"This is a question of human rights!"

"They're not human."

- Trip and T'Pol

We call Star Trek a fundamentally optimistic franchise, but that idealism often comes at the expense of realism. Trek stories can have great value as parables, presenting us with an allegory for a social problem and showing how sticking to humanist and humanitarian values can solve the problem in a jiff, but that’s just not how the real world works. If it was, we wouldn’t have to label Trek as optimistic.



“Cogenitor” finds the Enterprise writers wrestling with this. It’s an attempt to come to terms with the idea that Star Trek’s idealism is not truly reflective of the turbulent world that we live in, and it’s well aware that the righteousness of Trek characters can easily be interpreted as hubris.

Star Trek, probably the result of the franchise’s episodic nature; all moral or social problems presented by an episode of Star Trek need to be introduced and resolved in forty-five minutes. Usually, this manifests a Big Important Speech about peace and understanding and not being racist before the ship warps away to its next adventure, never to return. Rarely do we see follow-ups to episodes like those, where the fallout of the ship's visit to these alien cultures can be examined. I mentioned fleetingly in my review of “ The Breach ” that I found it difficult to believe that Phlox’s speech to Hudak would result in any tangible, large-scale change in the relations between their two cultures. This is a common problem in, probably the result of the franchise’s episodic nature; all moral or social problems presented by an episode ofneed to be introduced and resolved in forty-five minutes. Usually, this manifests a Big Important Speech about peace and understanding and not being racist before the ship warps away to its next adventure, never to return. Rarely do we see follow-ups to episodes like those, where the fallout of the ship's visit to these alien cultures can be examined.

(Deep Space Nine was the exception, showing us gradual cultural change in the Bajorans, Cardassians, and Klingons as a result of the show’s events. That show's writers were able to accomplish this because they had the luxury of staying in one place and the wisdom to embrace moderately serialized storytelling.)

Enterprise, “The Breach" warrants a follow-up episode tracing the path of the Phlox-born wave of understanding between Denobulans and Antarans, as well as the struggles that this movement faces in securing that understanding. As it stands, the episode suggests that racism can be cured with a speech. Earlier, “Enterprise’s Klingons, but the episode tries to have us ignore that; the message it sends is very much “one bold move can cure society’s ills.” It’s one of Trek’s central dogmas, and it's part of why these shows can be so inspiring to people in real life.



But while it’s a beautifully optimistic message, this kind of story can be problematic. It’s episodes like these that have earned Trek its reputation for being “preachy.” Our enlightened heroes are always right, and they can fix societal problems with a snap of their Space Fingers. Occasionally, this can result in the characters appearing self-righteous (as in “



Archer's joyride buddy is played by Andreas Katsulas, recognizable to sci-fi fans as Babylon 5's G'Kar

Despite the fact that the Vissians have three genders, "Cogenitor" doesn’t seem to be an episode specifically about LGBT issues. Rather, its aims are much broader: the cogenitors are designed as a stand-in for any oppressed minority. This is important because the point “Cogenitor” is trying to make is universal. To apply this directly to, “The Breach" warrants a follow-up episode tracing the path of the Phlox-born wave of understanding between Denobulans and Antarans, as well as the struggles that this movement faces in securing that understanding. As it stands, the episode suggests that racism can be cured with a speech. Earlier, “ Judgment ” suggested that just one person can effect genuine positive change on a society. We know that Kolos’ efforts to rectify the problems with Klingon society will fail, since the Klingons in Captain Kirk's time are even more guilty of his accusations than’s Klingons, but the episode tries to have us ignore that; the message it sends is very much “one bold move can cure society’s ills.” It’s one of’s central dogmas, and it's part of why these shows can be so inspiring to people in real life.But while it’s a beautifully optimistic message, this kind of story can be problematic. It’s episodes like these that have earnedits reputation for being “preachy.” Our enlightened heroes are always right, and they can fix societal problems with a snap of their Space Fingers. Occasionally, this can result in the characters appearing self-righteous (as in “ Dear Doctor ”) or even imperialistic (as in “ Terra Nova ”) as they impose their values on other cultures. It may work well in a sci-fi parable, but to suggest that you can solve real-world issues with a fancy speech about how your way of thinking is better is borderline irresponsible. “Cogenitor” is a sendup to exactly this problem.Despite the fact that the Vissians have three genders, "Cogenitor" doesn’t seem to be an episode specifically about LGBT issues. Rather, its aims are much broader: the cogenitors are designed as a stand-in foroppressed minority. This is important because the point “Cogenitor” is trying to make is universal.

It's all cleverly designed to play on the audience’s compassion. Surely, everybody watching regarded the Vissians’ treatment of the cogenitors with disgust. Many of us were probably cheering Trip along as he tried to push Charles to reach her potential as a person. Sure, we were aware of the danger that Trip was facing, but this is Star Trek, after all. It seemed par for the course for Trip to help Charles actualize, to learn to read and think for herself, so that by the end of the episode she could go back to Vissia and start a cogenitor rights movement. And then the Enterprise would fly somewhere new next week and we'd never hear from the Vissians again. That's just the Star Trek way.

