Rand leaving the Enterprise

[Desert Kris]

IIRC, Abode is written as a pretty generic TOS novel, as are its loose "sequels" Chain of Attack and The Final Nexus by Gene DeWeese. The Pocket Timeliners put those books late in the 5-year mission, but they don't explain their reasoning for the placement. The only thing I can recall about Abode that suggests a later setting is its cover, whose artist used TMP-era references even though there's nothing to suggest that setting in the actual story.

Maybe Abode is placed towards the end of the 5YM because it is grouped with Chain of Attack and The Final Nexus, and because those three books are threaded between JM Dillard's novels, Mindshadow, Demons, and Bloodthirst in some of the chronologies I've seen outlined. Five of these six books books have Ingrit Tomson as the security chief, I gather, and there's an impression that she's new in the post in Mindshadow. Some of the chronologies (and continuity discussions) I've seen have suggested that Dillard's books progression leads into The Lost Years depicting a version of the definitive end of the 5YM.

I'll freely admit that I am a little biased, but without meaning to be strict about the above interpretation. I just really like that hypothetically outlining of those books, so I've become a little attached to it.

There's a generic standby that I've sometimes use, when the passage of time between novels isn't fully clarified, in two variations. The first is a baseline assumption that when in doubt, a year separates one story from next. The second baseline assumption I might make is that the number of years that pass between the writing and release of the next book is also the roughly the same amount of time passing in-universe.

I don't know if those generic assumptions can work to space out the above six Star Trek novels, I can get easily confused sometimes trying to outline a chronology on my own. I think Dillard's novels might be spaced out that way, they are kind of vague about the time-distance between each other.

 

[Christopher]

Maybe Abode is placed towards the end of the 5YM because it is grouped with Chain of Attack and The Final Nexus, and because those three books are threaded between JM Dillard's novels, Mindshadow, Demons, and Bloodthirst in some of the chronologies I've seen outlined. Five of these six books books have Ingrit Tomson as the security chief, I gather, and there's an impression that she's new in the post in Mindshadow.

Oh, that would explain it. Still, G. Harry Stine/Lee Correy wouldn't have known any of that would happen when he wrote Abode. As far as its own text is concerned, I don't think there's anything that specifies its placement, aside from the general assumption that any novel is set sometime after the 79 episodes of TOS, or at least after whatever episodes it happens to allude to.

 

[LK3185]

Having recently finished Abode (its decent) just seems like Rand is there with Chekov because they are pretty familiar and also, you don't have to make an original character fit the role. Rand is used as female star fleet voice in the story and that's pretty much it. I will say in regards to placement, while I don't have the memory or deep knowledge of the TOS timeline, the book does feel post the series because of an empahis on the crew being together quite awhile. Its a seasoned crew that has dealt with plenty of new civilizations by that point. Of course, that's just speculation on my part.

 

[Christopher]

Having recently finished Abode (its decent) just seems like Rand is there with Chekov because they are pretty familiar and also, you don't have to make an original character fit the role. Rand is used as female star fleet voice in the story and that's pretty much it. I will say in regards to placement, while I don't have the memory or deep knowledge of the TOS timeline, the book does feel post the series because of an empahis on the crew being together quite awhile. Its a seasoned crew that has dealt with plenty of new civilizations by that point. Of course, that's just speculation on my part.

Well, yeah, that's usually a given. The natural place to put a tie-in novel is close to the "present" as perceived by the audience. TNG, DS9, and VGR novels tended to advance with the seasons, allowing for a year or so of lag time. And TOS novels written after the series were naturally set after the series, unless there was a plot reason to tie them to a specific episode as with Web of the Romulans or Double, Double. The natural perception was that the novels were continuing the series beyond its cancellation. (Although I find it odd that the Marvel (Vol. 1) and DC Comics series mostly advanced with the movie timeline while the majority of prose novels stayed back in the TV era.)

And it wasn't unusual for TOS supporting characters to come and go without explanation, like when Sulu missed a bunch of season 2 and then reappeared, or like Chapel's intermittent appearances throughout the series. So bringing back Rand doesn't mean the author was telling a first-season story, it just meant that they saw no reason not to use her. If the reasons for Grace Lee Whitney's departure had been more benign and she'd chosen to come back in season 3, say, I'm sure Rand would've reappeared on the show with just as little explanation for her long absence.

