----- Original Message ----- From: Neil Faulkner N.Faulkner@tesco.net
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
Not racism, surely? According to the episode "Traitor," there existed
the
"stock equalization act," a Federation law
An excellent example of how subcanonical interpretations can be confused with the original canon. Nowhere was it said that the SEA was a
Federation
law. In fact, we get the following:
AVON: That means the Helots are back in the empire. But they aren't the sort to cave in so quickly! It took the Federation years to subdue them on the first expansion.
And then, later:
DAYNA: D'you think I'll pass for a Helot? AVON: No problem. When Helotrix was first settled, the old Stock Equalization Act was still in force. Every Earth race had to be
represented.
That is, Federation conquest came after settlement. The implication is
that
the SEA is not a Federation law at all.
OK, point conceded. Unfortunately I don't have a copy of the episode to hand, so what I was going on here was the Programme Guide.
However, I still think the balance of available evidence does rule against racism, or overt racism anyway. As I said to Dana, Dayna's race is seldom remarked on and when it is, it's not in a fashion which singles it out at all for denigration *or* approval; neither she nor her father give the slightest hint that they have suffered racial persecution (Hal Mellanby is a rebel, but visibly not a Black Panther); Dayna *does* pass on Helotrix without comment. You can then, of course, raise the paucity of Asian/East Asian/Afrocaribbean officers, gentlemen etc. in the Federation, but to be honest, that seems to be the case for the entire galaxy, even independent or rebel planets/outposts-- and may be more evidence of past than of present racism (much as the fact that there are fewer Jews today in certain European countries than fifty years ago gives evidence not necessarily of modern, but of past antisemitism). We're back to the old negative-evidence argument, and I suppose that depends on where you stand on whether not seen=none or not seen=possible (and which, incidentally, goes for homophobia as well, since we don't see evidence for or against).
I'd also raise the fact that even the slight presence of minority actors would likely at the time have given it a very multiracial feel for the 1970s viewer (witness earlier arguments on visible presence of women)-- however, since in this post Neil is arguing entirely from the text and leaving the social context of the production's creation out, leave it out I shall.
However, the fact that it was the Programme Guide that misled me is an interesting one. The Programme Guide is therefore not canon; a point I'd agree with. But what other "official" written materials are not canon?
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com