Depictions of Torture in Sci-Fi

I'm providing a link here to a ministry that psychologically tortured me about ten years ago. I am diagnosed with OCD (and now also with bipolar). The ministry locked me in a room for five hours and the staff screamed at me to repent of my OCD or be cursed by God forever. Finally, when they saw I would not relent, they let me go.

Science fiction, to me, has always done a rather bad job at depicting torture. That may be, in part, because some sci-fi people are sadomasochistic at their heart (perhaps myself included). They like to see their heroes battling people dressed up as Nazis, people wearing uniforms, people saluting Nazis, or not saluting Nazis and getting shot. Doctor Who and Babylon 5 have both tried to depict torture but only somewhat successfully. BSG does a better job at it, but I also think there is a definite anti-Islamic strain of sadomasochism running through that series as well, one that I am very uncomfortable with. I think, as sci-fi or near sci-fi treatments go, Clockwork Orange and V for Vendetta are two of the better treatments, particularly the book version of V, which fully teases out the moral implications of V's torturous actions, even if it does somewhat excuse them (for somewhat understandable reasons however). I think, though, the definitive treatment of torture in a near sci-fi setting is Closetland, with Alan Rickman. Check it out. You just may have trouble sleeping after.

Why is BSG's 3rd season so bad?

I've been watching the 3rd season of the new BSG in bits and pieces, and I have to say, it sucks. I've heard that the writers were forced by SCI-FI to write the series episodically in season 3, instead of with a story arc. I don't know if that's true (I suspect it is), but I know that the series loses a lot of its power after the first four or five episodes of season 3. There's still potential there, but I wonder if I'll be disappointed by season 4 (no spoilers, please!). I think season 3 of BSG is to season 5 of Babylon 5 what bad cheese is to bad yogurt (o.k., sucky analogy). And I can't keep track of all the people hopping in the sack with one another in season 3. It's a little offputting. I don't care about the sex, but even most highschoolers don't go through partners that quickly!

Academics in Space

Relatively little television science fiction has dealt with the position of academics in the future. The one exception to this (here's a big surprise) is Babylon 5, which quite humorously took academic pretensions apart in its Season 4, when the academy was used to try to gain legitimacy for President Clark's fascistic regime. Later on, the series shows future academics, 100 years after Sherdian's death, tearing his reputation apart through historical analysis. I have mixed feelings about the latter event. JMS seems to believe in a vague class of people called "heroes" that are above the judgment of mere mortals. I, for one, would welcome such a historical deconstruction, as long as it doesn't lead to another future history (also shown by JMS), in which holograms were used to re-enact history, to the detriment of "fact"! Scary stuff, but since we don't have holodecks right now, not particularly convincing.
I would like to see something like "College 2101" or a show to that effect, but I don't think there'd be a huge audience for it. What do you think?

Charity in Science Fiction

Charity, in the form of debt-relief, medical clinics, etc. is very absent from television science fiction and the spirit of charity is also often quite absent. In TV sci-fi, the good guys are good because the programmers say they are good, or because they happen to rescue a planet of miners with their fancy laserblasters, but not because they are actually good people as a whole. Blake's 7, Firefly, and Farscape are much more realistic in this regard, as all three series show the "good" guys often rejecting charity for expediency, like people do in real life. I think the most moving acts of charity in TV sci-fi are probably Steven Franklin's repeated efforts to help the populace of Down Below. Babylon 5 is one of the few TV sci-fi shows to portray the full weight of poverty on a population, and Franklin represents the decent humanitarian impulse we wish we had. None of these programs, again with the exception of Babylon 5 and to a lesser extent BSG, come out in favor of the governmental palliatives we know are the only true solutions to poverty and want.

