The First Interracial Kiss on (American) Television

Spaniards are a ethnic group and within that are even more distinctive ethnic groups. That's implying that all of Europe is made up of the same ethnic makeup when it's clear that Europe is diverse with all sorts of people ranging from the Slavs to the English. European isn't a "race", its a classification of people who originate or live in Europe.

Isn't Nimoy of Russian decent? Russia isn't apart of Europe, its apart of Asia. Does that then make Nimoy... Asian?

I thought Shatner said he wanted to do the kiss over Nimoy.... or that's how the legend goes. Originally it was between Nimoy and Nichelle but the problem came when it switched up to Shatner. I guess he looks more "white, red blooded American".

Its frustrating because the show presented this image of you can not be both, you have to be one or the other. Spock always denied his human half, always found it to be offensive, never embraced it until in the movies. I sit there and watch it like, " This makes no sense? " It would pain me to deny my heritage because " I don't look it ". I am denying one of my parents, one half of my self. We shouldn't have to "choose" to exist in this world.

 

I think it's fairly obvious that when we say "interracial kiss", we mean "a dark-skinned person kissing a light-skinned person". It's the only distinction that makes any sense, while underlining how arbitrary and absurd those distinctions really are.

 

Arbitrary and absurd, yes But as said before, 'interracial kiss' signifying 'dark/light' is only relevant to period. Now, we have to look at Trek through new eyes. So no...it's not obvious that 'interracial kiss' means "a dark-skinned person kissing a light-skinned person". That implies only two races: me (white) and someone else (dark).

 

"Lokai is white on the right side. All of his people are white on the right side."

 

Trek

 

Race is a made up concept. To Ben Franklin, "white" meant "Anglo-Saxon" -- he wouldn't even have considered Scotty a white man. Over time the definition has expanded to include the French, Germans, Irish, Greeks, Italians, Spaniards, and most recently Jews. Whether you class the Spanish (Greeks or Russians) as white is entirely arbitrary.

 

Of course there is ethnic variety in Europe, thats why I put race in quotes. But when using broadstrokes as people often do when discussing race, white tends to mean European. Though "European" people often draw the line around their own national or ethic groups.

Russian spans Europe and Asia. (as does Turkey for that matter) Nimoy's Jewish ancestry also gives him a claim to "Asian" ancestry since Israel is/was in Western Asia.

 

I get ya.

Well, there's Russia that's in Asia then the countries of the Soviet Union which are actually not apart of Russia but apart of the Balkans and other states aka Southeastern/Eastern Europe.

Oh man, Russia/USSR you are so complicated

 

Exactly. And when you look at it from our 21st century perspective, there's simply no such thing as an interracial kiss, because "race" is an almost completely meaningless social construct.

 

Do you have a source to back up this assertion?

 

I think you'll find that "Russia" got its start on the European side of the Urals. The Balkans (Greece, the former Yugoslavia & Bulgaria) are south of Russia and the Former Soviet Union and were not part of either. The bulk of the Soviet Union had been part of the Russian Empire prior to the revolution. In the post Soviet era former "Republics" like Ukraine and Belarus became independent, even though they had been part of the Russian Empire or the USSR for over a century.

 

How? Nimoy's family was Russian in origin. I'm not sure what Shatner's ethnicity is. And don't say he's Jewish. That's not really an ethnicity. I have Indian friends who're Jewish.

 

Well, judging from the turmoil that's been happening in certain parts of THIS country after the first "mixed-race" president got elected, I'm only more sure of Trek's foresight. The world is not yet the happy place Trek envisioned it to be in the 23rd century.

 

Again, "Jewishness" is not an ancestry.

 

Race may have played a part in some of the politics, but President Obama's heritage isn't the sole reason to the political "turmoil" this country is experiencing.

It also still does not negate how poorly race issues were treated on the show. If its still supposed to be a vision of the future and an apparent message to show that humanity, and aliens, can come together with mutual respect it should have never danced around the issue with it's main cast. I don't believe TOS should be given all this high glory when it never did directly tackle the issue itself. It was like the joke of affirmative action took place before it was even signed into law. 200 years of progress? No, not really.

