Gene Roddenberry takes credit for everything.

[EnriqueH]

I've been hearing this for a while now from members of this community and I've also heard through the grapevine on occasion as well.

Does anyone have any attribution to this?

I'm curious to read/see/listen to these occasions where Gene has, allegedly, taken credit for other writers' work.

See, the problem I have with it is that EVERY Roddenberry interview I've read/seen/listened to in the past year does feature a Roddenberry that DOES give credit to other writers.

Now, I'm not saying it didn't happen, but given the relentless accusations always being bandied about regarding Gene's reputation for taking credit, I'm surprised I haven't yet run into an interview or magazine article that SPECIFICALLY shows me that Gene did this.

Can anyone enlighten me?

 

[Lance]

Sometimes it wasn't about his actually taking credit, but more about the original author's integrity.

Early TNG in particular suffered from Roddenberry's pen. I've got a book ('Making The Next Generation' by Edward Gross and Mark Altman) which looks at the growing pains of that first season, and publishes synopsies of the first season episodes in various stages of their development, signalling out particularly how the deaded "Roddenberry Rewrites" substantively destroyed a number of the episodes.

The clearest one was 'The Naked Now', which under Dorothy Fontana's original draft version was a deep psychological thriller delving into the deeper recesses of the new characters backstories, but which under Roddenberry's Rewrite became nothing but a cheesy eighties sex comedy in space.

Fontana had her name removed in protest.

Another one was 'Justice', which under John Black was a fascinating exploration of the lengths to which a society would go to sacrifice liberty in exchange for peace, but which under Roddenberry was rewritten as a cheesy eighties sex comedy in space. With a God-creature in it.

John Black had his name removed in protest.

I'm sensing a pattern.

Basically, Roddenberry had a habit of steamrolling other writers. He'd be sorry about it, he'd be apologetic afterwards. But he couldn't help himself. That this sometimes meant he got a financial divvy of their script was almost a side-effect, the real problem was his need to have "Latest Draft by G.R." stamped on everything. It was the ego.

 

[T'Girl]

David Gerrold and Dorthy Fontana contributions to the creation of The Next Generation were down played or completely dismissed by Roddenberry, TNG was his creation.

There was also the book The Making of Star Trek, Roddenberry had no hand in writing the book, but conned his way into being listed as co-author.

 

[Lance]

Another story is that what Gene used to do wasn't so much 'claim' authorship, but more he'd let other people accidentally attribute that authorship to him and simply fail to correct them. For example, the myth surrounding the addition of Worf to the cast. After the character was accepted warmly by the fans, Roddenberry allowed them to believe that Worf was his idea, without correcting them about the truth. When the factual evidence later came out, it showed that it was Bob Justman who conceived the character, and he and Rick Berman who pushed for Worf's addition to the cast. Roddenberry was against it all the way.

Aside from the rewrites and the pushing his way into royalties that didn't belong to him, this is the kind of thing that went on, and with each passing generation the myth grew until it was believed unquestionably.

 

[Orphalesion]

The clearest one was 'The Naked Now', which under Dorothy Fontana's original draft version was a deep psychological thriller delving into the deeper recesses of the new characters backstories, but which under Roddenberry's Rewrite became nothing but a cheesy eighties sex comedy in space.

Fontana had her name removed in protest.

Another one was 'Justice', which under John Black was a fascinating exploration of the lengths to which a society would go to sacrifice liberty in exchange for peace, but which under Roddenberry was rewritten as a cheesy eighties sex comedy in space. With a God-creature in it.

John Black had his name removed in protest.

Oh my.... any indication that Haven was originally good, Lance?

 

[tafkats]

Solow and Justman's "Inside Star Trek" makes reference to Roddenberry taking credit for other people's ideas in a number of places. And then there's the financial piece too -- like with the lyrics he wrote for the title theme that were never actually used;

This is Solow's description of how it happened:

When Sandy Courage was given his contract to write the Star Trek music, he was unaware of a two-sentence clause toward the end of the agreement. Thinking it was more of the usual boilerplate, Sandy signed the agreement without reading it fully. The clause, inserted by Gene's attorney, Leonard Maizlish, gave Gene the right to write a lyric to Courage's theme.

Almost two years later, after NBC put Star Trek on its schedule, Sandy received a call from Leonard Maizlish: "Listen, from now on we will be collecting one-half of your royalties." Sandy, confused as to how this could happen, spoke to Desilu Music Department head Wilbur Hatch and Desilu attorney Ed Perlstein. "They told me there was nothing that could be done, legally," said Sandy, and when he questioned Roddenberry, Gene explained, "Hey, I have to get some money somewhere. I'm sure not going to get it out of the profits of Star Trek."

