Anyway, it's a little disingenuous to say that you never blamed Shatner for any of this when your original post in this thread does just that: lays the blame for every change in Kirk's character from the Reed Richards figure you seem to want to reduce him to at the feet of the Shat.
No more or less than how disingenuous that very statement is on your part. I have never taken either the position that it was
ALL Shatner's fault anymore than I've taken the position that I've
NEVER given any of the blame to Shatner. I've always felt that there was plenty of blame for the direction Kirk went to go around. And the only time and place that I felt Shatner could be held to anything like that
all or nothing position would be
Star Trek V. But that is far beyond the topic here (which focuses on TOS), I haven't taken (nor will I accept being painted as having taken) such a position here.
Given that, it would be nice if you argued your points and let me argue mine, rather than attempting the
very disingenuous tactic of trying to reframe the other person's position... unless, of course, you honestly don't believe you are up to defending your position. In the end all of this comes down to our opinions, and the fact that you are incline to attack my opinion as
bad or
disingenuous may mean that you aren't up to stating your own differing opinion in a way that you think others would understand. And seeing as I never brought up
Reed Richards (nor do I know that character), it seems like another example of an attempt to put words in my mouth on your part.
You should be comfortable enough in your opinions to not be frightened by the differing opinions of others. I would be disappointed if at the end of this anyone actually changed their minds on Kirk. But I think it is below everyone here to stoop to the tactics your attempting, so lets try to steer clear of them from here on out.
Lets look at some of this other stuff, assuming that you'll return to a civilized discussion on the topic.
I wasn't suggesting it was the change in rank that magically changed Kirk's attitude but rather the accumulated experience and confidence that made him a bit less of a stiff. A man at 14, 24 and 34 will hopefully have evolved somewhat over those twenty years, and loosening up around around women should be a part of that. I'm hardly a playboy but I can joke with and talk to women in a way that would have been beyound me twenty years ago. Besides, as McCoy pointed out in the first season episode "Court Martial," Kirk had a lot of pretty "old friends." Seems he wasn't all about reading Spinoza.
Well, maybe we should consider the fact that that was put forward by McCoy, some one who had known Kirk for all of about a year at that point.
I'm not sure I could speak on the changes between 14 and 34 that a man would go through when dealing with girls seeing as I met my first wife when I was 16 (and she was 25) and we were together until I was about 30. I effectively missed the
"awkward with girls" phase most guys might go through, so I really don't know what changes might normally happen.
And I'm quite happy to invalidate some of the 1st and 2nd season examples on your list--as I said, it's a bad list. But were it a good list, I think we'd see Kirk was at his most seductive in the second season. "Gamesters of Triskelion" and "Mirror, Mirror" spring to mind. Indeed, his coldest and most smarmy charming of a woman is quite possibly in the 1st season "Coscience of the King."
I wouldn't argue against his actions in
Coscience of the King, but both parties were working toward alternative objectives.
And I wasn't saying that he was shy or unwilling to approach women... which seems to be another example of you arguing from a position of
absolutes. You seem to be taking what I say as
Kirk had no romantic tendencies when in fact what I was saying was that Kirk didn't fit the
girl of the week type of person that was later pushed onto the character.
I'm sure that framing my arguments in these black and white terms makes you feel better about your position, but I have never taken those extreme positions that you are trying desperately hard to make it seem like I've taken. So again, if you aren't up to arguing your own points without trying to make it seem like I've taken positions I haven't, then this discussion will be over very quickly. While I'm interested in how you see Kirk, please don't attempt to tell me (or others) how
I am seeing him.
As for Spock, I think the show made it clear that, in almost every way quantifiable, his intellect dwarfed that of all but the most brilliant humans (Dr. Daystrom, for example). And I got the impression that Kirk only occasionally beat Spock at chess--Spock was the ship's resident master, as Kirk said in "Charlie X." Of course Kirk would be shown to be Spock's superior in those intangible areas of will and intuition--he was the hero and the show was trying to appeal to that need of the common man to think he's as smart as the brainiacs. Remember, Kirk managed to whoop the intellectually and physically superior Khan, too, and that was in the first season.
Well, you bring up
Court Martial, so why don't we let Kirk speak for himself...
"It's not all bad, Mr. Spock. Who knows. You may be able to beat your next captain at chess."
Sounds like more than
occasionally to me.
As for Kirk's abilities with computers, lets also look at an exchange from that same episode...
Spock: Someone, either accidentally or deliberately, adjusted the programming and, therefore, the memory banks of that computer.
Cogley: Could that have had an effect on the visual playback we saw?
Shaw: Object! The witness would be making a conclusion.
Stone: Sustained.
Cogley: Hypothetically, Mr. Spock, hypothetically, Miss Shaw, if what you suggest had been done, it would be beyond the capabilities of most men. Is that true?
Spock: Affirmative.
Cogley: What men aboard ship would it not be beyond?
Spock: The captain, myself, and the records officer.
Cogley: Mm-hmm. And at the moment, you have no records officer.
Spock: Affirmative. Until he was lost, our records officer was Lieutenant Commander Finney.
Two references to Kirk's intellectual abilities in a single episode, helpful.
As for Spock's
"intellect dwarfed that of all but the most brilliant humans", the show didn't show anything any where near that extreme a view. People like Kirk, McCoy and Scott were often shown to be on par with Spock, and Spock wasn't the obvious choice in areas where their respective expertise overlapped. The only thing that Spock had as an intellectual power over others was the ability to calculate numbers quickly (and we assume accurately) in his head... a quality that, while cool, has never (in my experience) been a good measure of intelligence. What we were lead to believe was that Spock was physically stronger than humans, but little more.
But then again, I'm sure that to someone who feels intellectually inferior to
brainiacs (interesting term), Spock's character would seem very threatening to them... I would hope that you don't fit that description, but it would explain your position here.
