Shatner’s dramatic speech is considered overacting today. But it is a stirring delivery and I miss the ability of actors to give their all in conveying the important ideas that all of us should be taking to heart.

I would agree that an exact replica of the US Constitution on another planet is impossible, but this episode is about not forgetting the importance of liberty. So I didn’t mind a suspension of disbelief for this enjoyable episode.

I certainly liked it.

“Bad episode. Bad.”

You think you can do a better job? For someone who worked on Starship Exeter(which was in this episode), you certainly are quick to judge.

“I have tried Captain.”

What a cool name you have. Gene L. Coon made Star Trek great. He was like the Harve Bennett of the Star Trek movies. Even though Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek, Gene Coon made it work and turned it into, IMHO, the best television show.

Must’ve been typing while I was.

This is a great episode, in my mind. It has all the fun I could ask for, excellent performances, tight pacing, humor, and nifty surprises.

I Googled “E Plebmnista norcom forcom perfectumum” because about 3 decades ago, a girlfriend claimed it was Latin, and wondered why Spock didn’t notice…

I didn’t find a definitive answer. But it looks suspicious. Anyone?

Anyhow, In the process, I found a number of reviews, which like this one, said the ending was flag-waving. And thus suited to July 4th (too bad it had to be one day after).

Well, I liked this review, more than the others. Except for the negative parts, of course.

So, here’s my view…

I like, what I see, as it’s intended message. One particularly suited to July 4th. Patriotism, yes, but the kind that was (and is) often looked at as subversive.

Cloud William = far too many of my fellow Americans.

Kirk = Roddenberry

And that’s why it had to be exactly the US, and exactly the US Constitution.

It was his message to leaders and followers who believe that we can solve problems, by making exceptions to rights. Who think people should be treated differently according to race, belief, class, or whatever is popular.

Think about then. Descendents of Africans were sub-citizens in parts of the country. And seen as less-worthy by a huge swath of the entire country’s population. They were here, and had endured a bad history, because, at the beginning, rights didn’t apply to them. And, more than a century after freedom, many were still shorted on rights. The second-most shameful racism in our history (keep reading).

Hollywood was still licking its wounds after McCarthyism – people had been accused and brought before Congress, their careers destroyed because they disagreed with the structure or management of our system, or ventured into forbidden politics – they must be communist sympathizers!

“We must protect ourselves from the commies!” “We don’t need rights!”

Freedom of speech (protest, or just speech) was called unpatriotic, by many.

Now we have to protect ourselves from terrorists, we don’t need rights.

Freedom of speech has been called unpatriotic.

Persians and Arabs are suspect. And gays – well, if civil unions carried all the rights of marriage, then there wouldn’t have been that political football, two presidential elections in a row. There are weird disparities, and expectations, for each group, from society, employers, government, and beuraucratic catagories.

Changing to the next subject:

“Lily-white” “Blonde”. Ok, I know there’s a little exaggeration for humor and emphasis. :)

But I see a strong message against racism, and not just in Kirk’s words.

Yes the tribe, who brought in the sacred books was cacasian (although of a variety of skin tones, features, and hair colors, ahem).

Should we be surprised that they self-segregated, as groups did then, and now?

They were Roddenberry’s White Indians. (A concept he took to Genesis II and Planet Earth).

It was a jab at the most shameful bigotry in our country’s history. Most, in our country’s history, had looked down on the Indigenous Americans (both continents) as “savages”. At the time, it was still a popular view.

No coincidence, in the writing of the episode, that Tracey would also see them as unworthy barbaric aggressors…

And, oops, our heroes, and first time audience, see his point of view… until they figure out the other side of it.

The Americans were fighting for their land back. You know, the “savages”.

And changing the subject again:

Was there evidence of sexism, here? Not on the creators’s parts.

Cloud William’s mate didn’t “have much to do”. Well, they were primitives, one would expect some traditional roles.

But we didn’t see as much as you’d expect. He took her with him, into front-line battle.

She was right there, fighting Kirk, alongside him, even once after C.W pushed her away. When the fight carried itself away from her, she started to spectate. And only when Kirk started whomping on the greatest warriero they hade, did she gawk, and back away, as she realized how terrifying, this strange member of the firebox-wizards, was.

(Concessions had to be made to studio and network, but they did their best to keep it plausible).

And she didn’t hesitate to speak up with “Yes. It is written.”. There were husbands in the 60’s who would’ve glared at her for that.

The stunning Asian woman really was subservient. It was her job, for one thing. And one would’ve expected her culture to have reverted to an earlier set of rules, as well. (The Communist Chinese system was moving away from sexism, by the 60’s. But, after an apocalypse…). She noticed McCoy’s attraction, and reacted flirtatiously. One might read submissivness in part of her flirtation, as well. If so, it wouldn’t be surprising if she was raised to think that subservient gestures enhanced attractiveness.

“McCoy, himself trapped replaying his makeshift laboratory scenes from “Miri,” comes up with some good business of his own, especially when Kirk and Spock return from what must have seemed certain death and the doctor is too wrapped up in his studies to offer more than a distracted “Oh, hello Jim…” ”

Slight nitpick:

“Ahhh. Good morning, Jim.” :)

(He’d worked through the night).

There is another way to interpret his underreaction.

It might indicate that was utterly unsurprised that Kirk and Spock escaped. :)

And one last thought (no, really!).

Did Kirk violate the Prime Directive?

Of all the times he is alleged to have, I would say yes. This time he did.

Why? Perhaps the same reason Tracey did…

Infection, and response to the immune factors, could have easily impaired brain functions. Specifically of restraint and judgement.

Or… Kirk knew that would be a plausible defense for the both of them.

Medical experts would offer it as a strong possibility, and no one could dispute it (no way to experiment).

Kirk would get to do something about the tragedy of the Yang’s lost heritage, save everyone’s life, avert a slaughter, and keep the insanity from wiping out the accomplishments in Tracey’s carrer.

Even if Tracey got out of a psychiatric penal colony, at some point, he would still be a social pariah.

So at least let people’s memory of what he was, before that, mean something. Not have his entire service record cancelled out by him betraying his oath.

Too bad they didn’t seem to think of that. Perhaps after “Mirror, Mirror”, they could’ve found various rifts, in nearby places, that would lead them to parallel Earths. Of course there wouldn’t be the surprise, but that could be disposed of.

It could be suggested with rift-like effects. Implying they followed the Exeter through something. (But after any dialog that would’ve explained it to us). I wouldn’t want to give them that level of retcon power, though.