Richard Arnold Interview @MissionLogPod

[HaplessCrewman]

Frank & comprehensive interview on Mission Log Podcast with Richard Arnold, Roddenberry's assistant and archivist.

Arnold speaks about TOS's sexism, Roddenberry's view on the lasting impact of Trek, LGBT in Trek, etc. He's quite candid about Gerrold's "Blood and Fire".

I know he is a controversial figure in relation to licensees, novel and comics writers but I found his knowledge pretty undeniable. I did not know his history with Trek extended all the way back to TOS.

http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/supplemental/

Also, Gene Roddenberry goes on record about the whole sun/Son of G-d bit from "Bread and Circuses" in a 1990 interview. Read how he says he "hated it" in the link below.

http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/discovereddocuments/s014/

 

[Hober Mallow]

Also, Gene Roddenberry goes on record about the whole sun/Son of G-d bit from "Bread and Circuses" in a 1990 interview. Read how he says he "hated it" in the link below.

http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/discovereddocuments/s014/

"We had a bunch of cretins working on that episode." LOL...

 

[Harvey]

The comments about "Bread and Circuses" sound a little revisionist to me -- Roddenberry's MO by 1990 -- but I need to do more research.

 

[Warped9]

The comments about "Bread and Circuses" sound a little revisionist to me -- Roddenberry's MO by 1990 -- but I need to do more research.

Yes. The interview was interesting, but yeah, some of it doesn't ring quite right.

Here's a copy of a document they refer to in the interview: http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/discovereddocuments/s014/

 

[HaplessCrewman]

The comments about "Bread and Circuses" sound a little revisionist to me -- Roddenberry's MO by 1990 -- but I need to do more research.

Yes. The interview was interesting, but yeah, some of it doesn't ring quite right.

Here's a copy of a document they refer to in the interview: http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/discovereddocuments/s014/

Interesting! Which anecdotes don't ring quite right to you?

 

[Warped9]

The comments about "Bread and Circuses" sound a little revisionist to me -- Roddenberry's MO by 1990 -- but I need to do more research.

Yes. The interview was interesting, but yeah, some of it doesn't ring quite right.

Here's a copy of a document they refer to in the interview: http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/discovereddocuments/s014/

Interesting! Which anecdotes don't ring quite right to you?

Arnold comes across as rather reverential of GR. In the podcasts and interviews (like Arnold's) there is the repetition of things that have been debunked.

GR's "notorious" battles with NBC is one thing that keeps being repeated when NBC's side is never discussed. In the beginning NBC was quite supportive. Another repeated myth is that NBC wouldn't allow a strong role for a woman that is another thing that doesn't hold water when examined closely.

 

[HaplessCrewman]

Arnold does trot out old myths about Roddenberry that have been recently(?) debunked.

However, the Arnold interview makes quite a good companion piece to the Marc Cushman interviews on the Trek.fm podcasts.

http://trek.fm/podcast-directory/

For example, re: Roddenberry's police career. Arnold says G.R. had to draw his pistol only once and that was to shoot a dog that was preventing officers from reaching/rescuing a man who was in danger. Cushman, on the other hand, says that G.R. shot the dog to put it out of its misery.

Which story is more believable? Is one true and the other false - or can both be true?

http://trek.fm/podcast-directory/

Re: Cushman. Interesting how the discussion of photographic credits is virtually absent in regards to TATV Book Two. Remember what a firestorm that was surrounding the first book?

 

[Warped9]

Arnold tows the line that GR was right in his battles with the network. There is another side to it. For example GR's cast in "The Cage" was essentially all white American. Where was the racial diversity he supposedly fought for since the beginning? Oh, look, later we have documented evidence that NBC wanted more racial diversity. Could be GR needed a nudge from the network to put his money where his mouth was.

NBC didn't have a problem with women in strong roles (which is a myth Arnold repeats) but GR cooked up the story that they didn't like the character of Number One or any women in command.

No, NBC liked Number One fine, but they didn't like GR's obvious nepotism in casting his well known extramarital girlfriend.

Arnold repeats that GR always considered TAS apocryphal. Odd, that isn't borne out when GR and DC Fontana and others were making the show.

