Star Trek and Leonard Nimoy's dickheads

I think I like Star Trek enough to write a couple paragraphs about it. I recently watched a Saturday Night Live (SNL) episode where the actors portraying the younger Kirk and Spock are trying to defend the new Star Trek movie. And they get some help at the end from Leonard Nimoy, who of course played the original Spock. At the end Leonard Nimoy claims that people who don't like the new movie are "dickheads". Well, if Leonard Nimoy says so, it must be so. After all isn't he the authority on Star Trek?

Well, no. He isn't.

A very technical (and geeky) reason for that would be that Leonard Nimoy's Spock and hence the entire Star Trek series existed in a separate and parallel, and perhaps lagged, timeline than the Star Trek movie of 2009. In all fairness to the people who liked the movie and those who didn't like it (this author included) the new Star Trek movie is an entirely different set of events! Kirk and Spock in this timeline do not have to be like the Kirk and Spock of the original series. Even twin brothers have different personalities. Hence it is perfectly alright for someone to like Star Trek and still not like the new Star Trek movie. The fact that Leonard Nimoy doesn't understand that difference is disappointing. Mr Spock would have understood it right away.

There is however a second, non-technical, non-geeky and more philosophical response which I prefer. You see Star Trek may be a science fantasy television series or movie, but that's not all it is. Veiled behind the ostentatious display of science fiction and special effects are dilemmas and questions that we encounter in our mundane lives as well. And though our lives may be mundane, those questions are often baffling and sometimes downright profound.

Are our actions morally justified? Should I pay heed to my heart? Or should I follow logic? Is the individual more important than the collective? Why are we here? Who am I? Is this all there is? Who created me? Can I contact my creator?

Those are not light questions. Yet Star Trek asks them. And because it sets the stage with smoke and mirrors where we expect to see things of fantasy, because it makes us more accepting of things we otherwise know to be impossible, it also makes us more amenable to the suggestions of those questions. When V'Ger searches for its creator we identify ourselves with it because we search for our creator too. When the extinction of humpback whales causes a future earth to be in danger, we are reminded of our responsibility to nature too. When Spock sacrifices himself because he believes that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" we are reminded of our duties to the collective we are a part of too.

The message, if there is one, in the 2009 movie is either too feeble or too common place and it fails to surface even after two hours. May be in that parallel time line of the new movie there is no place for reflection or thought, just an abundance of testosterone.