Sandy felt that if the reason for the lyrics was to get singers to record the theme, to add value to the property, that woluld have been acceptable. In fact, Courage would have worked with Gene to assure the musicality of the lyrics. But it was simply Gene Roddenberry taking performance royalties away from Alexander Courage.

And as Courage points out, "Rodenberry's lyrics totally lacked musical practicality. He made two very serious errors in writing the lyrics. One, he changed the shape of the melody by adding extra beats, and two, he used a closed vowel with a z-z-z-z-z sound on the highest notes, something that gives great problems to singers."

With Gene taking half of Sandy's sole credit and royalty, I again marveled at his seemingly unending drive to fashion himself the single master, the absolute proprietor of Star Trek.​

 

[EnriqueH]

David Gerrold and Dorthy Fontana contributions to the creation of The Next Generation were down played or completely dismissed by Roddenberry, TNG was his creation.

Where did you read this, please? Again, as I mentioned in the original post above, I'm looking for attribution.

Another story is that what Gene used to do wasn't so much 'claim' authorship, but more he'd let other people accidentally attribute that authorship to him and simply fail to correct them. For example, the myth surrounding the addition of Worf to the cast. After the character was accepted warmly by the fans, Roddenberry allowed them to believe that Worf was his idea, without correcting them about the truth. When the factual evidence later came out, it showed that it was Bob Justman who conceived the character, and he and Rick Berman who pushed for Worf's addition to the cast. Roddenberry was against it all the way.

Aside from the rewrites and the pushing his way into royalties that didn't belong to him, this is the kind of thing that went on, and with each passing generation the myth grew until it was believed unquestionably.

Where did you get this, please? Again, I'm looking for the source because I'd like to look at this myself.

Sometimes it wasn't about his actually taking credit, but more about the original author's integrity.

Early TNG in particular suffered from Roddenberry's pen. I've got a book ('Making The Next Generation' by Edward Gross and Mark Altman) which looks at the growing pains of that first season, and publishes synopsies of the first season episodes in various stages of their development, signalling out particularly how the deaded "Roddenberry Rewrites" substantively destroyed a number of the episodes.

The clearest one was 'The Naked Now', which under Dorothy Fontana's original draft version was a deep psychological thriller delving into the deeper recesses of the new characters backstories, but which under Roddenberry's Rewrite became nothing but a cheesy eighties sex comedy in space.

Fontana had her name removed in protest.

Another one was 'Justice', which under John Black was a fascinating exploration of the lengths to which a society would go to sacrifice liberty in exchange for peace, but which under Roddenberry was rewritten as a cheesy eighties sex comedy in space. With a God-creature in it.

John Black had his name removed in protest.

I'm sensing a pattern.

Basically, Roddenberry had a habit of steamrolling other writers. He'd be sorry about it, he'd be apologetic afterwards. But he couldn't help himself. That this sometimes meant he got a financial divvy of their script was almost a side-effect, the real problem was his need to have "Latest Draft by G.R." stamped on everything. It was the ego.

Well, in these cases, the writers themselves removed the credit, which I understand is their right. Gene didn't deny their creativity.

I'm investigating this blanket accusation that seems to follow Roddenberry: "Gene Roddenberry took credit for others ideas."

This doesn't sound like it.

I also thought it was Gene's privilege as head-honcho to do the rewrites. Didn't he do that in TOS and have a good reputation for doing so? Maybe he was past his prime during TNG, but that's a separate issue.

I'm talking about Gene Roddenberry taking credit for other writers work.

Solow and Justman's "Inside Star Trek" makes reference to Roddenberry taking credit for other people's ideas in a number of places. And then there's the financial piece too -- like with the lyrics he wrote for the title theme that were never actually used;

This is Solow's description of how it happened:

When Sandy Courage was given his contract to write the Star Trek music, he was unaware of a two-sentence clause toward the end of the agreement. Thinking it was more of the usual boilerplate, Sandy signed the agreement without reading it fully. The clause, inserted by Gene's attorney, Leonard Maizlish, gave Gene the right to write a lyric to Courage's theme.

Almost two years later, after NBC put Star Trek on its schedule, Sandy received a call from Leonard Maizlish: "Listen, from now on we will be collecting one-half of your royalties." Sandy, confused as to how this could happen, spoke to Desilu Music Department head Wilbur Hatch and Desilu attorney Ed Perlstein. "They told me there was nothing that could be done, legally," said Sandy, and when he questioned Roddenberry, Gene explained, "Hey, I have to get some money somewhere. I'm sure not going to get it out of the profits of Star Trek."

