I like Tasha Yar.

[Newski]

Had she stayed, we would have had no "Yesterday's Enterprise" the same way, or Sela. We'd have probably still had an altered "YE" and no Sela is a good thing by me. Worf wouldn't have been as overexposed, and might have gone to DS9 from the start, two more good things.

Eh, I don't think Sela herself is a problem... I think the fact that they went out of the way to create this character, use her only a few times, build her up, but still we wonder "Why bother with the Tasha Yar's Daughter thing? What does this add to the story?"

Ultimately she was useless. Besides, we had a much better Recurring Romulan character. Tomalok.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOXT22Ghouw

Tomalok only had a few short appearances but was actually a lot more memorable and was a much better thought out character.



I think Yar dying in the line of Duty was the way to go... What actually impressed me about the episode was, they didn't have a long "Maybe we can save her" sequence where everyone tears up. She's dead, in sickbay, nothing they can do, story moves forward. Gets the memorial at the end,and the episode's done. To have that happen to a major character is actually quite ballsy.

Much better than Jadzia's fate in Deep Space Nine.

 

[Amaris]

Episode #10 "Hide and Q" made me think, too. When Yar was in the "penalty box", she was sitting by herself alone on the bridge, and she looked totally abject and helpless, and it bothered me. It did so because I knew in about 16 episodes, she would be dead, and that did not sit well with me. She had so much potential, and again, while I love that Worf was developed (he eventually became one of my favorite characters), I just think Tasha could have had that same chance.

J.

 

[Newski]

Thanks a lot. I'm overworked, my short film has put me in debt, and now Mr. Allen... You have made me sad.

 

[Amaris]

Thanks a lot. I'm overworked, my short film has put me in debt, and now Mr. Allen... You have made me sad.

Excellent. If you need any sad script writing for your short film, please drop me a line. I'm full of misery, and I love company!


J.

 

[DGCatAniSiri]

I have always had a soft spot for the characters who get killed off because the writers 'can't work with their character' - I always think something along the lines of 'give ME a crack at them, I could do something!' Tasha especially, since she's a fascinating character - all the other main cast are these people who have lived the good life in the heart of the Federation, while she grew up on a colony that 'failed' (don't quite understand that - if the colony failed, how exactly are there still people there?)

Sadly, Tasha's character was a victim of two things - the writers trying to put a female in a position that traditionally was a 'man's' role while also trying to make it seem a casual 'yeah, happens all the time, and, the bigger problem of the two, the 'our characters DON'T' clause that Gene put in for TNG. Her existence on Turkana IV would have been filled with occasions were she engaged in activities that Gene had dictated that our character would not do, and as such, it made it hard to do anything with her, because she wouldn't have been allowed to draw on her prior experiences, given that as a character, they were things that she should have done, but as a Gene Roddenberry character, she wasn't allowed to do.

I know Star Trek wouldn't be around without him, but I firmly feel that by the time of TNG's production, Gene had bought into his own hype and let himself believe that all it took to overcome these inherent human traits he deemed as being 'negative' was the power of positive thinking - if TNG Gene had worked on TOS, we wouldn't have had the Spock-Bones banter, because the characters were 'too evolved' for such arguments. All the TNG characters suffered because of the 'our characters DON'T' rule, but none so much as Tasha - if that hadn't been a rule, I would not be surprised if Denise Crosby would have wanted to remain with the show.

 

[Praetor]

Well said, DGCatAniSiri.

 

[Amaris]

I have always had a soft spot for the characters who get killed off because the writers 'can't work with their character' - I always think something along the lines of 'give ME a crack at them, I could do something!' Tasha especially, since she's a fascinating character - all the other main cast are these people who have lived the good life in the heart of the Federation, while she grew up on a colony that 'failed' (don't quite understand that - if the colony failed, how exactly are there still people there?)

