I say that I want it to be grander, because I feel that it would have been more meaningful to see Kirk dying to protect the Federation or something of that nature. Something that has more meaning to the character, I think that makes for better story-telling. It is why Khan was a great villain, it was personal to Kirk and that made the story all the richer.
But Jim Kirk was not the kind of person who would care less for the lives of strangers than for the lives of people he cared about. It's the sheer selflessness of the sacrifice, the fact that he had nothing personal at stake but still chose to give his all for the greater good, that makes it more meaningful to me.
Now Chris, you have been on the boards a long time. I think you have a problem trying to be right all the time and not respecting people's opinions.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but that's not my intent. I thought that was what people did when they had differing opinions: they shared them with each other, debated with each other so they could both have something to think about -- and, in a public forum like this, so that its audience will be able to hear all sides of a given issue. Respecting someone's right to their opinion doesn't mean you can't offer a differing opinion. All I'm trying to do is contribute to the discussion by offering an alternative perspective.
When I write a book, I often find it quite interesting to write debates between characters who have opposing viewpoints, and it can be fascinating to get into the heads of characters whose opinions I would personally disagree with. In fact, I sometimes find that the characters whose views are most alien to me are the ones who turn out the richest and most intriguing -- perhaps because I don't take their points of view for granted and make an extra effort to figure out how they could sincerely believe as they do. So it's the debate itself, the airing of multiple points of view, that's of worth to me. So in a BBS context, that often leads me to respond to the airing of one point of view by offering an opposing point of view, just so both sides will be in play.
But I have to admit, I can see how that could be frustrating to others. I think I picked up the tendency from my father, who was always quick to offer an opposing viewpoint to an opinion I expressed -- not out of hostility, but simply because it was his nature, perhaps our family's nature, to think critically and question everything. And I know I often got tired of that and wished he could just agree with me every once in a while. But if he had, maybe he wouldn't have challenged me to think as much.