The Holocaust and Contemporary Science Fiction

Contemporary science fiction, particularly television science fiction, does not often deal with the Holocaust, and when it does it does so in relatively allegorical terms. The most concrete references to it occur in "Genesis of the Daleks" and the 3rd and 4th seasons of Babylon 5, but both series ultimately shy away from the precipice. I think that for the genre to evolve, it has to be willing to take such portrayals to the hilt. For instance, a depiction of an interstellar Nazi state could be a major work of art, if done correctly, and a good cautionary tale as well. Some of the best depictions of the Holocaust have come from alternative history tales, such as The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H., Boys from Brazil, After Dachau, and Iron Dream. These are truly memorable portrayals of evil that deserve and demand a second reading. More complex visions of fascism, such as those offered in movies like The Believer and books like Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics. Realizing that Nazism has a perverse fascination on us that is not always salutatory will go a long way to at least partially mitigating its evils. I hope that in the future, television sci-fi can have the courage to show the Shoah, in the hopes of creating a more productive dialogue about what might have been, had the Nazis won the war.

Category: Politics

Aliens I: The Greatest TV Aliens Ever

For me, television science fiction has always been handicapped by its lack of inspiration in designing alien species. Part of this comes simply from budgeterary constraints. Its a lot easier to show knobbly headed humanoid aliens then anything truly unique. The Scarrans (pictured here) are among TV's best efforts at creating a truly unique looking alien. I think Babylon 5, Farscape, and Doctor Who (in both incarnations) have done the best at creating strange species, both from a psychological and biological perspective. Babylon 5 had the most detailed alien cultures of any show, particularly the Minbarri and Narn (admittedly humanoids). It also presented the wonderful Shadows, the first non-bipedal species to play a major role in a science fiction story arc. Farscape usually featured bipedal aliens, but wonderfully strange ones, like the Scarrans, Luxans, Hynerians, Pilots, etc. The cultures may not have exactly been detailed, but there was a wonderful sense of adventurousness in the design of these species. Star Trek has not been as successful, though there have been some wonderful species shown even in that series: the Horta and the Borg being both alien and well thought out. Doctor Who, however, is unique in its ability to create aliens that consistently defied the bipedal humanoid prejudice, even if they looked incredibly corny. The Daleks, for instance, though descended from a humanoid species, are one of the most startingly original creations in all of science fiction television.

Now what I would really like to see is Larry Niven's and Jerry Pournelle's Moties on sci-fi TV. That would be something to see.

The Lurkers and Homelessness

Babylon 5 is also unique in that it is one of the few sci-fi programs to deal with the issue of homelessness, through its depiction of the poor outcasts on the station, the Lurkers. The series's sympathy always is with the Lurkers, even if Garibaldi occasionally gets angry with them because there's increased crime in Down Below (where the Lurkers live). The series depicts a variety of paths to homelessness: drug addiction, alcoholism, political dissidence (the equivalent of being black in America on Babylon 5), mental illness, etc. The series is also not shy in condemning the right wing Clark administration for ignoring the plight of the homeless and instituting harsh policies against the poor and the mentally ill. Perhaps most importantly, several of the characters in the series flirt with having to live in Down Below, or try to stick up for people in Down Below and their rights. Marcus makes various friends among Down Below's population, as does Garibaldi. Lyta and Byron live in a colony in Down Below that is much like a hippie commune for telepaths. Franklin spends several weeks in Down Below dealing with his drug addiction. I think it's a tribute to Babylon 5 that the series dealt so honestly with these issues.

The Virgin in TV Sci-Fi

I'm hoping to teach a class on conservatism in fiction (a rather short reading list) in the Spring of 2011, so I'm coming up with all sorts of crazy arguments for conservatism, even though I'm far from a conservative. The lecture I'm working on now is called the "Case Against Sex" and it made me think of the treatment of virginity in TV sci-fi. There has been very little sexuality shown on screen, but characters are usually prone to be identified as heterosexual men or women (Captain Jack and company excluded). Explicitly virginal characters are very rare. Until the 1996 Doctor Who movie, and the new series, Doctor who was not, as Terrance Dicks puts it, a "snogger". In other words, he was always suppossed to be above romantic relationships and a little aloof from them. Doctor Who therefore is the model of the viriginal character in science fiction. The other major virgin in sci-fi is Marcus Cole from Babylon 5, where his virginity is seen as a mark of his priest-like Ranger status. The whole priest-Ranger idea is interesting, especially since Marcus's virginity is not tied to a hatred of sex, but simply the fact that he has not found the right woman. This makes his death at the end of season four all the more poignant, because we know he is sacrificing his chance for sexual love, for the woman he has romantic desires for. I think this latter, joyful kind of virginity may be a postive way of depicting singles and virgins in the future, rather than using them as the butt of some cosmic joke.