 

[Pauln6]

I'm constantly baffled by the absence of Rand in the novelisations and comics. She's promoted to a chief petty officer assigned to engineering by the time of TMP and that could have happened at any point after she ceased to be Kirk's yeoman. She hasn't even featured in the Year Five comic run, which has brought back quite a few familiar faces. It's not as if TOS is awash with female engineers. Then when you consider that she was essentially the female lead, who appeared as often as Scotty, until real world issues intruded, it makes it even stranger.

I think her appearance in the First Adventure is apocryphal since the part is clearly written for Yeoman Smith (no way is Rand 16 - we know that from Charlie X).

I believe that there was some vague discussion about Grace's possible return in later seasons as a guest performer although the idea was nixed (she was originally intended to be the crewman who bought the tribble in the early draft) so that could be an indication that Rand could have been around, if not on screen. That said, when asked why Rand wouldn't be coming back David Gerrold was allegedly told that she had transferred off the ship.

For my part, either works. Ro Laren left the Enterprise and returned with some new training, so why not Rand?

I think she works best as the everyman, able to dumb things down for the audience unfamiliar with Trek lore. She's also effective as a character when she interacts with a dumb question or a line of sass or sarcasm, steering well clear of any moon eyes at Kirk. Sadly, many of her appearances that I have read are rather dry cameos. I think John Byrne didn't really like the hair so he was happy to formally write her out but he later regretted that so he bought her back as part of the ensemble with a new hairdo. The science department was a brave choice though - the fact that she could make coffee with a phaser might show a rudimentary knowledge of physics but she doesn't strike me as a brainiac. Even Grace described as 'cute and not very bright'.

I think it's way past time she was rehabilitated as a main character.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I'm constantly baffled by the absence of Rand in the novelisations and comics. She's promoted to a chief petty officer assigned to engineering by the time of TMP and that could have happened at any point after she ceased to be Kirk's yeoman.

Unless the authors were doing a novel clearly set in the early part of Season One, use of Rand was not encouraged.

The whole "chief petty officer" was never planned out. "The Making of ST:TMP" has a memo where the main cast's ranks were being clarified. There is a correction to that memo which states that Rand is a "Chief", as in Transporter Chief. Her rank insignia is different to everyone's stripe. Rand's metal insignia is a trapezoid shape on her epaulettes. There is even a "Get Smart" gag in the apology email, "Sorry about that, Chief".

In her unscripted ST III appearance, that was filmed at ILM in a hastily-fitted Starfleet maroon uniform which just happened to have Commander rank. In her "Starlog" interview promoting ST IV, Grace mentions how they were trying to determine a rank for her character and she remembered, "On TMP I was a 'chief'...", so it was decided to make her a "Chief Petty Officer".

She hasn't even featured in the Year Five comic run, which has brought back quite a few familiar faces.

But she was brought back for John Byrne's "New Visions" photo comic series. Byrne happens to like Rand.

Then when you consider that she was essentially the female lead, who appeared as often as Scotty, until real world issues intruded, it makes it even stranger.

Well, it could also be a result of the fallout of her contract. Grace had a 13-week contract, while some of the others were "day players". Grace took a chunk of the budget each week and the writers were not utilising her character as much as they should have been. There was a conscious move towards having variety in yeomen after her departure. This is reflected in the books. Grace's likeness is used in the early Gold Key comics, and then she disappears. Just like in the show. Especially in the early days, the novelists weren't inventing reasons for characters' unexplained onscreen departures.

I think her appearance in the First Adventure is apocryphal since the part is clearly written for Yeoman Smith (no way is Rand 16...

Possible. I suspect that Vonda McIntyre was originally trying to do something with Rand that didn't work out as originally intended, and it did not survive the studio approval process. This was the only novel with cover text praise from Roddenberry himself. There was also a request that Chekov be included because the book was celebrated a major anniversary.

IIRC, in "Enterprise: The First Adventure", Rand was once on a ship that went through a time/space dilation, causing her chronological age to not match up with her physical appearance. It did my head in trying to work out what was being intended. Was Vonda trying to say that Rand was only 16 at the beginning of the mission, but appeared much older due to the anomaly? (It didn't end up working out that way.) The young crew person was definitely something that appealed to Vonda. A bit Horatio Hornblower. (Vonda has Peter Preston being a very young midshipman in the ST II novelization, too).

I believe that there was some vague discussion about Grace's possible return in later seasons as a guest performer although the idea was nixed (she was originally intended to be the crewman who bought the tribble in the early draft) so that could be an indication that Rand could have been around, if not on screen. That said, when asked why Rand wouldn't be coming back David Gerrold was allegedly told that she had transferred off the ship.

