A question about Roddenberry the the third season of TOS -- did he betray his fans?
Being iced in today and having a day away from work, I took the opportunity to read Shatner's _Star Trek Memories_, which has been gathering dust for about a year on a bookshelf. His account of the fan-based mail campaign to keep ST on the air for a third season corresponds to accounts I've read elsewhere, as does his explanation of Roddenberry's decision to pull back from the show, i.e., he told NBC that if they dumped ST in a lousy Friday night 10pm time slot for the third season, he would cease taking an active role in the production of the series. NBC called his bluff, and Roddenberry decided that he couldn't allow his bluffs to be called if he ever wanted to have any leverage in Hollywood ever again, so he basically quit in fact if not in title and hired another guy to take over his duties. Presumably the decision was also motivated by exhaustion and frustration from constantly fighting with the network brass, plus he had a chance to work on a movie project that he thought would give a boost to his career. Reflecting on this account, I'm struck by two things. One, being the producer of a two-year-old TV series with bad Nielsen ratings should not, I think, give anyone the illusion of being a major Hollwood player with the ability to strongly influence the money-based decisions of network executives. Two, if hundreds of thousands of loyal fans - organized by the efforts of a smaller group of superloyal fans including some of your colleagues - are responsible by virtue of their mass effort for basically giving you a job (or allowing you to keep the job you have for another year), shouldn't you do that job? So what if the Friday night time slot is the kiss of death...do you go out with a bang or a whimper? (Is there a Roddenberry-equivalent person for Farscape? If the fan campaign to save Farscape were victorious but that person were to step away from the show, would the fans have a right to feel betrayed? Other thoughts: I watched ST:TMP and ST:TWoK this weekend (the new editions). I still like the first one better, and the soundtrack feels better integrated with the story to my ears. That said, I can certainly understand why my opinion is in the minority - ST:TWoK offers more in the way of the standard forms of dramatic apppeal. Two things about TWoK jumped out at me though. One, do you remember the idiotic IDIC (infinite diversity in infinite combinations) medallion from TOS that Roddenberry made Spock wear in the third season to give a boost to a ST toy line he had invested in? And which Nimoy resented so much? I just noticed for the first time that in Nimoy's quarters on the Enterprise, he has a giant shimmery wall tapestry that reproduces the IDIC symbol. It looks like it's made out of recycled disco-ball mirrors, but it's there. It's the scene where Spock tells Kirk that piloting a starship is his first, best detiny. Two, Khan is not not not not not Ahab. Read Moby Dick: Ahab is a good and courageous man slowly driven to madness by grief and pain and superstitious obsession. Even in his madness his fundamental decency shines through; that's why he's so compelling. Khan, whatever his gifts, was never decent to begin with - he is a megalomaniac patterned after the Hitlers of the world and written specifically to evoke them. Ahab has his share of sinful pride, too, but Khan has none of Ahab's moral depth, nor any ounce of the fear and wonder at God's universe that helps drive Ahab to his death. If there's an Ahab in Star Trek, it would be Kirk, who sacrifices ship and his son and "the needs of the many" in order to satisfy his need for one. The only reason he doesn't go down with his ship and crew is because the ST formula forbids it. Marvin Long Austin, Texas Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Poindexter & Ashcroft, LLP (Formerly the USA) http://www.breakyourchains.org/john_poindexter.htm _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