Klingon Bible

I thought you all might want to know about my next story, which since there's no hope of publishing it, will not violate any copyright restrictions. It's based on the esoteric adventures of a KLV Bible salesman, who goes to a sci-fi conference, ostensibly to save souls, but in reality to indulge in some of the "darker" aspects of Trek (talked about in a previous post). I'm hoping to make this as outrageous as it sounds.
What do you think of efforts to translate the Bible, Shakespeare, etc. into Klingon? Is it a tremendous waste of time, a sign of Western decadence, a harmless diversion? Personally, I'm not sure. I do, however, find Trekkies obsession with their favorite series more than a little unnerving, especially when considering how inferior Trek is to Doctor Who, Blake's 7, Farscape, Babylon 5, Firefly, and the BSG reboot. Come on guys! The time of Trek is gone. Let's get some new ideas already!

Telepaths in science fiction: The Eternal Mutant Super Jews of Sci-Fi

Telepathy and those gosh durn Jews just seem to go together like Abbot and Costello, Laurel and Hardy, Kirk and Spock. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not being anti-Semitic here. Rather, I am pointing out the peculiar tendency of sci-fi writers to link Jews with telepathy, sometimes to poke fun at anti-Semitism, at other times for more poisonous reasons. The first example of this I would highlight is Norman Spinrad's excellent novel, the Iron Dream. In this novel, the linkage is intentional. Spinrad's novel is actually a novel within a novel, written in the voice of Adolf Hitler, who has become a science fiction writer. Hitler's science fiction novel (Lords of the Swastika) is a tale of a rise of a sci-fi dictator to power, who then battles hordes of mutants, who Hitler uses as stand-ins for Slavs, and in the case of the lead mind-controlling mutants, Jews. Spinrad's novel is a hilarious send-up of Nazi kitsch in science fiction, highlighting the disturbing similarities between fascism and science fiction novels like Starship Troopers. Of course, given that context, the portrayal is quite justified.
However, two other portrayals that come to mind are much more disturbing. Both portrayals cast Jews and Nazis as coming from the same cloth. The first is Babylon 5's use of telepaths. Though rogue telepaths are sympathetic characters, the Psi Corps, the leading telepath organization, is an SS-like group, devoted to persecuting "mundanes". This fulfills the secular\Christian fantasy that the Holocaust was really the Jews' fault, and not our own. Later on, however, the rogue telepaths look for a homeland (a.k.a. the Vorlon homeworld a.k.a Israel), but to get this homeland must engage in terrorism against the "legitimate government". Telepaths have sex differently (like the stereotype of Jews), think differently (ditto), and inspire all kinds of anti-telepath conspiracy theories (again ditto). This kind of plotline obviously has problematic elements that I don't think JMS ever adequately addressed.
Perhaps the most disturbing novel series along this line is the Firebird trilogy, written by evangelical author Kathy Tyers. Here, the human telepaths in the series are undoubtedly meant to represent Jews. Tyers basically admits as much in her forward. In the series, bad, secular Nazi-Jew humans (the Shuhr) attack the forces of light, represented most prominently by the Sentinels, who are good, Messianic Christian Jews. In turn, of course, the Christian Jews annihilate the secular Jews, which is seen AS TOTALLY JUSTIFIED by the author.
I guess sci-fi blood libels die hard, and I don't blame solely writers like Tyers for contributing to them. Too many of my secular friends turn legitimate anti-Zionism into an excuse to racially bait Jews. You'd think we'd have learned by now. I guess not.

The Arts and Sci-Fi Television

Science fiction television has never really done a good job of portraying the arts. STNG had a rather pretentious view of the arts, showcased by numerous allusions to Shakespeare and company. Babylon 5, meanwhile, while art itself, did not do so well in those episodes that dealt with literarily significant figures. Take for example, Michael York's truly dreadful performance in "A Late Delivery from Avalon" and the equally putrid retelling of the Grail legend that wasted the talent of all-time great actor David Warner. Then there's Commander Kang (or was it Chang, I can't remember) in Star Trek VI, with his mouthed renditions of the Great Bard's works.

