On this day in 1969 the final episode of Star Trek TOS aired. The end of a classic, but the beginning of something so much more.
We’re just going to ignore the fact that it was Turnabout Intruder, m’kay?
I cried that day: June 3, 1969.
not because Star Trek ended, but because I was 5 years old and got stung by a bee (or it was sometime around then.)
And thus the first William Shatner impression—done by a woman, no less.
I wouldn’t say Moment of Silence, I would say this day marks a moment of Transition.
For the series was struck down, but it became more powerful then we could imagine.
On the other hand, I would mark the day that the contracts for Serenity expired with a moment of silence. It has not resurrected yet.
m’kassssy…
after the silence, pastries must be consumed by all.
Bring on the paaaaah!!
Yes but Star Trek wasn’t resurrected until many years after it was canceled correct? 10 years at least. It has now only been 4 years since Serenity was on the big screen.
Keep the faith! 
Paled in comparison to Shatner’s impression of a woman scorned.
I actually like the episode, as long as I don’t think about it being the last. On it’s own it’s a lot of fun.
I always love to bring it up whenever anyone brings up Roddenberry’s vision of a perfect future.
I say “ahem, … uhhh Turnabout Intruder taught us that as a matter of canon… the federation is not equal opprotunity!”
It’s funny to watch the Roddenberry appoligists try to come up with an answer to that one! Truthfully we never saw a female captain until ST:IV. We saw two others ( and Nasheav probably was at one time- but I think she was always a desk jocky based on her doucheness) in TNG’s 7 seasons. I don’t think there were any in ds9, there was Janeway, and the one in Enterprise. So that’s like 6 female Starfleet captain charcters in around 780 hours of programming.
Roddenberry’s vison of the future!!!
Yup, waited 10 years for ST:TMP to hit the screen. And yes Whedon does have 1 more year for that contract to run out before he can do anything with the Firefly 'verse.
5!!! :eek: I was 10 1/2. It’s official…I’m an old Trekkie geek type person. 
what’s with the 10 year whedon thing? I thought that he could do anything he wanted. I have a few comics and stufff from a few years back… and the Serinity movie. WHat’s the deal. I guess I am not in the know on this one. HABU ( hook a brother up)
Bah. There are lots of starships, and we never saw very many in TOS. Your Roddenberry hating gets old quick.
“June 3rd, 1969… a day that will live in infamy…”
I’m just kidding… I was many years away from being alive then.
Well we know that there are only 12 or thirteen Starships in TOS and acording to Lester ( and Kirk didn’t argue) none were captained by women. We didn’t have to see it… we were told that. Not that that means anything. In a true equal socity there would be no affimative action and the best officer would get the command. Now this either means that A) Starfleet IS predjudiced as lester suggests or B) No women were better officers than their counterparts in order to get said promotions.
So this would show that “in show” the rules might allow for female captains… just none of the ladies were good enough. Either way… doesn’t jive with the touchy-fealy idea of an all inclusive trek Earth!
We can only judge by what we see. I think they never show us anything that counters what the lady says. If they have a few characters say that it’s an equal opprotunity world, and another character offers and opposing view… who is correct? I guess you just have to go with what we see. I don’t think we ever see any evidence that the lady wasn’t telling it like it was. If I am wrong, i’ll admit it… I just have never seen the evidence. And I have watched a LOT of trek. And I am includeing ALL trek to see more possible examples. But they aren’t there .
Now I know that realisticly tv producers rarly put female captains in episodes because I think that they weren’t really good at makeing strong women types that didn’t apear to be rough-cookies and sometimes a bit bitchy( aka Shelby, Keira Nereis, Ro Lauren, Yar, Toress, Nasheav, and to some degree Janeway ). That arc-type might not fit the episode as written. And I wouldn’t won’t them to feel like they have a quota to make sure they wrote an episode just to put a women in the chair.
But you don’t get to run you mouth about equality… then almost never show it. Racialy… they did it right. There is a hispanic Comedore in Menagerie, a Black Comedore in court martial ( I don’t feel they get enough credit for that one), Richard daystrom that invented the super computer in all the starships thru TNG was black, the guy that invented transporters… all good stuff. You get my applause. As for sexual equality… I don’t see the example ( other than Janeway. ) Not that this takes away from my love for trek… i just hate lip service. We shouldn’t give the show credit for something that they rarley demonstrate.
