Do you find it amazing that, almost 50 years after Star Trek was first developed for television, both of its headline stars are both still alive and both still active?
William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy are both in their 80s, I believe. Yet they are both still major presences in the entertainment business. In fact, both continue to develop as actors and as people.
Even as the supporting cast fade away, these two men continue to impress.
I wonder what the odds are of that?
Spock would be able to calculate them, I'm sure...
7.02.2014
Stumbling upon Star Trek
My partner is no Star Trek fan. She doesn't understand my fascination and she is rarely willing to sit down to watch with me.
At least, however, she tolerates my obsession and even takes part, at least so far as being willing to buy me Trek-related gifts. In fact, she's the one who bought be my Tribble.
The amazing thing to me is how angry she gets when she finds evidence that Trek has crept into even her own favourite elements of culture. Nothing pisses her off more than finding a Star Trek reference in the latest example of "real literature", philosophy or even hard news that she's picked up.
It makes me laugh, to be honest, how mad she gets. And I can tell when it's happened, even before she says a word.
She'll be reading happily away and then, all of a sudden, I'll hear her make this strange "hrmph" sound. I'll look over and I'll see that her entire body has stiffened in annoyance and her eyebrows have contracted into two dare I say "Spock-like" slashes.
Then she'll carefully place the book, magazine, newspaper (or even laptop) to the side, look at me and say, her voice as dry as the Sahara: "I hope you're happy."
And, without fail, I am indeed happy, delighted to find out that some high-brow author, doctor or journalist has seen fit to draw an analogy to my favourite show, to use a Trek expression or to cite an example from any iteration of the Star Trek Universe to illustrate a point.
She shakes her head and reads the offending section to me. I can only grin.
She treats the experience the way you might react to stepping in doggie doo in your favourite botanical garden. She's surprised, miffed and even quite a bit disappointed. Sometimes, the Trek reference is enough to turn her off the writer/journalist/doctor entirely.
I think it's hilarious... and clear evidence that the intelligence and quality of the ideas addressed in Star Trek and its progeny have ensured that the franchise has permeated our culture today.
At least, however, she tolerates my obsession and even takes part, at least so far as being willing to buy me Trek-related gifts. In fact, she's the one who bought be my Tribble.
The amazing thing to me is how angry she gets when she finds evidence that Trek has crept into even her own favourite elements of culture. Nothing pisses her off more than finding a Star Trek reference in the latest example of "real literature", philosophy or even hard news that she's picked up.
It makes me laugh, to be honest, how mad she gets. And I can tell when it's happened, even before she says a word.
She'll be reading happily away and then, all of a sudden, I'll hear her make this strange "hrmph" sound. I'll look over and I'll see that her entire body has stiffened in annoyance and her eyebrows have contracted into two dare I say "Spock-like" slashes.
Then she'll carefully place the book, magazine, newspaper (or even laptop) to the side, look at me and say, her voice as dry as the Sahara: "I hope you're happy."
And, without fail, I am indeed happy, delighted to find out that some high-brow author, doctor or journalist has seen fit to draw an analogy to my favourite show, to use a Trek expression or to cite an example from any iteration of the Star Trek Universe to illustrate a point.
She shakes her head and reads the offending section to me. I can only grin.
She treats the experience the way you might react to stepping in doggie doo in your favourite botanical garden. She's surprised, miffed and even quite a bit disappointed. Sometimes, the Trek reference is enough to turn her off the writer/journalist/doctor entirely.
I think it's hilarious... and clear evidence that the intelligence and quality of the ideas addressed in Star Trek and its progeny have ensured that the franchise has permeated our culture today.
6.27.2014
The best Star Trek episode...
My favourite episode of Star Trek is "Balance of Terror".
There are any number of excellent episodes in the three-year run of the adventures of Kirk and Company and, to be honest, even more really bad ones. But, for me, "Balance of Terror" stands out.
Based on the 1957 Robert Mitchum WWII film, "The Enemy Below", "Balance of Terror" is a taut, exciting and intellectually sophisticated drama that provides our first introduction to the Federation's most interesting and enduring enemies, the Romulans.