Perhaps the best series for dealing with the arts has been the new Doctor Who, which has offered entertaining and original takes on Dickens, Shakespeare, and Agatha Cristie. Also well done was the STNG episodes concerning Mark Twain, which featured a cameo from my all-time favorite author, Jack London (not in the flesh, of course.). In general, however, sci-fi television does not assume a high level of intelligence on the part of its audiences, though it does so more than most other genres.

All this begs the question: What science fiction series do you consider art? For me, Blake's 7, Babylon 5, and Battlestar Galactica are all definitely forms of artistic television, going beyond the simple boundaries of mere entertainment. Firefly, Farscape, Doctor Who, The Twilight Zone, Max Headroom, Dollhouse, and a few other series also deserve attention by literary and film critics. But as my students always remind me, art is in the eyes of the beholder. Perhaps every series can be viewed as art, even Buck Rogers. Well, then again, maybe not . . .

Conservatism in Science Fiction Television

Conservatism gets a bad wrap in science fiction (often deservedly so). However, science fiction television also tends to chicken out when dealing with conservative ideas. There seems to be a great willingness to critique social conservatism. DS9 condemns creationism, STNG anti-gay and anti-abortion activism, and BSG examines anti-terrorist rhetoric. However, I would argue that social conservatism, by and large, is a distraction and a dangerous distraction at that. Within a generation or two, virtually all Americans, including evangelicals and conservative Catholics, will be in support of gay rights. The abortion controversy may linger on longer, but clearly the religious

right is ultimately going to lose that battle as well. By contrast, economic and governmental conservatism, particularly the former, are rarely critiqued in science fiction. We do have the Ferengi in TNG, the proto-capitalists of the universe, but if anything, they seem like a Fascist caricature of Jews (which some fans have suggested was exactly the racist point), rather than a serious, thoughtful analysis of economic conservatives, libertarians, and neo-cons. Babylon 5 probably did the best job of analyzing the dangers of conservative thought, with its depiction of President Clark's gradual decline from conservatism to fascism. Despite the prevalence of Tea Party thought in recent years, no series has really addressed the Tea Party issue either. Maybe it is just too new. I do think, however, that the critiques of science fiction television towards social conservatism are stupidly reductionistic, rarely examining the complexity of religious and cultural taboos. Again, Babylon 5 did a much better job, particularly "Confessions and Lamentations", a cutting, deeply moving exploration of the self-harm caused by homophobia and anti-AIDs rhetoric. Sci-fi television also seems reluctant to engage conservatives in dialogue or permit conservatives to have any voice in sci-fi television. Only two series, bnth British, have really engaged political conservatism. The first, the Prisoner, was an exceptional piece of libertarian production, widely considered to be the best sci-fi series (perhaps the best series) ever made. Patrick Mcgoohan,

the show's creator, explored themes of individualism and social conformity in a way that appealed to both the socially conservative right and the liberal left. The second series, 1990, I have never seen, but it sounds like an excellent examination of the over-bureaucratization of Britain during the 1970's. Perhaps, if conservatives were given more respect by television producers, and listened to seriously, they would be more willing to listen to their opponents in return.

Weapons Fire rate, Accuracy in Sci-Fi

Science fiction television shows are famous for laser pistols, plasma guns, etc., so I thought it would be fun to examine how these shows apply weapons technology, particularly fire rates, and what it says about these series.

When it comes to space combat, clearly the reboot BSG and Babylon 5 did the best job. These two series tried to make such combat work within the relative constraints of zero g, and even though they used fighter craft, they did not do the crazy gyrations of X-Wings or the old Colonial Vipers. Babylon 5 combat, in particular, stuck rigidly to this Zero-g application, even when it made the battles a bit slow at times. Star Trek wasn't terribly bad in this regard either. Unrealistic space fights, in any case, seem to be more characteristic of sci-fi movies then television (Transformers, for instance).

