TV-When Characters Swear
This image shows Patrick Stewart as Picard, left, and Ed Speleers as Jack Crusher in the "No Win Scenario" episode of "Star Trek: Picard." Photo: Trae Patton/Paramount+ via AP
entertainment

‘Star Trek’, swear words and TV characters’ changing mores

11 Comments
By TED ANTHONY

For nearly four decades, Jean-Luc Picard of “Star Trek” has largely been presented as genteel, erudite and — at times — quite buttoned up. Yes, he loses his temper. Yes, he was reckless as a callow cadet many years ago. Yes, he occasionally gets his hands dirty or falls apart.

But the Enterprise captain-turned-admiral stepped into a different place in last week’s episode of the streaming drama “Star Trek: Picard.” Now, he’s someone who — to the shock of some and the delight of others — has uttered a profanity that never would have come from his mouth in the 1990s: “Ten f—-ing grueling hours,” Patrick Stewart's character says at one point during an intense conversation in which he expects everyone will die shortly.

The whole thing was in keeping with the more complex, nuanced aesthetic of this decade’s “Star Trek” installments. And the online conversation that ensued illustrates the journey undertaken when a fictional character voyages from the strictures of network and syndicated television to high-end streaming TV.

“'Star Trek’ was G-rated when it first came out. 'The Next Generation’ was clean-cut and optimistic. What we’re seeing now with ‘Picard’ is a little bit more of the grit,” says Shilpa Davé, a media studies scholar at the University of Virginia and a longtime “Trek” fan.

Over the weekend, “Star Trek” Twitter reflected that tension.

“Totally out of character,” said one post, reflecting many others. Some complained that it cheapened the utopia that Gene Roddenberry envisioned, that humans wouldn’t be swearing like that four centuries from now, that someone as polished as Picard wouldn’t need such language.

“Part of Star Trek’s appeal is the articulate way characters speak. Resorting to gutter language feels like a step backward since Star Trek’s characters are meant to be better than this,” John Orquiola wrote for the website Screen Rant on Sunday.

The backlash to the backlash followed. Christopher Monfette, the Paramount+ show’s co-executive producer, wrote an extensive and persuasive thread about the moment and why he believed it worked.

“It’s easy to hear that elevated British tone escaping the mouth of a gentlemanly Shakespearean actor and assume some elevated intellectualism,” he said, while acknowledging: “Criticism of its use is fair even if it just strikes a personal nerve — or if you’ve equated 'Trek' with more broader, family-friendly storytelling. But regardless, cursing in the show is carefully debated & discussed in the room or on set. We don’t take it lightly.”

The showrunner for “Star Trek: Picard ” this season, Terry Matalas, said the F-word from Picard wasn’t scripted but was a choice by Stewart in the moment. The result, Matalas said, was “so real.”

“Everything you do as artists, as writers and actors, even as editors, is authenticity. That’s the thing you want to feel,” he told Collider. “I was really torn because hearing that word come from your childhood hero, Captain Picard, it throws you. But wow, is it powerful.”

“Star Trek” has a long history of pushing boundaries, linguistic and otherwise.

“Let’s get the hell out of here,” Capt James T Kirk said on network TV in 1967, when that word was edgy. He’d just lost someone dear to him in the most trying of circumstances. Dr McCoy, the ship’s irascible physician, would often say, “Dammit, Jim.” And in the larger realm, the original series delicately danced with NBC censors over everything from women’s costumes to racial, sexual and war references.

But the crossing of last week's linguistic frontier is an interesting case. It highlights the turbulence generated when a beloved character born during the “family-friendly” TV era evolves against the streaming landscape, where constraints are fewer and opportunities for unflinching authenticity greater.

"This isn't just a rethinking of a fictional world. This is the same actor and the same character in the same setting that we had before. And all these years, he has been speaking and behaving in a certain way," says Robert Thompson, director of the Bleier Center for Television and Popular Culture at Syracuse University.

Sometimes this transition unfolds erratically. Velma, a member of the Gen-X-era Saturday morning cartoon “Scooby Doo,” recently appeared in a more multicultural cartoon reboot on HBO Max that featured a high-school shower scene and overt sexual references. It has been roundly panned. Several years ago, when “Riverdale” premiered, the attempts to push Archie, Jughead, Betty and Veronica from the sunny world of comics into the darker realm of teen drama produced uneven, sometimes jarring results.

“Star Trek” is in a whole different universe, so to speak.

Roddenberry famously framed it as a utopian future where the main characters generally avoided conflict with each other, their society wasn't motivated by greed and humanity was seen as inexorably moving forward. Purists have criticized the recent years of what they call “new Trek” as a darker, more fragmented universe.

Nonsense, say many others: Both allegory and word usage evolve with the times. After all, it was only seven decades ago that Lucille Ball (and her character) was expecting a baby on “I Love Lucy” and the word “pregnant” couldn't be uttered on national television — except, oddly, in French.

And for years before and after that, Hollywood's production code prescribed the ways morality and amorality could be depicted in film, with strict regulation of everything from sexual innuendo to whether criminals were portrayed sympathetically to whether the good guys won. Hence the term “Hollywood ending," which remains with us today in many parts of life.

All of which raises the question: Could it also be the boundaries themselves that help create memorable film and television, rather than merely the breaking of them?

“Star Trek had a certain kind of sincerity — almost like 'the 23rd century will be a family-friendly kind of thing,'” Thompson says. “The question is, what happens when your characters outlive the media industry standards? How do you accommodate the fact that you’re no longer limited without completely betraying the world that you’ve created?”