Keep in mind that David would have started playing with his spec scripts after seeing the first 13 episodes playing on TV. By the time his scripts were being pitched (and there were several), and one accepted, it was clear that Grace's contract was not being renewed.

Grace always said at conventions that her least favourite episodes of all time were: "Dagger of the Mind", because Rand's promised juicy role was rewritten for Dr Helen Noel; and the 14th episode filmed, "The Galileo Seven", because it was the first one made after her contract had ended - and Rand's name was simply scrubbed out and replaced with Yeoman Mears.

Ro Laren left the Enterprise and returned with some new training, so why not Rand?

Essentially that's what fandom decided. She needed time to retrain as a transporter operator, just as Chekov retrained in Security between TAS and "Phase II"/TMP.

I think John Byrne didn't really like the hair so he was happy to formally write her out but he later regretted that so he bought her back as part of the ensemble with a new hairdo.

I dunno. I thought Byrne simply liked the idea of doing things with his photo comic that TOS had not done onscreen, but using elements that had been onscreen. Formally writing out Rand was something that had not yet been done.

Hairstyles never stay in fashion very long. It would be odd that Rand hung onto that elaborate, unique basketweave for too long, especially after time away from the ship.

 

[Christopher]

IIRC, in "Enterprise: The First Adventure", Rand was once on a ship that went through a time/space dilation, causing her chronological age to not match up with her physical appearance. It did my head in trying to work out what was being intended. Was Vonda trying to say that Rand was only 16 at the beginning of the mission, but appeared much older due to the anomaly?

No, exactly the opposite. It wasn't a handwavey "anomaly," just a ship that lost warp drive and had to travel at relativistic speed for several years so that the crew was subject to time dilation. That meant Rand's personal time was slowed down relative to the outside world, similar to suspended animation, so when it ended, she was biologically a few years younger than her calendar age. That's how she was able to get a job in Starfleet despite being underage -- because her birthdate was more than 18 years in the past, so she was a legal adult on paper.

That's why it was so bizarre that McIntyre asserted this about Rand -- because Grace Lee Whitney was around the same age as Shatner and did not even remotely look under twenty, not to mention that "Charlie X" was predicated on Rand being way too old for the 17-year-old Charlie. It just made no sense for that character.

 

[Damian]

That's why it was so bizarre that McIntyre asserted this about Rand -- because Grace Lee Whitney was around the same age as Shatner and did not even remotely look under twenty, not to mention that "Charlie X" was predicated on Rand being way too old for the 17-year-old Charlie. It just made no sense for that character.

Yeah, I have to agree. The whole Rand backstory just didn't make a lot of sense. It's one thing when an author does something like that to try to explain an inconsistency. If Rand had looked like a teenager in the series and people thought how did someone so young get posted or something and McIntyre wanted to explain that she was older than she looked. But I never looked back at the TV series and think to myself, wow, Rand looks way to young to be the captain's yeoman. Even if you assume E:TFA is an entire year before WNMHGB, it's not like she'd be years younger.

Of course, I've had a number of issues with the character placement in E:TFA. Rand being Kirk's yeoman at that point didn't make a lot of sense to me since it seems pretty clear in "The Corbomite Maneuver" that he had only recently just met her. I greatly prefer yours and Friedman's pre-WNMHGB stories that are much more consistent with WNMHBG (and are just plain better stories overall).

 

[Christopher]

Of course, I've had a number of issues with the character placement in E:TFA. Rand being Kirk's yeoman at that point didn't make a lot of sense to me since it seems pretty clear in "The Corbomite Maneuver" that he had only recently just met her.

Yes. Chekov being on board at the time is just as contrived, the same as in the 2009 movie. It would've been better just to give him a side role as a cadet just starting out at the Academy, say. Or leave him out altogether. He appeared in only half of TOS's episodes and wasn't in season 1 or TAS at all, so it's not like he's indispensable.

The problem is that E:TFA was trying to be an anniversary celebration as well as an origin novel, so it contrived excuses to feature the entire familiar series cast instead of the less beloved second-pilot cast. I can see the real-world logic of that, but it was awkward in terms of in-story continuity. And it still doesn't begin to explain the bizarre de-aging of Rand.

 

[Therin of Andor]

No, exactly the opposite...That's why it was so bizarre that McIntyre asserted this about Rand -- because Grace Lee Whitney was around the same age as Shatner and did not even remotely look under twenty, not to mention that "Charlie X" was predicated on Rand being way too old for the 17-year-old Charlie. It just made no sense for that character.

