Re: The quote I posted earlier from David Mack.
Aside from being a great message in and of itself, I posted that because I’ve been having a lot of Kirk/Spock emotions as of late, and my desire to have the true depth of their relationship made canon grows stronger as the 50th anniversary nears.
“…certainly with love overtones. Deep love. The only difference being from the Greek ideal, we never suggested physical love between the two in the [original] series. We certainly had the feeling that the affection was sufficient for that, if that were the particular style of the 23rd century.” -Gene Roddenberry, 1978.
This quote always gets me. He’s saying that if homosexuality is no longer (as compared to the 60’s and 70’s) taboo in the 23rd century, then Kirk and Spock could certainly have a physical relationship. So, my question is, why can’t the AOS break the socially constructed shackles of the accepted blockbuster formula and make it so?
We’re living in a period of great change, and the time to finally show the true depth and diversity that exists in our world is now. Yet no film studio has had the gall to do it. Films (notably sci-fi and fantasy) depicting a better future (or the fight for it), still rely on normative restrictions of gender and sexuality. Someone needs to take a stand against this behaviour, and for me there is no universe more appropriate to break the (out-dated, sexist, sexually rigid) mold than Star Trek.
Star Trek’s original series was groundbreaking. It refused the normative formula. It depicted a world where women and men, of all species, races, and backgrounds were equal. I have no doubt that if they could have addressed sexuality at the time, they would have.
I love the AOS, but I am fully aware that it’s been, up until this point, frustratingly sexist and in no way groundbreaking beyond 1966. (Hell, if not stepping backwards from that. At least in 1966 women on the Enterprise were independent and not stripped down to their underwear for no apparent reason…) I have no doubt that the 23rd century will be one of equality and acceptance of all genders and sexualities, yet there is no representation of this in the reboot. To make such a necessary and inevitable part of our future invisible in a modern depiction for fear of controversy is both painfully backwards, and against all that Star Trek once stood for.
2016 will celebrate the 50th anniversary, and for me there would be no greater way to honour the ideals and vision of Gene Roddenberry and TOS than by breaking the mold and re-defining the mainstream sci-fic and fantasy genre for the future.
Okay, so 10 years ago I wrote this silly diatribe about how we were finally ready for more main character queerness in Star Trek. And while I fully believed it at the time, I think that the recent cancellation of Starfleet Academy proves me wrong. I’m not interested in getting into a debate with anyone about “wokeness” (or whatever) because it’s bullshit, but I wanted to take a second to remind you all of one thing:
HOPE
Star Trek is about hope. So remember friends, just because it didn’t happen a decade ago or this year, doesn’t mean it won’t. The Star Trek franchise isn’t going anywhere, and the time will come when our beloved Enterprise is helmed by an openly queer captain.
