This post begs for one of you talented folks to post a pic of Kent Brockman in a Captain Tracey uniform.
The Omega Glory's Good Points
- Thread starter ZapBrannigan
- Start date
This post begs for one of you talented folks to post a pic of Kent Brockman in a Captain Tracey uniform.
....and both incidents occured late into the series run, illustrating that the heroes were still not supermen with all of the physical answers.
Totally agree with everything in the OP except this:
What makes The Omega Glory so frustrating is that there was never any doubt that it started out strong and had a lot of positives going for it. It's the sheer awfulness of its resolution and underlying premise that wastes those positives and throws away what could have been a great episode -- and "E Plebnista" is the climactic summation of that awfulness.
Considered in isolation as spoken word, nobody should ever doubt Shatner's ability to declaim. But it's not in isolation: it's the closing statement of a story that has turned out to be an allegory about Dirty Filthy Yellow Commies and The Blond-Haired Blue-Eyed Aryans Who Virtuously Hate Them. There is no saving that. There is no decontaminating the speech of that content. And in fact it's offensive from every possible angle... because this moment is condescending in its treatment even of the Yangs, the comparative local "good guys" in this scenario.
A real shame.
What makes The Omega Glory so frustrating is that there was never any doubt that it started out strong and had a lot of positives going for it. It's the sheer awfulness of its resolution and underlying premise that wastes those positives and throws away what could have been a great episode -- and "E Plebnista" is the climactic summation of that awfulness.
Considered in isolation as spoken word, nobody should ever doubt Shatner's ability to declaim. But it's not in isolation: it's the closing statement of a story that has turned out to be an allegory about Dirty Filthy Yellow Commies and The Blond-Haired Blue-Eyed Aryans Who Virtuously Hate Them. There is no saving that. There is no decontaminating the speech of that content. And in fact it's offensive from every possible angle... because this moment is condescending in its treatment even of the Yangs, the comparative local "good guys" in this scenario.
A real shame.
Umm, how are the Yangs the good guys here? In the conclusion, I mean?
The rumors that they are genocidal barbarians, first perhaps viewed with suspicion seeing as they come from the mouth of the main antagonist of the story, are now fully confirmed. They stomp around like so many deranged Nazis. And it turns out they don't even understand they should actually be good Americans through and through!
In comparison, the episode definitely establishes the Kohms as the meek victims, giving them no threatening attributes at all. If the writer wanted us to cheer for the Yangs at the end, too bad. By associating them with Yankees, he only managed to smear this real-world civilization for good.
Timo Saloniemi
The rumors that they are genocidal barbarians, first perhaps viewed with suspicion seeing as they come from the mouth of the main antagonist of the story, are now fully confirmed. They stomp around like so many deranged Nazis. And it turns out they don't even understand they should actually be good Americans through and through!
In comparison, the episode definitely establishes the Kohms as the meek victims, giving them no threatening attributes at all. If the writer wanted us to cheer for the Yangs at the end, too bad. By associating them with Yankees, he only managed to smear this real-world civilization for good.
Timo Saloniemi
Not remotely. The Yangs are pretty clearly portrayed as noble savages defending themselves from a ruthless and aggressive totalitarian enemy (who are Tracey's allies by reason of their corruption and his own). And because they're confirmed in the end to be a devolved form of American from a parallel Cold War that went hot (this being TOS this was all meant quite literally), Kirk's reaction to them isn't "ZOMG you're genocidal barbarians victimizing these poor helpless people;" it's rather them he entrusts with the task of restoring peace and the true, universal meaning of America's constitution (and redeeming even the degraded Kohms too).
An "aggressive totalitarian" enemy - helpless to defend themselves against the savages? Bullshit.
The episode goes as far as establish that this little village full of meek, civilized people is all that is left of the Kohms on the entire planet, and the savages are going to rape, pillage and devour their way through that one as well in no time flat!
Further bullshit. No corruption of the Kohms is mentioned anywhere in any fashion.
But the audience's is. Because that's what we see: animals wearing sorry excuses for cultural veneer, completing their savagery against the last remnants of civilization on the planet, while having the audacity to wave Stars and Stripes and wipe their asses with the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.
Sure, because the Kohms are dead already. Killed by these bastards. Who probably never will regain enough civility to keep the last villageful of actual human beings alive for any length of time.
Timo Saloniemi
Your reading just doesn't hold up, sorry Timo.