But the episode’s final scene changes everything. It’s there to tell us: “life isn’t like this.” Cultural change is a messy, protracted thing, and for an outsider to try and spur it on can be dangerous.



At first, this bitter message of non-interference seems like a dangerous re-tread of the controversial “Dear Doctor,” an episode that came to the conclusion that compassion should not be a consideration when dealing with other cultures. It might be easy to interpret “Cogenitor” through the same lens. After all, Trip’s attempts to interfere with Vissian culture resulted in a death and severely damaged relations between Vissia and Earth. But the episode goes out of its way to avoid such a clear-cut lesson. Trip’s actions are admonished because of their consequences and because they involved breaking orders, not because they were wrong. Archer himself admits that he doesn’t know what he would have done in Trip's shoes. The writers present the issue as too complex to have a simple answer, just as it is in real life.





Fun fact: this is the first "sexy cheese-tasting" scene in Trek history

But let's get back to Star Trek. Enterprise’s previous attempts at morality plays have been lacking. “The Breach” presented a black-and-white moral conundrum, where there was no real question of who was right and who was wrong. As I’ve mentioned, “Dear Doctor” posed similar questions to “Cogenitor,” but unlike this episode, it tried to actually answer them. To say that the answer provided by “Dear Doctor” was unpalatable would be an understatement, but the true flaw of that episode was that that answer was painted as absolutely the right decision. The moral framework of Enterprise at the time was unwilling to have our heroes be on the wrong side of a moral debate. There was no room for grey areas, so Archer's decision had to be portrayed as absolutely 100% correct. We can be thankful that has now changed, because by making our heroes fallible and their morality not universal, "Cogenitor" is made that much more compelling. Where “The Breach” had an obvious answer, and “Dear Doctor” came to the wrong answer, “Cogenitor” doesn’t pretend to have answers at all, and it’s all the more powerful for it. This was a timely lesson. With the War on Terror blooming, one of the reasons cited for why America should go into the Middle East was the treatment of women in Islamic fundamentalist regions, particularly in Afghanistan. The Bush administration even attempted to brand the War on Terror as a “fight for the rights and dignity of women.” These women were a repressed minority, kept shut away at home, disallowed to contribute to society, whose only purpose seemed to be in conceiving children. As I mentioned before, the cogenitors were designed to be a catch-all stand-in for any minority, but they seem particularly suited to allegorically represent these women. And just like how none who watched this episode would suggest that the oppression of the cogenitors is morally permissible, very few in the western world argue that the oppression of these women is. But Berman & Braga’s script stresses that, although it is the right thing from the human (western) perspective to “liberate” the cogenitors (oppressed women), care must be taken in how this is done, lest the results be disastrous. This proved sadly and eerily prophetic, as that the United States' headfirst interventionist charge into the Middle East only served to make the situation worse for the women living there by reinforcing stereotypes, decreasing trust in western ideologies, displacing families, and leading to marked increases in violence towards women. Thanks to many painful decades of persistence and bravery from countless Muslim women (and the NGOs that support them), there has been genuine progress made for women's rights in the Middle East recently, but it's hard to argue that the radical interventionism that accompanied the War on Terror helped matters in any way.But let's get back to’s previous attempts at morality plays have been lacking. “The Breach” presented a black-and-white moral conundrum, where there was no real question of who was right and who was wrong. As I’ve mentioned, “Dear Doctor” posed similar questions to “Cogenitor,” but unlike this episode, it tried to actually answer them. To say that the answer provided by “Dear Doctor” was unpalatable would be an understatement, but the true flaw of that episode was that that answer was painted as absolutely the right decision. The moral framework ofat the time was unwilling to have our heroes be on the wrong side of a moral debate. There was no room for grey areas, so Archer's decision had to be portrayed as absolutely 100% correct. We can be thankful that has now changed, because by making our heroes fallible and their morality not universal, "Cogenitor" is made that much more compelling. Where “The Breach” had an obvious answer, and “Dear Doctor” came to the wrong answer, “Cogenitor” doesn’t pretend to have answers at all, and it’s all the more powerful for it.

It’s very telling that “Cogenitor” does not offer answers to the questions it raises. The issue of how to deal with oppression that arises from cultural differences is impenetrably complex. The script tosses the idea of cultural relativism at the audience and asks us what we think of it. Is there a limit to how much another culture’s ideological differences can be tolerated? Trip seems to think so. Even Archer, despite not granting the cogenitor asylum, seems to have mixed feelings about the matter. The script didn’t take a heavy-handed, preachy Star Trek stance on the issue. The script only wants to explore the topic, to get the issues of moral relativism and fighting oppression stirred up in the audience's minds so that they might make their own judgments. We see the problem and, like Trip, start looking for an easy fix. The whammy ending comes with the ultimate message of the episode: there is no magic bullet for societal and cultural problems. Real life is a frustrating, complicated mess of moral greyness.

