Shouldn't have done that
- Thread starter Laura Cynthia Chambers
- Start date
That was the novel I was thinking of though when I recalled reading a novel about how Saavik ended up being a protege of Spock. But yeah, if there is some novel out there that says Spock (or his parents) actually adopted Saavik I don't recall anything like that.
This was just a case where what Avro had said in her post made me think of a novel where Saavik's initial meeting of Spock and how she ended up under his care at least in some limited fashion. And the novel I was thinking of was The Pandora Principle.
It's also probably important to remember that Vulcan's Glory and the Vulcan's Soul trilogy (which is a continuation as far as I know that shows a married Spock and Saavik) likely occur in a different 'continuity' then The Pandora Principle and any stories that might indicate Saavik was some sort of adoptee of Spock or Sarek. I don't recall them using anything developed in that novel to any great extent.
As an aside I found Vulcans Soul to be interesting in the sense that it does appear to take place within the relaunch timeline and I recall seeing a few references to the Watraii in some later novels, though later novels do seem to ignore the marriage of Spock and Saavik. Though at the same time it can be argued that the lack of any mention of their marriage in later novels does not necessarily negate it either.
There were no such stories at the time. Before Vulcan's Heart, the only versions of Saavik's backstory I know of were:
Vonda McIntyre's TWOK novelization: In which Saavik is angry when David Marcus mistakes her for Spock's daughter, because of the violent circumstances of her own conception. She admires Spock as her savior and role model, but has a vehement aversion to family connections.
DC's "The Origin of Saavik" storyline: In which Spock discovers Saavik before TOS and breaks his silence with Sarek to convince him and Amanda to take Saavik in. While relating this, Saavik tells Kirk and McCoy that she may have been a little in love with Spock growing up, so she certainly didn't see him as family.
The Pandora Principle: In which Spock discovers Saavik shortly after TMP, spends a year teaching her, then leaves her with a foster family. His role strikes me not so much as a father figure as a cross between Paul D'Arnot (Tarzan's mentor) and Henry Higgins.
Marvel's Untold Voyages: In which Spock discovers Saavik shortly after TMP, takes her to the Vulcan embassy on Earth to be taught Vulcan behavior, then returns a year later to discover she feels lost and alone, whereupon he asks Sarek & Amanda to take her in. They say they'll raise her as if she were their own, but there's no mention of actual adoption.
So there was simply nothing before Vulcan's Heart which suggested any kind of real or perceived family relationship between Spock and Saavik. He was her rescuer, her mentor, her role model, never anything like a father or brother. In the versions where Sarek & Amanda raised her, she was treated as their ward, an unrelated child they were raising in loco parentis. I don't think we saw a version where Saavik thought of Sarek & Amanda as her parents until Unspoken Truth, more than a decade after Vulcan's Heart.
Anyway, my impression of Heart continuity-wise was always that it was compatible with Pandora. It didn't directly acknowledge it, but it didn't contradict it in any way either. (Also, to correct myself, while the main body of the novel was some 70 years after TMP, the wedding itself was only about 55 years after.)
Thanks for the summary
Yeah I can see that Pandora and Heart can exist together. I guess it's the same thing I argued that just because novels after Soul didn't say anything about their marriage doesn't make it inconsistent because they never say he wasn't married.
We know canonically that Picard was at Sarek's son's wedding, and I doubt that meant Sybok. So we know that Spock at least has been married; we just don't have any canonical information about his spouse's identity.
And of course, Saavik came to Spock's aid in TSFS when his reborn body went into Pon Farr.
Which I guess is where they got the idea to depict his marriage. Not a huge fan of Spock marrying Saavik to be honest, but not because of any perceived controversy. Just more it seemed their relationship wasn't that kind of relationship. But that's just me so take it for what it's worth. Not something I make a big deal about in any event
It all sounds like a Woody Allen Star Trek script! 
Be afraid. Be very afraid.It all sounds like a Woody Allen Star Trek script!
I feel like it’s something of a no-win scenario with the story they were telling - Saavik was the only female Vulcan who Spock was established having a positive relationship on screen, aside from T’Pau, who was family. So when writing a story about Spock marrying someone, about their relationship, the authors could utilize her or create a new character that none of the audience knew or had any particularly vested interest in. At least Saavik was preestablished, a character the audience knows and has a connection to.
It’s something of the inherent issue within the medium of tie-ins, when to use a preestablished character and create a new one. If Vulcan’s Heart had been written a decade later, at the point when multiple series were running with heavily original characters, maybe they’d have created a new character, but that was unlikely to do at the time that book was written, so they limited themselves to options from within canon, which pretty much limited them to Saavik.