Also, now that I think about it, I do not believe they ever landed on a planet that wasn't only occupied by white people.

Probably one of the major reasons why I love the hell out of Star Trek VI. It was not afraid to show how bigoted the future was.

Shatner apparently is from Schattner which is German in origin.

 

^Looking at TOS through contemporary eyes, for all its faults (which we all know), I think it's still a pioneering programme to be cherished. Maybe not truly groundbreaking like I Spy or Julia, but not to be dismissed. When you look at what TNG did with Code of Honor (black planet) and Angel One (feminist planet), even The Outcast (transgender planet), prob a good idea didn't even try But I've read a lot of stuff by original TOS fans who say that Uhura's presence, Daystrom (everyone forgets him) and ....Last Battlefield were ground-breaking.

 

I'm not completely downplaying what TOS did achieve. I am merely against the idea that TOS tore down doors that were already opened or revolutionized television. I feel that Star Trek played the token card a lot. A lot of the big "race" issues did come into fruition until S3, long after Roddenberry walked off. I'd say the Jeffersons and Good Times was more revolutionary in terms of African Americans on television than Uhura's glamourized secretary position on Star Trek.

At face value, Uhura was ground breaking. She wasn't in a kitchen or talking with that degrading " Yessa, yessa, right away sa " speech pattern. But going deeper, she did nothing ground breaking. She just sat there, she was replaceable, she didn't do much of anything other than say a thing or two to advance the plot. She wasn't a "strong black woman" she was simply " the black girl on the bridge that answered phone calls ". To me, that's not ground breaking - it's more along the lines of saying, " In 200 years, black women will finally be able to be those secretaries. "

Uhura was the fourth highest ranking officer on that ship but it was never utilized. There was opportunities to command the Enterprise in Scotty's absence but that went to some random white guy. Uhura was weak in that sense because she was a woman and because she was black. It really did not scream feminism or racial equality, IMO.

 

Compared to other SF shows of the day, Trek was doing pretty well, racially. Irwin Allen didn't have a person of color in any of his shows until his fourth, Land of the Giants. The Seaview was strictly whitebread.

Maybe because he was batshit crazy.

Commodore Stone is actually a good example.

 

Star Trek has gained this mysticism that it did so much for American television, period. I think that over the years, after it's cancellation, it became bigger than what it really was in terms of what it did on a social level. My father watched Star Trek as a kid and he never could tell me what Uhura did, always Captain Kirk and how he was the man. As a black child growing up you'd think that he'd talk about Uhura... no, it was Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock. To me, that doesn't say that Star Trek tore down walls and created big change.

It tells me that she was there but barely noticeable.

Desilu and NBC made sure that Uhura stayed in the background so that the show would not offend the South. She was never allowed to make a change in the mindset of America -- only to look pretty behind the Captain. Being the token <insert race other than white> character on a show isn't enough to slap the " REVOLUTIONARY " label on Star Trek. Not doing anything, in my opinion, is just as bad as being a maid in the kitchen. The only difference is that you're not actually wearing the servant dress.

Uhura simply wasn't not an empowering young black woman which, at that time, should have been utilize. Women's movement? Civil rights? That was a transcending moment of that time period for women and people of color!

It's like MNS saying Airbender was racially diverse, but all the oppressed citizens and extras happened to be the minorites. The main cast was still white. Katara and Sokka were still the only two white kids in a village of Inuit extras. What?

 

I'd love to see you in a discussion with Nichelle Nichols.

Women in general were treated worse over all. They were set decoration, sex objects, people to be comforted and frightened, or evil. But never in command. I don't give a crap what the man said in public, but Roddenberry's attitude toward women was not at all groundbreaking. If he wasn't boinking Majel, Number One probably would have been a man. Or not existed at all. The network had no problem with a woman having command responsibilities, they had a problem of being forced to use Roddenberry's squeeze.