HUGE Mr Sulu Spoiler

[m.lp.ql.m]

It's all about wearing people down at every turn by opposing whatever choice is made no matter what it is or how it's done.

If the role is large, oppose it as pushing an agenda.
If the role is small, oppose it as not doing enough and say they should save it for a bigger character.
If an established character is announced to be gay, oppose it for violating canon or someone's vision.
If a new character is announced to be gay, say that it's tokenism.
Or oppose it because it's in the Abramsverse (sorry, Kelvinverse) and everything about that sucks.
Or oppose it because the makers are hacks.
Or oppose it because a lot of Trekkies are unfortunately allergic to change of any kind.

The goal is to just keep the opposition going until everyone is fed up with talking about it and you've soured the whole idea, so maybe next time producers or writers decide that they don't want to deal with all the drama and just don't bother with a gay character (or all-female Ghostbusters, or black Johnny Storm, or a female Starbuck, or a Latino Spider-Man).

tl;dr - It's all about gay people even existing.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

"I killed Hitler!"
"No you didn't, I killed Hitler!"
"What do you mean you killed Hitler? I stabbed him in the chest! It was plain as day!"
"What? No you didn't, because I made him fall down an open manhole cover and he was fine before I did it."
"All of you are crazy. I went back and sent Hitler to art school. He became a mediocre art scholar in a forgotten school somewhere."

That would get confusing awfully fast.

Have you ever read The Men Who Murdered Mohammed?

 

[BillJ]

But why would you choose to only focus on onscreen evidence? (Unless of course, you are leaning toward wanting the Prime Sulu to be gay, which I suspect you are.)

I have no skin in the game beyond thinking it is about time Star Trek caught up with the rest of 21st century society.

The apparent intent of the creator of the series that Sulu -- a character he created -- was straight. (And no evidence to the contrary.)

Apparent is key. Does anyone have Roddenberry on record as saying his intent was for Sulu to be straight? Or are we relying on second hand information?

The evidence of the actor himself, who breathed life into the character and played him for decades, insisting that Sulu was straight. (And this actor is a gay man and one of our generations biggest gay rights activists, no less!) His insistence is so strong that he is disappointed that this played out the way it did. Because he knows that the original Sulu was straight.

I think throughout this thread we've discussed why Takei might not be too keen on Sulu being gay. For one, it lessens his impact on the franchise and gives another actor acclaim for a character he originated. Maybe Takei's response is a pure as the driven snow, but somehow I doubt it.

 

[Amaris]

Have you ever read The Men Who Murdered Mohammed?

I have not read that, no. I'll check it out.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

There's circumstantial evidence on-screen in TAS that Sulu Prime was straight. It's been mentioned in-thread.

It's hard for me to imagine that behind the scenes Sulu Prime was conceived of as anything other than straight. I feel confident that that's where Takei as getting his notion that Sulu Prime was straight. He played him staight. He was never told to do otherwise. Heck, it's conceivable that he had a private conversation with Gene about it, but I have no direct evidence of that.

Retcons can be fine. I'm not a slave to canon, and I support them in some cases. In this case, I'd be fine with a retcon, but I don't think it's necessary, and I think that's what it would have to be.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Yep. According to Simon Pegg, and Roberto Orci, the moment Nero showed up there were ripples in spacetime going forward and backward.

Forward and backward in their own (Kelvin) timeline, yes.

This does not affect Prime Sulu.

It only explains (to those concerned about genetics) how Sulu could suddenly 'become' gay if he was born before Nero's ship showed up to change things.

Pegg's quantum physics talk is a fancy way of saying "We can do whatever we want" and "You can believe whatever you want" even though we are squeaking a little bit outside of the clever trick we used, to be able to pull this off. Oh, and we are calling it science instead of creative license, because that seems to play better with the Trekkies...

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

There's circumstantial evidence on-screen in TAS that Sulu Prime was straight. It's been mentioned in-thread.

Correct. Add it to the list.

 

[Kemaiku]

The Franklin rather nicely tethers both universes, her being part of the larger NX program still existing in both.

 

[BillJ]

Retcons can be fine. I support them in some cases. In this case, I'd be fine with a retcon, but I don't think it's necessary, and I think that's what it would have to be.

It's up to individual interpretation, because we will likely never visit those characters in that universe again.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

It's up to individual interpretation, because we will likely never visit those characters in that universe again.

Absolutely, although it is a lot less academic for TrekLit authors.

 

[BillJ]

Absolutely, although it is a lot less academic for TrekLit authors.

They haven't been shy about using gay characters up to this point, it will be interesting to see how they carry forward.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

I have no skin in the game beyond thinking it is about time Star Trek caught up with the rest of 21st century society.

Sure, but thinking that (and I agree with you, by the way) does not turn a previously straight character gay.

Apparent is key. Does anyone have Roddenberry on record as saying his intent was for Sulu to be straight? Or are we relying on second hand information?

We are relying on information given to us by a man whose whole life has been about this character. Who would know better than Takei? He says he had these conversations with Roddenberry. Takei was there. We weren't.