Sadly, Tasha's character was a victim of two things - the writers trying to put a female in a position that traditionally was a 'man's' role while also trying to make it seem a casual 'yeah, happens all the time, and, the bigger problem of the two, the 'our characters DON'T' clause that Gene put in for TNG. Her existence on Turkana IV would have been filled with occasions were she engaged in activities that Gene had dictated that our character would not do, and as such, it made it hard to do anything with her, because she wouldn't have been allowed to draw on her prior experiences, given that as a character, they were things that she should have done, but as a Gene Roddenberry character, she wasn't allowed to do.

I know Star Trek wouldn't be around without him, but I firmly feel that by the time of TNG's production, Gene had bought into his own hype and let himself believe that all it took to overcome these inherent human traits he deemed as being 'negative' was the power of positive thinking - if TNG Gene had worked on TOS, we wouldn't have had the Spock-Bones banter, because the characters were 'too evolved' for such arguments. All the TNG characters suffered because of the 'our characters DON'T' rule, but none so much as Tasha - if that hadn't been a rule, I would not be surprised if Denise Crosby would have wanted to remain with the show.

Agreed. I can't help but become disgruntled with Gene at times because of that. He became too strict, too rigid, and it was a shame, but then no one is perfect. I just wish he would have relented somewhat on that line of thought.

J.

 

[Praetor]

I think what GR missed out on was that it wasn't that viewers who bought into the optimistic Trek future wanted perfect humans, they wanted to relate to "better" humans who fought and successfully overcame their lesser natures on the show, not somewhere in the past or off-screen. Kirk wasn't perfect - he didn't always have confidence he was doing the right thing or have the answer right off, but he would find it.

Having Tasha have to fight to overcome her upbringing (or lack thereof) sometimes would have been better.

 

[KingstonTrekker]

I remember liking the character when I first watched the series. I was sad to see her leave the series. However, now I find it tough to even watch Denise Crosby in the role...she is such a horrible actress...

 

[Amaris]

I think what GR missed out on was that it wasn't that viewers who bought into the optimistic Trek future wanted perfect humans, they wanted to relate to "better" humans who fought and successfully overcame their lesser natures on the show, not somewhere in the past or off-screen. Kirk wasn't perfect - he didn't always have confidence he was doing the right thing or have the answer right off, but he would find it.

Having Tasha have to fight to overcome her upbringing (or lack thereof) sometimes would have been better.

Yes, I think that would have been a great opportunity for everyone involved.

I remember liking the character when I first watched the series. I was sad to see her leave the series. However, now I find it tough to even watch Denise Crosby in the role...she is such a horrible actress...

To be fair, none of them did very well with the stilted dialogue and poor stories of the first season. I mean, look at Worf season one, and then season seven. Two totally different actors in a way. I think in time she would have found her footing.

J.

 

[CaptainStoner]

I have always had a soft spot for the characters who get killed off because the writers 'can't work with their character' - I always think something along the lines of 'give ME a crack at them, I could do something!' Tasha especially, since she's a fascinating character - all the other main cast are these people who have lived the good life in the heart of the Federation, while she grew up on a colony that 'failed' (don't quite understand that - if the colony failed, how exactly are there still people there?)

What I don't understand is, how one expects a new series with 8 main characters to devote that much time to Tasha Yar. It's not at all as if she was ignored. It's a big cast, and the actor left too soon. The writers were working with the character, and it was her decision to leave.
Now, was it her decision to get killed off? Sure would have been easier to have her transfer! Might have made a much better episode than "Skin of Evil", and as a bonus: no Sela.

Sadly, Tasha's character was a victim of two things - the writers trying to put a female in a position that traditionally was a 'man's' role while also trying to make it seem a casual 'yeah, happens all the time, and, the bigger problem of the two, the 'our characters DON'T' clause that Gene put in for TNG. Her existence on Turkana IV would have been filled with occasions were she engaged in activities that Gene had dictated that our character would not do, and as such, it made it hard to do anything with her, because she wouldn't have been allowed to draw on her prior experiences, given that as a character, they were things that she should have done, but as a Gene Roddenberry character, she wasn't allowed to do.

