Comments on: Star Trek: Spock’s New Cultural Relevance

By: Brad Williams

Brad Williams — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:23:33 +0000

Science fiction is awesome. As Carissa pointed out in the article, there are limitless ways in which one can use such a constructed universe to safely explore serious issues. Do Spock’s difficulties in understanding, expressing, and dealing with emotion have anything to teach us about autism? Why is it that we regard Spock as Vulcan even though he is half-human? Fun things!

*spoiler alert!*

However, I must quickly add that all of those interesting issues are far overshadowed by the fact that the old Spock went back in time and contributed to the blowing up of his entire planet…in the past. This would presumably mean that the old Spock would not exist, and so he couldn’t unwittingly contribute to the destruction of his old home world, which would in turn mean that he would exist. So is this a multi-verse? A universe? Seriously! Forget the girl Spock, explain paradox to us!

By: petered

petered — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 01:31:09 +0000

I do like the idea of people giving up power for a higher reason, but my understanding after watching the movie was that Spock gave up his position because of regulation. The rules stated that any captain who was emotionally compromised would be forced to give up their command. It seemed to me that Spock’s rigid adherence to the rules was as much of a factor as wisdom in giving up command.

I thought the movie did a poor job at developing Spock’s character, and it gave a bad message about the response to emotions. The only emotion I remember Spock feeling or showing was anger and sadness, hardly a good representation of someone becoming in touch with emotions. Additionally, the “good” response to those emotions the movie gave was an unwise vengeful attack, which takes some of the shine off the idea of Spock developing his emotional side.

By: Carissa Smith

Carissa Smith — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 13:04:22 +0000

Kate: Yes, I’m focusing more on identification with Spock here, as opposed to finding him sexy.

By: kate

kate — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 10:04:02 +0000

Er, Leonard Nimoy was the one from the original series who got sacks of female fan mail in the 60s. Isaac Asimov even wrote an article on Spock’s sex appeal. The Spock character didn’t appeal just to the geeky girls either. In fact I don’t think science fiction was geeky in the 60s, it was quite exciting, hence the popularity of Dr Who and 2001 a Space Odyssey.

By: satchel

satchel — Tue, 19 May 2009 19:44:50 +0000

what i want to ko is whats the difference between spock and original spock. In all fiarness i ahvent seen the movie……or any of the episodes….but im gonna see the movie this weekend. Still i wanna kno the difference between spock and original spock?

By: The Dane

The Dane — Wed, 13 May 2009 01:16:01 +0000

@Carissa - I think i only called you Clarissa once. And I even knew that wasn't your name. I just have a nostalgia-crush on Clarissa Explains It All (which I really only saw twice) and so have to fight the usurpation of your true name by your not-as-true name. The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

By: Carissa

Carissa — Wed, 13 May 2009 00:17:08 +0000

@Sean: If you want the source, the original story was run by the LA Times back in 2005–the article isn’t accessible anymore, though, unless you’re willing to pay for it, which is why I didn’t link to it. The internets kind of exploded over it back in the day. But, as I hoped to suggest, I don’t think it’s all that relevant anyway. If, say, a study shows that pedophiles like to drink tea, that doesn’t mean there’s anything at all wrong or “sick” about drinking tea. But it does mean that society in general may cast aspersion on those who drink tea, rightly or wrongly. I’m just calling attention to some of our past cultural associations with those who admire Spock.

@hi-chan: As The Dane said, it’s only my experience that I’m speaking of. My childhood was sadly deprived of fellow female nerds.

@The Dane: Thanks for spelling my name correctly!

By: The Dane

The Dane — Tue, 12 May 2009 20:47:29 +0000

@Sean - I'll be kind and simply suggest that you wildly misread her. @hi-chan - Are you saying that Carissa is wrong and that she really has known geek women who adore Spock with equal fanaticism? 'Cuz that would be a weird thing to say. The Danes last blog post..20090417.teaParty

By: hi-chan

hi-chan — Tue, 12 May 2009 19:15:21 +0000

“On the other hand, I’ve never known any women, even self-proclaimed geek-girls, who worship Spock with quite the same intensity.”

I have to say, Clarissa, you are wrong on this one. As a nerdy girl who grew up in the Silicon Valley, I knew plenty of younger and older women who romanticized and idolized Mr. Spock. In fact, it takes one to know one…I have always had a huge crush on him. :-) I really think you’ve hit the nail on the head about what makes him so attractive to women, though, besides the “tall, dark and handsome” thing. It’s a sort of gracious humility, sort of the way Christ was willing to be a servant to others. Also, like Christ, Spock is good at witty comebacks. ;-)

Still don’t believe girls love Spock? Here’s another data point for you:

http://www.doublex.com/blog/xxfactor/venus-loves-spock

By: Sean Gaffney

Sean Gaffney — Tue, 12 May 2009 17:51:31 +0000

Clarissa says, “…a correlation between Spock-obsession and pedophilia. (Making any sort of causal argument here would be ridiculous, of course.)”

And yet, despite stating it would be ridiculous to argue, you do make flippant use of an unsourced study, directly connecting Star Trek fans and pedophilia. May I ask why? In what way was this article enhanced by pointing out your passive feeling that nerds are probably also “sick”? That those who grew up enjoying the series are not only socially awkward but probably (not definitely, of course, that would be ridiculous, but probably) socially suspect?

I can’t seem to wrap my head around how this information plays into the article — especially the conclusion that choosing to be Spock-like (and thus, pedophila prone) could be a good thing for Christians.