Ground weapons, on the other hand, are rarely portrayed realistically. Take Star Trek's phasers or the blasters of the old BSG colonials. These weapons were portrayed as the height of technological advancement, yet their fire rate was so slow that it would have made more sense to just use SMG's and other ballistic weaponry. Indeed, few sci-fi shows have solved this problem. Only Babylon 5 created energy weapons with high enough fire rates to convince the viewer that the weapons are more deadly than those used today. Even the great Farscape series's weapons fired somewhat slowly. That is why I commend the reboot BSG for using ballistic weaponry like that used today. Realistically, I don't think energy weapons, as they stand today, could be used for anything other than tank-killing. BSG simply makes more sense.

I think there is another important reason to keep using the ballistic weaponry. If we have to show weaponry on television, we should show weaponry that has real bloody consequences. BSG does this, but most other sci-fi series have shied away from showing the true human cost of weapons fire. Perhaps if more American sci-fi series showed blown up Cylon children, and not fade aways, we wouldn't be killing real children in Iraq and Afghanistan. Series like Farscape and Star Trek, though good, too often allow people to fantasize about violence without having to deal with the true consequence of that violence. It's time for that to change.

Sci-Fi Political Thematic Encylopedia

I have been working slowly over the last few months on a sci-fi television political thematic encyclopedia, covering how a variety of television programs deal with issues of race, class, sexuality, gender, fascism, terrorism, religion, conservatism, homophobia, libertarianism, abortion, illegal immigration, Marxism, genetic engineering, cloning, artificial intelligence, and about 30 other topics. It is a massive undertaking. For right now, I am concentrating solely on space operas, and I obviously cannot cover everyone, since the financial costs of purchasing all those sets would be restrictive, and I wouldn't have the time to watch every series.

Here is the list of series I feel are significant enough to definitely be covered with a short explanation of my reasons why:

Alien Nation, Caprica, Firefly, Farscape, Star Trek, TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, Babylon 5, BSG (original), BSG (reboot), Blake's Seven, Doctor Who (original), Doctor Who (reboot), Earth 2, Crusade, Space Above and Beyond, Space 1999, Andromeda, Torchwood, V (original . . . in later editions I may cover the reboot, but I'm trying to limit shows post 2007. Note that with V I am only using the two original miniseries. I don't consider the actual first original series, back in 1985, as canonical, as the original producer was no longer at the helm and the show clearly suffered from this. Similarly I don't blame Glen Larson for Galactica 1980, even though he was at the helm, and so I don't include that either).

Major Canon Space Operas I don't cover: Earth Final Conflict, Lost in Space, Red Dwarf, Lexx, Stargate SG-1, Stargate Atlantis, Stargate Universe, Tomorrow People, UFO.

My reasoning: The Star Trek series are self-explanatory. Whether you like them or not, Star Trek has put a defining stamp on American sci-fi, so I cover each Trek series, even the otherwise marginal Enterprise. For a similar reason, I cover Doctor Who and its reboots, since they are foundational to British sci-fi, like them or not. Firefly, though short, was good. So was Space Above and Beyond and to a lesser extent, Earth 2. They aren't major shows, but they are politically unusual enough to warrant inclusion. Babylon 5 defines post 1993 sci-fi, so its inclusion, along with Crusade, are obvious. Babylon 5, BSG, Firefly, and Farscape all relied heavily on Blake's Seven, which is why I included that series. Of the series I list here, Space 1999 is probably the most marginal. However, it was the first attempt to create a major post-Star Trek series. The original BSG is also relatively marginal, a one series show with some serious writing flaws. I include it, in part to be a BSG completist, and also because the original BSG marked a critical point in American sci-fi. Alien Nation and V, though not the equal of nineties series, were important enough within the rather sparse 1980's, to merit consideration.