Just like some characters ( and creators) say that among Starfleet officers ( and sometimes humans in general) there is no greed or desire to aquire material things… but we see the characters on ds9 gambling, paying for goods and services and gripeing about prices ( with Quark). Sisko “purchases” land. That’s ownership and requires money… how does that happen. How do they eat at the klingon Deli? They have replicators in their quarters if they didn’t have latnum! How does Bones buy the Romulan Ale, Kirk’s glasses, Saurian Brandy?
The trek you watch isn’t alway the trek that “they” tell you it is… actually it’s better!
So often in trek, lip service is paid to ideas that sound great… but those ideas aren’t always practiced as example in episodes. It’s almost like a Majel Barret or Roddenberry would be at a Con or speaking to an interviewer and say “trek is all about [insert touchy-fealy idea here]”
But apon review of the shows, this idea may be referanced once or twice… but not be a part of practice. However, there are many shows that can be refrenced that could counter said ideas.
I have never said I don’t like trek. I love it. Gene Coon invented some of the best trek that I have ever watched.
I have always maintained that some of the things that some people claim “trek” is works in a press junket, or interview, or at a con… but when It comes time to make good TV, those ideas aren’t put into practice. So since we don’t SEE them in practice… are they really there?
Look at ds9… that series tears down MANY of the concepts that some trek fans and even creators claim to embody a starfleet officer. vucan serial killer, greed, money, wealth, Captains murdering incocent Romulans to get them into wars, Maquis, Captain’s hung up on racial predjudice from earth’s past !
That’s all great stuff! I love ds9!
I don’t think it had anything to do with Roddenberry’s vision. It had to do with “the suits”. Roddenberry originally wanted a woman for second-in-command and also fought for a black woman on the bridge of a starship.
I’m not making any apologies for Roddenberry or the producers of any Trek incarnation. I just think it was a decision handed down from on high.
Besides, Janice Lester was a loon and blamed Starfleet. We never heard Starfleet’s side. There’s no doubt that her psychological problems played a factor.
just like lt cmdr Ben Finny, who also blamed Kirk for his own issues.
I dont care that there were almost no women captains in all of canon trek. I want to see Khan fight Kirk in the Engine room or Sisko tricking Romulans into war. I don’t care about a charcters gender or race as long as they are cool.I don’t, BTW, think that they owed us the diversity…they just owe us to not brag about something that they didn’t do.
If the story didn’t get made ( for whatever reason) it’s not a part of trek. “They Intended to do it”… isn’t the same as getting it done. We can all talk about how they “wanted to do something” but if it wasn’t done… it wasn’t done.
And Lester wasn’t gripeing about XO’s , she was gripring about ship captains. Once again… she might have been crazy… but she wasn’t disputed by Kirk, or later incarnations of trek. Not as a noticable percentage of characters.
Yes I understand that there were real world 20th century reasons for this… but they shouldn’t get credit for something that they wished, intended, tried or talked about doing. Only for what they actually showed us.
A side note… we do see eqaulity in Enterprise. We end up with two ships and 1 is captained by a women.
I think that trek tells great stories. Then someone in the press or a fan asks them about something political or socialy ground breaking. Those people being asked just honestly were trying to tell a good story and sell some advertiseing. The particuler episode might set a precedent, or make some social comentary as intended. The problem is, the whole franchise may not have backed that ideology up. So those that want to believe the dream cite the one episode that says as much ( like Picard saying religion is stupid) where I tend to look at the franchise as a whole and look to see if said principle is actually practiced. And when it’s not… I don’t get mad or anything. I just point it out to those that love the comunist hippy love fest episodes and point out that the majority of trek doesn’t back that up. Or in the case of ds9… the Roddenberry dream world is why they almsot lost to the Dominion until they stopped acting that way. Several episodes ( Riza, and Admiral Forester Episodes come to mind) are about how the federation was weak and powerless and going to lose to the Dominion if they didn’t get their act together.
Turnabout Intruder ( as I pointed out) is the episode where a character claims Starfleet is sexist and we have no evidence to that she was lieing. 5 or 6 charcters in hundreds of episodes doesn’t prove her wrong. Or even offer a good argument.
From what I’ve read, when he got approval from the studio to do Serenity he had to sign a 5-year contract that keeps him from developing and shopping around anything to do with Firefly…series or movies.
Trek was actually resurrected in 1973 with the animated series. Gene Roddenberry, the original actors and writers were all involved.