Exactly!

 

[Damian]

Yes. Chekov being on board at the time is just as contrived, the same as in the 2009 movie. It would've been better just to give him a side role as a cadet just starting out at the Academy, say. Or leave him out altogether. He appeared in only half of TOS's episodes and wasn't in season 1 or TAS at all, so it's not like he's indispensable.

The problem is that E:TFA was trying to be an anniversary celebration as well as an origin novel, so it contrived excuses to feature the entire familiar series cast instead of the less beloved second-pilot cast. I can see the real-world logic of that, but it was awkward in terms of in-story continuity. And it still doesn't begin to explain the bizarre de-aging of Rand.

I don't recall Chekov being in E:TFA. His role in the book must have been pretty limited, but yeah, I agree. I can see maybe some later season 1 era novels featuring him in another part of the ship (and some have done just that). In a way it'd make sense that he'd have to work his way up to be the 'day shift' navigator, so he probably was somewhere else on the ship for a time (which is why I never thought Khan knowing him in TWOK was a huge deal--though it might have been helpful if they picked a character who we actually saw interact with Khan in "Space Seed").

But very little of the novel felt like it fit in the proper era. Sulu being helmsman, McCoy being CMO (and what was really bizarre is Kirk considered contacting Piper in the novel to be temporary CMO because they couldn't find McCoy--though Strangers from the Sky did offer a bit of a continuity 'fix' by noting McCoy was on board when Kirk took command but had to take a leave of absence and Piper came out of retirement to help out) and everything else seemed off.

Pike was promoted to Commodore in the novel while in "The Menagerie" we are told he was a fleet captain (although perhaps that's one and the same, but then you'd think they would have said he was a commodore in "The Menagerie).

Other than Kirk taking command and being green as a captain since in that novel the Enterprise is his first command it didn't feel like a first mission for Kirk. Of course this younger Kirk is a lot different than that portrayed in other early Kirk career novels like The Captain's Oath and MBK. It seemed McIntyre went with the maverick idea. Her Kirk during this period is impulsive, quick to leap without thinking and emotional.

Like you noted, it was very awkward. When I last read it a few years back it really felt off, esp. knowing everything we know now about the continuity (and frankly even when I first read it when it came out in 1987 it felt off even back then).

 

[Therin of Andor]

Like you noted, it was very awkward. When I last read it a few years back it really felt off, esp. knowing everything we know now about the continuity (and frankly even when I first read it when it came out in 1987 it felt off even back then).

Reading the book, I was not really impressed by the circus troupe scenes. There was also Stephen, the smiling blond Vulcan juggler.

IIRC, the circus scenes actually work much better in the heavily abridged audio presentation.

 

[Christopher]

I don't recall Chekov being in E:TFA. His role in the book must have been pretty limited

Yeah, he showed up briefly as a junior cadet on the night shift. It was more an extended cameo than an integral role.

Other than Kirk taking command and being green as a captain since in that novel the Enterprise is his first command it didn't feel like a first mission for Kirk.

No, it wasn't his first command. McIntyre stayed true to the assertion in The Making of Star Trek that Kirk's first command was a destroyer-equivalent (i.e. smaller) vessel, as well as the line in "Where No Man" that Kirk had requested Gary Mitchell on his first command, which McIntyre named the Lydia Sutherland after two ships from the Hornblower series. It was a plot point in E:TFA that Kirk had hoped to bring Gary Mitchell with him to the Enterprise as his first officer, but had to accept Spock in the role instead because Mitchell had been badly wounded in the Battle of Ghioghe (IIRC) and was still healing.

Like you noted, it was very awkward. When I last read it a few years back it really felt off, esp. knowing everything we know now about the continuity (and frankly even when I first read it when it came out in 1987 it felt off even back then).

Yes, it felt off at the time. We haven't really learned anything new about the relevant continuity since then, at least not where the crew's backstories are concerned. The main inconsistencies that have arisen subsequently have to do with Klingon history and culture. For instance, McIntyre's rather condescending take on the Klingons' reaction to Shakespeare -- preferring a doggerel corruption of the Bard's poetry to the genuine article because they're a bunch of barely literate savages -- fits poorly with TUC's portrayal of Klingons as deeply appreciating the real thing. And ENT established a longer history between humanity and the Klingons than E:TFA presumed, I think.

