sf-lovers (06/28/82)
>From JPM@Mit-Ai Mon Jun 28 12:11:40 1982
SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 27 Jun 1982 Volume 5 : Issue 72
Today's Topics:
SF Movies - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,
SF Books - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan,
Spoiler - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 15 Jun 1982 02:58:54-PDT
From: ihuxi!otto at Berkeley
Subject: Commentary on Mister Saavik
One of the more intriguing aspects of STAR TREK II, for me at least,
was the new character Mister Saavik, particularly in light of some
Trekiana. In the original TV episode of Star Trek (or was it in the
pilot that was turned into the two-episode show: Menagerie) the
science officer was a woman identified as "Number One." Audience
reaction to this character was not positive. She was a hard, efficient
person; just right for a science officer, but not easy for the
audience to take. As a result there was a quick shifting of roles,
with Spock becoming the science officer and Number One becoming Nurse
Chapel.
Now, in ST II, we have the character of Mister Saavik, a half-Vulcan
woman Star Fleet Cadet. In her we see the same sort of conflict we
have seen often enough in Spock between emotions and logic, although
in her case it seems to be more conflict between correct
professionalism on the one hand and human relationships on the other.
This conflict is understated in the film, but is evident precisely
*because* we have seen the same sort of conflict many times within
Spock.
What I find intriguing is that the character of Mister Saavik--doesn't
this very name help sharpen the feeling of conflict?-- works very
well. What accounts for this? and why did Roddenberry & Company
choose to try a character type that proved to be a mistake when Star
Trek began? I think there are two answers to these questions. The
first is that over time Spock has clearly become the sentimental
favorite of Trekkies. When Leonard Nimoy's name appears at the
beginning of the film, it gets the biggest audience reaction. Of all
the characters in Star Trek, Spock seems to most nearly represent
those conflicts and tensions we all experience within ourselves. As a
result there is a transfer of audience sympathy to a character that is
so clearly *like* Spock. Saavik immediately benefits from our knowing
Spock so well.
The second reason this character works so well, I feel, is that Saavik
is truely a modern character. The role of women today (or should I
say roles?) is much less clear cut today than it was perceived to be
20 years ago. The question of "how much should women give up of
themselves in order to succeed in male-dominated activities" seems to
be a pervasive question these days. Saavik, for genetic rather than
historical reasons, finds herself dealing with the same or similar
conflicts. Thus, audiences today have more sympathy and understanding
for Saavik than they evidently had for Number One.
I have to admit that of all the elements of ST II, I was most
surprised by the introduction of Saavik as a character and my reaction
to her. I find myself truely interested in how she will figure in
future ST films, and commend Roddenberry & Company for seeking to
improve Star Trek by expanding the number of continuing characters we
care about.
George Otto
Bell Labs, Indian Hill
ihnss!ihuxi!otto@Berkeley
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, June 27, 1982 4:34PM
From: Jim McGrath (The Moderator) <JPM at MIT-AI>
Subject: SPOILER WARNING! SPOILER WARNING!
All of the remaining messages in this digest discuss some plot details
in both the movie and the book Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. Some
readers may not wish to read on.
------------------------------
Date: Monday, 14 Jun 1982 13:52-PDT
From: jim at RAND-UNIX
Subject: Khan's RHM
Khan addressed his Right-Hand-Man by name as he (the RHM) was dying.
I heard it as "Joachim", but didn't spot the name in the credits.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jun 82 1:41:43-EDT (Tue)
From: Sue Pohl <sue@BRL>
Subject: Kahn's Right Hand Man
Kahn's second in command is called Joachim. The name is mentioned a
couple of times throughout the film. Unfortunately I do not recall
who the actor is, but unless I'm mistaken, he's supposed to be a
relatively unknown person.
Sue
------------------------------
Date: 15 June 1982 1108-EDT (Tuesday)
From: David.Lamb at CMU-10A
Subject: ST:TWoK nits (spoiler)
Some questions/objections to ST:TWoK can be found in the novelization.
1) Khan's right-hand man was called "Joachim".
