Rest in Peace: Live in Our Hearts
| Meta | |
|---|---|
| Title: | Rest in Peace: Live in Our Hearts |
| Creator: | Judith Yeatman |
| Date(s): | June 1984 |
| Medium: | |
| Fandom: | Star Trek: TOS |
| Topic: | |
| External Links: | |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
Rest in Peace: Live in Our Hearts is a 1984 essay by Judith Yeatman printed in the New Zealand zine Nome v.2 n.8.
Some Topics Discussed
- the death of Spock in the recent movie
- emotional trickery
- the "American desire" to not want to see characters die
- what do fans want from the Star Trek franchise?
- the reality of death
The Essay
Whether or not to kill off Spock, that is the question. No, we all shouted when the possibility was first mentioned. Paramount went ahead and killed him anyway. However, with the detestable rumours and half-truths which had been circulating, and with Spock being an American television hero, and American television heroes tending not to die as they do, the death was unconvincing for some. I, for one, did not cry, because I did not believe.
Now the rumour is that Spock is not really dead. Well, we knew it all along, and we say hurrah. But what.are we thinking of, we 'Star Trek' fans of the world? ; What is it that we want anyway?
I am led to believe that what the majority of "Star Trek" fans want is this: 'Star Trek' should continue as a series of films to be released at approximately 18-month intervals. The 'Enterprise' should remain at the centre of 'Star Trek' and her main crew members should remain; until they die of old age that is. 'Geriatrics in Space'? What then? Do the younger crew members move up and take over the main positions or does 'Star Trek' just stop its screen life and live on in books and fanzines?
After fighting for over 10 years to get 'Star Trek' back on celluloid.. and succeeding, surely we do not want to let its screen career end. Why try to keep 'Star Trek: as close to what it was in the television series as possible? Couldn't it still be 'Star Trek' without Spock, Kirk, and McCoy? It is my contention that it could be 'Star Trek', could be at least as good if not better.
Surely we have the foresight to see that, to stay alive, things must grow, and to grow they must change. Think of the fans-to-be. Think of ourselves in our old age, enjoying a different but still-living 'Star Trek'. It is theoretically possible for 'Star Trek' to continue to live on screens, and their future replacements, forever, or at least as long as the human adventure continues.
I don't necessarily hold with putting big-name stars in the main roles, although it could be successful if done carefully. Neither do I hold with replacing all of the main characters at once. The Kirk/Spock/ McCoy triangle, especially, needs to be handled with care. It is strong and contains a magic balance which holds all of 'Star Trek' together. It is the main spirit of 'Star Trek' and if it is ever lost, 'Star Trek' may well die. However, it must be possible to transfer that spirit, gradually, into another group of entities where it can continue to thrive, having been given new blood.
There is probably no reason to move totally away from the adventures of the 'Enterprise' since the ship can be revamped every few years, but it would not hurt to also show parts of the voyages of other Federation ships and there are so many aspects of Star Fleet, the United Federation of Planets, and the whole 'Star Trek' universe which we have not yet seen, possibly because we have so far been confined to what the 'Enterprise' and her crew experience.
I do not care terribly much, though, how the continuance of 'Star Trek' is managed, as long as it is done very well; just as I did not care terribly much how Spock was to meet his end. After all, people do not always die heroically in real life and it would not hurt for 'Star Trek' to resemble real life a bit more closely. Sure, 'Star Trek' is our fantasy, our dream of what the world could, and may, be like some day, but one very important ingredient that makes 'Star Trek' so good is that it is believable. Whatever is done to the 'Star Trek' entity, the believability must remain strong.
I have got away from Spock's death a bit here, but Spock's death could be, in fact should be, the first step to be taken in the growth of 'Star Trek'. It should be the first because it is the most difficult.
I plead with Paramount not to bring Spock back to life. Let him live on in people's minds, still very much the half-Vulcan hero that he is. Otherwise you will be fooling the fans into believing that death on the screen, and perhaps even in real life, is never real or final. The fans will be as Kirk was, never having faced death. But, worse than that, you will lose your credibility with fans. They will cease to believe what you have to say. And that, surely, would be a very bad thing.