I never believed Nimoy's Spock was as emotionless as he (and others) claimed—unless you believe "sass" isn't an emotion, because Nimoy's Spock is SASSY! So many of the Spock memes have him rolling his eyes in exasperation, raising his eyebrow either sarcastically or skeptically, his smirk as he turns back around to his station—he's not lacking in emotion, he's strictly disciplined his so as not to let his emotions rule him. (That "Vulcans replaced emotions with logic generations ago" thing always sounded more like a SF writer's invention than something sapient beings would actually do, anyway.)
He's more like the Stoics of Hellenic Greece than the "walking machine" McCoy so often snarled about him being.
That was the point, or one of them, that Gene Roddenberry was trying to make when he took Spock past "A guy with pointy ears I'd like Martin Landau or Leonard Nimoy to play", as Spock was originally created to be in "The Cage".*
As a source of drama he saw Spock as the voice of logic and reason, versus Dr. McCoy (who spends a LOT of time on the bridge for a ship's doctor!) as the voice of humanism and (as you put it) "Who are you if not your emotions?". Kirk as Captain would be the ultimate arbiter, but his decision-making process involved getting the opinion of his advisers and making a decision from there.
Spock and the entire Vulcan race don't really make much sense, as any TREK writer quickly finds out once they try writing another Vulcan character, or even try writing Spock! Yes, if you went with the notion of "virtuous reason" as a cultural ideal for the Vulcans they might work overall, but as a race that (mostly) suppresses their emotions to live a life of "logic" is a "One Trait to a Race" kind of writing that few could live up to, and leaves out a lot of people who are more humanistic, or aggressive, or neurodivergent, or greedy! That's why Vulcans in other shows so often come off as arrogant, snobbish, or "go rogue" so the story can happen.
The only reason Spock in STAR TREK: THE ORIGINAL SERIES work at all is because of Leonard Nimoy, who plays the character like an idealized Jewish intellectual. He put a great deal of himself into the character so you could how, in another world, he might have been a scholar—in control of his emotions almost all the time, but not so lacking in them that he lacks humor, curiosity, or caring.
----
* While THE MAKING OF STAR TREK claims Roddenberry wanted Nimoy all along, Martin Landau claimed that he was offered Spock first, and turned it down because he didn't want to be "that alien guy" on a stupid Sci-Fi TeeVee Show, and HE recommended Nimoy!
Thanks for this! I've always been drawn to the "brainy sidekick" character. For example, as a kid watching "Wild, Wild West" I always preferred Artemis, the smart inventor played by Ross Martin, rather than brawny James West (played by Robert Conrad). I felt the same way about Mr. Spock--much cooler and more attractive than Jim Kirk. I wonder if others have similar preferences--more attracted to the person who intelligently solves problems even if less conventionally handsome than the "star"? The high school computer nerd rather than the football player? I know which type I (very happily) married decades ago--although much more demonstrative than Mr. Spock!
I do want to point out that while it doesn't mean that men don't die from occupational hazards more frequently than women, fields that are dominated by women underreport both injuries and workplace violence. Healthcare occupational hazards of all kinds are vastly underreported. Homicide is the second leading cause of workplace death for home healthcare workers for example.
I doubt it tips the balance; women are forcibly kept out of a lot of dangerous occupations through sexist hiring and harassment, and then I think workplace safety standards are seen as less important since women aren't working in the field.
I never believed Nimoy's Spock was as emotionless as he (and others) claimed—unless you believe "sass" isn't an emotion, because Nimoy's Spock is SASSY! So many of the Spock memes have him rolling his eyes in exasperation, raising his eyebrow either sarcastically or skeptically, his smirk as he turns back around to his station—he's not lacking in emotion, he's strictly disciplined his so as not to let his emotions rule him. (That "Vulcans replaced emotions with logic generations ago" thing always sounded more like a SF writer's invention than something sapient beings would actually do, anyway.)
He's more like the Stoics of Hellenic Greece than the "walking machine" McCoy so often snarled about him being.
yeah, Trek itself makes it clear Spock isn't really emotionless.
the question for me is, what does it mean to not let your emotions rule you? who are you if you're not your emotions (in part)?
That was the point, or one of them, that Gene Roddenberry was trying to make when he took Spock past "A guy with pointy ears I'd like Martin Landau or Leonard Nimoy to play", as Spock was originally created to be in "The Cage".*
As a source of drama he saw Spock as the voice of logic and reason, versus Dr. McCoy (who spends a LOT of time on the bridge for a ship's doctor!) as the voice of humanism and (as you put it) "Who are you if not your emotions?". Kirk as Captain would be the ultimate arbiter, but his decision-making process involved getting the opinion of his advisers and making a decision from there.
Spock and the entire Vulcan race don't really make much sense, as any TREK writer quickly finds out once they try writing another Vulcan character, or even try writing Spock! Yes, if you went with the notion of "virtuous reason" as a cultural ideal for the Vulcans they might work overall, but as a race that (mostly) suppresses their emotions to live a life of "logic" is a "One Trait to a Race" kind of writing that few could live up to, and leaves out a lot of people who are more humanistic, or aggressive, or neurodivergent, or greedy! That's why Vulcans in other shows so often come off as arrogant, snobbish, or "go rogue" so the story can happen.
The only reason Spock in STAR TREK: THE ORIGINAL SERIES work at all is because of Leonard Nimoy, who plays the character like an idealized Jewish intellectual. He put a great deal of himself into the character so you could how, in another world, he might have been a scholar—in control of his emotions almost all the time, but not so lacking in them that he lacks humor, curiosity, or caring.
----
* While THE MAKING OF STAR TREK claims Roddenberry wanted Nimoy all along, Martin Landau claimed that he was offered Spock first, and turned it down because he didn't want to be "that alien guy" on a stupid Sci-Fi TeeVee Show, and HE recommended Nimoy!
Thanks for this! I've always been drawn to the "brainy sidekick" character. For example, as a kid watching "Wild, Wild West" I always preferred Artemis, the smart inventor played by Ross Martin, rather than brawny James West (played by Robert Conrad). I felt the same way about Mr. Spock--much cooler and more attractive than Jim Kirk. I wonder if others have similar preferences--more attracted to the person who intelligently solves problems even if less conventionally handsome than the "star"? The high school computer nerd rather than the football player? I know which type I (very happily) married decades ago--although much more demonstrative than Mr. Spock!
I do want to point out that while it doesn't mean that men don't die from occupational hazards more frequently than women, fields that are dominated by women underreport both injuries and workplace violence. Healthcare occupational hazards of all kinds are vastly underreported. Homicide is the second leading cause of workplace death for home healthcare workers for example.
I didn't know that!
I doubt it tips the balance; women are forcibly kept out of a lot of dangerous occupations through sexist hiring and harassment, and then I think workplace safety standards are seen as less important since women aren't working in the field.
In fatalities I think you're right. In things like assault on the job I think the underreporting does a real disservice.
Women experience more sexual assaults on the job for sure.
Great stuff! Fabulously concise.
Oh I just mean simple physical assault.
Love me some Trek.