Stardate: 3468.1
As
the Enterprise approaches a Class M planet, Pollux IV, during a survey mission,
something strange and frightening occurs. A giant green hand, composed entirely
of energy, snares the ship in a trap.
Captain
Kirk (William Shatner) soon learns that he and his crew are prisoners of the
Greek God, Apollo (Michael Forest).
Apollo
and his fellow Gods were actually space travelers who visited Earth 5,000 years
earlier and were mistaken for deities by the primitive human beings of the
time.
Apollo
orders Kirk to beam down and attend him, but leave Spock (Leonard Nimoy) -- who
reminds him of Pan -- on board the starship. Kirk complies, and he transports
down with Dr. McCoy (DeForest Kelley), Chief Engineer Scott (James Doohan),
Ensign Pavel Chekov (Walter Koenig) and “A & A” (Anthropology and Ancient
Civilizations) officer Carolyn Palamas (Leslie Parrish).
Scotty
has a crush on Palamas, and does not take it well when Apollo shows a special
interest in the Earth woman, promising to make her a “Goddess.”
As
for the remainder of the crew, Apollo plans for them to spend the rest of their
days worshipping him. He thrives, in fact, on such worship and adoration.
Kirk
refuses to “bend knee” and Apollo
demonstrates his power. He is able to hurl lightning bolts like the mythical
Zeus, and growing to gigantic proportions.
While
Spock and Uhura (Nichelle Nichols) attempt to find a way to punch a hole
through the force field created by Apollo, Kirk must convince Palamas to spurn
Apollo, even though she has fallen in love with him.
If
she fails, Kirk observes, the Enterprise crew better get used to “herding goat.”
On
first blush, “Who Mourns for Adonais” feels like a very formulaic episode of Star
Trek (1966-1969).
We
have already seen the Enterprise crew grapple with a God-like being on several
occasions, in “Charlie X,” “Where No Man has Gone Before,” and “The Squire of
Gothos,” to cite three examples.
The
Squire of Gothos” seems to be a major influencer, in particular, on this
episode. There, as in here, the god-like
opponent to the crew (Trelane/Apollo) does not like Spock, traps a landing
party on a planet surface, and dresses a female crew-member (Yeoman Ross/Lt.
Palamas) in an historical/period dress. In both stories, ship technology (transporter/vs.
phasers) at Spock’s command plays a role in rescuing the stranded crew members.
“Who
Mourns for Adonais” also pipes in the Khan/McGiver romantic subplot from “Space
Seed,” with yet another vulnerable
female officer being forced to choose between her Starfleet duty and her
romantic love for a charismatic, larger-than-life male.
Once
more, I would be hard-pressed to find an opposite example in Star
Trek; an episode wherein a male officer succumbs to the charms of a
charismatic female character and his loyalty (or lack thereof) threatens the
crew.
“Who
Mourns for Adonais” is “sixties sexist” in its depiction of Palamas, no doubt. In
the teaser, Kirk notes that she will get married and leave the service. Really? Married female officers can’t serve
in Starfleet? (See: “Balance of Terror:” where a woman getting married does
just that)
And
why can’t Carolyn’s prospective husband be the one to leave his career? Why
does it have to be her?
In
this way, and in comments like Apollo’s line “she seems wise…for a woman,” Star Trek is every bit 50 years old.
I find it constantly baffling that Star Trek can be so forward thinking
in so many ways, and yet still demonstrate such sexism towards females.
Also,
Scotty seems woefully out-of-character here, pining away for Carolyn Palamas.
We all know he’d rather be reading his technical journals, right?
Lastly,
there is an element of “camp” creeping into the series here. Instead of a story with genuine science
fiction concepts, “Who Mourns for Adonais” provides an opportunity to raid
Greek myth, Greek architecture, and so forth -- even Greek drama, actually --
for its story. Lost in Space (1965-1968)
often featured stories wherein the Robinsons, stranded on an alien world,
encountered “types” from Earth history.
They met police men, Western bandits, pirates, department store managers
(!), Arabian thieves, and so on.
“Who
Mourns for Adonais” threatens, in visual terms, to be of the same school. But Star
Trek gets away with it because there is usually a reason for such Earth-types
to appear (they are either space travelers, or from a parallel world). In other words, there is usually a real
underpinning for the existence of such colorful Earth clichés.