2) Ceti Alpha 5 and Ceti Alpha 6 were a planet/moon of about equal
size. The Reliant noticed anomalies in the system but attributed them
to error in the records from the single probe of the system, from 60
or so years before. Kirk had deliberately hidden the fact that Khan
and company were marooned there. I confess to not understanding why
they thought they were examining the 6th planet.
3) The need for the lifeless planet wasn't technical, but moral. The
magic Genesis device rearranges any sort of matter, such as for
instance the material in the nebula. Admittedly Genesis is magic, but
remember Clarke's third law.
4) Checkov didn't immediately beam up when he noticed "Botany Bay"
because they had to be in the open; conditions on the planet were so
bad that being inside something made beaming up impossible, instead of
marginal as in the open. As to panicking, Chekov always was excitable
- the book has the amusing touch of him "loosing his Standard" and
reverting to Russian when excited.
5) Chekov essentially has a bad concussion at the point where he mans
the weapons console. He's not functioning very well, but much of
Kirk's bridge crew is hurt, so even in this state he's useful.
6) The device Spock is launched in is indeed a photon torpedo casing;
in the book Saavik carefully reprograms it, for unstated reasons.
This might have something to do with why it re-enters (aside from the
meta-reason that they're obviously aiming for a way to bring Spock
back).
7) Kirk reprogrammed the simulator, not from "inside", but in a
midnight raid just before he took the test for the third time.
A lot of the nits I've seen people pick are either institutionalized
Star Fleet idiocies (ranking officers on landing parties, consoles
blowing up when the ship is hit, wimpy photon torpedoes) or are little
things that it's real hard to explain in a motion picture - either it
would slow things down, or you'd have to be reading some character's
mind. The novelization is a good source of answers to small
questions. As others have noted, it also makes Saavik a far more
interesting character.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jun 1982 2303-EDT
From: Thomas Galloway <Galloway at YALE>
Subject: Star Trek II- The Rationalizations
Quite a few of the inconsistencies mentioned so far can be cleared up
by either reading the book, or using some imagination/common sense.
Such as:
The book tells you that C A VI was a moon of V, so the orbit problem
is not too bad. I could see the explosion of a planet causing the
moon's axial tilt to be changed, thus affecting the climate. Also,
its noted that Kirk either didn't record the planet where he dropped
Khan, or it was marked top secret (i forget which), and since Chekov
was not bridge crew at the time, its amazing he even remembered the
Botany Bay after 15 years. Finally, since the planet was at one time
human habitable, the parasite is not that great a suspension of
disbelief.
As for the genesis bomb needing a planet, well, my understanding is
that it just needed mass. Either they didn't think of a nebula,
didn't want to use it for the first test, or the galactic equivalent
of the Sierra Club stopped them from using a nebula in the first
place. As for the genesis wave being picked up on sensors, since the
thing will be affecting the matter its in contact with, the wave
propagated through the gas, and when the wave was close enough to the
Enterprise, it was picked up on the sensors.
Chekov returning to duty was a bit forced. In the book, he is dizzy,
and gives some indication that his inner ear is wrecked (in which case
you really have to wonder why he's aiming anything!), but this is
suppose to be the 23rd century, so assume that McCoy healed him *real*
fast.
As for photon torpedos being less powerful than an h-bomb, so what if
they are? A bomb and a torpedo are two entirely different classes of
weapons. Particularly since a photon torp always struck me as being
closer to a phaser type ray than a missile. Torps should be designed
to hit things going at warp speed, which I don't think a physical
object that small could do. Photon torps are probably tachyon based,
come to think of it.
Any other rationalizations out there?
tom
------------------------------
Date: 12 June 1982 08:26-EDT
From: Jonathan M. Levine <CAIN at MIT-AI>
Subject: Star Trek II: Comments on "Trek-ness"
Being a hardcore Trekkie, there is very little Gene Roddenberry could
do (other than Star Trek I) that would disappoint me.
