Discussion in 'Star Trek - The Original & Animated Series' started by SignGuyHPW, Oct 11, 2013.
Why? So they stop throwing plameek soup at you.
Just making the point that Kirk "high-fiving" the Vulcans if Spock and T'Pring had public sex is something that would be seriously out of character for TOS Kirk.
I have no idea where the poster got the notion of Kirk high-fiving anyone, and thought it could be from the Abramsverse, since that Kirk is a great deal less mature than TOS Kirk.
It plays into the notion that Kirk is a womanizing horndog. Which was part of Kirk's reputation to the public at large long before Abrams or even Meyer got their hands on Star Trek.
The same public referred to "Dr. Spock" and laser weapons.
And Abrams is an idiot. He's like a Berman who never got a regular job. The Kirk as Don Juan thing has been debunked repeatedly.
Boy, people look the most mature when name calling.
Whether or not it has been debunked, it is still the perception that the general public has had of the character for the last forty-plus years.
Yes, the public gets stuff wrong. Mostly because their perceptions aren't based on actually watching the show and hearing things second hand.
Abrams is a very successful producer and director. Not sure how that makes him an idiot. What's a "regular" job? Aren't you a lawyer? To some people that's not a "regular" job. Eye of the beholder.
Even in the Abrams' film Kirk's not much of a "Don Juan". He manages not to score with either of his leading ladies.
Apparently Stonn wasn't bonded as a child, since he was available as an adult for T'Pring, so the practice of child bonding isn't universal.
And what's the point of bonding anyway, if the woman is free to choose someone else? Did T'Pring's bonding just not take? If she had married Spock and then carried on with Stonn when Spock was gone, would she have been snubbed on Vulcan, or is that business as usual?
Lots of unanswered questions. The Vulcan part of the story to me is interesting, but secondary. The central part is the irony of the two friends being forced to fight to the death for the possession of a woman neither of them really wanted.
Stonn probably was bonded as a child, but there are a few possible reasons why he still wasn't bonded as an adult. First, the girl could have died and Stonn's parents didn't bond him to anyone else. Second, it's possible that the girl's family decided, for some reason, to have the bond severed (a kind of pre-pon farr divorce which would be facilitated by a healer). This would make sense if the girl's family intended to move permanently off-planet, or if they just decided Stonn wasn't good enough. Of course, Stonn's family could have been the ones to decide to sever the bond. Third, maybe nobody thought Stonn was good enough for their daughter!
The social consequences for the woman is a great incentive for her to go through with the marriage, rather than choose the challenge. After all, T'Pau asks T'Pring if she is prepared to become the property of the victor - that's not just ceremony - she's asking if T'Pring is prepared to literally become chattel - someone who is owned. This would result in a loss of respect, many of the rights that normal Vulcan women would take for granted, and social ostracism.
Yes, she would have been snubbed on Vulcan. I'm reasonably sure that Vulcan social norms don't include adultery.
If only Kirk had knocked out Spock in the first round. The look on T'Pring's face when Kirk, to keep diplomatic relations kosher, brings his new Vulcan bribe up to the ship. How's that for you, little miss only three possible outcomes.
I'll leave the rest to Eddie Murphy
One thing is sure: if Kirk had "won", he can say goodbye to his command. Imagine the reaction shipboard if after they beam down for Spock's wedding, Kirk returns with no Spock, and married himself. This is the guy you're then going to follow loyally into the jaws of potential death? He'd come off like a total sucker from then on!
I started a fanfic about this awhile back...
Yeah, I wonder where we've seen this behaviour before. For example, people talking how ST09 and STID sucked donkey balls well before seeing them...
I love that bit.
That's true, but if you're recreating original characters based not on the originals but on public perception, aren't you just making parodies or caricatures?
I've seen the tallies that have been done that shows Kirk didn't sleep with every woman he encountered but that doesn't mean he was never something of a ladies man. He definitely had a non-platonic eye for members of the opposite sex.
And some people insist on holding grudges because some of "the public" might not like the same things they like. I did see the 2009 movie. It was crap (in my opinion, of course). I intend to see the other movie as well. I'd be happy if it was any better, but I'm not really expecting much.
I've never made the "Mr./Dr." mistake, however. Not once. In fact, I keep telling Chapters/Indigo (a bookstore chain) that they ought to be wary of selling merchandise that's labeled "Dr. Spock" (and is clearly TOS Spock) - legitimate merchandise wouldn't have that error on their packaging and advertising.
There are some parodies that are quite good. The best ones are respectful of the original source material, yet can be bitingly satirical and funny.
Kirk was a flirt and ladies' man, but he did not have sex with as many women as people tend to think. During the whole of TOS, there are only 3 I can think of: Drusilla, Deela, and Miramanee.
Well, he was a Gene Roddenberry character, after all...
Wow. Not even once? I mean, wow. That's really something.
Well, since you decided to post a dig at me for my opinions of the Abrams movies and connect it with "the public" who make such stupid errors about Spock's proper title, I thought I'd clarify the matter.
Separate names with a comma.