It’s something of the inherent issue within the medium of tie-ins, when to use a preestablished character and create a new one. If Vulcan’s Heart had been written a decade later, at the point when multiple series were running with heavily original characters, maybe they’d have created a new character, but that was unlikely to do at the time that book was written, so they limited themselves to options from within canon, which pretty much limited them to Saavik.
Frankly it didn’t have to be a Vulcan, based on what we saw in TNG I thought Spock had married a human who was deceased. Remember Spock only went through with his betrothal because he wanted to follow only his Vulcan half, after V’Ger he was under no obligation. The lack of mentions of a spouse in Unification strongly suggests that she’s passed away otherwise Picard would be asking if she’s given any statement or would go to see her, instead he goes to Sarek who he knows has been estranged for years
Then we have Jean-Luc’s presence at the wedding but not knowing the groom as a young lieutenant, nor does he mention knowing the wife. This again suggests that he was there as part of an honour guard, possibly as an officer starfleet could see as promising and wanted to groom for bigger things. So again all considered a non Vulcan, Starfleet Wedding with the spouse now deceased, strongly suggests to me a human spouse.
Even expanding beyond Vulcans, it's still the same issue - who did Spock have a relationship in canon that could translate to marriage? Most options he'd have who have a basis in canon - a character like Uhura, or Chapel, or even, digging into the grabbag of canon, someone like Leila Kalomi... These are all people who'd be settling into the twilight of their lives, hitting up against or even crossing the line into three digit ages, while Spock, with the longevity of a Vulcan, would only be in his middle age. A Vulcan at least makes sense in terms of having lifespan similarity without having Spock hooking up with someone half his age or something - sure, I might sideeye the idea of Saavik as Spock's wife, but it's still a damn sight better than having centennial Spock hooking up with someone who read about him going through fal-tor-pan while she was in grade school.
And, as for the lack of mention of a spouse in Unification, that is easily explained even within the framework of Saavik as Spock's wife, where she is a Starfleet captain, and so anything he is doing in secret, logic would dictate he introduce a degree of separation with his plans, to avoid any blowback falling upon her and her career based on his actions. (And, out of universe, this is an undeveloped character who it's entirely possible that the writers even forgot they'd established - having Picard visit Sarek had an emotional connection for the audience, so from the writing perspective, it made sense to go to him and not introduce this unseen wife.)
A lot of the decisions made in ALL fiction serve the needs of dramatics and audience's emotional engagement, rather than necessarily being the perfectly rational and reasonable choice - in the real world, you could have to speak to five different people to get an explanation, but in fiction, between condensing material and working with things like actor availability or costs, instead, those answers are consolidated into a single character (just as a singular example). From a story perspective, it made more sense to look within Spock's own established history to select a prospective wife, and by the point in the timeframe that the involvement of Picard is justifiable, much of the characters who had any kind of connection to him that could see them tying the knot with him would also not be of a reasonable point in their lives to be marrying him.
Like I said, if the tie-in novels were in the place they were a decade or so later, maybe they'd have done it. But at the time, it made more sense to draw from an established character, someone who the character knew and, more importantly, the audience knew that the character knew. That heavily limited the pool of candidates right there. Saavik makes sense with those restrictions.
And, as for the lack of mention of a spouse in Unification, that is easily explained even within the framework of Saavik as Spock's wife, where she is a Starfleet captain, and so anything he is doing in secret, logic would dictate he introduce a degree of separation with his plans, to avoid any blowback falling upon her and her career based on his actions. (And, out of universe, this is an undeveloped character who it's entirely possible that the writers even forgot they'd established - having Picard visit Sarek had an emotional connection for the audience, so from the writing perspective, it made sense to go to him and not introduce this unseen wife.)
A lot of the decisions made in ALL fiction serve the needs of dramatics and audience's emotional engagement, rather than necessarily being the perfectly rational and reasonable choice - in the real world, you could have to speak to five different people to get an explanation, but in fiction, between condensing material and working with things like actor availability or costs, instead, those answers are consolidated into a single character (just as a singular example). From a story perspective, it made more sense to look within Spock's own established history to select a prospective wife, and by the point in the timeframe that the involvement of Picard is justifiable, much of the characters who had any kind of connection to him that could see them tying the knot with him would also not be of a reasonable point in their lives to be marrying him.
Like I said, if the tie-in novels were in the place they were a decade or so later, maybe they'd have done it. But at the time, it made more sense to draw from an established character, someone who the character knew and, more importantly, the audience knew that the character knew. That heavily limited the pool of candidates right there. Saavik makes sense with those restrictions.
