Need, by Reed Lackey

24 May

Star-Trek-The-Motion-Picture-janice-rand-18685086-1920-822

Fans of J. J. Abrams’ 2009 reboot of Star Trek, if not already familiar with the franchise, might find themselves interested to go back and watch the original series of movies to see what they have to offer. If that’s you and if you should decide to start from the beginning, you will most likely find the experience quite jarring.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture, in striking contrast to Abrams’ vision, is not an action-packed, humor-filled thrill machine. It is a deliberately paced, methodically executed science fiction story with precisely three—yes, three—moments of humor. It’s also a pretty excellent piece of cinema if you know what you’re facing and perhaps the most underrated of the Star Trek films.

SPOILERS

The story takes place about three years following the conclusion of the five-year space exploration mission of the crew of the starship Enterprise which the original series chronicled and the latest installment Into Darkness teases. There is a mysterious cloud-entity on a direct course for Earth which has already displayed intense destructive power. Avengers assemble! – I mean… enter the iconic crew of the Enterprise (Kirk, Bones, and of course, everyone’s favorite pointy-eared Vulcan).

The film isn’t perfect. There are several scenes consisting of no dialogue (however with an absolutely beautiful Oscar-nominated score by Jerry Goldsmith), the first hour of the film is spent simply assembling our key players, and by the time the big ideas of the film are introduced, many people may already be clued in or will have fallen asleep. However, it is the philosophy at the heart of this story that keeps me periodically returning to it and why I sit to write this for you now.

At the heart of this destructive cloud-entity (which eventually identifies itself as “V’ger”) is a machine which is searching in vain for its “Creator”. It has traveled to the far reaches of the universe and back collecting an incalculable amount of information, yet it is hollow and cold—a fact which is revealed when Spock attempts to mind-meld with it. The simple feeling of one hand holding another is a concept beyond the capacities of V’ger.

When the crew finally stands before the heart of the V’ger cloud in person, they discover that V’ger is actually an abbreviated form of “Voyager 6,” a probe which NASA supposedly launched in the late 20th century for the purposes of space exploration and data collecting. The probe has now completed its task and returned to deliver its information: although about 300 years too late. Its goal now is to somehow “join” with its creator to take the next step in its evolutionary journey. This means that a human being will have to unite with the machine to take them both where none have gone before.

The resolution plays out a bit too obviously for my tastes, but the ideas at its core still fascinate me. The Star Trek universe has always been essentially humanistic, meaning that while certain storylines may acknowledge the possibility of a God, they discredit the firm existence of or devotion to such a being in favor of the qualities and potential of human beings. I try as often as I can to engage with this perspective as respectfully as possible despite my being a devout Christian. Rod Serling reportedly once said, “I believe in God, but I believe in Man more.” While I disagree, I certainly sympathize.

In Star Trek: The Motion Picture, the idea is explored that perhaps knowing all things about the mystery of the universe would not be sufficiently satisfying to conscious existence. The probe in the plotline has learned enough to become a conscious being, but it cannot experience emotion or friendship or love. This creates in it an essential need. Spock once describes V’ger as a child who “knows only that it needs… but like so many of us, it does not know what.”

Despite its lack of clarity for what its need is, V’ger knows essentially that it can fulfill this need by uniting with its Creator—which in this story, of course, turns out to be human beings. But the implications behind this idea (intended or otherwise) are staggering. A need exists which can only be fulfilled by connecting with the source of existence itself. No character in the film ever says it, but the unspoken question lingers in my mind as I watch the movie, “Is the same true of us?”

You know what my answer to that question would be, so I won’t pretend there’s any suspense in my raising it. I’m not quite as sure how the creator of Star Trek, Gene Roddenberry, or the screenwriter Harry Livingston would answer the question. But perhaps in cases like this we can rest on the wisdom of the unparalleled poet and prophet, Dr. Suess, who wrote “Sometimes the questions are complicated and the answers are simple.”

Perhaps that’s true more often than we know.

2 Responses to “Need, by Reed Lackey”

  1. WordPress › Error

    There has been a critical error on this website.

    Learn more about troubleshooting WordPress.