We only doubt him because we don't like, don't understand, or are surprised by his position.

We can spin it that Takei is lying or re-writing history, but why would we want to do that? It is much more reasonable to take him at face value.

Unless we are tring to fit a square peg into a round hole.

I think throughout this thread we've discussed why Takei might not be too keen on Sulu being gay. For one, it lessens his impact on the franchise and gives another actor acclaim for a character he originated. Maybe Takei's response is a pure as the driven snow, but somehow I doubt it.

Those reasons seem pretty forced.

Takei maintains that he is clinging to the way things were, because the creator, who he has great respect for, intended them to be that way. His thoughts are logical and consistent. Personally, I feel differently about it, but that doesn't make Takei's position on the matter insincere or suspect.

 

[Amaris]

Forward and backward in their own (Kelvin) timeline, yes.

This does not affect Prime Sulu.

It only explains (to those concerned about genetics) how Sulu could suddenly 'become' gay if he was born before Nero's ship showed up to change things.

Pegg's quantum physics talk is a fancy way of saying "We can do whatever we want" and "You can believe whatever you want" even though we are squeaking a little bit outside of the clever trick we used, to be able to pull this off. Oh, and we are calling it science instead of creative license, because that seems to play better with the Trekkies...

I never said it affected prime Sulu, only that if Sulu were straight in the prime universe, that doesn't mean he will be straight in the Kelvin universe.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I think that we also have to consider how conservative the show was overall. They never had a gay character at all on TOS. It would have been an enormous controversy. We'd have to believe that Sulu was designated as possibly gay behind the scenes, and that it was a perfectly kept secret that somehow that never got out even after all these years. I find that really, really hard to believe.

It's not a case of sifting through canon to see what might or might not be consistent. It's a case of inferring the intent of the writers and showrunners.

 

[Amaris]

I think that we also have to consider how conservative the show was overall. They never had a gay character at all on TOS. It would have been an enormous controversy. We'd have to believe that Sulu was designated as possibly gay behind the scenes, and that it was a perfectly kept secret that somehow that never got out even after all these years. I find that really, really hard to believe.

It's not a case of sifting through canon to see what might or might not be consistent. It's a case of inferring the intent of the writers and showrunners.

Plus, Takei talked about playing Sulu as straight. Well, no kidding, but did he really have a choice in the matter? When he spoke to Gene about a gay character on the show, Gene turned him down over and over again, and this was before Gene had seen the error of his ways (and still did nothing). So again, it's not like he had a choice.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

I never said it affected prime Sulu, only that if Sulu were straight in the prime universe, that doesn't mean he will be straight in the Kelvin universe.

Agreed.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Plus, Takei talked about playing Sulu as straight. Well, no kidding, but did he really have a choice in the matter?

Yeah, I don't think there was a choice. Certainly none that Takei had.

Of course, it's really hard to know what it even means to play a character straight, or gay for that matter, especially if there is no behavior change evident from how that internal state might be configured in the actor's mind. That, too, has basically been mentioned in-thread.

 

[Samuel T. Cogley]

Plus, Takei talked about playing Sulu as straight. Well, no kidding, but did he really have a choice in the matter? When he spoke to Gene about a gay character on the show, Gene turned him down over and over again, and this was before Gene had seen the error of his ways (and still did nothing). So again, it's not like he had a choice.

But if this were true, and Takei wished Sulu to have been gay all along, but/for Mean Gene preventing it from happening, he would likely be thrilled that this "error" is finally being corrected.

Instead, his reaction is the opposite, indicating that he long ago made peace with it, or never had a problem with Sulu being straight in the first place.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

But if this were true, and Takei wished Sulu to have been gay all along, but/for Mean Gene preventing it from happening, he would likely be thrilled that this "error" is finally being corrected.

Instead, his reaction is the opposite, indicating that he long ago made peace with it, or never had a problem with Sulu being straight in the first place.

I strongly suspect (admittedly, talking out of my ass and without direct evidence, but anyway....) that, given the day, Takei was quite used to playing straight people in order to get work.

 

[Amaris]

But if this were true, and Takei wished Sulu to have been gay all along, but/for Mean Gene preventing it from happening, he would likely be thrilled that this "error" is finally being corrected.

Instead, his reaction is the opposite, indicating that he long ago made peace with it, or never had a problem with Sulu being straight in the first place.

Not necessarily. Think about it: You play a character straight for decades, because anything else would be forbidden. You ask the creator of the show to involve gay characters in the show, but are turned down repeatedly. So you continue to play the character straight, because anything else would mean unemployment, cancellation, being outcast.

Finally, social acceptance gets to the point where it's safe enough to come out, and you do so some 40 years after you began playing that character. You gain notoriety from this decision, and so it becomes a part of your identity, character and all. Now a new guy comes along playing a modern version of your character, except that this Sulu is gay. He gets to play Sulu as gay, Sulu gets to be himself without shame, without having to play to stereotypes. Can you honestly tell me that it wouldn't bother you just a little bit? That you wouldn't find it remotely incensing, or perhaps be a little bitter from it?