Once they're named "the Communists," we know they're an aggressive totalitarian enemy and we're told precisely what the war we're witnessing is:
McCoy calls Kirk "a romantic" for saying this, but a few moments later events ratify Kirk's interpretation. The reveal is a reversal of expectations. The people we're told are "savages" in the first part of their episode are fighting in a noble cause to retake their land from communist conquerors. The last bastion of "civilization" is in fact a bastion of tyranny about to fall to the noble "Yankee" resistance.
The messaging is not in any way even the teeniest bit ambiguous.
The Kohms, now finding themselves on the losing end of the war, are pretty clearly using Tracey for his weapons technology.
I think you'll find this is not in fact the general audience reaction. The Yangs are presented initially as unreconstructed savages in order for the final reveal about what they are to be a reversal that presents the whole conflict in a different light. And part of what they're meant to echo is the American Indians, who can be used either as a pure-savage trope (which is the initial fake-out) or the noble savage trope (the eventual conclusion).
The noble savages are still savages, of course, to be condescended to and instructed (like I said, this episode is offensive from every possible angle), but they are also Americans, which means of course they eventually won and we're witnessing their final victory over communism. The notion that this is written with the premise that Kirk is acquiescing in genocide instead of ratifying and completing the triumph of the American constitution over communism* is risible. It flies directly in the face of what the episode plainly tells us and would be wildly out of character for the writers of Sixties Trek.
Of course, your interpretation is what the story looks like if you're not willing to buy the American jingoism being sold here at face value. And I can't blame you for being unwilling. But it's made absolutely, inescapably plain that we are meant to buy the American jingoistic interpretation as the truth about these events and about Omega IV.
See why I find this episode so awful?
* It may seem confusing, by the way, that they build a Native American-style fighting-for-lost-lands romance into this outcome. Weren't the real Yankees land thieves of precisely the sort that the Kohms in this story turn out to have been? But it's a contradiction characteristic of American romanticism about "the Indians;" much like the way the safely-defeated Highlander Clan lifestyle is romanticized in modern Britain, Americans often found it safe to present the noble savage in elegiac terms once the real aboriginal was confined to reservations (hence the Lone Ranger's sidekick Tonto). The Yangs are simply a version of that trope executed in... for lack of a better word, "blond-face."
Once they're named "the Communists," we know they're an aggressive totalitarian enemy and we're told precisely what the war we're witnessing is:
Omega Glory said:
McCoy calls Kirk "a romantic" for saying this, but a few moments later events ratify Kirk's interpretation. The reveal is a reversal of expectations. The people we're told are "savages" in the first part of their episode are fighting in a noble cause to retake their land from communist conquerors. The last bastion of "civilization" is in fact a bastion of tyranny about to fall to the noble "Yankee" resistance.
The messaging is not in any way even the teeniest bit ambiguous.
The Kohms, now finding themselves on the losing end of the war, are pretty clearly using Tracey for his weapons technology.
I think you'll find this is not in fact the general audience reaction. The Yangs are presented initially as unreconstructed savages in order for the final reveal about what they are to be a reversal that presents the whole conflict in a different light. And part of what they're meant to echo is the American Indians, who can be used either as a pure-savage trope (which is the initial fake-out) or the noble savage trope (the eventual conclusion).
The noble savages are still savages, of course, to be condescended to and instructed (like I said, this episode is offensive from every possible angle), but they are also Americans, which means of course they eventually won and we're witnessing their final victory over communism. The notion that this is written with the premise that Kirk is acquiescing in genocide instead of ratifying and completing the triumph of the American constitution over communism* is risible. It flies directly in the face of what the episode plainly tells us and would be wildly out of character for the writers of Sixties Trek.
Of course, your interpretation is what the story looks like if you're not willing to buy the American jingoism being sold here at face value. And I can't blame you for being unwilling. But it's made absolutely, inescapably plain that we are meant to buy the American jingoistic interpretation as the truth about these events and about Omega IV.
See why I find this episode so awful?
* It may seem confusing, by the way, that they build a Native American-style fighting-for-lost-lands romance into this outcome. Weren't the real Yankees land thieves of precisely the sort that the Kohms in this story turn out to have been? But it's a contradiction characteristic of American romanticism about "the Indians;" much like the way the safely-defeated Highlander Clan lifestyle is romanticized in modern Britain, Americans often found it safe to present the noble savage in elegiac terms once the real aboriginal was confined to reservations (hence the Lone Ranger's sidekick Tonto). The Yangs are simply a version of that trope executed in... for lack of a better word, "blond-face."