Like the Mitchum movie, "Balance of Terror" takes the time to establish the character, the humanity of the enemy in an effort to raise the stakes in the drama. These are not simply faceless, cold-blooded killers --these are people who believe as strongly in the rightness of their cause as we believe in ours.
And, in a theme that is later picked up much more powerfully in "Arena", the possibility is raised in "Balance of Terror" that we may, in fact, be in the wrong.
The episode also introduces us to the talents of actor Mark Lenard, who portrays the Romulan Commander. Lenard, as we all know, became a fixture in both Star Trek and TNG as Spock's father, Sarek.
There are any number of excellent episodes in the three-year run of the adventures of Kirk and Company and, to be honest, even more really bad ones. But, for me, "Balance of Terror" stands out.
Based on the 1957 Robert Mitchum WWII film, "The Enemy Below", "Balance of Terror" is a taut, exciting and intellectually sophisticated drama that provides our first introduction to the Federation's most interesting and enduring enemies, the Romulans.
Like the Mitchum movie, "Balance of Terror" takes the time to establish the character, the humanity of the enemy in an effort to raise the stakes in the drama. These are not simply faceless, cold-blooded killers --these are people who believe as strongly in the rightness of their cause as we believe in ours.
And, in a theme that is later picked up much more powerfully in "Arena", the possibility is raised in "Balance of Terror" that we may, in fact, be in the wrong.
The episode also introduces us to the talents of actor Mark Lenard, who portrays the Romulan Commander. Lenard, as we all know, became a fixture in both Star Trek and TNG as Spock's father, Sarek.
6.23.2014
Trekking to wellness: Life lessons from the Star Trek Universe
Several years ago, I was invited to give a presentation as part of "Wellness Week" at the University at which I was employed. Since I had a fairly decent profile as a public speaker, and as one who liked to work pop culture into my presentations, I was asked specifically to tie my presentation to something, anything in popular culture that might make it jump out at people.
So, not surprisingly, I chose the Star Trek universe. I called the presentation "Trekking to Wellness" and focused it on life-lessons I have learned from Star Trek in several of its iterations.
Needless to say, most of the lessons came from Star Trek but at least one, if I recall correctly, came from TNG.
I had a blast preparing for that presentation. I fired up my iMac, got iMovie and iDVD ready to roll and then began to rip scenes from episodes and movies that I felt were particularly instructive to someone who wants to reduce stress and increase wellness (whatever that means...).
The first scene that came to mind was the one from "Shore Leave" where, once the mystery of the crazy planet is revealed, the opinion is expressed that "the more sophisticated the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of play". I love this idea. I agree with it wholeheartedly. I firmly believe that people who are ultra-serious, ultra-intellectual all the time are not really that smart. They use intensity and unwavering intellectualism to cover up the weakness of their intellect. The smartest people I know are also the ones who laugh the most. Because, let's be honest, if you can't laugh at the world, you're going to cry over it instead.
Then there's the oft-repeated line in The Wrath of Khan about the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few... or the one. I know this isn't a Star Trek original; I know it was earlier and better expressed by some moral philosopher or ethicist somewhere. But Star Trek helped bring it into 20th Century pop culture. And I think it is, for the most part, true and morally supportable. But I also think it is very important that, in The Search for Spock, the characters recognise that, sometimes, the needs of the one outweigh the needsof the many. Or, more accurately, the many often have unspoken needs that are so directly tied to the one that they become indecipherable and addressing the needs of the one in fact addresses the needs of the many.
And, of course, there's "Amok Time" and the "having is often not so pleasurable a thing as wanting" line Spock tosses at Stonn as he relinquishes his claim on T'Pring. Great line. And so true. If you keep this sentiment in mind, you'll save a lot of money and retain a lot of pleasure. How often have you craved an object for a long time, with an intensity that is almost painful, then broken down and acquired it, only to find that the charm almost instantly wears off? Enjoy the wanting. The having is often not so great.
There were others, about which I might write later, but I would be remiss if I didn't finish this blog post with my absolute favourite line from the entire run of TNG. Since I'm not as avid a fan of TNG as I am of Star Trek, I can't rhyme off the episode title from memory (and my from-memory rendition of the quote will probably be even more inaccurate than the near quotes set out above) but it's in the show about strategy.
