FIRST I will say that I am a fan of William Shatner OC. The “OC” stands for “Order of Canada” – which is an honor of merit bestowed by the Canadian government.
The 2019 announcement specifically mentions Captain James T Kirk/Star Trek but these types of honors tend to be conferred because of a combination of “entertainment and philanthropy” e.g. The motto of the “Order of Canada” is “DESIDERANTES MELIOREM PATRIAM” (They desire a better country)
Not being a Canadian – I had to look up the “Order of Canada.” I was trying to figure out if there is a formal address for “Officers of the Order of Canada” (umm, no? I’m still not sure – apparently Canada uses “Honorable” and “Right Honorable” for certain positions/persons – but I don’t think “OC” comes along with an honorific, but again I’m not 100% on that one way or the other …)
fwiw: Mr Shatner pointed out that being “knighted” is mostly for citizens of Great Britain. SO Mr Shatner is not “Sir William” (and I’m told that Canadian citizens are not eligible for the top two levels of the “OBE”)
fwiw 2: Article 1 Section 9 Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the United States gov’ment from conferring “Titles of Nobility” – but several prominent Americans have been awarded “KBE” by the United Kingdom. The “KBE” usually gets described as an “honorary knighthood” – they get the award from the Crown and can put “KBE” after their name if they want, but don’t get the official honorific of “Sir/Dame.”
Star Trek
“Star Trek” TOS (the original series) ran for 3 seasons (79 official episodes) and then there was an “animated series” that ran for 22 episodes.
It is part of the legend of “Star Trek” that the show ran for 3 seasons and was CANCELLED each season — organized “fan letter” campaigns convinced network decision makers to bring the show back for another season after the season 1 and 2 cancellations.
BUT while the fan letter campaign might have convinced network executives to keep the show on the air, it couldn’t convince them to invest money in the show. e.g. if you watch the TOS episodes in order you will notice a drop in “production value” in many season 3 episodes.
The rumor was that Mr Shatner and Leonard Nimoy were the only actors “getting raises” – and most of season 3 is just not as good as seasons 1 and 2 for various reasons. Of course “not very good” Star Trek is still better than a lot of shows – I’m not being overly critical but two words “Spock’s Brain” (season 3 episode 1)
I have always had the impression that William Shatner has a passion for performing – which is why he has 250 credits to his name. Leonard Nimoy went from Star Trek to “Mission Impossible” and has 136 credits. DeForest Kelley was 10 years older than both Mr Shatner and Mr Nimoy – and was certainly the more “established” actor when Star Trek TOS started (not surprisingly considering the time and popular tastes – he was in a lot of westerns) – has 133 credits to his name.
ANYWAY – My very round about point is that while William Shatner OC will be remembered as “Captain Kirk.” Mr Shatner has had a long and distinguished career. – i.e. his career included a LOT more than JUST “Star Trek” – e.g. Mr Shatner’s portrayal of the very “not Captain Kirk” character “Denny Crane” won him a Primetime Emmy in 2004 AND 2005, and don’t forget the “exceptionally 80’s” TJ Hooker.
The motivation for the blog post was a meme with Mr Shatner asking “When did Star Trek become political?”
“When did Star Trek become political?”
William Shatner OC
There are a LOT of responses belittling Mr Shatner – with the general theme being something like “Star Trek is the most political show in the history of television!”
While I understand what folks “mean” when they say that Star Trek was/is “political” I have to disagree because, well, they are simply wrong.
Science Fiction in general
We should probably define some terms:
Merriam-Webster tells us that Science Fiction = “fiction dealing principally with the impact of actual or imagined science on society or individuals or having a scientific factor as an essential orienting component”
The important part of the “science fiction” definition is of course the “science” part — i.e. just because a story takes place in “outer space”, has “ray guns” and/or spaceships does NOT automatically mean it is “science fiction.”
e.g. A lot of those “serial” films like Flash Gordon or Buck Rodgers are more “space fantasy” than science fiction. “Star Wars” (the original trilogy) is very much “space fantasy” – and the broad thematic similarities between Flash Gordon and Star Wars should be obvious (heroes going off on a mission to save life as we know it).
To be clear I am not criticizing any of the above – they are entertaining and have had societal influence – but they could just as easily take place “once upon a time in a land far far away” (e.g. sounds a lot like “A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away”).
