It probably depends on the diplomat.Which oddly doesn't seem to work on diplomats.![]()
It probably depends on the diplomat.Which oddly doesn't seem to work on diplomats.![]()
He couldn't even charm Nancy Hedford.It probably depends on the diplomat.
Who would want to charm a ball of energy?He couldn't even charm Nancy Hedford.
Beverly Crusher.Who would want to charm a ball of energy?
The ball of energy was the Companion.Who would want to charm a ball of energy?
She was an extension of the Companion.The ball of energy was the Companion.
Uh, no.She was an extension of the Companion.
Oh, that's right. She later became merged.Uh, no.
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.
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.
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.)
As someone whose parents have a significant age gap yet have always loved each other, I take minor offense to that.
Honest Question not a "gotcha!": When did Gene Roddenberry disown the TMP Novelization? This is news to me. I know he later said he considered TNG to be the "real" Star Trek, but that's not quite the same as disowning the TMP Novelization, since TMP and Phase II are really just a rough draft of TNG.It's from Roddenberry's TMP novelization, which Roddenberry himself later disowned and declared non canon, so there goes that idea.
Kirk and co. would have been booted out of Starfleet in Picard’s time. And we know how wild Picard was in his cadet days. Not really a wonder why Picard has a stick up his ass.Picard has too big of a stick up his ass.
Sisko would be more revered on Bajor. He’d be seen more as a General MacArthur or General Patton type in the Federation history texts.Sisko is war criminal.
Janeway was the answer to what Kirk would be like in the 24th century. And Starfleet wasted no time giving her a desk job due to it and are hoping that she doesn’t get herself demoted to be captain again.Janeway is a murder.
Archer tortured a pirate before becoming one himself, was bigoted towards Vulcans and managed to get his ally’s government disbanded. Somehow, this made him Federation President material.And Archer is a fucking bore.
A bit harsh, but I agree Kirk was the most likeable.One could argue he's revered by default.
Picard has too big of a stick up his ass.
Sisko is war criminal.
Janeway is a murder.
And Archer is a fucking bore.
Archer's "bigotry" towards Vulcans added some depth to the story. The relationship between Vulcans and Humans not always being so rosey was more interesting than a "kumbaya" type atmosphere.Archer tortured a pirate before becoming one himself, was bigoted towards Vulcans and managed to get his ally’s government disbanded. Somehow, this made him Federation President material.
Honest Question not a "gotcha!": When did Gene Roddenberry disown the TMP Novelization? This is news to me. I know he later said he considered TNG to be the "real" Star Trek, but that's not quite the same as disowning the TMP Novelization, since TMP and Phase II are really just a rough draft of TNG.
well, recent real-life events show that everyone can be president material.Archer tortured a pirate before becoming one himself, was bigoted towards Vulcans and managed to get his ally’s government disbanded. Somehow, this made him Federation President material.
I think it was around the same time he got all obsessive about what is or isn't canon, so around late 80s. IE, no novels are canon (and he did even specify "not even my TMP novelization") TAS isn't canon (which has since been lifted anyway) TFF is apocryphal (which has created a muddied situation regarding that movie ever since) and so on.Honest Question not a "gotcha!": When did Gene Roddenberry disown the TMP Novelization? This is news to me. I know he later said he considered TNG to be the "real" Star Trek, but that's not quite the same as disowning the TMP Novelization, since TMP and Phase II are really just a rough draft of TNG.
Honestly, I can't imagine that most of those missions would be known by the general public in the Star Trek Universe. At the very least, aspects of them would be highly classified.Looking at the TOS episode list, it seems to me that Kirk probably originally became famous when the Enterprise became the first ship to breach the Galactic Barrier in "Where No Man Has Gone Before." Making peaceful contact with the First Federation in "The Corbomite Maneuver" probably reinforced that fame, and then his profile probably continued to rise throughout 2266-2267 as a result of him managing to prevent no less two major wars in one year: with the Romulans in "Balance of Terror" and with the Gorn in "Arena." Public opinion might also conflate Kirk with preventing another war with the Klingons during "Errand of Mercy" even though real credit goes to the Organians.
Now, these missions I imagine would be publicly known. Earth was directly endangered in both TMP and TVH and Kirk saving the UFP President and exposing a huge conspiracy to sabotage the Klingon/Federation peace process happened at a huge public conference. That stuff is going to be reported on, and honestly, that's enough to make Kirk notable in history.And then he saves Earth from V'Ger in The Motion Picture. And then, he saves Earth again from the Probe in The Voyage Home. And then, his career culminates in him saving the President of the United Federation of Planets, exposing the assassins of the Chancellor of the High Council of the Klingon Empire, and preventing a new Federation-Klingon War and enabling the final end to the UFP/Klingon Cold War.
TV Tropes has even named that trope: Famous, Famous, Fictional, with several examples from Star Trek in the "Live-Action TV" subsection.See, TOS knew the trick to that, which later shows have forgotten: mix familiar and unfamiliar names so the audience gets it from context. "The same old promises made by Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar, Hitler, Ferris, Maltuvis." "He made the duotronic breakthrough that won him the Nobel and Zee-Magnees Prizes." That sort of thing.
It's technically legal but it ain't right.
As someone who was raised by a loving mother and stepfather 13 years apart in age, a 15 year age difference has never seemed like that big of a deal to me. As long as everyone is above the age of consent, I don't have a big problem with it. Kirk/Lenore does violate the "half your age plus seven years" rule of thumb, though. (Assuming that Kirk is 33 during the first season, Lenore should be 23 and 1/2 years old for it to be appropriate by that metric. But hey, dating a younger woman ends up with Kirk exposing the true identity of Kodos the Executioner and catching a serial killer, so I'll cut him some slack there.)As someone whose parents have a significant age gap yet have always loved each other, I take minor offense to that.
Kirk/Lenore does violate the "half your age plus seven years" rule of thumb, though.
more like an Internet ruleA religious rule? First I've heard of it.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.