But
here’s the rub. All the flaws I have
named don’t ruin the episode in the slightest, and “Who Mourns for Adonais”
works effectively because there is a genuine intellectual debate behind it, and
an emotional context to that debate.
In
simple terms, “Who Mourns for Adonais” is about the never-ending battle between
progress and tradition.
On
one side is Apollo, who believes that mankind has “lost something special” in the 5,000 years since he last saw them. He
wants them to return to a simpler, more basic time. He is, in essence, the call
of tradition, longing for a lost golden age.
For
Apollo, the age for which he longs is in which he is privileged as the
unquestionable “God” of the people and worshiped as such. In that age, Gods such
as he stood apart, and beyond others.
They took mortals as wives, and these wives were not “officers” with “jobs”
or “duty.” They wore dresses, not uniforms.
On
the other side of the equation is progress, represented by Kirk and the
Enterprise crew. Kirk and his crew possess no desire to go back to a system
which benefited Apollo, at their expense. They are not goat or sheep herders,
and they don’t want to gather laurel leaves for a personality who is their
equal…not their superior.
Kirk
and his crew want to chart their own destiny and be independent…free. In other
words, Kirk and his crew are all about egalitarian modernity, which promises
equal rights and sovereignty for all people.
Kirk’s
world is not about a return to nature and a Luddite life (represented by the
gathering of laurel leaves…), or accept subjugation to an authority he no
longer recognizes and has “outgrown.” His world is about pushing the edge of
knowledge; self-direction and self-determination. Justice and
self-determination for all.
These
two philosophies -- status quo/tradition vs progress -- come into direct
conflict in “Who Mourns for Adonais.” And, of course, we know which philosophy
wins.
As
Kirk understands, history only moves in one direction, ultimately. It moves
forward. There are those who resist progress, and wish for a “golden age” (one usually
based on myth…like Apollo’s very existence) to return. But it can’t return, for a lot of
reasons. Conditions change. Technology
changes. People change. Progress meets resistance, but progress always wins,
even if there are setbacks along the way.
Other
episodes very much concern the idea of false or erroneous progress (consider
the androids of Dr. Korby in “What are Little Girls Made of” or the M-5 in “The
Ultimate Computer,”) but Star Trek
almost never rejects true, human progress.
Kirk
strikes a blow for progress and self-determination in “Who Mourns for Adonais,”
but the spectacular quality about this episode is that he ultimately takes no
joy in his victory.
Neither
do the others.
In
the coda, McCoy wishes, aloud, that they had not had to take down Apollo. Kirk wonders if it would have hurt them to
gather a “few laurel leaves,” simply to respect the tradition that, in a very
real way, made Western civilization possible.
This
compassion for a former enemy, and a philosophy that doesn’t serve them, is a
factor that distinguishes Star Trek from other space
adventures.
Kirk
and McCoy can honor what Apollo was, and what he gave our culture, in
context. But that doesn’t mean that he
can win; or that they can accept his prescription for their lives (see: goat
herders). Time eventually passes all
ideas by, including Apollo’s. Humanity
simply can’t go back to what it was, 5,000 years ago. Just like we, in America, can’t go back to
what we were 60 years ago. We can have
compassion for those who desire a return for that (mostly mythical “golden age”),
and you can help them cope with change, but progress will not stop for them;
any more than Kirk allows progress to stop because of his respect for Apollo,
or the ancient Greeks.
An
appeal to tradition is, simply put, a logical fallacy. It says, simply, we should
continue to do something because we have always done that thing. But knowledge does -- and must -- intervene
in that thought-process. We learn new things, and we develop. And so we can’t relive or re-conjure the
past, knowing what we now know.
Sixty
years ago, in film, pregnant women smoked and drank alcohol on-screen. Even in
futuristic drama, women were treated in a sexist fashion. We know today, that
there is a reason not to continue such behaviors.
The
chain of tradition, at some point, must be broken in the name of egalitarian
justice, and knowledge, instead. That’s,
finally, what “Who Mourns for Adonais” is all about. We can appreciate the past. But we will not relive it.