Social Commentary
Going back to our definition – notice the “impact … on society or individuals” part. If someone is telling stories about the impact of “whatever” on “society and individuals” they are almost certainly engaging in “social commentary” —
e.g. H.G. Wells typically gets credit for “inventing” the genre with “The Time Machine” in 1895. — Mr Well’s time traveler (an inventor/scientist) went into a distant future where humanity had destroyed the societies of his time (war is bad) and there are two surviving “classes” of humans – one above ground and the other below … so “science” and “social commentary” has ALWAYS been a recipe for “science fiction”
There are multiple “sub genres” of “science fiction” that I will just wave at as we go by – i.e. a comprehensive discussion on all things “science fiction” is beyond the scope of this little blog …
BUT “social commentary” is NOT “politics” — e.g. if you want to say that “Star Trek” has always been a commentary on modern society – then I would tend to agree.
The movies with “the original cast” also fit into that model — i.e. they are broad “social commentary” about issues of the day but are NOT “political”
Politics
Obviously now we need to define politics – the first recorded use of the word in English goes back to 1529 – with an “art or science of government” meaning.
The roots of “politics” go back to the Ancient Greek “polis”/city state – so when Aristotle said that “Man is by nature a political animal” he was saying that men are capable of communication and moral reasoning — therefore they can create governments/societies based on that moral reasoning (i.e. “politics”)
fwiw: Aristotle wasn’t a fan of “democracies” because they tend to decay into chaos – so his use of the word “political” was descriptive in a general sense – neither positive or negative – he was obviously biased toward the Greek polis (constitutional republic) as an ideal.
The word “politics” gets thrown around a lot – as it is used in “modern times” it can be understood as the practical process of “who gets what, how much they get, and when do they get it” — i.e. if you have scarce resources there will ALWAYS be “politics” to deal with – whether you are talking about a small business or the Federal government EVERYBODY can’t get EVERYTHING they want NOW – so “politics” happen.
“Science fiction” might tell a story where the “social commentary theme” is “racism is bad” or “war is bad but sometimes necessary” – but would NOT advance a specific set of policy principles or advocate for (or against) a current political figure.
Sure someone COULD tell a thinly veiled story pushing a specific political agenda and pretend it is “science fiction” – but that is more accurately called “propaganda” not “fiction”
If we went through all of of TOS episodes we can PROBABLY find an underlying “social commentary” in each one – some are more overt than others – but it is there if you look for it (an exercise for a time when I have more time on my hands).
Fashions change – social commentary endures
It can also be fun to point out the “science fiction fashion victims” – just like you can point out the “historical epic fashion victims” – i.e. any television show or movie tends to reflect the time it was made.
SO we get miniskirts and beehive hairdos in TOS and somehow all of the aliens look like humans from 1960s North America who all speak English on every “M” class planet they stumble upon after travelling multiples of the speed of light to get there. Oh, and all alien species are all able to interbreed (and fall in love with Captain Kirk) – and those sideburns …
BUT this is all part of the suspension of disbelief – we can also point at “Doctor Zhivago” (1965) as a great movie about the Russian revolution (1917-1923) with a cast full of actors with “1965” hairstyles – enjoy the movie, don’t worry about the hairstyles
It is also fun to compare the “tech” from TOS to the “tech” in TNG — One of my favorites is the concept of the “paperless society” – in all of TOS episodes and movies if you see a “dead tree” book on the Enterprise it is probably a “plot element” – they read off of screens a lot, and they use (what we would call) “tablets” a lot. BUT Captain Jean Luc Picard had his leather bound edition of the “Complete Works of Shakespeare”
in the “just for fun” category Pavel Chekov could illustrate the potential dangers of working in “political” jokes – e.g. the character was introduced in an attempt to appeal to younger viewers and also as a little “Cold War” reference.
According to Mr Chekov EVERYTHING was invented in Russia – which is still funny as a running gag, but during the Stalin era Russian history was periodically rewritten to conform to the current political environment …
“The Trouble With Tribbles” Season 2 Episode 15
Scott : [raising his glass] Now this is a drink for a man. Chekov : Scotch?
Scott : Aye.
Chekov : It was invented by a little old lady from Leningrad.
BUT yes, I am nitpicking — my original point was that Star Trek TOS is “social commentary” and it remains popular BECAUSE it was NOT “political” — which was probably what Mr Shatner was saying — if he actually said the “When did Star Trek become political?” line …
Leave a Reply