 

[Damian]

No, it wasn't his first command. McIntyre stayed true to the assertion in The Making of Star Trek that Kirk's first command was a destroyer-equivalent (i.e. smaller) vessel, as well as the line in "Where No Man" that Kirk had requested Gary Mitchell on his first command, which McIntyre named the Lydia Sutherland after two ships from the Hornblower series. It was a plot point in E:TFA that Kirk had hoped to bring Gary Mitchell with him to the Enterprise as his first officer, but had to accept Spock in the role instead because Mitchell had been badly wounded in the Battle of Ghioghe (IIRC) and was still healing.

OMG, I completely forgot that. Duh. I remember now even posting about that on other threads. How bad is that?

Yes, it felt off at the time. We haven't really learned anything new about the relevant continuity since then, at least not where the crew's backstories are concerned. The main inconsistencies that have arisen subsequently have to do with Klingon history and culture. For instance, McIntyre's rather condescending take on the Klingons' reaction to Shakespeare -- preferring a doggerel corruption of the Bard's poetry to the genuine article because they're a bunch of barely literate savages -- fits poorly with TUC's portrayal of Klingons as deeply appreciating the real thing. And ENT established a longer history between humanity and the Klingons than E:TFA presumed, I think.

Yeah. I even made some allowances to account for when the time the book came out (pre-TUC for instance) and it still felt really out of sync. And like I said, even when I first read it when it came out it didn't feel right.

I recall being really excited when I read about the novel coming out. I was a very new Trekkie at that point (so new I actually thought novels were part of what we all call canon today). I thought, we're finally going to get the story of Kirk taking command from Pike. Then when it came out I was really disappointed. I wasn't overly impressed with the overall story, and a lot of the characters being misplaced bugged me even way back then. Hell, even Gary Mitchell's role was very minimal.

The only highlight was maybe the aliens they encountered in the latter half of the novel. They were a bit more unique. But the rest was just meh. It's not the worse Star Trek novel I ever read--I mean, it's better than the Phoenix novels. But for what was supposed to be a huge novel release (even being the first Giant novel) it was a disappointment.

 

[Christopher]

I recall being really excited when I read about the novel coming out. I was a very new Trekkie at that point (so new I actually thought novels were part of what we all call canon today). I thought, we're finally going to get the story of Kirk taking command from Pike. Then when it came out I was really disappointed. I wasn't overly impressed with the overall story, and a lot of the characters being misplaced bugged me even way back then. Hell, even Gary Mitchell's role was very minimal.

We'd gotten a different version of that story in DC Comics' first TOS annual the previous year, written by Mike W. Barr. I always preferred Mike's version, which was truer to the pilot era and featured Mitchell and Kelso significantly (although it also contrived to feature McCoy instead of Piper, which was fine because Piper was dull).

 

[Damian]

We'd gotten a different version of that story in DC Comics' first TOS annual the previous year, written by Mike W. Barr. I always preferred Mike's version, which was truer to the pilot era and featured Mitchell and Kelso significantly (although it also contrived to feature McCoy instead of Piper, which was fine because Piper was dull).

Really don't like Dr. Piper do you . I wonder if he had stayed on would have have become a more interesting character over time. His role in WNMHGB didn't give him a lot of opportunities to excite (though I am glad the way things turned out, I would never want to give up Dr. McCoy).

I was always curious to see if some novel might 'rehab' his character a bit, make him less dull. Perhaps a late Pike era novel with Piper as CMO.

Sort of how like some of the novels 'rehabbed' Captain Harriman on the Enterprise-B. I was glad that the novels made him a worthy captain of the ship. Fair or not Generations left you with the impression that he was in over his head (I know there are arguments for and against that assertion, but that was the first impression).

 

[Christopher]

Really don't like Dr. Piper do you .

Well, he was hardly there. He had like eight lines, and they were virtually all exposition. He was more a placeholder than a character. Paul Fix had nothing to work with and did nothing with it.

I wonder if he had stayed on would have have become a more interesting character over time.

Writing-wise, Boyce, Piper, and McCoy were exactly the same character, just as Pike and Kirk were exactly the same character to start with. It was only the actors that made them different, as they interpreted the characters as written and the later writers began writing to their strengths. I don't think Fix could've made the character as interesting as Kelley did, or even as John Hoyt would have if he'd stayed.

Sort of how like some of the novels 'rehabbed' Captain Harriman on the Enterprise-B. I was glad that the novels made him a worthy captain of the ship. Fair or not Generations left you with the impression that he was in over his head (I know there are arguments for and against that assertion, but that was the first impression).