Arnold obviously reveres GR and keeps perpetuating the same stories. And many of those stories have long been debunked.

I also question Arnold's supposed encyclopedic knowledge of Trek when he couldn't remember details of episodes he was referring to.

So, yeah, I'm not accepting everything he says as gospel.

 

[HaplessCrewman]

No question Arnold tows the line on the Roddenberry myths. I've always been a little skeptical about G.R.'s virtues and the Solow/Justman book went a long way (for me) in dispelling the myths and humanizing the man.

However, I do find Arnold's story about G.R. sanctioning TAS based on the thought that Trek would never return in any meaningful way to be pretty believable.

I would cut Arnold some slack on his Trek knowledge. After all, he was obligated to know all about TOS, the movies, TNG (up to 1990). I'll challenge anyone on TOS knowledge but I can't (nor would I want to - ha ha) keep track of all of the minutiae of the modern era Treks.

 

[GSchnitzer]

I'll challenge anyone on TOS knowledge but I can't (nor would I want to - ha ha) keep track of all of the minutiae of the modern era Treks.

Challenge accepted!

 

[Botany Bay]

Also, Gene Roddenberry goes on record about the whole sun/Son of G-d bit from "Bread and Circuses" in a 1990 interview. Read how he says he "hated it" in the link below.

http://www.missionlogpodcast.com/discovereddocuments/s014/

What a find. Thankyou very much for sharing.

I assume SS is Susan Sackett?

I've heard 'Bread and Circuses' was the last straw for an exhausted Coon who decided to quit TOS after a few run ins with GR over the type of episode this should be. The story apparently caused some conflict between the Christian Coon and the atheist Roddenberry. He doesn't blame Coon for the "son of God" scene, but it's sure clear he didn't like it much!

I suppose we should be wary of Roddenberry's recollections in 1990. If you've read Sackett's tell all book about her relationship with GR, he was in a pretty bad way by this point, sadly.

 

[Maurice]

Ahem...

It's TOE(S) THE LINE, not tow! Stop that.

 

[HaplessCrewman]

Ahem...

It's TOE(S) THE LINE, not tow! Stop that.

Ulp! Never knew that. Thanks.

Re: Susan Sackett's book. I did read the book but don't remember much about it except the sort of unsavory details she related about G.R.'s behavior towards her. Really had some stuff I didn't need to know. If you want to hear about an old man making the moves on a reluctant younger woman... this is your book. There's some Star Trek stuff in there as well, ha ha.

 

[Warped9]

There's nothing wrong in admiring someone and defending them. I don't have an issue with that. And it's entirely possible that such a person might only know one side of a story if they feel they have no reason to disbelieve the one they admire.

But when said person repeats things that have long been proven incorrect then they shouldn't be surprised if they get called on it.

Put another way....

Is Arnold lying by repeating something that has since been proven false? Only if he knows full well it has since been proven false. If he doesn't know it has since been proven false then Arnold cannot be accused of consciously lying.

In Arnold's case I can't say one way or another. But here in a public forum we can certainly discuss what we know to be true after hearing someone repeat something we know to be false.

Having said that while listening to Mission Log podcasts as they review the individual episodes we can hear the two commentators repeat stories and anecdotes that have long been debunked. These guys are still essentially fans and it's possibly that like many other fans they might not have learned that certain long held myths have long been debunked.

Listening to Arnold and Rod Roddenberry (on other podcasts) they do put across the idea that GR did have a certain take on the way he wished humanity to be. If so then it's entirely believable that GR's ideas were filtered into his writing. In the beginning it might not have been a truly coherent vision laid out before doing Star Trek, but fans could nonetheless have been picking up on something that was filtering into the show.

It might not have been something GR had a plan for, but years later as he heard fans reflecting these ideas back to him he could have convinced himself he intended it all along. He might even have come to convince himself that stories he fabricated and repeated were indeed true in his mind.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Arnold repeats that GR always considered TAS apocryphal. Odd, that isn't borne out when GR and DC Fontana and others were making the show.

However, I do find Arnold's story about G.R. sanctioning TAS based on the thought that Trek would never return in any meaningful way to be pretty believable.

I agree with both of you.