In this case, Stewart has said he returned to the character because he was persuaded there were new stories to tell. Just as he had aged two decades since his last "Star Trek” appearance, so, too, had Picard — with all the evolution that went along with it.

The kind of evolution, perhaps, that might make a man facing his own end choose a word that still carries a lot of power — even in today's swearing, streaming world. When Jean-Luc Picard says that word, you can be absolutely sure he means it.

Ted Anthony, director of new storytelling and newsroom innovation for The Associated Press, has been writing about American culture since 1990.

© Copyright 2023 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

11 Comments
Login to comment

I read a few years back that Quentin Tarantino wanted to direct a rated-R Star Trek movie. I have no problem with a rated-R Star Trek per se, but I have a huge problem with Quentin Tarantino directing anything Star Trek.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Orlik, Roddenberry was a genius in story telling and far ahead of his time. Swearing in the series just seems crass, maybe more relatable to many but as an idealized future, just somewhat lazy.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

The showrunner for “Star Trek: Picard ” this season, Terry Matalas, said the F-word from Picard wasn’t scripted but was a choice by Stewart in the moment. The result, Matalas said, was “so real.”

Given Patrick Stewart's acting chops and experience with Star Trek and this character, I trust his judgement on this.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I'm not a fan of the swearing in 'Star Trek'. It's generally unnecessary, abuses the tradition, and cheapens the brand. And I'm not exactly a puritan or prude. It just feels wrong. Like special effects and visceral violence, it's usually a sign of creative laziness. The replacement of art with eye candy and shock value.

'Picard' got very mixed reviews when it came out, which is unusual for any ST series. I have s1 on DVD but haven't watched it yet.

The overreliance on violence, sex and swearing in Western TV may be one reason why folk turn to Kdrama. The finale of 'Endeavour' last week felt like the end of an era. There is no longer a drama series on British TV that I'm particularly interested in watching or await the next series of. The storylines and characters are just unappealing, sometimes to the point where watching it feels like a form of emotional abuse (something that might also be said of the news). I'll stick with kdrama and box sets of drama from the 70s, 80s and early 90s.

Velma has been appearing in (often very enjoyable) erotic fan art online for decades, but there's no reason to insert that into the actual TV series. That just feels wrong - like the character is being abused by the current writing team. If you inherit a character, you inherit an artistic tradition and a responsibility. If you aren't up to that, create a new character in a new drama.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

It takes brains not having to cuss to strongly communicate.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

I can imagine a crew cooked up on a ship facing mortal danger on a regular basis might resort to the odd profanity.

I spent a bit of time on my dad’s ship when it was in dock and the air turned blue over a game of poker.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Kind of on the fence on this one. It's true that TOS shocked people with some of their diction and storylines back in the 60's but the use of the F-word in particular from Jean Luc sounds out of place as he never uttered them before. Other characters in Picard have swore but not him...until now. I'd prefer that ST avoid modern cuss words as it brings the show to close to home for me. I prefer it when 'their world' is different from ours and not the same as ours.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

It's a failure of creative writing. Pure and simple.

If the same character, after literally decades of far-dicier service, never had to once sink to the profane of profanity (in fact, more often than not, the Picard character has long been celebrated for being elevated in his self-control and sense of decorum when under fire), then this just seems like a let-down - an anachronism smeared on to a once noble character.

Of course, we do live in a time when tearing down and belittling soaring pieces of culture and history, dumbing down music and literature to its crassest form, and critiquing everything and anything under the sun until they become banal and mundane, is now the norm, so what did we expect from a show that in reality is no more than a shell of what previous generations of writers and show-runners brought us from the Star Trek universe?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Sad to see the spotlight on Picard's profanity rather than the story. Having to rely on Picard swearing for "powerful" moments, lets down the effort on bringing a engaging event in Picards later years to the screen. It was not "modern" and in my opinion, not needed for the story. Change for the sake of change and nothing else.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

"Oh dash it all... the gosh-darned Titan is going to explode... whatever are we to do?"

Star Trek has always been a product of its time, and the language sometimes verges on the silly as the writers went out of their way not to offend anyone. The swearing doesn't bother me - Picard's world isn't a utopia... it's never been a utopia.

Death penalties for mutiny and visiting Talos IV, for example... not exactly life affirming.

Roddenberry wasn't really a visionary, by the way - he just turned Forbidden Planet into a TV series ^_

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

“Totally out of character,” said one post, reflecting many others. Some complained that it cheapened the utopia that Gene Roddenberry envisioned, that humans wouldn’t be swearing like that four centuries from now, that someone as polished as Picard wouldn’t need such language.

“Part of Star Trek’s appeal is the articulate way characters speak. Resorting to gutter language feels like a step backward since Star Trek’s characters are meant to be better than this,” John Orquiola wrote for the website Screen Rant on Sunday.

This isn't the STAR TREK franchise that Gene Rodenberry made. And isn't this on Netflix anyway? This isn't on network TV. And for the record I remember the use of a few swear words in the STAR TREK mo9tion pictures. Dr. McCoy used the 'GD' word and Kirk gave that famous line, 'Klingon bastard, you murdered my son! Ohhh, Klingon bastard, you murdered my son!' in STAR TREK 3.

Either way, I gave up on it all in the 21st century because it has strayed from the original vision altogether, starting with 'Voyager'. That was a dud. Now it's mostly a soap opera in space.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites