From: v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Subject: Re: Star Trek's Classics && Analogies
Summary: What is an analogy?  Federation : USA :: Klingus : USSR
Keywords: analogies, stuff
Date: 13 Apr 92 05:41:00 GMT
Followup-To: rec.arts.startrek.misc
Distribution: na
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr13.035056.4431@leland.Stanford.EDU>, underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) writes

>>>>         _Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country_
>>
>>>Urgh. Definitely not top 10 for me, not even top 20. Once the immediate
>>>impact passed, I found it a supremely forgettable movie. The perestoika
>>>...
>>     I don't see it that way at all.  _Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home_
>>     was a supremely forgettable movie.  _Star Trek: The Motion Picture_
>>     is a supremely forgettable movie.  What V?  
>>     TUC, I think, was imaginative and very intricately weaved politics,
>>     classic literary epic situations and nostalgia.  
>>     I thought Chang was a fantastic warrior, cut from the same mold as
> 
>That's just the point.  All the regular actors (Shatner, etc.)
>acted poorly.  Only the "non-regular" actors like the one playing
>Chang performed well.

     I don't agree.  I thought all the regulars performed well, even   
     Shatner.  I was especially impressed with the skill at which
     Nimoy tossed out Spock's witty dialogue (and that's after being
     disappointed as hell at his monotone performance in "Unification").

     On the Valeris front.... well, we'll leave it as pathetic.  She
     definitely qualifies as "guest cast."  Kirstie Alley returning
     as Saavik would have added zing to the film, without doubt.

>Come on.  Are you saying that you sensed Kirk's anguish at the beginning
>of the movie in which Kirk is making his unbelievable soliloquy about
>the pain of losing his son?  I didn't sense any of his anguish.
>The whole thing seem faked.

     How much anguish are you expecting ten years after the fact?
     Remember that the events of III are at least ten years previous
     to The Undiscovered Country.
     I thought the scene was excellent, good conflict between Spock
     and Kirk.  Believable.
     The Kirk-Spock scene I thought under-par was the "forgiveness"
     scene just before the concluding battle scene - "Spock, you
     wanna know something?  Everyone's human.  Everyone."  
     (But remember, the original scene had Spock take Kirk's hand
     and put it lovingly to his face...)

>Compare this pathetic bit of acting to the exhibition of genuine anguish
>in the "City on the Edge of Forever", where Kirk also deals with his
>anguish.  (Spock gives his haunting comment after McCoy wild-eyedly
>queries Kirk, "Do know what you've done?"  Spock says, "He knows,
>doctor.  He knows.")

     I recall the genuine anguish of Kirk falling onto the deck,
     "You son of a bitch you killed my son," and losing it.  You
     can't compare Kirk's anguish five minutes after having to watch
     Edith die and Kirk's speech to Spock a DECADE after David's
     death.  

>>     Kirk but on different ends of the same spectrum.  Christopher
>>     Plummer was just incredible in the role.  No one else could get
>>     away with quoting so much Shakespeare and making it work!  
>>     I don't agree that the perestroika theme was jumping on the
>>     bandwagon, because Star Trek has used the USSR-US relations as
>>     a major allegory for 25 years.  ...

>It goes deeper than that.  The full analogy is
> 
>   Federation:  United States of America
>   Klingus:  USSR
>   Romulus:  China
>   Vulcan:  Japan

     Not really.  I'll go along with the first two (although the
     first doesn't really apply to TNG).  The Romulans of TOS were
     the Japanese.  The Vulcans were the peaceful counterparts
     of the Japanese - the religious sect of the Japanese, if
     you will.  
     There is nothing to indicate that the Romulans are China.

     If you want to start a thread on analogies in Star Trek's races,
     I'll be right there with you, but this is a discussion on
     episode reviews that I would really like to keep somewhat on
     the subject.

>I've noticed that few avid fans of Star Trek have accurately made
>this analogy--particularly with regards to Romulus and Vulcan.  
>Please do note that the analogy is very accurate.

     Not accurate at all, really.  

>Romulans and Vulcans may physically look alike, but the mentality
>underneath is very different.  Very different.  The same applies to
>the real life counterparts.

     Briefly: The Romulans as introduced in "Balance of Terror" are
     clearly meant to be the "Japs" of WWII.  The Vulcans are the
     older, wiser, peaceful counterparts to the Romulans - like,
     Bhuddists, but still Japanese.  


          ^Scott Gorcey, v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu^
Xref: sparky rec.arts.startrek.misc:3114 rec.arts.startrek.current:4830 comp.sys.mac.hypercard:1850