Warped9 is right that the Animated Series wasn't always apocryphal in Roddenberry's mind, because in 1973 the idea that there was a "canon" in the way it's currently used by Trek fans didn't exist -- and wouldn't for several years.

The decisive moment with the Animated Series' status came in the late-80s, when Filmation went through bankruptcy. As one of the studios' assets, it was tied up in the bankruptcy proceedings, which meant that Paramount couldn't touch it. For the licensees it was simply easier to declare it non-canon and off-limits (which is what Roddenberry and Arnold did in their Canon memo) rather than have them caught in the mess of the Filmation bankruptcy.

HaplessCrewman is also right that Roddenberry had no expectation of Star Trek's return in 1972/3 when the Animated Series was in development. Star Trek wasn't going anywhere and, for that matter, neither was Roddenberry.

But that wasn't the only reason Roddenberry signed off on the Animated Series. Roddenberry got his name out there and got checks to cash, and Fontana and Gerrold did the hard work. Not a bad deal, really.

 

[Grumps]

I'm about halfway through the interview and am enjoying it more than I expected to, given the vilification of Arnold's name.

One thing that struck me... the story of "Conspiracy" and how Gene forced the writer to make the ending more and more gross to prove to the studio who was in control. It's ironic that he wanted creative control over TNG to preserve his "vision", but the demise of Commander Remmick he insisted upon is one of the least Trek-like moments of all the series. "Conspiracy" is one of my favorite episodes, but the exploding head and alien body cavity just doesn't fit. Just an example of absolute power corrupting absolutely, I guess.

 

[Warped9]

Arnold makes a point of mentioning some of GR's ideas got into TNG that shouldn't, but he also kind of glosses over it. By the late '80s GR was not in good health and running TNG with absolute authority would not be a good thing.

I'm reminded of reading about Henry Ford Sr. running Ford as he got older. He could (and did) make some wrong minded decisions.

 

[HaplessCrewman]

Actually, I was surprised to hear from Arnold that TNG's "Silicon Avatar" was the last episode G.R. saw. I had always assumed that he had stepped away from TNG by that point. Maybe his involvement in the 3rd season was just watching episodes.

Has anyone here read The Last Conversation by Yvonne Fern? Talk about recording the thoughts of a man in his declining years...

 

[Maurice]

But that wasn't the only reason Roddenberry signed off on the Animated Series. Roddenberry got his name out there and got checks to cash, and Fontana and Gerrold did the hard work. Not a bad deal, really.

Gerrold wrote two episodes. Hardly doing the "hard work".

As to the Mission Log podcast I abandoned it after their awful discussion of "This Side of Paradise" where one of them insisted that Kirk was wrong in removing the colonists from their "paradise", completely missing the point that the people were in no way consenting. It was pretty repugnant, and I had no interest in hearing them after that.

 

[Warped9]

I don't always agree with the podcast commentators, but then I didn't always agree with friends with whom I've had similar discussions over the years. That doesn't make the discussions worthless. The same occurs here on the TBBS. Sometimes these guys surprise me in seeming to tear down something in an episode only to turn around and like it.

I think they both get "A Taste Of Amageddon" wrong because they completely fail to consider the actions of the Eminians against Kirk, his landing party, the Enterprise and the Valiant fifty years prior.

The Prime Directive doesn't apply for several reasons not the least of which it's Fox's stubbornness that puts Kirk and his crew in danger. Kirk was totally cool with leaving these shmucks to their stupid games. But the Eminians are not a backward, isolated culture with no knowledge of spaceflight and other worlds. And their unwarranted acts of aggression against Kirk, his crew and ship escalates things to an all but formally declared war. Kirk is warranted in protecting Federation lives and property. He's also right that they aren't responsible or subject to any Eminian-Vendikan agreements where the Federation weren't participants. Anan 7 simply doesn't realize the scale of his folly in his aggression against Kirk and ship. If the Enterprise, the second Starfleet starship (and with a Federation official aboard), failed to return and report Starfleet could well come loaded for bear in the next Federation visit. And we already know what just one starship can do. Kirk even lays it out: "We make the real thing." What Starfleet could do to Eminiar and Vendikar would make Anan 7's supposed fears look like an after school scrap between ten year olds.