From: vandenhu5655@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current
Subject: Re: Locarno = Kirk (Spoilers "First Duty"))
Date: 15 Apr 92 20:35:37 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <maj1.703279548@Ra.MsState.Edu>, maj1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Mark "Beren" Jamison) writes:
> tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
> 
>>maj1@Ra.MsState.Edu (Mark "Beren" Jamison) writes:
>>>tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>>>kyle@uunet.uu.net (Kyle Jones) writes:
> 
>>>>>ccmk@lure.latrobe.edu.au writes:
>>>>> > The emphasis is on the refusal to give in no matter the odds.
> 
>>>>>tlynch@cco.caltech.edu (Timothy W. Lynch) writes:
>>>>> > That's not an "I will not fail".  That's an "I will not give up"; and I 
>>>>> > find that an admirable quality most of the time.  The "I will not fail"
>>>>> > is adolescent arrogance at its worst.
> 
>>>>>OK, assuming for a moment that you're right: give us an example
>>>>>of Kirk taking on something that's way over his head, ignoring
>>>>>all warnings, and just foolishly bulling ahead.
> 
>>>>Refusing to do a thing about Gary Mitchell until it was damn near too late
>>>>in "Where No Man Has Gone Before"?  Letting Khan get in close enough to 
>>>>cripple the Enterprise in ST2?
> 
>>>Where do these signify the "I will not fail" mentality?? 
> 
>>You mean saying "there can't be anything wrong with the Reliant because I'm
>>James Kirk and invulnerable"?
> 
> Come again?? His moves with the reliant may belie a sense of trust in all
> Federation people, not an "I can't lose" mentality.. Granted it was stupid,
> less arrogant men have done the same sort of thing though..
> 
> 
>>>As far as Kahn was concerned?? Where is he ignoring all warnings??
> 
>>Ohhh, I don't know...completely ignoring standard (and *sensible*) regulations
>>involving ships that are coming towards you and silent running, not doing any-
>>thing to safeguard the ship until the Reliant's shields were up *and* weapons
>>were locked, and thus pummeling the ship.  You know, the error that caused 
>>the damage that in the end, drove Spock to sacrifice himself.  That error.
> 
> Well, I'll argue with you on that one.. See above.. Now if you had pointed
> out his goading Kahn into a fight at the end, well that's another story,
> and that was what caused Spock's sacrifice..
> 
> 
>>>This is something I really don't understand in most Kirk Bashers (tm),
> 
>>I'm afraid I don't see any around.  You'll have to deal with those actually
>>posting.  I don't bash Kirk lightly, nor on a regular basis.  (Shatner, 
>>perhaps.  :-) )  I will not, however, accept the picture given of "he had no 
>>flaws and was a perfect man in every way", nor will I refuse to acknowledge
>>parallels that I see.  If you and others intend to label me a rabid Kirk-
>>basher for it, feel free.
> 
> Sorry, I was moving on a tangent, I tend to do that too often. I was speaking
> more i terms of othe posters.. Besdies don't you like labels?? :-)
> 
> 
>>>they refuse to take as cannon TOS, which in several episodes describe Kirk
>>>as a Stick in the mud during his academy days.. If anything, based on 
>>>what we have learned from the shows, and ignoring neat plot devices thrown
>>>into a Movie, Locarno = Picard.. 
> 
>>"Neat plot devices" thrown into the greatest TOS-characters product ever
>>filmed, IMO.   You can discount ST2 if you like; I shan't.
> 
> Sorry, perhaps my meaning was not clear.. I was not saying I ignore ST2 I
> was just taking what someone else had argued from..
> 
> 
>>And as for the Locarno=Picard analogy [thought up by those getting *extremely*
>>defensive about the L/K connection, I might add], I've already pointed out
>>elsewhere that there's no evidence for either Locarno being a hell-raiser or
>>for Picard being outright *dishonest*.  We know Picard was troublesome and
>>perhaps disruptive; all appearances from TFD indicate that Locarno was viewed
>>very favorably by the Academy at large, faculty and students alike.  And
>>Picard's never been said to lie or cheat at the Academy in any form; Locarno
>>and Kirk have.
> 
> Both Picard and Locarno have pulled "stunts".. Besides where did Kirk Lie??
> 
> 
>>Locarno/Kirk is not a perfect analogy; I've long since clarified my position on
>>that.  Locarno/Picard is a meaningless one, particularly since the overt lines
>>drawn in the show itself were for Wes/Picard/Boothby.  I think that when poor
>>Scott Gorcey started this thread, he didn't realize quite what a bundle of 
>>raw nerves he was going to set off.  
> 
> Well it was the equality symbol that was bothering me, that and the 
> Kirk Bashers(tm) trying to say that cheating on a test you're taking
> for the third time to prove a point, and  trying a "Stunt" that could,and did
> , get people killed, is equivalent.. 
> 
> 
>>>Even if we accept STII as cannon we have 
>>>one instance of Kirk doing something in his academy days that only remotely
>>>is similar to Locarno, 
> 
>>The remoteness is under some discussion, it seems.  You can dismiss it if
>>you like; I've already granted that Locarno is far more dishonest and venal
>>than Kirk's ever been shown to be.  The bare facts of Kirk cheating on the 
>>KM test do not appear to be a problem, though; it's the discussion of what
>>it means that's caused the uproar.
> 
> Absolutely..
> 
>>>Picard however has a very vague, but distinctively
>>>rawdy and bawdy description of his days at the Academy.. 
> 
>>Neither of which appear to apply to Locarno.  He *looked* like a model 
>>student until this happened, eh?
> 
> point taken.. 
> 
> And Now for something completely similar but different too..
> 
> From the vague stuff we learned from Boothby about Picard, doesn't that 
> speech he gave wesley seem a bit hypocritical?? It actually made me think that
> Picard was acting like the stereotyped father who has such great
> expectations of his son that the Father completely forgets what kind of
> stuff he did as a child..
> 
>>Tim Lynch (Cornell's first Astronomy B.A.; one of many Caltech grad students)
>>BITNET:  tlynch@citjuliet
>>INTERNET:  tlynch@juliet.caltech.edu
>>UUCP:  ...!ucbvax!tlynch%juliet.caltech.edu@hamlet.caltech.edu
>>"Science is the only self-correcting human institution, but it also is a 
>>process that progresses only by showing itself to be wrong."
>>			--Allan Sandage
> --
> ______________________________________________________________________________
>                        Still looking for Luthien
> maj1@ra.msstate.edu                                  maj1@beren.b17a.ingr.com
> ______________________________________________________________________________

Don't you just hate it when you are expecting an intellectual reply at the
end of a real long post but there's nothing there but a smart-a** comment? :)

- Todd
' I could---but why? '
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current