From: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!sf-lovers Newsgroups: fa.sf-lovers Title: SF-LOVERS Digest V5 #72 Article-I.D.: ucbvax.7802 Posted: Mon Jun 28 12:15:40 1982 Received: Tue Jun 29 08:59:57 1982 >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)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 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 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 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 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) 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. 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 ***********************