Star Trek

No. It fits Captain Angel's perspective as an edgy pirate pining after their lover, but Starfleet is full of hopeful, enthusiastic scientists who are in space because they want to be. They love exploration for exploration's sake, and are on a ship full of people who likely have similar interests.

Angel's perspective is warped by their passion; I mean, they're literally in the middle of hijacking a Starfleet ship to get their lover back. They think their dependency on love is universal, when in reality most people are more emotionally stable than them. Although it probably helps when you're in Starfleet and have an incredibly supportive working environment and not, you know, a pirate crew.

Well that, and a hot drink. Tea, earl grey perhaps?

An atmosphere helps though

I had a hard time liking this character just because she seemed mostly there to advance the love triange plot and love triangles are so boring to me.

Doubt any of us could really say, as we haven't spent much time in space.

Any one who has, please speak up.

Full disclosure, I am not an astronaut, nor do I have full context behind the quote. I think that curiosity and exploration would help. Also, warp drive made all those planets a whole lot less lonely

Depends on what we mean by "space", but IMO this sentiment is much more contemporary than what someone living in the space-based luxury we see from Starfleet would think.

CATS. CATS ARE NICE.

Yes, but only because starships don’t have holodecks yet when this takes place.

it’s pretty hot anywhere near a star, tho

Someone's never had garlic bread, I see.

Love and drugs yeah. I think she is onto something

I dunno, drugs are pretty good at doing that.

I dunno lady, have you tried sitting in the ships sweet spot?

What if love is the only thing that transcends the dimensions of space and time?

Honestly I feel like most of NuTrek is overseen by people who never really liked star trek in the first place and were tasked with watering down the IP into lowest common denominator mass market schlock instead of expanding on the series.

It didn't help that when Discovery came out the majority of reviewers clearly knew extremely little about the Star Trek as a whole. I remember reading an article on how Discovery breaks ground for female characters in Star Trek, who previously have been stereotyped to caregiving roles.

I was not a fan of SNW season 1. It felt like it focused on visuals and recycled a bunch of low effort cliches for the plot. They also seemed to try to rush character development in a way that felt completely unearned.

However, I loved SNW season 2. It's the first show I felt was a true modern successor for Star Trek. While not perfect, it managed to do a great job taking classic themes of star trek and updating them to the modern era. I consider "Under the Cloak of War" an all time Star Trek great. Also season 1 being bad actually makes it feel more like Star Trek.

So to answer your question: No. This is incredibly stupid. While the words were by a villain, it implied that there was a lot of truth to them. There are many ways to lead a fulfilling life without (romantic) love. There are many things in the galaxy beyond coldness. This has been well established by Star Trek and demonstrated by multiple characters in multiple series.

Also, they should give whoever writes lower decks a serious show. They clearly have an extremely deep understanding of Star Trek and have done a good job developing characters.

Q agrees