Sandy felt that if the reason for the lyrics was to get singers to record the theme, to add value to the property, that woluld have been acceptable. In fact, Courage would have worked with Gene to assure the musicality of the lyrics. But it was simply Gene Roddenberry taking performance royalties away from Alexander Courage.

And as Courage points out, "Rodenberry's lyrics totally lacked musical practicality. He made two very serious errors in writing the lyrics. One, he changed the shape of the melody by adding extra beats, and two, he used a closed vowel with a z-z-z-z-z sound on the highest notes, something that gives great problems to singers."

With Gene taking half of Sandy's sole credit and royalty, I again marveled at his seemingly unending drive to fashion himself the single master, the absolute proprietor of Star Trek.​

Ok, but Gene wrote the lyrics, right? They were shitty lyrics, but he wrote them, right?

I'm talking about Gene taking credit for other people's work.

In other words, did Courage write the lyrics and Gene took credit for it? Because when I hear "Roddenberry took credit for others work." that's what it means to me.

A lot of people seem to enjoy saying "Roddenberry took credit for other people's work." But I don't see any concrete evidence of this.

Again, I'm not saying it didn't happen. I'm just surprised with ALL my non-fiction Trek reading that I haven't seen any clear cut evidence of this.

I still haven't.

Please don't mistake this as me being a jerk. It's an accusation that I keep wondering about, and it's mentioned so frequently that it's DRIVING ME NUTS because it's always said in passing, but there's never any attribution or specific instances mentioned.

Which makes me suspect it's just hearsay.

Or a witch hunt.

 

[Sector 7]

You asked for examples. You were given examples. That should be the end of it, yet you still want to say, essentially, "Poor Gene, he is so maligned." The truth is: Gene Roddenberry would sell his own mother to make an extra dollar; he used the "casting couch" at every opportunity; he cheated on his wives. Time to realize GR is not an angel and move on.

GR created, arguably, the best sci-fi television show of his day. What he did to it-- and to the others who created it-- is not his shining moment in history.

 

[Silvercrest]

Sounds to me like if he insisted on taking half the money for the theme (even with no lyrics), he's taking credit for the theme.

If he got himself listed as co-author of The Making of Star Trek, he's taking credit for writing it.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Ok, but Gene wrote the lyrics, right? They were shitty lyrics, but he wrote them, right?

I'm talking about Gene taking credit for other people's work. In other words, did Courage write the lyrics and Gene took credit for it? Because when I hear "Roddenberry took credit for others work." that's what it means to me.

Writing lyrics for the express purpose of screwing another guy out of half of his royalties certainly shows questionable ethics. I can easily see someone who is capable of that doing much worse.

A couple of examples off the top of my head:

-Harold Livingston feuded with GR while they were writing ST:TMP. He told a story about GR rewriting his script pages without Livingston's knowledge before turning them into Paramount brass, like Michael Eisner. Another time, he rewrote a script draft and put his name above Livingston's, which he was not entitled to do. I'm not 100% certain where I read this, but I believe it might've been in Shatner's Star Trek Movie Memories book.

-Harlan Ellison's 1990s book on The City on the Edge of Forever reprints an excerpt from a Roddenberry interview where the interviewer theorizes that GR's mother inspired the character of Edith Keeler. Roddenberry does nothing to disabuse the interviewer of this notion. Again, easy correction to make, but Roddenberry chose not to do so.

 

[EnriqueH]

You asked for examples. You were given examples. That should be the end of it, yet you still want to say, essentially, "Poor Gene, he is so maligned."

WRONG.

Read my initial post again.

I specifically asked for ATTRIBUTION.

In other words, WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR INFORMATION?

Starlog? An interview you saw in Entertainment Tonight? The Tonight Show? Barbara Walters? What?

Further, those were NOT examples. And I addressed why.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

You asked for examples. You were given examples. That should be the end of it, yet you still want to say, essentially, "Poor Gene, he is so maligned." The truth is: Gene Roddenberry would sell his own mother to make an extra dollar; he used the "casting couch" at every opportunity; he cheated on his wives. Time to realize GR is not an angel and move on.

This bears repeating.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I specifically asked for ATTRIBUTION.

In other words, WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR INFORMATION?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Gene+Roddenberry+stealing+credit

 

[EnriqueH]

-Harold Livingston feuded with GR while they were writing ST:TMP. He told a story about GR rewriting his script pages without Livingston's knowledge before turning them into Paramount brass, like Michael Eisner. Another time, he rewrote a script draft and put his name above Livingston's, which he was not entitled to do. I'm not 100% certain where I read this, but I believe it might've been in Shatner's Star Trek Movie Memories book.