I saw him as a captain who was perfectly competent but was stuck with an inadequate ship through no fault of his own. He came up with a number of promising suggestions that just couldn't be done because of the ship's limitations, and when he ran out of ideas, he did the smartest, most admirable thing possible under the circumstances: setting aside his ego and calling on the experience of a more seasoned veteran. I don't understand why people hold that against him. How many times did Kirk defer to Spock to come up with a solution he couldn't think of? Nobody holds that against Kirk. It's not a captain's job to have all the answers, it's a captain's job to work with a team and bring the answers out of them.

 

[Damian]

I don't think Fix could've made the character as interesting as Kelley did, or even as John Hoyt would have if he'd stayed.

I don't know much about Fix so I honestly couldn't say how he would have been long term. Kelley was great as McCoy so I would never change a thing about that. And I have seen Hoyt in a lot of shows and some movies and he probably would have been fine.

I just thought it'd be interesting to someday see a novel that gives Piper a meaningful role. Just because the actor might have been meh does not mean the character would have to be.

I saw him as a captain who was perfectly competent but was stuck with an inadequate ship through no fault of his own. He came up with a number of promising suggestions that just couldn't be done because of the ship's limitations, and when he ran out of ideas, he did the smartest, most admirable thing possible under the circumstances: setting aside his ego and calling on the experience of a more seasoned veteran. I don't understand why people hold that against him. How many times did Kirk defer to Spock to come up with a solution he couldn't think of? Nobody holds that against Kirk. It's not a captain's job to have all the answers, it's a captain's job to work with a team and bring the answers out of them.

And that's actually a case where the novelization of the movie helped. It presented him in a more favorable light, and of course the Lost Era novels go a long way to presenting him as more than capable. It's just the first impression from the film leaves you with a less than favorable view of Harriman. The casual movie going audience probably thought of Harriman as a buffoon, fair or not. And I think the filmmakers were probably trying to make Kirk look good at the expense of Harriman. On repeated viewing, and reading the novelizations, and the other novels Harriman was featured in, I have a much more favorable view of Harriman now. But I have to admit, after I saw Generations for the first time my first thought was "how did that guy become captain of the Enterprise?"

 

[Christopher]

I don't know much about Fix so I honestly couldn't say how he would have been long term.

I've seen him in a few other roles and found him unimpressive.

I just thought it'd be interesting to someday see a novel that gives Piper a meaningful role. Just because the actor might have been meh does not mean the character would have to be.

He has a significant role in The Lost Years: Traitor Winds, IIRC.

And that's actually a case where the novelization of the movie helped. It presented him in a more favorable light, and of course the Lost Era novels go a long way to presenting him as more than capable. It's just the first impression from the film leaves you with a less than favorable view of Harriman.

What I'm talking about is all right there in the film. Yes, the acting and directing suggests he's out of his depth, but if you look past the superficial impression at what's really going on, there's nothing to fault him for. The problem is that a lot of people don't really appreciate how admirable it is to be able to say "I don't have the answers so I'll trust in someone with greater expertise." Being a strong leader is not just about being macho and dominant, it's about knowing when to be humble, to put ego aside for the greater good. And it's sad that a lot of people don't understand that.

 

[Damian]

What I'm talking about is all right there in the film. Yes, the acting and directing suggests he's out of his depth, but if you look past the superficial impression at what's really going on, there's nothing to fault him for. The problem is that a lot of people don't really appreciate how admirable it is to be able to say "I don't have the answers so I'll trust in someone with greater expertise." Being a strong leader is not just about being macho and dominant, it's about knowing when to be humble, to put ego aside for the greater good. And it's sad that a lot of people don't understand that.

Yes, and I did acknowledge later on I revised my opinion of him. I'm just talking about first impressions, and probably what a lot of the casual movie going public probably thought.

I'm not even just talking about the asking Kirk for advice, though the way it was presented on screen made it seem like Harriman was just out of his depth and turning to someone for help because he couldn't hack it. It wasn't that he asked for help. It was just that the way the scene played out it made it seem like he wasn't ready and he needed Kirk to swoop in and rescue him. But it wasn't just that. The film made it seem like Harriman took the ship out before it was ready. There was just a lot of the way that whole prologue was presented that could leave you with the impression that Harriman wasn't ready for command, certainly not of the flagship of the Federation. Now on deeper reflection and after reading other novels featuring him, he has been presented as a much more favorable character. But I can understand why some average Joe on the street might leave the film with an unfavorable view of Harriman.