Why Star Trek?
| Meta | |
|---|---|
| Title: | Why Star Trek? |
| Creator: | Leslie Fish |
| Date(s): | August 1976 |
| Medium: | |
| Fandom: | Star Trek: TOS |
| Topic: | |
| External Links: | |
| Click here for related articles on Fanlore. | |
Why Star Trek? is a 1976 essay by Leslie Fish.
It was printed in Stardate #10.
Some Topics Discussed
- Gene Roddenberry knows how to pick good actors
- the show had good production values and the fans recognize this
- Roddenberry knew how to tap into science fiction and find good writers
- Starfleet and Star Trek exist in a military that is liberal and more relatable/attractive
- Star Trek presents an optimistic future
- Space: 1999 gets kicked around twice
From the Essay
Why STAR TREK, indeed? If you're of a fanatical turn of mind, there are plenty of other subjects to snag your attention: radical politics, or far-out religions, for example. Even if you prefer the specialized realm of Science Fiction-in-Film, there are plenty of other movies and TV programs to absorb your interest: 2001 , The Bionic Woman, and even, Ghu help
us, Space: 1999. So we're back where we started. Why all the widespread interest specifically in STAR TREK? Just what does this program have going for it that can seduce so many intelligent and enthusiastic people?
The difference between STAR TREK and other TV series really becomes notice able when we begin to look at underlying ideas inherent in the series. First of all, STAR TREK really did have some underlying ideas, not just TV-standard cliches. It depicts a future society with some refreshingly advanced basic assumptions: all intelligent beings are equal and bigotry of any kind is despised, all new societies are to be approached with respect and peaceful intentions, all societies have equal rights to their own chosen direction of development, and war is an abhorrent last resort rather than a common tool of politics. The very idea that these could be the basic ideals of a vast star-spanning society is extremely advanced, even for "mainstream" Science Fiction. How many SF films and books and stories, even those that are rated high in quality by SF fans and writers, assume that future society will be just as ignorant, tyrannical and warlike as societies are today? Roddenberry has made an incredible jump into future thinking by insisting that civilizations can learn and grow and progress past such evils; the STAR TREK view of the future is an amazingly optimistic--and yet realistic--one. Consider: the Enterprise is a Federation warship, the equivalent (as Roddenberry often pointed out} of a big Navy battleship today. James T. Kirk is a 22nd Century Navy Captain, and is crew are all Navy, i.e., military personnel. Remember that the military (particularly the Navy!) has always been the most socially and politically conservative group in any society. Yet the crew of the Enterprise act and think like the better class of Liberals today!
This progressive and optimistic thinking becomes even more noticeable in the specific ideas that each script deals with. Individual episodes wrestle with some amazing concepts: When is war necessary? ("A Private Little War") Under what conditions is it right to change someone else's society? ("The Apple", "Return of The Archons") How lenient can you afford to be with an enemy? ("The Lights of Zetar11, "Arena") Just how much difference is there between a children and an adults? ("Miri", "And The Children Shall Lead", "Charlie X", "The Squire of Gothos"} What is the nature of love? ("Metamorphosis", "Is There in Truth No Beauty") What is the essential difference between a person and a machine? ("What Are Little Girls Made Of?", "Requiem for Methuselah") And so on. STAR TREK scripts wrestle with some amazingly big ideas--bigger than you'll find in most SF films.
Finally we get into the area of characterization, where the difference really stands out. Look carefully at the STAR TREK characters, regulars and one-shots; they are all complex yet understandable, interesting blends of desirable and undesirable characteristics, deep-minded and broad-minded and essentially (as Spock would put it) logical in their behavior patterns. Most SF film characters simply are not nice people, while the STAR TREK characters are generally admirable characters. Roddenberry's basic attitude seems to be that future Humanity will be people like ourselves, only better--a little wiser, a little gentler, a little more open-minded, a little more willing to regard each other with respect and even love--and this shows constantly in the interaction of the characters throughout the entire series. The deep friendship between Kirk and Spock and McCoy, for example, is a rare and priceless gem among literary relationships--particularly in Science Fiction, and especially in SF filmdom. I think it's this, more than any other element, which has inspired the tremendous outpouring of unusually high-quality STAR TREK fan literature that has so surprised the industry (and so delighted Ballantine Books. Can you imagine anyone getting this seriously involved with the personalities of the Space: 1999 Alphans? It would take a lot of work!
In the end, besides the rare quality of the production, acting and scripts, I think that the root of STAR TREK's appeal lies in its thoughtful and hopeful picture of the future. It shows us a civilization that is not only technologically but socially advanced, populated by intelligent, free-minded people. It's a splendid vision of tomorrow, and I think we'd all like to live there.