Buck Rogers was obviously fluff, and while I may get to it if I have time, it's not high on my list. Earth Final Conflict was very interesting at points, but suffered from hampered writing. I would include it, if I could obtain all the DVD sets, but there's copyright issues. Several relatively good British programs I decided not to include: The Tommorow People, UFO, Red Dwarf, and Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Tommorow People, though it ran a long time, wasn't a major genre influence, neither was UFO. I like Red Dwarf and think I would like Hitchhiker, but I decided not to do comedies so I wouldn't have to handle crap like Mork and Mindy or Futurama. If I get time, I may do Red Dwarf alone, because it is probably the fourth most important British sci-fi series (after B7, Dr. Who, and the Prisoner). Probably my most controversial omission is the Stargate series. Frankly, I find the writing in Stargate putridly bad (a statement that is itself not particularly well written, but I'm going on no sleep here). In addition, the number of seasons of these series would make covering a marginal series like SG-1 unfeasible for the present, especially if I want to cover any major non space-operas.

Non-Space Operas

Ones I hope to cover: Dollhouse, Outer Limits, Twilight Zone, X-Files, Prisoner, Dark Angel, Max Headroom.

Ones I won't cover: Jeremiah, Jericho, Cold Lazarus, Outer Limits (new), Logan's Run, 1990, Planet of the Apes, Quantum Leap, Sliders, Seaquest, Survivors, 4400, Heroes.

My reasoning: Dollhouse has a genuine science-fiction idea and sounds intelligently written (I haven't watched it yet). The original Outer Limits and the original Twilight Zone were, in my opinion, top 25 shows, so they definitely warrant inclusion if I get the time (though occassionally Twilight Zone is more fantasy than sci-fi. X-Files was, after Babylon 5, the most important science fiction show of its decade, and certainly the definitve Earth-bound post Prisoner series. The Prisoner is often ranked as the greatest sci-fi show ever, and I think there is definitely reason to support that viewpoint. Max Headroom was the first attempt at using cyberpunk in sci-fi tv. Obviously it should be included. Dark Angel is more borderline, but there's enough interesting elements that I think it would make for some interesting analysis.

As for the series I reject, Jeremiah was good, but just not genre significant enough. Jericho and Survivors I reject because I don't really want to deal with post-apocalyptic sci-fi, a form of sci-fi I find slightly too respectable and mainstream (though I do regret giving up on both these series, which sound excellent). I would love to do Cold Lazarus, but there's hangups with its DVD release. Logan's Run and Planet of the Apes were not well enough written to warrant a look, nor was Seaquest. 1990 is not available on DVD. I wish it was, as it represents, along with The Prisoner, the only right-leaning sci-fi series, and therefore would make for some interesting discussion. Quantum Leap, for me, is really a fantasy series, not sci-fi. Seaquest, despite the special effects, was marginal. 4400 and Sliders while good, simply weren't significant enough for me to personally take the time to watch them. Leaving Sliders out is really the only difficult choice.

Series that are good but that I don't consider sci-fi: Flash Forward, Lost, Buffy, True Blood, etc. A lot of these series are good, but the sci-fi elements are so minimal that I don't think I can justly merit buying them or taking the time to watch them.

So, you're probably wondering which of these series I own: Of the non-space operas, only Outer Limits and the Prisoner. Dollhouse isn't too expensive, and the X-Files has complete transcripts online, so I don't have to watch the show. Max Headroom is also cheap, and coming out soon, and Dark Angel is reasonably priced. That means only Twilight Zone will bite deep into my pocket, if I decide to cover these series.

Of the space operas: I own Firefly, Farscape, Babylon 5, BSG (old), BSG (reboot), Blake's Seven, Buck Rogers, about 40 old Doctor Whos and 1 season of the new Doctor Who, Earth 2, Red Dwarf, Space ABove and Beyond, Space 1999, UFO, V, and a season of Torchwood. All the Star Trek series I can find exact transcripts online, which is good, as their price is way out of my range. Crusade is relatively cheap, which means my main expenditures will be on buying Doctor Who and Torchwood seasons and episodes. I may not include every Who episode, particularly some politically marginal ones like The Romans, Space Musuem, and the Chase.