The Search for Spock made it as clear as a PG film could that Saavik had sex with the regenerating Spock to help him through pon farr. Indeed, the script for The Voyage Home established that the reason Saavik stayed on Vulcan was that she was pregnant with Spock's child.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Saavik?so=search#Final_film_appearance
This was fairly well known in fandom even though it was cut from the final film. So the idea of Spock and Saavik as a couple, even as co-parents, was seeded by the filmmakers themselves, and thus it's natural that fans and writers would pick up on it.
I think there's a generational difference in play here. These days, raised awareness of sex crimes and pedophilia has made us see any relationship between people of widely different ages as taboo, even if they're both consenting adults at the time. But in previous generations, it was seen as normal for romance to blossom between older men and younger women, even women they had known as children. Back then, the social norm was that a couple would defer sex until marriage, so attraction between an adult man and a teenage girl wasn't seen as pedophilia, just as anticipation of a future possibility. Often it was the girl who was portrayed as the aggressor, the one falling in love with an older man and pursuing him; you can see this dynamic in "Miri." I referred to the line in DC's Saavik origin story where Saavik says she was a little in love with Spock while she was growing up.
Whatever gave you the idea that his spouse was deceased?
Yeah, I know. Doesn't necessarily mean he would have to marry her years later.
It was just a plot point of the Heart/Soul story that I wasn't a huge fan of. But overall I liked the stories in those novels so it's not something that I hated so much that it ruined the stories for me. And I wouldn't even say I hated that plot point. Just more a preference.
I noticed in the Crucible trilogy by DRGIII that he decided to go in a different direction with Spock's marriage. I do recall in his acknowledgments that he had considered putting his novel in the existing continuity at the time (which I assumed would have included Spock's marriage to Saavik) but they decided to make that trilogy separate.
True. Though I will say in TSFS even though I as a fan know what is about to happen I never got any creepy vibes from that whole scene. I think partly because we don't actually see them engage in intercourse. It's just strongly inferred that's what's about to happen. Also they are aliens and finally we know Saavik is doing what she does to save Spock's life essentially. Most reasonable people I think would understand the circumstance. The alternative was to let Spock probably die.
That's one reason I always thought the criticism of the prince kissing Snow White to awaken her a little ridiculous. I still recall some famous person (I forget who) saying the prince never got her permission to kiss her. Um, how would you have liked him to do that? She needed his kiss to wake up. The choice was to kiss her and save her life or let her die. I think most women would be like "yeah, kiss me, don't just let me lie there and die you moron!" lol. Same thing here I think. The choice was to 'help' him through Pon Farr or let him die. So I think most fans understand that.
Though in this case, unless I'm missing something, I haven't heard any complaints honestly of that being any case of pedophilia or non-consensual sex.
It's not about "having to." I was addressing your question about where the idea of pairing Spock and Saavik came from. The movies themselves set Saavik up as a potential love interest for Spock, and there was an existing fan interest in following up on that, which I'd assume is what Vulcan's Heart was written to respond to.
That's why it's so weird to me to see people today reacting to the idea of Spock and Saavik together as some shocking perversion coming out of nowhere, or to see Saavik as Spock's daughter. It was commonplace in the '80s and '90s to see them as a prospective couple, because TSFS itself had set that up, and it was fairly well-known that TVH had almost followed through on it. So it was no surprise at all when Heart put them together. As soon as "Sarek" established that Spock had married, Saavik was probably the leading candidate in fan conjectures. It's strange how completely that's changed.
Except it doesn't work to defend the choices of a story by citing the circumstances within the story, because the writer chose those circumstances in the first place, and could've chosen them differently. That's what's being criticized -- not the actions of the imaginary characters, but the decision of the real-life storytellers to present the story in that way. The creators of stories like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty chose to portray men winning women by kissing them nonconsensually. That choice of fictional story device says something about the attitudes and assumptions of the storytellers and the culture they were writing for, and it's those real-life attitudes that are the basis of the criticism. The story choices are just symbolic of those attitudes and beliefs.
I was referring to the perception of Saavik as a daughter figure to Spock or somehow off-limits because of their age difference. I'm saying that cultural attitudes toward an older man/younger woman relationship have shifted, which is probably why this aversion to the idea of a Spock/Saavik "ship" is around today even though it was commonplace to ship them in the '80s and '90s.
Although as you point out, technically the Spock that Saavik slept with on Genesis, and would eventually go on to marry in Heart, was twenty-odd years younger than her, despite his physical appearance.