This
conclusion is not without pain. Carolyn hurts Apollo, the man he loves. And Apollo, in being spurned, realizes he has
outlived his usefulness. He learns that, even as a near-God, he can’t
re-conjure a past age, or past ethos.
“Who
Mourns for Adonais” is a glorious episode, in part because of the contradictory
thoughts/emotions it raises. We definitely
don’t want Apollo to succeed. And yet we
never hate him. We always feel
compassion for him. Kirk’s final line,
wondering if they couldn’t have gathered, for their host a few laurel leaves, is perfect. It captures
the tradition vs progress debate perfectly, and reminds us that there are, in
this battle, unfortunate casualties.
The
march of progress cannot stop. But we
can still honor our past, and the tradition that brought us to our current
stage of development.
Next
week: “The Changeling.”
Nailed it. They weaved a lot of pathos and melancholy into Adonis. And we do indeed feel sorry for him. Superb work from Michael Forest.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting (and cringe inducing) to see a lot of the sexist attitudes woven through old television shows, especially one so forward thinking as Star Trek. I think the reason why the writers and producers were so blind to it was because I don't think they realized that it was actually demeaning. I can recall the news coverage of the Women's Liberation Movement in the early 70s where the male reporters seemed genuinely baffled by their cause. Why wouldn't women want to stay home and raise kids rather than deal with the rat race? Men simply didn't get it back then.
ReplyDeleteTerrific analysis, John. I won't repeat any of your points.
ReplyDeleteI really like this episode. The reasons for my affection, in addition to your story points, are as follows...
- The terrific opticals of the oversized Apollo.
- Fred Steiner's great score. One of the best episodic tv scores ever.
- The sense of drama: while on the surface this episode appears to stream unbridled melodrama, it actually is a fine fusion of affecting performances and story (themes).
A few years ago I read an interview with actor Micheal Forest where he talked about his trip on Star Trek. The producers at first made calls to agencies in England in order to get a British actor. Forest auditioned for the role and the producers asked him if he could do a British accent, to which he responded with a simple "I could but it wouldn't be me".
Micheal Forest was great in the role as Apollo. So affecting were the dramatics as Apollo gave his speech from the heart, that he and Leslie Parrish were actually crying. Watch Scotty, Kirk, and the rest in this scene. The acting is top drawer.
Final note: Micheal Forest was so impressed with the temple set the designers and crew had constructed on the stage that he felt it helped his greater performance as Apollo. When he sat in his seat for the first time he felt right at home.
Thanks, John. There's a couple of things about this episode that also come to mind...
ReplyDelete1) The title comes from the poem "Adonais" by Shelley: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/poems/detail/45112
2) Kirk's line "We find the one [God] sufficient" sounds rather un-Roddenberry, leading some to think it was put there to appease the network. Heaven forbid the viewers extend the "we don't need you any more" argument to the predominant religion of the day!
3) The fan-produced series "Star Trek Continues" produced as its first episode a sequel to this episode, "Pilgrims of Eternity" starring Michael Forest himself! http://www.startrekcontinues.com/
I think the clostest you might get to the male side of these episodes is "Elaan of Troyius". There, Kirk is able to fend off his (chemically-induced) infatuation, just as Palamas is able to do here, and as McGiver wasn't.
ReplyDeleteBut note one of the big things in this episode: it proves that the Greek gods did exist in ST's history. And so probably most of the myths surrounding them.
JKM, I need to point out here that Kirk's line about Palamas' possibly marrying and leaving the service was much less sexist than it seems: it was written toward her eventual pregnancy! A sequence about her being pregnant by Apollo was filmed but cut, as was probably other material written toward that ending, while Kirk's line remained. Her character was probably intended to evince some ambivalence about remaining in Starfleet and a desire for a family which Apollo picked up on. Of course, one cannot be pregnant on a 5 year mission with the ship configuration as it was then . . . that would have to wait until over 80 years later when TNG had a much larger vessel and missions were designed to accommodate families on long voyages.
ReplyDeleteJohn,
ReplyDeleteNot much to add, except for the mention of this episode's giant green space hand in the recent Star Trek Beyond; not only is the green space hand referenced in Scotty's dialogue - it actually appears in the closing credits! Right after the actors' names, a gaseous green hand takes a swipe at the camera. I thought that was a really cool reference to include in the film - twice!!
Steve