That just doesn't make a lot of internal sense. Gene wrote Tasha with the dark background, and it does color her character.

I know Star Trek wouldn't be around without him, but I firmly feel that by the time of TNG's production, Gene had bought into his own hype and let himself believe that all it took to overcome these inherent human traits he deemed as being 'negative' was the power of positive thinking - if TNG Gene had worked on TOS, we wouldn't have had the Spock-Bones banter, because the characters were 'too evolved' for such arguments. All the TNG characters suffered because of the 'our characters DON'T' rule, but none so much as Tasha - if that hadn't been a rule, I would not be surprised if Denise Crosby would have wanted to remain with the show.

Space. The Final Frontier. But not the movie, "The Final Frontier". Just the space part. These are the voyages of the U.S.S. McCoy-Spock Banter, her ongoing mission: to argue our way around strange, new, but also cliche, worlds. Too seek out new foreheads, and new canon violations. To boldly go no further than September 2, 1969!

 

[GalaxyX]

Space. The Final Frontier. But not the movie, "The Final Frontier". Just the space part. These are the voyages of the U.S.S. McCoy-Spock Banter, her ongoing mission: to argue our way around strange, new, but also cliche, worlds. Too seek out new foreheads, and new canon violations. To boldly go no further than September 2, 1969!

LMAO!!

Anyway, funny because I too like the Tasha Yar character for various reasons:

1. I think Denise Crosby was pretty hot, at least back then.

2. She had come from a troubled past.

3. She could take care of herself in a fight, and was a tough girl WITHOUT being a smug, bitchy man hater (It seems to me that nowadays "tough chicks" are portrayed as being men haters who kick men in the balls any chance they get).

Sadly the character did not continue, for whatever reasons. The Sela thing just didn't make any sense at all.

 

[Tachyon]

Tasha is alright.

 

[Angry Angel]

It was her background that I found interesting, it gave a nice contrast to the glorious of what the Federation was supposed to be. But I never felt all that convinced of it on screen, and I'm not sure whether it was because of the dialogue the writers gave her or Denise Crosby's portrayal of the character. Have to say that in the first couple of seasons there were a lot more cringeworthy moments besides Tasha. Could well be that if she had been allowed to carry on to the final seasons the character would have gotten a better place. But one can't dismiss the impact her dimise had on other characters like Data and Picard.

 

[Myasishchev]

I think what GR missed out on was that it wasn't that viewers who bought into the optimistic Trek future wanted perfect humans, they wanted to relate to "better" humans who fought and successfully overcame their lesser natures on the show, not somewhere in the past or off-screen. Kirk wasn't perfect - he didn't always have confidence he was doing the right thing or have the answer right off, but he would find it.

Having Tasha have to fight to overcome her upbringing (or lack thereof) sometimes would have been better.

Yeah. If nothing else, it would give the rest of the crew someone permanent to talk down to, instead of hiring expensive guest stars.

Maybe Roddenberry did turn them all into weenies, but there was still interpersonal conflict at least as late as his TMP novelization. Also several references to Kirk's boner.

 

[Praetor]

I have a thought about that...

 

[Amaris]

I have a thought about that...

So do I, but they're drowned out by my brain's screams of "WHY GOD WHY!?!?"


J.

 

[Praetor]

I have a thought about that...

So do I, but they're drowned out by my brain's screams of "WHY GOD WHY!?!?"


J.

Did you ever notice that the older Roddenberry got, the more perfect and "evolved" he insisted his characters be?

 

[Amaris]

I have a thought about that...

So do I, but they're drowned out by my brain's screams of "WHY GOD WHY!?!?"


J.

Did you ever notice that the older Roddenberry got, the more perfect and "evolved" he insisted his characters be?

I noticed. I love TNG, but the first few seasons he lays it on so thick that the self satisfaction just about chokes you to death!

J.

 

[Praetor]

I'll stop being OT after I say this: I have a theory that the older GR got, the more regrets he had, and the more he wanted and perhaps indeed needed to feel that humanity could be perfect, because he saw himself as being so imperfect.