Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site dartvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!dartvax!merchant
From: merchant@dartvax.UUCP (Peter Merchant)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: disposable cast?
Message-ID: <3271@dartvax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 18-Jun-85 11:28:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.3271
Posted: Tue Jun 18 11:28:17 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Jun-85 11:23:44 EDT
References: <1802@ut-ngp.UUCP> <257@azure.UUCP> <3242@dartvax.UUCP> <15099@watmath.UUCP>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Lines: 51

> Chris Andersen writes:
> >> In other words, are Spock, Kirk, McCoy, etc., really THAT essential to the
> >> nebulous being known as "Star Trek"?
> >>                                       Chris Andersen 
> 
> Peter Merchant responds:
> >Well, everyone has their own definition of "Star Trek."  By my definition,
> >the stories are about Jim Kirk and his buddies.  Thus, with no Jim Kirk,
> >the show kind of falls apart.  Kind of like James Bond without James Bond.
> >
> >... I think Spock could disappear ... At least, that's what I think...
> >                                 Peter Merchant
> 
> I have to disagree...  My definition of "Star Trek" is the *universe*
> or the setting of the show.  Your analogy with James Bond is not
> applicable...  Star Trek is NOT the Jim Kirk show...  
>     
> I agree with you that the show does revolve around Jim Kirk and his
> buddies but I don't think that this is the only criteria on which it 
> should be based.  As I have stated in previous postings, I think a
> show could be recreated with totally new characters and new stories.
>     

Oh, a show could definitely be "recreated" within the Star Trek Universe.
But I really don't think that it would be "Star Trek."  Take any story
and it has a central character who, in theory, has a decision to make.
In "Star Trek", that character is Jim Kirk.  If it were Bob MacKenzie
("I say we go pick up some beers, hoser...") on board the Federation
Starship Gazornaplatz, it wouldn't be Star Trek.  It would take place
in the same "universe" as Star Trek and the two shows might actually
meet ("The universe is a big place.") but it ain't Star Trek.

Star Trek is the voyages of the starship Enterprise and, in theory,
Jim Kirk.
> You said that you think Spock could disappear.  If anything, Spock
> is more essential to the series than Kirk is (Spock was an officer
> on board the Enterprise before Kirk was reading StarFleet manuals).
> One of the most notable things about Star Trek (especially when
> it was first released) was the idea of an alien working with
> humans.  NBC was totally against the idea of Spock during the
> first couple of episodes and only overwhelming, positive response
> to the character prevented them from telling Gene Roddenberry to
> axe him...  
>     
Spock is a funny case.  He became more important as the show went on
because he is an interesting character and people wanted to see more
of him.  But he is still only the advisor!  Jim's the one who makes 
the decisions.

--
"Two cents plus two cents.."                   Peter Merchant