So wish me luck on this political extravaganza, that will probably take me 10 years to research and another 10 years to complete

Babylon 5 on religion

Babylon 5 was one of the most interesting series in its treatment of religion. Brother Theo promoted a relatively promising view of Catholicism that acknowledged its ambiguity. G'kar became an exalted spiritual leader. I found the Minbarri's complex notions of religion to be one of the first realistic portrayals of how an advanced alien culture might view religious experience (G'kar himself eventually comes to this view). The episode "Parliament of Dreams" realistically portrays a multicultural religious movement. About the only thing missing from Babylon 5 is a realistic treatment of evangelical religion and Islam. I would argue that historically these two religious movements have faired rather badly at the hands of sci-fi television writers. Fundamentalism in particular, was a target for derision by the writers of STNG and DS9 (anyone remember when Vedek Winn goes "creationist wacko" on Keiko Obrien). Islam, meanwhile, has never been adequately shown in any sci-fi series. Indeed, in sci-fi television, the assumption seems to be that only Christianity (Catholicism and an occasional liberal Protestant) and Judaism exist. Examples of detailed analyses of other religions are rather scare. The Doctor Who episode "Kinda" explores some Buddhist themes, and Star Trek Voyager condescendingly dealt with Native American religion, but overall most sci-fi characters are Christian, secular, New Age, or (on rare occassion) Jewish in outlook. Surely there's enough complexity in the world to now deal with religions other than the traditional ones America has gifted us with. And I also think we need more nuanced treatments of sci-fi fundamentalism, not Stargate SG-1 and DS9, but the reboot of Battlestar Galactica and the excellent Dune miniseries

Top 100 Sci Fi Show List

Check this link for a top 100 sci fi shows. The top 25 are:

25. Terminator series
24. Prisoner
23. Cowboy Bebop
22. Space 1999
21. Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy
20. Farscape
19. V
18. Fringe
17. Stargate SG-1
16. Dollhouse
15. The Tick
14. Futurama
13. DS9
12. Twilight Zone
11. Blake's 7
10. Lost
9. BSG reboot
8. Babylon 5
7. X Files
6. Buffy
5. Max Headroom
4. TNG
3. Firefly
2. Doctor Who
1. Star Trek

My take on the top 25: Overall, this is one of the best of these lists I've seen, though none can be perfect. Firefly I think is rated a little high, though it certainly should be in the top 20, perhaps the top 10. Max Headroom I've not seen, but I'm not quite sure it's a top 10 show, at least in influence. I have no interest in Buffy or Lost, but I admit they may be good shows. It's good to see Blake's Seven and Babylon 5 high on the list. Twilight Zone should obviously be higher, as it is one of the most influential genre shows ever. Farscape too, is rated way too low, as is the Prisoner (the Prisoner should have a real shot at the top 5, both in terms of quality and genre influence). The only real problems I had with the picks was the inclusion of the Tick and Space 1999 in the top 25. The latter, in particular, is nowhere near as good as some of the other series on the list. Also problematic for me is Stargate's position, as I simply did not find it to be a quality show. I'd actually rate Andromeda and Enterprise above it. As for Star Trek and Doctor Who winning the top spots, here's my take. I certainly don't think they're the best series ever aired: Firefly, Babylon 5, BSG, Farscape, The Prisoner, and Max Headroom all had better writing. But in terms of genre influence, they are simply indispensable. I think in the future BSG and B5's influence will lead them to be rated higher in such polls (4th and 3rd respectively). However, I think Blake's Seven, arguably more influential than any series on the list save Star Trek, will never receive its due, because fans don't realize how much Firefly, Farscape, Andromeda, and Babylon 5 borrowed from it.

The collapse of TV Sci-Fi

Excellent article on television science fiction that basically reaches the same conclusion that I have: the golden age of TV-sci fi is over. Nowdays, the genre is dominated almost exclusively by the Sci-fi Channel, a network not known for its propensity for risk. Television science fiction is instead dominated by cheap knock off series, like Stargate Atlantis, quasi-sci Fi like Heroes and Lost, and the occassional gem, like the new Battlestar Galactica. The space opera, as it stands, is practically dead. The last genuine human-alien space opera is now six years old (Enterprise) and the last great space opera (Farscape) even older. So, fans, I suspect it will be a while before we get another five year story arc, if ever.