That’s a surprisingly pessimistic attitude to see coming from Star Trek, but I think “Cogenitor” delivers it with suitably Trek-like sincerity. After all, the message is not that cultural understanding and universal humanism is impossible, just that it isn’t simple. It’s a deconstruction of all of the previous Trek episodes that irresponsibly suggested that a few Shakespearean speeches were the answer. The episode is torn between the franchise's humanist values and the depressing notion that those values might not be realistic – they're ideals to strive for, not practical measures. This is Star Trek soul-searching, one of the most introspective episodes of the entire franchise.

If it isn't clear by now, I think that "Cogenitor" is incredibly thought provoking. After I finished it, I found myself thinking for hours about what I would have done. Where should the line be drawn between culture tolerance and human rights? Even in editing this review, I've been wrestling with where I come down on the issue, and, just like Braga, I don't think I've found a satisfying answer yet. This is challenging television, and I love challenging television.

The script of “Cogenitor” is nothing short of masterful. It plays with the audience’s emotions and knowledge of Trek clichés perfectly. Many will see it coming that Trip’s actions will lead to some negative consequence, and that will surely add to the suspense, but I doubt any first-time viewer will quite be prepared for the sobering gut-punch that is the episode's coda.

Star Trek history. It’s numbingly depressing, played brilliantly by both actors. Trinneer doesn’t turn Trip into a tear fountain, or overact his sorrow, but instead plays an utterly petrified, stunned silence that I’m sure mirrored exactly how many in the audience were reacting. And Bakula does a wonderful job using facial expressions and body language to show that Archer is shouldering much of the blame himself, not only for setting a bad example for Trip to follow, but also for not granting the cogenitor asylum. The look on his face when Trip halfheartedly tries to tell him it wasn’t his fault is just painful.





Star Trek. The best part of how this kind of material executed on In contrast with the dark ending, the majority of “Cogenitor” is enormously pleasant. It hearkens back to early Season 1 scripts like “ Strange New World ,” “ Cold Front ,” and especially “ Breaking the Ice ” in its relaxed pace. It’s day-in-the-life material, and I’ve already gone on record time and time again about how much I like day-in-the-life material in. The best part of how this kind of material executed on Enterprise is how these scripts let us bask in the wonders of space travel. This episode, at least until its final moments, showed us how interesting a peaceful first contact can be. It's just a group of explorers who are genuinely excited about the possibility of cultural exchange, and that's wonderful. Similarly, Archer’s voyage in the stratopod with G’Kar isn’t just there to show us some fancy special effects, it’s there to sell us on the beauty of the cosmos. There's also a C-plot with Malcolm and the Vissian tactical officer, which, while mostly pointless (and mercifully short), does hammer home the idea that meeting new alien races doesn’t have to be a bad thing like it so often is on Trek. It’s a bit lame to see that the Enterprise writers chose to illustrate this point with a sexual encounter, but at least it presents us some interesting dissonance between the sexual attitudes of Vissian women and cogenitors. The final scene between Trip and Archer is one of the most emotionally stunning scenes inhistory. It’s numbingly depressing, played brilliantly by both actors. Trinneer doesn’t turn Trip into a tear fountain, or overact his sorrow, but instead plays an utterly petrified, stunned silence that I’m sure mirrored exactly how many in the audience were reacting. And Bakula does a wonderful job using facial expressions and body language to show that Archer is shouldering much of the blame himself, not only for setting a bad example for Trip to follow, but also for not granting the cogenitor asylum. The look on his face when Trip halfheartedly tries to tell him it wasn’t his fault is just painful.

Archer’s stratopod ride, as I’ve already mentioned, was a delightful bit of peaceful “boldly going,” but it also served a greater purpose: to lull us into a false sense of security. Seeing Archer and G’Kar develop a bond was well done and benefited from some solid chemistry between Bakula and Katsulas, which it makes the sting that much more personal when the ultimate confrontation happens. Instead of a verbal brawl between Captain Archer and some evil, leather-clad baddies of the week, it’s a very uncomfortable, awkward moment where Archer is embarrassed in front of a man who was his friend and who had shown him nothing but generosity. There’s the implication that, in addition to the gut-punch of the cogenitor's death, Earth has lost a potential ally.

“Cogenitor” is entertaining on many levels. It tells a fascinating story with a killer twist, and it's thought provoking not only in an allegorical sense in terms of how it applies to our modern world, but also in a meta-textual sense as a deconstruction of some of Star Trek's longest traditions. It recalls and even exceeds some of Deep Space Nine’s most challenging hours in just how much it pries into the realism, rather than the idealism, of the Trek ethos. It is a dark, numbing episode, but also an excellent one.

This is Enterprise's first indispensable Trek classic.





Episode ReviewSeason 2, Episode 22Enterprise makes first contact with a friendly three-gendered species.