It may not be fair to evaluate the legacy left behind of this series: after all-- it hasn't even concluded yet-- however, as a series, DS9 leaves behind much that is already ripe for analysis.

DS9's success as a series can be considered on many levels: its success at telling a story over seven years; its success at carrying the mantle as a distinctly different, yet distinctly Star Trek series set in the Alpha Quadrant; it's success at establishing memorable characters; and its success from a business point of view.

I will readily admit my own bias.  (That would make sense considering that this is what this article is about, after all.)  I am one who adored DS9 in it's first five seasons, (particularly seasons 3-5) but found myself very disappointed by season six and seven, for reasons that I hope will be clearly outlined here, while still maintaining an objective point of view and while still trying to make this, in part, a retropsective of DS9 as a whole.  A tough task.

Throughout the past six-and-a-half years, DS9 has been a series of, and about contradictions.

Hailed by most mainstream critics as being the "ugly duckling" of the Trek franchise, on-line, you would be hard pressed to find serious sentiment against it.  Hard-core DS9 fans are prominent and strongly opinionated, to the extent that an objective, balanced view of the series on the internet is sometimes an elusive thing-- often obscured by an abundance of pro-DS9 hyperbole.  Opinion summaries often over inflate the quality of what DS9 does, over-emphasizes the importance and dramatic quality of what it achieves.  To many, saying you don't like DS9 is often akin to telling people you aren't a fan of Star Wars (especially this year).

Unlike some of the other Trek spinoffs, there's a defensiveness associated with DS9's fandom.  That's only natural, perhaps-- after all, the show came under attack from virtually all quarters during it's run.  Among them, the media, those who did not think that the station-based concept lived up to Trek expectations, not to mention the attacks the show recieved from those behind another station based sci-fi show on the air.

In some respects, it's time for a few people to stand up and put the show in it's proper perspective.  To set the record straight:  DS9 was, at times, a strongly powerful series with compelling characters and intriguing situations.  At times it was also loyal to the original tenets of Star Trek ideology.  But it  must also be said that there were times when DS9 was creatively confused, where the quality of the scripts were all over the map and where there were characters whose motivations and characteristics shifted week to week to accomodate plot requirements.  It was also a show that at times, discarded or turned against creative elements which had made the show so strong in the first place, in favor of introducing new, and increasingly more bizarre, concepts.

In other words, DS9 as a series was as complex and as multi-layered as the galaxy it tried to present.  There's no simple judgement to be made on DS9.  It had it's strengths and it's weaknesses.  For some reason, many consider it impossible to have loved the show but still be able to acknowledge and discuss the show's flaws.

Like the other Trek shows that came before it, DS9 has it's own set of myths surrounding it, emanating from within the fandom.  The most popular, perhaps, is that because of it's continuing storylines, its often percieved as being the most consistent series with the Trek canon (while sister series Voyager, which ran concurrently with DS9 for five years, comes off poorly in comparison.)

That's a case of popular myth, of course-- in reality, DS9 has had more than it's fair share of inconsistencies (to name just a few, the change in the nature of the Wormhole species, Kai Winn's abrupt turn against the Prophets, all of "Wrongs Darker than Death or Night", not to mention the implausibility of the Dominion War given the stated strength of the Cardassian-Dominion alliance... the three greatest powers of the Alpha Quadrant consistently losing the war against a third rate empire that was virtually conquered two years earlier by Klingons and terrorists?  Even with limited Dominion re-inforcements, this seems unlikely.)

So from different sectors, DS9 has both been praised and reviled.  Depending on who you ask on any given day at any given time, you're likely to get starkly different reactions regarding the series.  Perhaps that's it's greatest strength:  that within the public, DS9 consistently excites reactions within people-- whether intensely positive, intensely negative or intensely apathetic.  Whatever the feeling, people usually have a reason why they feel that way and are willing to argue it.

In general though, the praise for DS9 has typically come for it's darker, continuing storylines and it's character development.  The disapproval comes for it's corruption of the Federation, it's abrupt character shifts, bizarre twists and it's lack of exploration and human discovery-- in other words, the core basis of what makes Trek Trek.

It's hard to judge DS9 and it's impact on the Trek franchise as a series whole.  Each season was so distinctly different that to get an accurate perception one must look at them one by one.

The first two seasons can be virtually linked together:  DS9's original premise of the Federation on the frontier, bringing in new races in to the union.  Given the frontier lore of the American continent there were significant parallels to draw here and intriguing stories to tell involving the Federation and the "natives" of this region: the peaceful Bajorans and cunning Cardassians-- both complex cultures with conflicting and believable motivations.   Coupled with the parallels to the "ancient" west, DS9 dealt with storylines not only of terrorism but restoring a newly sovereign territory.  In it's first two years, DS9 shone with stories depicting real Bajoran political and religious strife, a people coming to terms with it's independence after forty years of occupation; and struggled with telling sci-fi stories with it's stationary setting and establishing strong personalities for it's characters.

The third season corrected the errors of the first two by introducing the Defiant, which enormously helped in terms of the series' mobility; allowing the cast to occasionally venture off elsewhere, to seek out new life, or just to boldly go where ever they wanted to (as the often did in this season).  Meanwhile, back on the station the chemistry between the characters was beginning to click.  Like TNG, the third season was one in which DS9 "gained it's wings".  This season where DS9 broke itself away from the Trek formula of TNG and TOS and distinguished a unique identity for itself.  The show was willing to take risks: it was willing to take the characters further and it was willing to introduce background storylines which didn't conclude within the hour.

The material introduced during this season set the stage for some strong episodes over the next few years about the apprehensions of the possibility of invasion: in them, DS9 explored what people will do to prevent war and the mentality of those who have to prepare for it.  The third season was also balanced:  The Dominion, sci-fi, character and Bajor stories got equal coverage.

By season four, with the introduction of Worf, DS9 took a turn in to Klingon affairs.  The introduction of a limited war to the Alpha Quadrant allowed DS9 to take it's best look at what warfare is like.  Also significant was how strong character relationships became during this season, and how they were rapidly becoming the core foundation of the series.  Bajor, however, disappeared almost completely from view in this year.

The fifth season was arguably the peak of DS9: the culmination of all the different elements DS9 had experimented with in it's preceding years.  There were a number of powerful Bajoran stories, coupled with intriguing political shifts and movement on the Dominion warline.  New villains came to the forefront, and character relationships were continuously growing stronger.  There was a mix of everything, including strong humor and science fiction.  This season juggled all these elements adeptly, establishing a fair balance of consistently well told, intelligent stories featuring a core ensemble that was a pleasure to visit week after week.

For me, the final two years of DS9 blunted much of what it had achieved in the first five:  main characters were often pushed to the background (sometimes, in the case of Worf, O'Brien, Quark and Jake) for weeks-- if not months-- at a time.  In contrast, minor or recurring characters would recieve an undue amount of emphasis.    In the seventh season, Jake barely appeared at all; Worf went MIA after "Once More Unto the Breach" until "Penumbra" and the most focus O'Brien recieved was the B-plot of "Prodigal Daughter".  In contrast, Nog received many of his own episodes, and time crucial to developing story was consistently cut out of episodes for a musical performance by Vic Fontaine.

The final two seasons lost a sense of direction and cohesion.  It also lost the sense of family. 

DS9's character weakness was that as a whole, it was a show about some people who are in cliques and the focus was on how the cliques intersect.  The depiction was not a crew that appreciated each other and enjoyed each other's presence-- and to an extent, considered the others to be family, as all other Trek series have done.  It's one thing to have a different dramatic focus: it's quite another to have a crew that is disjointed and for the most part, still acquaintaces rather than friends by the end of the series.

While there were many compelling character stories in the final two seasons, this failure came off making the show feel hollow.  While the development of so many characters is admirable, it's disappointing when you find that there's so much that still needs to be done with the regular characters by the end of the series.  DS9's interest in character development proved to be it's greatest strength and also a terrible weakness.

DS9's dramatic integrity was also compromised in the last two seasons by bizarre gimmicks and twists needed to propel the storyline.  Could you imagine, in the first season (or even the fifth, for that matter) that Kira would find out that Dukat was her mother's lover?  (And in command of Terok Nor fifteen years before he even arrived at Bajor and five years before the station was even built, no less!)  That Sisko was intentionally concieved by wormhole aliens (who, in the pilot seemed disoriented and nearly completely unaware of the existence of linear beings)?  That Dukat could be at times sane, insane and a religious leader?  That Ezri would inexplicably fall in love with Julian?  That the affairs of the Alpha Quadrant would be dictated by voodoo dolls?  That Bajor's affairs would be dictated by a magic spell book, complete with pages that flame with fire?

One by one, more ridiculous ideas came to the front, bending believability, continuity and plausibility.

Why did DS9 vary so much season to season?  Was it a case of schizophrenia?  A case of self-doubt forcing the producers to re-tool the show every year because of it's status as "Trek ugly duckling"?

I'm not sure, although in the long run I think we got a "flavor of the season" approach to much of DS9.  That's not to say that it was a bad thing, simply to say that the approach existed.  Indeed, I enjoyed much of what I got from DS9.

A final decision on DS9 must also be a final judgement on the so-called "War Arc", the last two seasons.  It was, after all, the storyline which recieved the most attention throughout the duration of the series.  It was a late addition to the series which affected the ways in which we saw the characters of DS9.  It's fair to say that the War was DS9's own chosen storyline.

What is frustrating about DS9 for many people was it's casting aside of everything that made DS9 unique in it's early seasons.  It's nice that DS9 tried it's hand at being about so many things, but it could also be considered a failing when the show's original concept becomes completely cast aside and forgotten.  The complete memory wipe of DS9's original mission-- to bring the Federation to the Frontier hurts the way we look at the series' effectiveness as a whole.

DS9 earns credit for having a continuing story that (although it probably should have picked one and stuck to it, since it's original, Bajor, was abandoned).  It achieved it's chosen mission: it won the war, but not it's original misison.  As such, as DS9 comes to an end, it's hard to escape a sense of failure.

Another important element in judging DS9 as a series was whether, it was indeed, a Trek series:

DS9 endorsed policies other Trek series would have abhorred:  bringing the Romulans in to the war was certainly a war crime, yet for Starfleet this was acceptable behaviour and war time tactics.

Indeed, this aberration of behaviour was not simply limited to Starfleet in wartime, but as episodes such as "Inquisition", "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" established, something that has been going on since the Federation's inception, (like it or not, Jim Kirk).

Did this add something to the Federation and the vision of optimism Star Trek has stood up for throughout TOS, TNG, Voyager, and the early days of DS9? 

If not, on a "spiritual" level, can DS9 be considered a Star Trek series at all? 

The alternative is that DS9 was simply a non-Star Trek show set in the universe Star Trek established.  What is, and what is not, Star Trek is an important distinction.   Despite the defense of the show by some producers that Star Trek stands for a lot of things, clearly there has been a philosphy connected to the show since it's earliest days which advocated non-violent resolution to conflicts, was distinctly anti-war, and established a vision that in the future, there is hope.  Something that even in these days, we see little of from the popular media.

DS9 matched few of these criteria: when faced with war, DS9's crew strived to be as bad, if not worse as their enemies, yet hypocritically condemned the moves of Agency Section 31.  Manifestation of the ideals of Starfleet and the Federation existed in Bashir, certainly, and to an extent Worf, but DS9 often showed a crew willing to compromise principles to suit their interests.  Sisko's actions were consistently debatable, yet the character was portrayed as being beyond rapproach.

Not to sound entirely negative; there were many, many strengths of DS9-- the acting was strong and the ensemble is arguably Trek's best.  The effects and production was also some of the finest Trek has ever seen.

DS9 is certainly the most lush of the Trek series; it's attention to detail is second to none.  It's risks and general character development were incredibly strong assets.  Unlike most TV and film, the villains were typically portrayed as being neither completely good nor bad, but existing within shades of gray.  This is the biggest disappointment of the last two seasons, which saw the villification of Dukat and Winn-- DS9's most interesting and complex villains.  Instead of the intelligent, multi-layered, thought-provoking illustration of humanity and good vs. evil, the show descended to clicheed portrayals of villains-- disappointing given DS9's legacy of dimensionality.

With all that taken in to account, DS9 leaves at it's worst:  with five excellent seasons under it's belt, the lasting impression is of a show that strived to fully explore themes unique to the show: to explore individual characters, to explore morality-- many of the things DS9 accomplished are what Star Trek is all about.  The lasting impression is of a strong series that leaves an unfortunate aftertaste nonetheless.

In it's first five seasons, DS9 was consistently and enlightening, intelligent series.  In it's last two years, the show struggled but still produced many fine episodes.  For me, my time with DS9 was worthwhile.  I think I simply may have requested a transfer in it's final two years.