Something I've come to find interesting as of late is that even when we're first introduced to them, our crew is not a bunch of fresh faced kids on a voyage to the unknown. The show makes it more than clear that this five year mission is not the main cast's first rodeo in space; Spock spent around 12 years with Pike; Kirk was already serving on ships over a decade prior; McCoy is I think already middle aged (at least, Kelley was - almost 50 when the show ended). The only kid of the bunch is Chekhov; the rest are veteran hands. While they're dealing with unknowns, you get hints that they're old hands at this already in a sense.
The show debuted in 1966, right around the time the so-called "generation gap" in American society was growing ever wider, and yet our heroes were NOT the Baby Boomer kids, teens and young adults who were watching the show, but men who were almost (by 1960s standards) middle aged. Kirk I believe states in one episode that he's 34. He's closing in on 40 - in a time when a popular expression said not to trust anyone over 30, and when 40 was considered "old."
I find it interesting that Gene chose to present as us heroes who were middle aged people even at the outset, when he could've easily I'm sure have chosen to go the route the Kelvin series has and shown a fresh crew straight out of the Academy. I'm happy he did what he did, but the thought is interesting to ponder - what if TOS had been led by a cast of 20 somethings, portraying essentially new kids on the block. I think in some ways it was a daring move for the time period and especially with consideration for the fact that (correct me if I'm wrong) young people were the target audience. One has to remember, the 1960s were a very different time from today. 40 was not "the new 20". I know my mother (who is 62 now) said when her father passed away at age 55, she viewed him at the time as an old man who had lived a full life. When my other grandfather was on the verge of turning 40 in 1969 he became obsessed with mortality and believed he wouldn't survive the year, as he was now "old." Anecdotes aside, it speaks to perhaps a different conception of age and aging than we operate under now (I wouldn't know as I'm only 26, so I was not even a thought when TOS first aired).
It speaks to the genius of the show that in such a time when authority was being constantly questioned and older figures were viewed with disdain suspicion, Star Trek managed to make young kids and young men want to be Captain Kirk - a figure of authority himself, and a guy who was already old enough to be their older brother or even their dad. People related to these characters despite them literally being part of "the establishment" within the context of their show. In an era where the military was looked down upon, Starfleet, while not necessarily totally a military outfit, was idealized by kids. That's brilliant. The characters were THAT likable, and the show THAT fascinating and exciting, that it transcended factors which could've been barriers to success, especially in the time period in which it came out.
I'd love to hear any additional thoughts on the matter.
The show debuted in 1966, right around the time the so-called "generation gap" in American society was growing ever wider, and yet our heroes were NOT the Baby Boomer kids, teens and young adults who were watching the show, but men who were almost (by 1960s standards) middle aged. Kirk I believe states in one episode that he's 34. He's closing in on 40 - in a time when a popular expression said not to trust anyone over 30, and when 40 was considered "old."
I find it interesting that Gene chose to present as us heroes who were middle aged people even at the outset, when he could've easily I'm sure have chosen to go the route the Kelvin series has and shown a fresh crew straight out of the Academy. I'm happy he did what he did, but the thought is interesting to ponder - what if TOS had been led by a cast of 20 somethings, portraying essentially new kids on the block. I think in some ways it was a daring move for the time period and especially with consideration for the fact that (correct me if I'm wrong) young people were the target audience. One has to remember, the 1960s were a very different time from today. 40 was not "the new 20". I know my mother (who is 62 now) said when her father passed away at age 55, she viewed him at the time as an old man who had lived a full life. When my other grandfather was on the verge of turning 40 in 1969 he became obsessed with mortality and believed he wouldn't survive the year, as he was now "old." Anecdotes aside, it speaks to perhaps a different conception of age and aging than we operate under now (I wouldn't know as I'm only 26, so I was not even a thought when TOS first aired).
It speaks to the genius of the show that in such a time when authority was being constantly questioned and older figures were viewed with disdain suspicion, Star Trek managed to make young kids and young men want to be Captain Kirk - a figure of authority himself, and a guy who was already old enough to be their older brother or even their dad. People related to these characters despite them literally being part of "the establishment" within the context of their show. In an era where the military was looked down upon, Starfleet, while not necessarily totally a military outfit, was idealized by kids. That's brilliant. The characters were THAT likable, and the show THAT fascinating and exciting, that it transcended factors which could've been barriers to success, especially in the time period in which it came out.
I'd love to hear any additional thoughts on the matter.
