainly, it didn’t take an anthropological degree or eye or study for even the most casual fan to note how the mini-skirts o TOS reflected the more open feminism and sexuality of the 60s, how “Let That Be Your Last Battlefield” reflected the Civil Rights movement, or to note that Star Trek shows that showed up 25 or 35 years later would portray more women or minorities on the show. The lack of interesting content might have been at least somewhat counterbalanced by some good stories from the shows and/or a stylish or humorous flair to the writing, but there was too little of the former and next-to-none of the latter, with the style mostly flat and pedestrian.

One of my tests of how much I learned from or enjoyed a book are the number of highlights I made as I read it, and sadly, there were a mere handful in The Voyages of Star Trek. For that reason, I can’t recommend it.

I am not a Trekki - per se. I enjoyed some aspects of the book, as they provided me with some larger context of all the different TV Shows and movies of the franchise. I felt somewhat smarter. But as exciting as each chapter starts, they all go downhill fast. First, there is that attempt to provide context to the times in which the shows and movies where made, and I cannot think of ANY TV show that is not inspired by the events and culture of their times. As if this is not enough, it tries to analyze roles of group association by gender, sexual orientation, race and other things in a somewhat scientific manner. It is a very cold presentation of the facts and really takes the fun out of one of the most entertaining franchises on film.

I still give it three stars, because I enjoyed the summaries at the beginning of each chapter very much. But as each chapter wound down, I asked my self, shall I continue reading this, or shall I move on. I made it to the final frontier, but barely.

Authors K.M Heath and A.S. Carlisle have written a book about one of my favorite subjects: Star Trek.” I have been a lifelong devoted fan of all the shows (even “Enterprise!) and so I dug into their “The Voyages of Star Trek.” The book is positioned as an investigation of “the enduring appeal of Star Trek, noting how it has mirrored, foreshadowed, and adapted to contemporary American culture from 1966 to the present.” Further, the forward described this as an intellectual study. So my hopes were high and I dug in for a good COVID-19 read.
I wanted to like this book..I really did. Although the sections reviewing the American culture decade-by-decade and a number of corresponding episodes from the different Star Trek sagas were an interesting walk done memory lane, the methodology for their conclusions was weak at best or nonexistent at worst. But what made me cease reading this book ( not completing a book is a once-every- five years” experience for c’est moi) were the authors progressive conclusions on all the cultural topics they sited. A few examples for your reading pleasure: (1) in chapter 3 the authors are referencing the movie Platoon “with its portrayal of America’s sleazy involvement in the Vietnam War...” one could have been against the Vietnam War” (as I was) without adding the opinion that it was “sleazy.” (2) Many paragraphs are given over to anti-capitalism rants with direct references to the Ferengi, a “species whose culture revolves around business transactions, profits, and greed.” (3) Thirdly, referencing women’s issues the authors bring up the headline saga of Anita Hill -Clarence Thomas in 1991 leaning into sympathy for Anita Hill determining, without evidence, of her side of the story having been true. A few paragraphs later “In many aspects, TNG mirrored the hypocritical image of women in America...” Wow...didn’t’ see that one coming. (
(4) “Though the 1980’s were known as the decade of greed, the 1990’s were no less money grubbing. Just because Hollywood uses a catch phrase doesn’t mean there is any proof of its being true. Continuing...” investors had no idea how the corporate bosses were ripping them off...ethics flew out the window...the high mucketymucks and their accounting conspirators” summarized as the “ugly side of America.”
Best way to summarize this book comes from the forward: “This book began in an undergraduate course in cultural methods in anthropology...”. Yes, yes it did.