Data engages a representative of the galaxy's greatest race of native strategists in a game of Strategema and loses. Thinking he must therefore be defective, Data withdraws from duty. Picard, desperately needing Data's services, confronts him in his cabin and says "It is possible to do nothing wrong and still fail" or "It is possible to do everything right and still fail" or something like that.
However he phrased it, Picard is absolutely right. And his words are worth bearing in mind throughout your life. I have, in fact, quoted Picard to several people in my life who have applied and interviewed for a job but failed to receive a job offer. "What did I do wrong?" they ask. And I quote Picard at them.
Generally, I say to them that the first thing they need to do is review their own behaviour, their own actions, the answers they gave in the job interview in as objective way as they can. If they can find something that, their objective review tells them, they could have done better, then learn from that.
If, however, their objective review comes back with no glaring errors, no mis-steps, then maybe they have to accept the fact that, in life, it is possible to do everything right and still fail. The process of hiring people in to a job, for example, is subject to so many tensions and demands and influences that it is often the case that a person who is perfect for the job and performs perfectly in the interview process is not offered the position.
The presentation was very well received and a lot of fun to give. And it reinforced for me the truths I had already gleaned from the Star Trek Universe.
So, not surprisingly, I chose the Star Trek universe. I called the presentation "Trekking to Wellness" and focused it on life-lessons I have learned from Star Trek in several of its iterations.
Needless to say, most of the lessons came from Star Trek but at least one, if I recall correctly, came from TNG.
I had a blast preparing for that presentation. I fired up my iMac, got iMovie and iDVD ready to roll and then began to rip scenes from episodes and movies that I felt were particularly instructive to someone who wants to reduce stress and increase wellness (whatever that means...).
The first scene that came to mind was the one from "Shore Leave" where, once the mystery of the crazy planet is revealed, the opinion is expressed that "the more sophisticated the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of play". I love this idea. I agree with it wholeheartedly. I firmly believe that people who are ultra-serious, ultra-intellectual all the time are not really that smart. They use intensity and unwavering intellectualism to cover up the weakness of their intellect. The smartest people I know are also the ones who laugh the most. Because, let's be honest, if you can't laugh at the world, you're going to cry over it instead.
Then there's the oft-repeated line in The Wrath of Khan about the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few... or the one. I know this isn't a Star Trek original; I know it was earlier and better expressed by some moral philosopher or ethicist somewhere. But Star Trek helped bring it into 20th Century pop culture. And I think it is, for the most part, true and morally supportable. But I also think it is very important that, in The Search for Spock, the characters recognise that, sometimes, the needs of the one outweigh the needsof the many. Or, more accurately, the many often have unspoken needs that are so directly tied to the one that they become indecipherable and addressing the needs of the one in fact addresses the needs of the many.
And, of course, there's "Amok Time" and the "having is often not so pleasurable a thing as wanting" line Spock tosses at Stonn as he relinquishes his claim on T'Pring. Great line. And so true. If you keep this sentiment in mind, you'll save a lot of money and retain a lot of pleasure. How often have you craved an object for a long time, with an intensity that is almost painful, then broken down and acquired it, only to find that the charm almost instantly wears off? Enjoy the wanting. The having is often not so great.
There were others, about which I might write later, but I would be remiss if I didn't finish this blog post with my absolute favourite line from the entire run of TNG. Since I'm not as avid a fan of TNG as I am of Star Trek, I can't rhyme off the episode title from memory (and my from-memory rendition of the quote will probably be even more inaccurate than the near quotes set out above) but it's in the show about strategy.
Data engages a representative of the galaxy's greatest race of native strategists in a game of Strategema and loses. Thinking he must therefore be defective, Data withdraws from duty. Picard, desperately needing Data's services, confronts him in his cabin and says "It is possible to do nothing wrong and still fail" or "It is possible to do everything right and still fail" or something like that.
However he phrased it, Picard is absolutely right. And his words are worth bearing in mind throughout your life. I have, in fact, quoted Picard to several people in my life who have applied and interviewed for a job but failed to receive a job offer. "What did I do wrong?" they ask. And I quote Picard at them.
