Must agree. It's similar to how The Mandalorian allows Star Wars fans to enjoy the SW universe again, without having to worry about how the mainline story (i.e. VII, VIII and IX) went, and how they felt about it.I'm really starting to see the error of my criticism of the series. Even If I didn't care for it at first, I realize now that making the show radically different in tone, and style from the past Star Trek series was a great start to distancing itself. And now especially true. It cant help but be original, because there is no blueprint for the structure of where it is currently.
Would I still love the "comfort food" of past Trek formula and resolution, even though the well is about dry?
Absolutely. But maybe 'Strange New Worlds' will provide that.
I for one rather enjoyed all three of the new ST shows (Discovery, Picard, and Lower Decks), all in different ways.
I have to agree less-than-perfect heroes does make it more dramatically interesting: one case in point being The Expanse, even if we're 'conditioned' to root for the crew of the Roci as they're the protagonists we're meant to follow.Which saddens to no end.
However I agree with your analysis, Star Trek today - and most popular culture - features less than ideal characters, which makes for more dramatically interesting characters but not ones to idolize. How the MCU was able to make Captain America such a dramatically rich character and one to admire is a fantastic writing and acting feat, especially in these times.
Saru is the most idealistic character on Discovery and by no coincidence my favorite.
More interestingly, though, is that I find I have no idea which "side" I'm supposed to root for in Raised By Wolves. I can see/understand the POV of both "sides", but it's hard to say I know which "side" I am for, or indeed I'm supposed to be for.