Star Trek is silly.
Why is Kirk so revered???
- Thread starter Dar70
- Start date
Saving Earth is like any other titanic task at that tier of competency: it ain't what you do, it's how you do it.
Truth hurts.
Kirk works great as that famous guy who, when you dig closer, doesn't quite live up to the hype.
Remember when 34 year old Kirk seduced a 19 year old girl to get closer to Kodos the Executioner? Ooof.
Remember when 34 year old Kirk seduced a 19 year old girl to get closer to Kodos the Executioner? Ooof.
And what is the problem? Two legal adults, 15 years apart. Definitely was not a big deal in 1966; should not be a big deal now.
I agree that is kind of silly because it makes the entire five year mission program look like a massive failure, it doesn't make me think "Kirk is awesome" it makes me think "Starfleet is callous and sends crews out to die"
Seriously? He was the youngest human Starfleet captain of his day, lead the most successful of the 5 year exploratory missions, had a list of commendations a Doomsday Machine long - as heard in Court Martial, he dealt with the Klingons several times during the cold war era (that almost went hot before the Organian mission that he was a part of), dealt with the return of the Romulans after decades of isolation, saved the Federation president at the first Khitomer conference and revealed a conspiracy thus saving the chance for peace with the Klingons, had more first contacts than any ship until Voyager got stranded in the delta quadrant, met Apollo and others, commanded the first ship known to traverse both the great barrier and galactic barrier and return, was linked to the creators of the genesis device, commanded a crew that went on to celebrated careers themselves, saved the Earth several times, saved several other planets, saved the Federation/galaxy/universe/multiverse various times, was charismatic and doubtless has a popular fanbase watching his holos, defeated a Gorn in single combat, was a celebrated tactical genius, got demoted for stealing his ship to resurrect his first officer, generally turned death into a fighting chance to live...
By what insane metric is Kelvin Kirk more capable than prime Kirk?
I've heard that the Breen home world is actually quite temperate...
Really? Thanks to serialization she's only had a couple big missions since becoming a captain. Kirk saved the galaxy weekly.
Well, I'm not actually saying that. OP was saying that Michael Burnham could have fought Sisko, Picard and Janeway all at once based on their fighting prowess shown onscreen, and my point was it's false equivalence because media has changed in the half century duration. TOS Kirk vs Discovery Burnham isn't a fair fight but Kelvin Kirk vs Discovery Burnham would have put it in balance a little more. It's like saying TOS Spock is weaker compared to Discovery Spock or Kelvin Spock, whereas they are all just different depictions of the same fictional character.
well, it’s a vast, dangerous galaxy. Also we don’t know how many connies on a 5 year mission there are, but Roddenberry always intended for them to being very few. five year missions are also rare in the kelvin timeline, by the way, with the enterprise’s being the first.
It's technically legal but it ain't right.
Why not?
We are talking adult age, out of school, old enough to be drafted, old enough to vote, and legally responsible for themselves. Why in the world would this be wrong or immoral? Stop infantilizing grown people. There's nothing "technical" about it. She was not a child. (As clearly evidenced by the episode's twist.)
I suppose it's the same thing where we revere Sir Francis Drake and his ilk, hundreds of years later and we don't, say, remember the commanders of WWII battleships.
I mean, in the 24th Century frame of reference, Kirk had a ground breaking 5 year mission which through open the boundaries of what a 5 year mission meant. Sisko et al are all looking back 100 years later, to them Kirk's time was more primitive and what he achieved with the tech available get naturally romanticised by them, even if their adventures are, really, comparable. By their time it's become more normalised and they can get a full steak dinner from a magic hole in the wall or visit Paris in a holodeck. They're not eating primary coloured wooden cubes and they've got a full jazz quartet and drama clubs instead of Uhura on a harp.
I mean, in the 24th Century frame of reference, Kirk had a ground breaking 5 year mission which through open the boundaries of what a 5 year mission meant. Sisko et al are all looking back 100 years later, to them Kirk's time was more primitive and what he achieved with the tech available get naturally romanticised by them, even if their adventures are, really, comparable. By their time it's become more normalised and they can get a full steak dinner from a magic hole in the wall or visit Paris in a holodeck. They're not eating primary coloured wooden cubes and they've got a full jazz quartet and drama clubs instead of Uhura on a harp.
I don't quite buy that argument. We may not remember battleship commanders, but we remember Yuri Gagarin and Neil Armstrong. We remember pioneers and discoverers, and there are just as many of those in the 24th century as the 23rd.
I think the point was that space is really dangerous and their is a cost in lives unlocking its secrets.
Q from “Q, Who” really says it all...
Gagarin and Armstrong are less than 100 years ago though. And they're pioneers, yeah. And that's what I'm saying, they remember and revere Kirk as a pioneer, as we do Gagarin and Armstrong due to his legendary 5 year mission. We don't remember the second Russian in space, nor most of the other Apollo astronauts (Aldrin, Collins and the crew of Apollo 13 aside).
There's also that, of the 12 Constitution class ships, Kirk's pretty much the only one (we know of) who didn't lose his mind or his ship in the 2260s. He brought the Enterprise home. Wasn't Kirk the youngest to achieve rank of Captain too? So, those in the same professional field are bound to be more than familiar with him.
I doubt, for example, Sisko's dad or Jake is going to revere him quite so much as Sisko, a Starfleet captain would.
As someone whose parents have a significant age gap yet have always loved each other, I take minor offense to that.
Of those twelve, the only ones we know who did lose their minds or ships in the 2260s are Decker, Tracy, and whoever commanded the Defiant. That leaves eight others who deserve the same credit as Kirk.
That's never been canon, unless you're talking about the Kelvin timeline. The idea Kirk was the youngest Captain in the Prime Universe is pure fanon.
We don’t know how many of those 8 came back.
Similar threads