Yes, I remember this. But Gene didn't leave Harold's name off, did he? So that means he still gave Harold credit. So that doesn't qualify as "Roddenberry took credit for others wok".

-Harlan Ellison's 1990s book on The City on the Edge of Forever reprints an excerpt from a Roddenberry interview where the interviewer theorizes that GR's mother inspired the character of Edith Keeler. Roddenberry does nothing to disabuse the interviewer of this notion. Again, easy correction to make, but Roddenberry chose not to do so.

THIS could be the example I was looking for. I'll look into it when I finish "Return to Tomorrow."

Thanks, Jonny.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Yes, I remember this. But Gene didn't leave Harold's name off, did he? So that means he still gave Harold credit. So that doesn't qualify as "Roddenberry took credit for others wok".

I don't think you're understanding the significance of Roddenberry putting his name in first position. GR putting his name first implied that he was the primary author of the screenplay, which he was not. The Writer's Guild has rules against that sort of thing, and the order the names appear in is NOT arbitrary.

Livingston's name was still on it, yes, but it was definitely stealing credit.

 

[EnriqueH]

Looks like we're *ALL* writing and self-editing at the same time.

You asked for examples. You were given examples. That should be the end of it, yet you still want to say, essentially, "Poor Gene, he is so maligned." The truth is: Gene Roddenberry would sell his own mother to make an extra dollar; he used the "casting couch" at every opportunity; he cheated on his wives. Time to realize GR is not an angel and move on.

This bears repeating.

I already addressed part of Sector 7's comments above. Nobody is saying Gene is an angel. That's an assumption on your part. Further, the topic isn't Gene's sex life. I'm SPECIFICALLY asking about Gene taking credit. Please try to keep it on topic. As I think this is a fair question to ask.

I specifically asked for ATTRIBUTION.

In other words, WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR INFORMATION?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Gene+Roddenberry+stealing+credit

I'll check it out, thanks!

 

[EnriqueH]

Yes, I remember this. But Gene didn't leave Harold's name off, did he? So that means he still gave Harold credit. So that doesn't qualify as "Roddenberry took credit for others wok".

I don't think you're understanding the significance of Roddenberry putting his name in first position. GR putting his name first implied that he was the primary author of the screenplay, which he was not. The Writer's Guild has rules against that sort of thing, and the order the names appear in is NOT arbitrary.

Livingston's name was still on it, yes, but it was definitely stealing credit.

You're right. I didn't understand.

See, in the newspaper business, we'd put our names on top when we were the last person to work on it.

So whoever re-wrote the re-write would have his/her name on top.

Jonny, you're the man. Thanks for answering my question.

 

[Sector 7]

Looks like we're *ALL* writing and self-editing at the same time.

You asked for examples. You were given examples. That should be the end of it, yet you still want to say, essentially, "Poor Gene, he is so maligned." The truth is: Gene Roddenberry would sell his own mother to make an extra dollar; he used the "casting couch" at every opportunity; he cheated on his wives. Time to realize GR is not an angel and move on.

This bears repeating.

I already addressed part of Sector 7's comments above. Nobody is saying Gene is an angel. That's an assumption on your part. Further, the topic isn't Gene's sex life. I'm SPECIFICALLY asking about Gene taking credit. Please try to keep it on topic. As I think this is a fair question to ask.

Your title "Gene Roddenberry takes credit for everything." opens up the question of his moral character. I addressed this. It IS OT. This habit of yours shows up in every thread you create, or contribute to, about GR.

 

[EnriqueH]

Looks like we're *ALL* writing and self-editing at the same time.

This bears repeating.

I already addressed part of Sector 7's comments above. Nobody is saying Gene is an angel. That's an assumption on your part. Further, the topic isn't Gene's sex life. I'm SPECIFICALLY asking about Gene taking credit. Please try to keep it on topic. As I think this is a fair question to ask.http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Gene+Roddenberry+stealing+credit

Your title "Gene Roddenberry takes credit for everything." opens up the question of his moral character. I addressed this. It IS OT.

I disagree vehemently.

You're not on topic. The topic is clear: Gene taking credit, which you have not addressed because I specifically asked for attribution on Gene taking credit.

What about the attribution? Do you have any attribution?

 

[Amaris]

Enrique, for your reading pleasure: http://www.academia.edu/2967654/Sta...re_The_Creation_of_an_Early_Television_Auteur

You'll find almost everything stated about Gene in this thread will be in that document. I'm not sure how you felt toward unauthorized biographies and such, so here's an academic paper for your perusal.