Last edited:
...Meaning the noble resistance has become the tyranny, and worse.
But the idea that the Kohms would have been evil first is bullshit. Nothing in the episode supports such a claim in any way. Spock is pushing this argument out of his ass by virtue of the names appearing similar to those of 20th century Earth rivals, but it's not even a solid turd, merely so much hot air.
And that's unfair to you, because they are Commies? Makes no sense.
But there is no reversal. We learn nothing new about the conflict at any point. The savages undergo no redemption.
False. The episode plainly tells us the Yangs completed a genocidal rampage across the planet. At no point does it mention the American Constitution playing a role in the conflict. The Yangs believe in Freedom all right, but their Freedom is genocide and nothing more. They can't read the Constitution, and thus cannot act on its contents, least of all adopt them as their life guide.
Now that's a completely different issue. The heroes certainly seem to ignore the facts, at least for the duration of the Spock/Kirk two-phrase discussion about the Yangs possibly being out to "reclaim their land". But this does not have the effect of convincing the audience of anything, any more than, say, Kirk suddenly saying "now there's an ugly broad, lucky my back is turned at her most of the time" would make us think ill of Uhura's appearance.
I guess we're "meant" to think "Spock's Brain" is funny or splendid drama, too. And in that sense you are of course correct. But while "we are meant to think" is a valid claim, "The Yangs are clearly portrayed as" is not. "Portrayal" means the wholesale onscreen presentation of Yang-related pseudo-facts that is out of the hands of the writers as soon as they let their pens rest: the audience is the only judge of what is actually being portrayed. It just took me this long to realize you saw this part differently. Sorry about the shouting-past-each-other moments above!
Timo Saloniemi
You may believe that, and it would be the saner interpretation of such events: but again, it is quite clearly not the stance the episode takes.
The cues for how the audience is meant to react to these events come from the protagonists. When Spock and Kirk tell us that the Yankees have been fighting to regain land stolen from them by Asiatic conquerors, they are very clearly not being presented as talking out of their asses -- and given that they are talking about communists and Asiatics, which are two stock names of evil for Sixties American audiences (who are in the midst of the Cold War with Russia and China and who vividly remember Japanese perfidy in WWII when this episode airs) this is not a surprise. Their speculation is being treated seriously by the story and is borne out quickly by words and behaviour of Cloud William.
Owing to that, your speculative reading is not a plausible in-context reading of the script. I'm sorry, it just isn't. But you're right to be disturbed by the idea of the script having such a premise, because it is disturbing. It means the Yangs are being presented as a relatively noble cause even having exterminated most of the Kohms, which effectively means the script and our heroes are tacitly telling us such measures may be acceptable as a way of overcoming communism if it comes to open war. Sure, it's a little overzealous -- the Yang cause is still presented as savage -- but it is not presented as evil by any stretch.
It's not a question of its being unfair to me. Once the Kohms have been framed as Asiatic Communist land-stealing bad guys who are being given their comeuppance by a resistance of noble Yankee savages, the contextual cues as to how to read their behaviour are being made inescapably, utterly clear.
No, you're trying to ignore the interpretation the protagonists present and the way the events are shown to bear out that interpretation, and you can't do that. That's cherry-picking.
It's the holy book of the Yangs. Of course it's mentioned.
The Yangs are descended from its writers and, garbled though their now-degraded oral tradition about its contents has become, the basic character of their society is still owed to it: they noble savages in the classic style, austere and honorable in their own way to any enemy who isn't a Kohm. Kirk is required to instruct them and complete their freedom, he is not presented as its source.
No, it is the same issue. The heroes are our window on the story. They are our source of facts. The story is specifically crafted to suggest that their interpretation of events is correct. There is no lack of clarity as to what the writers believe and want us to believe is the correct and factual interpretation of events on Omega IV. None.
That you don't like this interpretation is understandable. It's unpleasant and hypocritical and jingoistic and racist and effectively winks at genocide without owning up to doing so. But it is not in the least bit unclear that this is the interpretation audiences were meant to come away with. That they're not the boss of you is fine, good for you, but that doesn't change the very clear cues given throughout the story. You don't choose to see the Yangs as the good guys; it is very clear nevertheless that the script is presenting them as the local good guys, or at minimum the lesser local evil. There is no way around that.
