Balance of Terror.
Kirk drift—misremembering a character…
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
- Status
... Gary Mitchell was describing Lieutenant Kirk, the Academy instructor, as seen from the viewpoint of someone who had been a student in one of his classes. That's never meant to be a definition of the character of Captain Kirk; it's one person's impression of that character at one early stage of his career.
"Stack of books with legs" is an example of a single line--almost a throwaway--being exaggerated into carrying far more weight than was ever intended.
Last edited:
Oh, right!
Except it was repeated in Shore Leave when Kirk described his young self as "positively grim".
Some dialogue is meant to be expository, yes, but my impression is that too many folks these days seem to think that all dialogue is meant to be be expository and must be taken literally. Even with regards to emotional states and reactions. "But wait, she said she hated him, but now she loves him? That doesn't make any sense!"
And often writers may try to deliberately mislead the audience, the better to pull a surprise reveal later on. "Guess what, she's not really his sister; she's his wife!"
Which invariably runs the risk of confusing some viewers. "Wait, I thought she was his sister? I'm positive they said so earlier!"
Saw this a lot back when I was writing the UNDERWORLD novels. Those movies were perhaps a little too fond of "Surprise, everything you knew was a lie!" twists, which inevitably left some viewers behind.
"But . . . but Viktor said that killing an Elder would kill every vampire he created! Why didn't all the younger vampires die when he did?"
"Because that's what the Elders wanted the younger vampires to believe! They explained it was a ruse midway through the second movie, remember?"
A textbook example of viewers thinking that all dialogue is exposition, to be accepted as gospel, as opposed to words coming from the lips of specific characters in a specific contexts who are bound to have their own agendas and perspectives when dealing with others.
And there, it was Kirk describing himself as an Academy Cadet / Midshipman -- so a snapshot of an even earlier place in time than Mitchell's impression of Kirk as an instructor. That, too, was never meant to define an overarching quality of Kirk as a character, but rather was used to succinctly describe a phase of the character's development.
Neither "stack of books with legs" nor "positively grim" would properly be applied to Kirk as captain of a starship.
He can look back at his earlier self and recognize how he's changed and grown over time. That's self-awareness.
Nicely and succinctly put. One individual's opinion should not be mistaken for a universal constant.
If somebody proudly declares, "No Andorian would ever surrender," that doesn't mean that "canon" is being violated if we see a different Andorian surrender at some point. Just means that not all Andorians react the same under every circumstances.
Complexity, contradictions, and subtext are things. In fiction, as in real life.
"Vulcans do not lie."
Which was pretty significant. His career is probably fried if that didn't turn out well.
Clap. Clap. Clap. Clap.
Either you were super ranty and bouncing around all over the place gesturing wildly during that OR you were ice cold in you Spockian best like you were explaining to McCoy why he couldn't remove Decker from command on medical grounds. Win either way. (Yes, yes, you were typing at a keyboard. Leave us SOME illusion!)
EDIT: DAMMIT, did someone else use the word "Spockian" RIGHT before I did?!?
More like I've been thinking and talking about this for years now, even if I seem to be running into this sort of stubborn literalism more often lately. (Perhaps related to the increasingly pervasive tendency of posters to insist that their takes on this or that new work are "objectively" correct?)
Last edited:
All it takes is one Youtube video, one mistaken interpretation published on a fan site, one reddit thread, one fanfic conflated with the show's portrayal, and voila. Instant urban legend alternate take adopted by everyone and his second cousin.
Lucille Ball battled the network to save Star Trek anyone?
That shit seems to be everywhere.
Alexander Courage never worked on Star Trek again after Roddenberry weaseled his way into the royalties.
From Snopes:
"Roddenberry's gain was Star Trek's loss. Courage scored only a few episodes of the series' first season before commencing work on the feature film Doctor Dolittle. Afterwards, associate producer Robert Justman was unable to secure Courage's composing services for Star Trek's second season, something Justman attributed to Courage's lingering disappointment over the royalty issue."
Arrrrgh! Never mind that he composed music for all three seasons AND did arrangements on Star Trek: The Motion Picture.
"Dozens of southern states refused to air the interracial kiss episode!"
"Victoria Vetri played Isis!"
(At the least that last one finally seems to be dead.)
And may I say, Alexander Courage's second season library music was some of the best material they had. Kirk's "One Man with a Vision" music in "Mirror, Mirror" was Courage's, for instance.
Incidentally, I notice we have a guy posting as "Zapp Brannigan" now. I just want to say, that's not me.
Who thought that?
Early on, he says:
Later, after he learns more:
Born with the potential to impregnate themselves when fed well.
People just take individual comments out of context, I guess, or fail to combine comments separated by scenes.
Early on, he says:
Later, after he learns more:
Born with the potential to impregnate themselves when fed well.
People just take individual comments out of context, I guess, or fail to combine comments separated by scenes.
- Status