I enjoyed Star Trek II alot, and in discussing some of the plot
materials with other Trekkies in the area, we decided the following
(without reading the book... just using logic)
1) The reason the beasties didn't kill Chekov or the Captain of the
Reliant was because they had tremendous conflicts, causing alot of
electrical impulses down the cerebral cortex, and making it
uncomfortable for the creatures. Or Khan was lying (about a 50:50
split here)
2) Perhaps "Mr." is a title for any COMMAND officer (officer able to
replace the captain in an emergency). As far as we remember, Uhura
was never referred to as Mr., but Chekov was, as were some of the
other male officers. There were never any female command officers
before.
3) According to official Starfleet lines, Romulons are enemies. We
Thought Saavik was half-Vulcan half-human. If she was brought up
as a human or Romulon, she would have been MUCH more emotional (the
Romulons split from the Vulcans before the mysterious event which
gave Vulcans their logic) Hmmm...What is she doing on a federation
starship acting like a vulcan?
4) I expected Spock's death (it's been going around that he would die
for quite a while) but it still hit me a bit harder than I
expected... although I admit it was (as usual) a bit melodramatic.
I am torn between my feelings that Spock made the series, and that
if he's dead he should STAY dead.
Is there any truth to the rumor that Leonard Nimoy is not coming back?
He's been threatening this for quite awhile...
------------------------------
Date: 13 Jun 1982 1618-EDT
From: John R. Covert <RSX-DEV at DEC-MARLBORO>
Subject: Mister Saavik
Cadets at military academies are call Mister.
------------------------------
Date: 06/15/82 11:40:49
From: RP@MIT-MC
Subject: Saavik
I question whether Saavik is a true Vulcan. During Spock's funeral I
am sure I noticed a tear under an eye. Did anyone else notice this?
------------------------------
Date: 11 June 1982 19:11-EDT (Friday)
From: Mijjil (Matthew J. Lecin) <LECIN at GREEN>
Reply-to: Lecin at RUTGERS
Subject: SPOILER fer shure
Saavik - we are led to believe that she is half-Vulcan, half-Romulan.
Now, how many Vulcans have we seen hanging around female Romulans?
Anyone care to REMEMBER that at the end of "Enterprise Incident", when
they have finally located SPOCK on the Romulan flagship using sensors
(damn Romulans are SO hard to tell from them Vulcans!) and they beam
him back to the Enterprise, they have a little surprise in the form of
the ROMULAN COMMANDER HERSELF!
And she DID try to subvert him with DINNER (she had her personal chef
make him a few VULCAN delicacies) and whatever comes AFTER dinner.
Saavik *** IS SPOCK'S DAUGHTER !!! ***
Which would definitely explain why she was *SO* attached to Spock
(aside from the fact that she must be "sorta lonely" away from other
Vulcans) and CRIES at his funeral.
<Mijjil>
Run that one up your Jeffries Tube and see what happens!
[ Actually, such a possibility is denied in the book - it appears they
the standard operating procedure to facilitate such an union is akin
to violent rape. -- Jim ]
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jun 1982 21:28:53-PDT
From: CSVAX.wss at Berkeley
Subject: Khan `eavesdropping' on Enterprise communicators
It does not seem unreasonable to me that Khan should be able to
eavesdrop on Kirk's communication with the Enterprise.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jun 1982 21:38:14-PDT
From: CSVAX.wss at Berkeley
Subject: Khan `eavesdropping' on Enterprise communicators
I can think of several reasons as to why Khan should be able to
eavesdrop on the Kirk's conversation with the Enterprise.
1. The communicators all over starfleet may use the same code.
Not unreasonable, as surely there must be occasions when a
landing party wants to contact a starship other than their own.
2. Kirk could have "absent-mindedly" used an open channel. It is
possible that this could sneak past Kahn's colossal ego.
2' Kirk could have been using a channel that had been preassigned
to communications involving the space station. I can't think
of any good reason for this, other than as a somewhat more
subtle form of 2.
3. Given the information that the Enterprise could take control of
the command console of the Reliant by supplying the proper
prefix code, maybe one of Kahn's followers managed to figure
out or find a key for deciphering Enterprise communication.
(If so, Starfleet is not too bright; it is never a good idea to
leave plaintext passwords lying around!). However, this
explanation relies on Kirk's being aware that communications
security was being compromised.
------------------------------
End of SF-LOVERS Digest
***********************