Ok, maybe a poor choice of words in saying 'having too.' For me it's not any kind of creepiness. It's just honestly a personal preference. I always thought of Spock being a mentor to Saavik as opposed to being any kind of family, adopted or otherwise. So that's not really the issue for me. It really is just a 'preference' thing. I guess because it seemed a bit too obvious for me. Maybe that's unfair. And again, I bring it up more in passing. I really liked Vulcan's Heart and the Soul trilogy otherwise so it's a minor nitpick for me in the grand scheme of things. And the only reason I sort of mentioned it is because future novels seemed to ignore their marriage (though other elements like the Watraii were mentioned later and there's nothing I saw in later novels that contradicted their marriage, it just wasn't mentioned at all).
I do recall someone saying that he (the prince) never got her permission to kiss her, so that's what I was referring to. In story that seems a bit preposterous because the choice was pretty black and white. Kiss her to wake her up and save her life, or let her die. I mean, I think most people would take the former.
And I'm always careful not to apply today's standards to movies and shows decades, almost 100 years ago. I think it's ok to be aware that some things would be unacceptable today. But in the 1930s what was acceptable was a lot different. I love Hitchcock and James Bond movies. Obviously some of what happened in those films (esp. earlier Bond films, and even in Star Trek itself in the 1960s) would not be acceptable today. But I try to be fair and consider the timeframe those stories were written.
Honestly I've never been a fan of Snow White, but that's not because of the kissing issue. I just didn't care for it overall. Not my favorite Disney movie. I always loved Alice in Wonderland personally, probably because I'm a little twisted
. And the Black Cauldron, the closest Disney got to an outright horror animated film IMO. And I give Disney some credit. They can poke some fun at themselves. I remember in Ralph Breaks the Internet that Ralph needs all those princesses (including Snow White and Sleeping Beauty) to save his ass at one point in the movie.
Again, though, that's an unfair criticism because it's not the in-story logic being criticized, it's the real-life attitudes it reflects. The concern is not literally about the actions of an imaginary character in an imaginary story. You're completely misunderstanding it if you think that's the issue. The concern is what message the stories send to the audience. The concern is about raising children with stories in which men kiss unconscious women without their consent and the outcome is positive for everyone. That plays into the cultural attitude that men don't need women's sexual consent and are entitled to take what they want, and that's a harmful attitude that needs to be changed. The idea is that for today's audiences, today's children, we need to amend or replace the old stories so that they don't reinforce such harmful attitudes.
I agree it's important to have those discussions and be aware of acceptable behavior today (and things being made today may have elements that are unacceptable in the future).
I just don't want things to get to the point that older films/shows are essentially 'erased' from existence. There are some misguided folks, IMO, that would have us do just that. Wipe them from existence. Not everyone, and I'm not suggesting that you are advocating for that. In a way things like that can be teachable moments. Give you the opportunity to explain why some things would not be considered acceptable today, even if they were at some time in the past.
And honestly, for me personally at least, the movie makes it clear that she will die without his kiss. It's a black or white choice so I kind of find it a stretch to be too critical of that element. Yes, we can criticize the writing overall, but also remembering the time the story was written and what was acceptable then is much different than today. I'd personally rather use that as a teaching moment for a child. Explain how things were viewed in the past and why that is unacceptable today, and in story the extenuating circumstances. No you don't kiss someone without their consent. But the way the story was written the choice was to kiss her or let her die. That's not something that would happen in real life. Of course, you'd explain that in an age appropriate manner with a child. But I find things like that can offer us opportunities for education. Don't hide them or try to pretend they don't exist. Use those moments to explain why we no longer find some things acceptable. And it's ok to enjoy some of those stories overall if you are aware of that if the story is otherwise good. I love Goldfinger for instance. I know some elements of the movie could not be made today (like how Bond forces himself on Pussy Galore towards the end obviously would not be found acceptable in a movie today). But it's still a good movie overall.
This is what CHCH (a local TV station) shows before any episode of a retro show they deem to have something offensive in it:
Though I've seen some episodes they failed to catch, and some that it seemed silly to flash this before.
Though I've seen some episodes they failed to catch, and some that it seemed silly to flash this before.
This is what CHCH (a local TV station) shows before any episode of a retro show they deem to have something offensive in it:
Though I've seen some episodes they failed to catch, and some that it seemed silly to flash this before.
I have the Tom and Jerry cartoons from the 40s to the 60s that MGM put out and they have warnings, and in the 2nd box set Whoopi Goldberg explaining about some elements (particularly Mammy Two-Shoes) being unacceptable in todays world. But explaining that it's important we don't ignore history.
I think most reasonable adults realize this. And for children in cases where a child might be watching, I think there could actually be some valuable teaching moments in some old shows and movies.
Similar threads
