You’ve heard of the “Bechdel-Wallace test” and its potential value to some people in measuring various media in a given context.

I propose a measure we’ll call the “Captain and Crew Test”…

I was enduring – yes, that’s the word I’ll choose – an episode of a certain Trek show and found myself thinking that I seem to enjoy Star Trek shows where the captain isn’t the center of attention for the continued story, rather the crew as a whole (including the captain as professionally and relatively required) works together on the story of the day or is portrayed in multiple dimensions without the commanding officer present.

So, here’s my attempt at codifying this “Captain and Crew Test”:

  • The episode/show has to have at least two crew members (i.e. not the captain) essential to the story,
  • who interact with each other without the captain,
  • about the story without specific direction from the captain

I think these “rules” could use some adjustment and addition, but I think you get what I’m proposing/suggesting/inciting.

UPDATE 2024-07-04 04:35:34 UTC: Check out the quick and amazing work by @danielquinn@lemmy.ca to compile a subset of the percentage of lines for each character in a few Star Trek shows.

  • Indy@startrek.websiteOPEnglish
    0·
    5 months ago

    Here’s an addendum with a few great episode examples which might pass my “test”.

    • TOS: “Amok Time”, (arguably) “The Galileo Seven”
    • TNG: “Brothers”, “Lower Decks”, “The Measure of a Man”
    • DS9: “It’s Only A Paper Moon”, “Improbable Cause”+“The Die Is Cast”, “The Magnificent Ferengi”

    Other shows also have great episodes that pass, but I want to stop here for my examples so as to avoid showing my hand (too much) and stating which show(s) I think fail.