Thank you for taking the time to respond to this thread and your willingness to express your opinions on the subject. It’s been more helpful than you may realize. Unfortunately it seems I haven’t come across very well in posting this thread. I am very new at posting in a forum, having never done so before two days ago! Perhaps I shouldn’t have created a new thread until I had a better idea what to expect from it. I can see where you’re coming from in the first paragraph. I would have probably felt the same way under these circumstances. We don’t know each other, and for all I know I’ve come across as a complete crack pot. Just like with Nerys Myk, I don’t know your level of understand regarding the hero’s journey, and feel no need to defend my own, but it seems like you are at least familiar with it. Again, I need to stress it was a misnomer to restrict the scope of this topic to just TOS. I meant this topic to cover the entire body of filmed Kirk/Spock adventures. Unless there’s a distinction which encompasses this corpus of material, I would like to continue using TOS when referring to it. Again, I obviously didn’t do a very good job at explaining my position. I will try to be more clear here. I completely understand and believe Kirk has earned his position as Captain of the Enterprise. I think his leadership skill are exemplary, and he is a very intelligent and insightful leader of men. I was trying to point out the reason why Kirk is in position of lead character in the series is because of his rank as captain. The position itself is what puts Kirk in the position of making the decisions which push the plot forward, which is the role of the protagonist. I do not doubt for a minute he has earned the right to sit in the center seat, but his qualification was not my point at all. I hope I made the distinction clear. I've responded to the last part of your post line by line below: Campbell is not an "authority." Here is where I have to strongly disagree with you. Not only was Campbell an authority on the hero’s journey, he was the authority on the subject. Campbell literally wrote the book on the hero’s journey for Pete’s sake! He was talking about basic themes that underlie cultural myths, If you believe Campell was only referring to “basic themes that underlie cultural myths” then you have given yourself away. To me that indicates a one-dimensional understanding of his work. Any understanding of it is better than no understanding, don't get me wrong. However, it is soooo much more than what you have indicated it to be. but he certainly wasn't saying that every single work of fiction is required to conform to a single formula. Correct, I have never seen him quoted as saying that. He was describing the pattern, not prescribing it. As Chekov said once, “if the shoe fits, wear it.” And he wasn't writing about the structure of episodic television series. That is a logical conclusion, since he published The Hero With A Thousand Faces in 1949. Yes -- you're coming from a completely different direction than I am. We're not going to be able to agree on this. That’s a shame, predictable, but a shame. Despite one of the most important things Star Trek attempted to teach us, people still tend to reject what is strange to them instead of seeking to understand it.