Podcast 30: Shamefully returning to what Joey wants

Annals of the Homestarmy

Monday, August 17. 2009

Posted by Radar in Podcast

Comments (15)
Trackbacks (0)

Podcast 30: Shamefully returning to what Joey wants

As Joey likes to put it, the experiment failed. We have moved back to our 4 television episode per podcast format. I was really hoping that we could shorten the podcast length but it seems that it does not matter how many Next Generation television episodes we cover we still seem to end up over 2 hours. Oh well it was worth a try. We were pleased to have Jared pop in on us this week to lend his assistance on Ethics. And we also had lots of listener comments (thanks to Listener Jim, My Friend Jon Madsen, Simon, and Julia). This podcast covers episodes 13-16 of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Season 5.

Various topics discussed in this podcast include:
    JC Hutchins 7th Son Novel
    Welcome to listener Julia
    Genetically Engineering things: Sharktopus and Humans
    What wins: Rights of the one, Or, the Good of society?
    Granting Asylum
    Passionate street sweepers
    Rabbits and Pregnancy Tests: Who came up with this one?
    Stump Jared: TW5 3, Jared 1
    Assisted Suicide
    Moral Absolutes: 2+2≠4
    Medical testing: What is too far?

Direct MP3 Download
RSS Feed
Subscribe Using iTunes

Here are the ratings that we gave for each show:

The Masterpiece Society: 51min 49sec
Peter: SciFi - 8 Television - 5
Joey: SciFi - 8 Television - 3

Conundrum: 17min 53sec
Peter: SciFi - 6 Television - 4
Joey: SciFi - 7 Television - 6

Power Play: 19min 06sec
Peter: SciFi - 5 Television - 3
Joey: SciFi - 6 Television - 3

Ethics: 1hr 18min 02sec
Peter: SciFi - 4 Television - 6
Joey: SciFi - 3 Television - 8
Jared: SciFi - 2 Television - 7

If you have something to say then we welcome your comments below, or feel free to email us at [email protected], twitter us at hashtag TrekWest5, or leave us a voicemail at 801-788-4913.

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Daboo on :

I know you guys aren't going to change your format, but I have to say I really preferred the fewer episodes per podcast because you were able to go into more depth on the interesting questions and discussions that the episodes raise. IMO, the writers and creators of TNG really wanted their audience to think deeply about the show and the moral dilemmas they present speak to that. Those are by far the most interesting parts of the podcast, and when you're cutting off discussion to squeeze four episodes in you kind of work against that feeling. If it were me, I'd try two.

The Mad Giggler on :

This coincides with my remark from a few podcasts ago.

Ancient of Days on :

Indeed it does, but I think you're both INSANE. I can't think of a single time in the past 2-3 months where we've ended a conversation because we were worried about the length of the conversation - if we were going to do that, we wouldn't be publishing podcasts that are 2-3 hours long!

So could one [or both] of you point to a conversation where we did that? Because I'm having trouble matching what you're hearing with what we recorded. :)

The Mad Giggler on :

In your last podcast with Anne, I specifically recall an interesting conversation bewteen Joey and Anne being cut short by Peter. He said the phrase, "Let's get back to Star Trek." Frankly, I don't believe I'm your audience, because I don't listen to your podcasts for Star Trek.

Ancient of Days on :

The podcasts aren't really supposed to be "about Star Trek", so I'm glad that's not why you're listening. Star Trek is just a vehicle for directing our weekly conversation. :)

The Mad Giggler on :

Your choice to increase the number of episodes per podcast is in direct contrast to your statement that the show is not about Star Trek.

To wit:

(1) You have a limited amount of time in which to record your podcast.

(2) You always seem to fill that time regardless of whether you do two episodes or five.

(3) Adding more episodes means increasing the amount of time spent talking directly about Star Trek because you must at the very least set apart time for discussing plot summaries and episode ratings.

Therefore, adding more episodes per podcast by definition means more Star Trek and less "interesting" stuff.

Ancient of Days on :

My argument is that the number of episodes we have to discuss NEVER affects how much time I spend discussing the "interesting stuff" - if the podcast needs to be 17 hours long for me to feel like I've covered the topic, I *will* deliver you a 17 hour podcast.

As for wanting to do more episodes per podcast, it's actually a direct result of my desire to get through Star Trek in fewer podcasts so that we can move to Babylon 5. :)

The Mad Giggler on :

/sigh

Daboo on :

Why did you even decide to do TNG then? Why not just start with Babylon 5?

Radar on :

Because 5 West Trek, sounds stupid.

Jim on :

I think the show works well with four episodes per podcast. While the show isn't about Star Trek, it is about the ideas presented in the show. I've never felt that the show ended abruptly, or a discussion for that matter. Sometimes discussions are incomplete, but this comes more from the nature of conversation wherein an important point is overlooked as the conversation moves in a different direction. After every discussion I've ever had, I wished I'd remembered to talk about something or brought in a point I didn't think of at the time.

Jim on :

Rabbit: See _Fatal Attraction_, wherein an obsessed Glenn Close boils the family rabbit. I should have been more clear. My apologies.

Radar on :

Ah. My parents never let me watch that movie. And by the time I was old enough to be able to, I just didn't want to. Sorry we didn't get the pop-culture reference. Where is my friend Jon Madsen when we need him.

Ancient of Days on :

I have also never seen Fatal Attraction - it's one of those that has perennially been on my "should probably get to that someday" list. Thanks for clearing that up!

Jim on :

Joey, I don't think that the "masterpiece" society was destined for death with the leaving of fifty people. Perhaps I missed that line. What I got was that their way of life was being threatened; they'd be missing perfectly engineered engineers. They'd have to settle for those whose natural talent was perhaps less and I guess would have to work harder in school. The lament of Picard doesn't seem to be about the colony dying (or else he'd just not bring anyone aboard) but that their lifestyle is in jeopardy. The perfect world created by breeding and indoctrination is threatened by the cultural contamination of the Enterprise crew. To me this was the same problem as with "Pen Pals". Lives are counted for less than the culture when the Prime Directive is interpreted in this manner. But, I may have overlooked a line about impending death to the Moabites.

Add Comment

Name

Homepage

Comment

In reply to

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA