I'm with some of the other folks around here: Pulaski was a better character. Conflict between the ship doctor and the captain makes for more interesting narrative opportunities, and Pulaski was great specifically because she was willing to stand up to Picard and be a pain in the ass.
Fans just didn't like her because she didn't immediately see Data as a person, but even that was interesting because not everyone would, and giving voice to that again created interesting ways to explore the implications of Data's existence.
Fans just didn't like her because she didn't immediately see Data as a person
It wasn't just that she didn't immediately see Data as a person; it's that her first scene was so ham-fisted and poorly written. She made a specific effort to mock something she didn't even think was alive.
It would be equivalent of someone saying "Oh does my car not like that I left my lights on? Could it be that I offended it in some way?" It's an inanimate object, why would you even bother saying that? If you saw someone doing that you would think they are an idiot and an asshole, as they didn't miss an opportunity to be a dick even if the subject is an object performing its function.
I agree, Pulaski was far more interesting than Crusher. Pulaski butting heads with Picard? Going to be a great episode. Pulaski paling around with Geordie and Data? Going to be a great episode. It's just her first scene was so bad that it was memorable, which meant it took time to warm up to her and what she brought to the show.
While i agree with all your points, the way she came across while not seeing Data as a person infuriated me. It's one thing to have a good philosophical debate, as ST fans we love a good debate, but the way she acted with Data just drove me crazy. You can disagree with an idea and not be a bigot.
And yet we know in Measure of a Man that Pulaski was far from unique in her views, and was in fact a) quite tame about it and b) ended up changing her mind, showing on-screen how a person can change in a positive way. That's a far more compelling (and realistic) message than everyone just unquestioningly accepting the one and only android in all of Starfleet holding a senior role on the Starfleet flagship.
Think of it like "The Devil in the Dark". It would've been incredibly boring if everyone just immediately accepted the Horta right off the bat instead of seeing it as an unthinking monster. The journey is in the message that you can come to understand something different from you and accept it not just in spite of those differences but for them.
Everyone simply accepting Data on the Enterprise right off the bat without question was, frankly, lazy writing. And they figured that out eventually, hence episodes like Measure of a Man.
I always felt Pulaski was Bones character all over again. I'm ok with the conflict part but prefer soft spoken character, it blends better with TNG plots full of ethics and moral dilemmas. Bones/Pulaski fit better in an action based series, with no room for psychological introspection and deeper characters.
Besides, they wasted a perfectly good plot twist that Pulaski is actually Thalassa secretly still in Ann Mulhall's body, and that she changed names to hide the slower aging.
I disliked Pulaski because she was written as a Mary Sue.
Picard needs heart surgery? Pulaski is the best heart surgeon in the galaxy. Virus that ages people? Pulaski wrote the definitive paper on Viruses. Riker's dad shows up? Oh Pulaski dated him. Geordi has problems with his visor? Pulaski had done several successful ocular implant surgeries.
It was ridiculous.
You can get away with giving a character one unique ability. But Federation's top heart surgeon, virologist, opthalmologist, and dates Riker's dad is the same person? That's bad writing.
LOL you've described literally every doctor in Star Trek ever. I mean, Christ, they lampshaded this with McCoy when he exclaimed "By golly, Jim - I'm beginning to think I can cure a rainy day!" when he treated a fucking silicon rock monster.
Honestly at this point this is just making up reasons to be mad.
While I agree it is a bit much, I think I'm willing to lessen her sentence because Star Trek: TNG is full on hardcore competency porn. Everyone else on the show is an expert in exochemolinguistics, why shouldn't the chief medical officer of the Federation flagship have six different medical degrees?
A lot of my issue with Pulaski is meta rather than in-universe; I'm not so happy with my understanding of what was going on behind the scenes in seasons 1 and 2, why McFadden and Crosby left among them. And something about trying to play it safer with Bones McCoy 2.0 feels slightly cynical?
Unpopular opinion, but I liked Pulaski. She didn't put up with bullshit, but she was also one of the only characters to actually have legitimate growth over the course of their time on the show, going from not respecting Data's sovereignty as a person to understanding why he was one.
And she was Star Trek alum. The only regular on TNG that had also been on the Original Series.
Pulaski was indeed good. But Crusher was better. Especially the v1.5 character that came back to the show. Full Commander, command experience, clever as fuck (solving actual murders and conspiracies), not being a doe-eyed soccer mom all the time.
Apart from the infamous candle fucking, her episodes are among the best of the series.
+1 for Pulaski being a good chief medical officer. Personally, I would prefer her to Crusher, were I staffing a ship. (Nothing wrong with Crusher, I just like the cut of Pulaski's jib a little more.)
Edit: note that in real life McFadden strikes me as an absolute badass in a way they never let her character be.
Holy crap, originalucifer, I understood that reference. Muldaur's character Roz Shays was killed off in LA Law that way...by inadvertently walking into an empty elevator shaft! The character was prickly and not well-liked, but it was shocking AF because it was in the middle of a scene and came out of nowhere. Shit, I haven't thought about that for a while.