Again I call complete bullshit. The episode is full of pseudo-facts that are independent of what the heroes do or say. Sometimes these facts expose the fallibility of our heroes, such as in this episode. Any "crafting" done on the story is irrelevant except as viewed through the end result, and the end result consists of the facts rather than the crafting.
And, ultimately, the only thing that matters, as it's off the authors' hands. What is meant and what is shown are two different things, and if these happen to coincide, then the writers have succeeded. If they don't, they have failed. Doesn't mean that the result would be objectionable, unenjoyable or anything of that vein - writer failures are often blessings without disguise.
Again, what was meant and what pseudo-transpired are fundamentally unrelated things. Trying to claim that the Yangs are good guys is false when referring to the events of the episode. It is only true when referring to the writing process, which isn't a relevant part of the user interface of Star Trek.
Timo Saloniemi
My impression of the conflict between the Yang and the Comms was that the Comms won and took over the USA with the help of biological warfare (probably on both sides).
I didn't get the idea that the Yangs were about to go on or had been on a genocidal rampage of the planet. They kept saying they wanted their lands back. Not that they wanted to take over the Comms land just that they wanted the Comms out.
That being said I don't think that the episode made the Yangs out to be 'noble'. Good determined crazy fighters but not morally better or worse than the Comms. If GR had wanted to portray the Yangs as being wonderful, he would not have:
1. Had the Yang leader 'betray' Kirk.
2. Had the Yangs appear sort of stupid
3. Had a very attractive Comm woman catching McCoys attention.
IMO one of TOS's strength (at least in the early episodes) was that the 'enemy' was not made out to be totally evil and the Federation totally good. The Organians thought the Klingons and Federation were much the same, in 'Balance of Terror' the Romulan Commander was portrayed sort of sympathetically as was Kang in 'Day of the Dove'. I don't think that the Comms were supposed to be totally bad and the Yangs totally good.
If they were then the writers got it wrong at least in my case but then again I'm not a Yang or a Comm.
I didn't get the idea that the Yangs were about to go on or had been on a genocidal rampage of the planet. They kept saying they wanted their lands back. Not that they wanted to take over the Comms land just that they wanted the Comms out.
That being said I don't think that the episode made the Yangs out to be 'noble'. Good determined crazy fighters but not morally better or worse than the Comms. If GR had wanted to portray the Yangs as being wonderful, he would not have:
1. Had the Yang leader 'betray' Kirk.
2. Had the Yangs appear sort of stupid
3. Had a very attractive Comm woman catching McCoys attention.
IMO one of TOS's strength (at least in the early episodes) was that the 'enemy' was not made out to be totally evil and the Federation totally good. The Organians thought the Klingons and Federation were much the same, in 'Balance of Terror' the Romulan Commander was portrayed sort of sympathetically as was Kang in 'Day of the Dove'. I don't think that the Comms were supposed to be totally bad and the Yangs totally good.
If they were then the writers got it wrong at least in my case but then again I'm not a Yang or a Comm.
Trying to claim that the Yangs are being sold as good guys is simply correct. If you'll notice, this does not mean I actually think they are good guys. I simply think the episode is attempting to sell the audience on that proposition, which is precisely why it is offensive.
A shaggy dog kind of episode. All set up and no punch line. Too bad, because as the OP pointed out there were plenty of good parts that somehow added up to...not much.
I never got the feeling they were trying to sell the Yangs as the good guys. The very first glimpse we get of them, they are trying to behead a Kohm.
Huh? I thought the first glimpse we got of the Yangs was Cloud William's head on the chopping block and the execution interrupted by Tracey, who had him locked up.
See above in re: the way the episode sets up an expectation of the Yangs as antagonists and then (tries to) reverse it. Basically the Good All Along trope in action.
Oops. Right you are!
Memory plays tricks on you when you get old!
But I still don't think they were trying to sell the Yangs as the good guys.
Oops. Right you are!
Memory plays tricks on you when you get old!
But I still don't think they were trying to sell the Yangs as the good guys.
Well I watched it just last week, so that's the only way I remembered.
And yes, the Yangs were being set up initially as the bad guys, and Kohms were being presented as semi-friendlies or allies due to Tracey being with them. I didn't have that much trouble back in 1968 or whenever with the Yang/Yankees business but then they had to bring the flag in and ruin any believability factor remaining.