#kirk drift

I like how in SNW they're making an effort to bring these aspects of the character back. They are also simultaneously playing with the pop-culture version as a kind of a wrong first impression that people sometimes get, and confuse with the real thing.

I absolutely love this approach to tackling Kirk Drift.

That is exactly how Roddenberry wrote Kirk in the TMP novel. He was written as a person that many talked about due to his reputation via his career, but only a handful genuinely knew him personally. The rumours often preceded the person, and Starfleet wasn't always necessarily kind to Jim. There was a lot of contention there.

It is implied in the novel that there are many rumours about Jim, a lot of old blood who were resentful that such a young man speed-ran by them through hard work and ambition to the flagship.

As we see in SNW, even his older brother exemplifies the sentiment of the older crowd who resent Jim for hustling so hard and succeeding so young.

We also get to see how vulnerable this makes Jim at times in TOS, and he will fret with McCoy or Spock privately about the pressures he feels; he is a young captain trying to live up to the magnitude of what he fought to get.

They beautifully worked in similar moments throughout SNW to showcase this:

He feels isolated and lonely, and he is aware that there are people just banking on him to fail so that they can have their shot at the flagship. His own brother has even voiced resentment toward him, and teases him about the fact that he got a posting on the Enterprise while Jim was assigned the Farragut.

The Enterprise isn't just Jim's dream, it is the dream of countless people enlisted at Starfleet during that time.

His intelligence carried him there, but he often self reflects and worries -- sort of haunted by the things people say behind his back, and occasionally to his face.

He isn't actually unflappable -- we learn that in private conversations with Spock and/or Bones when he goes to pieces and then puts himself back together before facing the crew in TOS.

He has deep insecurities, and valid ones, because people he has worked alongside of and even looked up to started side-eyeing him for his ambition.

His reputation/the Starfleet-Jim hate train also gets him blacklisted on a number of occasions, and it is mentioned to Spock multiple times that sticking with Jim and his shenanigans could potentially hurt his reputation in the fleet.

In Lower Decks, it is revealed that Spock gets invited to a Fleet party to be accoladed, and Jim isn't even invited. In fact, they won't let Spock in if Jim is his plus one.

Spock ends up having to choose between going to the party, or leaving at the front door with Jim.

Spock chooses to bail on the party to go to a dive bar with Jim, and it turns into their regular place.

There were times when Spock and the crew were the only friends Jim had in his corner at his own workplace.

It just goes to show that despite his self confidence, Jim was actually bullied and hazed quite a bit by Starfleet alumni. He was routinely bullied by Finnegan. And he continues to be undermined and talked down to for his youth throughout TOS by high ranking officials. It even continues into the movies.

When the crew is reprimanded for their actions in ST III, Spock is not accused of any wrongdoing. But when the rest of the Enterprise crew comes out to hear their charges, Spock walks down and stands with them explaining: "I stand with my ship mates."

We have always known that Jim was a cheerleader of Spock's, and how he would defend him when others said terrible things about him. But honestly, it also worked both ways. The fleet and people Jim worked for would frequently undermine or talk down to him. Spock would go out of his way to support Jim, and vice versa.

In a way, together, they tackled one another's demons. They had each other's back when nobody else did.

For all of Jim's hang ups, he still manages to show up for himself and his team.

**With them**, he feels like the best version of himself. They help him realize his potential. We see that in the SNW pep talk that Spock gives Jim during his first stint in the chair. I think the show has nailed that, and tied together a number of facets about Kirk threaded throughout the canon nicely.

SNW has an incredible opportunity to re-introduce him as he was in TOS, as opposed to the Kirk-Drift Zapp Brannigan take that folks seem to think TOS Jim was.

It isn't just a great opportunity to correct false ideas about Jim, but it is an awesome platform to let us get to know other characters such as Nyota Uhura better. I love her so much, and I'm glad we are getting better acquainted with who she was. Much later in life she apparently goes on to lend a hand in training a young Jean-Luc Picard -- I've always wished we could have seen that in a show, too. Obviously not SNW as it's a completely different time period, but spinoff series? DELULU FANTASTIES

Anyway, I digress.

TOS was never just "the Jim Kirk show". Of course it focused on the triumvirate, but it was always the story of the Enterprise crew, and how that group of people who as individuals felt like they belonged nowhere -- and they came together to build a home and place to belong. It reminds us time and again that Jim would not be the Captain he was known to be without that crew. It's so evident at the beginning of TMP when he doesn't have Spock and how things keep going awry. What a change in dynamic and efficiency there is when Spock returns.

cathexis

noun  Psychoanalysis 

the concentration of mental energy on one particular person, idea, or object (especially to an unhealthy degree).

from this sentence:

You “know” Star Trek before you ever see Star Trek: a ‘naive’ encounter with such a culturally cathected text is almost impossible, and even if you manage it you probably also have strong ideas about that period of history, era of SF, style of television, etc to contend with. 

To me the division is not "man who has a lot of sex | man who doesn't." It's "man who treats women as objects to collect and enjoy | man who genuinely sees women as people and loves them."

It's the post scarcity future, I'm sure there's a vaccine for every STI and we know their birth control works great. There's no reason not to have sex if you want to have it. There shouldn't be shame involved in having lots of it.

But if you watch Kirk carefully, he does not ever treat women like collectibles or disposables. He interacts with them very much as people. Some he flirts with and it's not serious (which they know). Some he's trying to help. Some manipulate him, which sucks. And some he presumably has sex with, but only because he genuinely likes them as people and wants to do this fun thing with them.

None of this fits the idea of a womanizer as a man who takes advantage, pretends to be in love only long enough to score, cheats, gropes his employees, can't see women as people because he's only looking to get as many of them into bed as possible.

So I wish people would stop painting him as that. He's a flirt, he falls for people easily, he's noticeably horny, but he's never disrespectful of women. The writers were very careful about that. They saw the world around them full of that kind of caddish behavior and wrote a man who would never. They show Kirk being tempted by Rand, Marlena, etc., and then making the deliberate choice not to act that way. Because they were making a point about how a hero acts. We even see him give Charlie a lecture about how to treat women, and it's a lesson he personally follows. It's a bit heavy handed if anything.

in honor of finally watching every Star Trek (yes, all 900 of them, yes all of TAS and ENT and PRO), i re-read "Kirk Drift" and it goes just as hard as i remembered

This is a pretty up-front, surface-level reading of the text that has the generosity to allow an obvious fucking Holocaust metaphor to not be about dicking—that doesn’t do the equivalent of assuming the Nazi officer/Jewish servant girl “love story” in Schindler’s List is authentically romantic and should be celebrated as such. Yet popular reception consistently makes McCoy’s mistake, collapsing plots and emotional drives down into a pablum. But that’s okay and normal because it’s straight pablum. Do you see the incredible violence this way of thinking about sexuality does to relationships, and to stories that include them? The sheer stupidity of it? This conception of sexuality does incredible violence to heterosexual romance, compressing its rich and varied possibilities and significations down to “the many, many seduction [sic] committed by James T. Kirk.”