Generally, I say to them that the first thing they need to do is review their own behaviour, their own actions, the answers they gave in the job interview in as objective way as they can. If they can find something that, their objective review tells them, they could have done better, then learn from that.
If, however, their objective review comes back with no glaring errors, no mis-steps, then maybe they have to accept the fact that, in life, it is possible to do everything right and still fail. The process of hiring people in to a job, for example, is subject to so many tensions and demands and influences that it is often the case that a person who is perfect for the job and performs perfectly in the interview process is not offered the position.
The presentation was very well received and a lot of fun to give. And it reinforced for me the truths I had already gleaned from the Star Trek Universe.
6.18.2014
TOSsing one out there...
Let's get one thing straight: I am using the "TOS" acronym in the title of this blog because I like the term "TOSser" to refer to a Star Trek fan like me. That's all.
This is the ONLY place I will ever use TOS and I will never use "The Original Series" to refer to the original series.
As far as I'm concerned, the first set of Star Trek voyages, that wondrous three-season adventure with Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest, is STAR TREK. It is not "The Original Series". It is "Star Trek", Star Trek, Star Trek or however else you want to type it.
Everything else is derivative of the original.
So, in this blog (as in life), I will use the term "Star Trek" to refer to the Kirk, Spock, McCoy TV show. I will use the traditional short forms (TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise) for all other derivations of Star Trek.
You will never catch me using TOS or "the Original Series" in this blog. There is no need. That 1960s show is Star Trek. Period.
I plan to use this blog to jot down random stuff that might occur to me from time to time about Star Trek and its many derivations. Some entries may be long, some very short. Some might simply be a sentence while others might go on for many inches of web-space.
Some might be profound. Some ridiculous.
I might talk about episodes of the various TV series or about the individual movies. I might look at Star Trek books, both fiction and non-fiction, or Star Trek comic books. I might even talk about some of the merchandise that has sprung up around Star Trek, like my Franklin Mint three-dimensional chess set, my Tribble or even my Enterprise pizza cutter.
I might speak about the Star Trek universe in general or about specific characters, issues, or plot-lines. Read the blog or don't. I don't care. Agree with me or don't. I do care. Just as long as you tell me about it.
To that end, I invite you to comment on any and all of my blog entries, either by clicking one of the Reaction boxes below or by entering a Comment using the Comments function. I will be moderating the comments but there isn't much (other than really offensive stuff) that I won't allow to be published.
This is the ONLY place I will ever use TOS and I will never use "The Original Series" to refer to the original series.
As far as I'm concerned, the first set of Star Trek voyages, that wondrous three-season adventure with Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest, is STAR TREK. It is not "The Original Series". It is "Star Trek", Star Trek, Star Trek or however else you want to type it.
Everything else is derivative of the original.
So, in this blog (as in life), I will use the term "Star Trek" to refer to the Kirk, Spock, McCoy TV show. I will use the traditional short forms (TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise) for all other derivations of Star Trek.
You will never catch me using TOS or "the Original Series" in this blog. There is no need. That 1960s show is Star Trek. Period.
I plan to use this blog to jot down random stuff that might occur to me from time to time about Star Trek and its many derivations. Some entries may be long, some very short. Some might simply be a sentence while others might go on for many inches of web-space.
Some might be profound. Some ridiculous.
I might talk about episodes of the various TV series or about the individual movies. I might look at Star Trek books, both fiction and non-fiction, or Star Trek comic books. I might even talk about some of the merchandise that has sprung up around Star Trek, like my Franklin Mint three-dimensional chess set, my Tribble or even my Enterprise pizza cutter.
I might speak about the Star Trek universe in general or about specific characters, issues, or plot-lines. Read the blog or don't. I don't care. Agree with me or don't. I do care. Just as long as you tell me about it.
To that end, I invite you to comment on any and all of my blog entries, either by clicking one of the Reaction boxes below or by entering a Comment using the Comments function. I will be moderating the comments but there isn't much (other than really offensive stuff) that I won't allow to be published.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)