"The Enemy Within" and psych. class

[plynch]

I showed "Enemy Within" in my psych class today (11th/12th graders), as I sometimes do. The students then compare in writing, Trek's good/bad model of human nature to Freud's tripartite model (id/ego/supersgo).

Plus, probably a dozen kids have now seen a classic Trek for the first time. So, there's cultural literacy in today's lesson, too! Several kids had never HEARD of William Shatner. Other kids tried to jog their memory with "Priceline" and that beauty contest movie with Sandra Bullock to no avail.

Anyway, after watching it three times, I can say
a) Boy, there are several really nice dramatic things in the script. And the early dynamic among the big three is rougher, but cooler than in later ep.s. And I love the minor crewmen with speaking roles.

b) Aside from this episode, the bridge itself is very Jungian: a circle with four guardrails, a cross in the center (nav/helm+astrogator); and more or less in the center of the circle is Kirk, a whole, "de-individuated" person, who integrates both head (Spock) and (heart). Nice overhead shot right at the end.

c) Though I don't believe in new FX, I would go for editing out Spock's nasty remark. It really mars the ending, which would have been glorious.

Thoughts?

 

[Shatnertage]

Cool.

When I showed "Tapestry" to a class, they seemed mostly weirded out by "an old guy" kissing a woman their age. They didn't seem to get it the way I thought they would.

I like your thoughts on the Jungian aspects of the bridge.

 

[scotpens]

. . . Aside from this episode, the bridge itself is very Jungian: a circle with four guardrails, a cross in the center (nav/helm+astrogator); and more or less in the center of the circle is Kirk, a whole, "de-individuated" person, who integrates both head (Spock) and (heart). Nice overhead shot right at the end.

c) Though I don't believe in new FX, I would go for editing out Spock's nasty remark. It really mars the ending, which would have been glorious.

Funny, that's one interpretation of the bridge layout I've never heard before. The bridge was designed to be practical, functional and believable as the nerve center of a technologically sophisticated space vessel. But if Matt Jeffries were still alive, I'm sure he'd be tickled by your analysis.

As for Spock's final line about Evil Kirk having some "interesting qualities," it's an artifact of its time. That rather strange sense of humor was soon written out of Spock's character. And I assume you're not seriously advocating censorship.

 

[plynch]

. . . Aside from this episode, the bridge itself is very Jungian: a circle with four guardrails, a cross in the center (nav/helm+astrogator); and more or less in the center of the circle is Kirk, a whole, "de-individuated" person, who integrates both head (Spock) and (heart). Nice overhead shot right at the end.

c) Though I don't believe in new FX, I would go for editing out Spock's nasty remark. It really mars the ending, which would have been glorious.

Funny, that's one interpretation of the bridge layout I've never heard before. The bridge was designed to be practical, functional and believable as the nerve center of a technologically sophisticated space vessel. But if Matt Jeffries were still alive, I'm sure he'd be tickled by your analysis.

As for Spock's final line about Evil Kirk having some "interesting qualities," it's an artifact of its time. That rather strange sense of humor was soon written out of Spock's character. And I assume you're not seriously advocating censorship.

HA! No - I was joking about remastering his line.

As for the Jung squared-circle, and the other archetypes, it just comes forth naturally, as in rose windows, mandalas, the Celtic cross, native American circle of four colors, compass, etc . . .

Though I do remember reading about the Enterprise having round (maternal, feminine) and cylindrical (phallic) shapes on purpose. I THINK MJ did that on purpose and not someone later "reading into it." Couldn't tell you where I got that from if life depended on it, though.

(Remember that in the 1960s Freud was still influencing psych. to a large degree; witness the psych department in "Mad Men" and the subtexts they try to spin into their ad campaigns. Back when art departments airbrushed skulls into the ice cubes of whiskey ads and the smoke of cigarette ads, to appeal to our Freudian death instinct.)

The squared circle being present in the bridge design, I fully assume was subconscious, which makes it all the better!

 

[scotpens]

. . . Though I do remember reading about the Enterprise having round (maternal, feminine) and cylindrical (phallic) shapes on purpose. I THINK MJ did that on purpose and not someone later “reading into it.” Couldn't tell you where I got that from if life depended on it, though.

Sometimes a nacelle is just a nacelle.

 

[BolianAuthor]

I am pretty sure the Enterprise was based upon popular images of space craft and real-world space tech at the time... the saucer and cigar shape was very common amongst reports of what UFO craft looked like in the 60's, and the warp nacelles are obviously based on a rocket-type of look.

 

[Pauln6]

. . . Aside from this episode, the bridge itself is very Jungian: a circle with four guardrails, a cross in the center (nav/helm+astrogator); and more or less in the center of the circle is Kirk, a whole, "de-individuated" person, who integrates both head (Spock) and (heart). Nice overhead shot right at the end.

c) Though I don't believe in new FX, I would go for editing out Spock's nasty remark. It really mars the ending, which would have been glorious.

Funny, that's one interpretation of the bridge layout I've never heard before. The bridge was designed to be practical, functional and believable as the nerve center of a technologically sophisticated space vessel. But if Matt Jeffries were still alive, I'm sure he'd be tickled by your analysis.

As for Spock's final line about Evil Kirk having some "interesting qualities," it's an artifact of its time. That rather strange sense of humor was soon written out of Spock's character. And I assume you're not seriously advocating censorship.

HA! No - I was joking about remastering his line.

Heh, I'd rather edit in some scathing remark from Yeoman Rand so show that junior crew (and women) don't have to take that kind of crap from senior officers.

 

[Timo]

Well, perhaps all of Spock's talk afterwards about him "not being interested in command" was merely to cover up the fact that his remarks had totally stalled his career...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[EnsignHarper]

EW is still one my favorite Treks of any of the franchises...period.

First, lets forget the 'oh why didn't they just use the shuttle' boo hooing from the nit pickers....beisde s the fact it was not built yet, they obviously had to make a situation dramatically where the transporter HAD to be fixed - split Captain or not.

Second, this is Shatner at his absolute best - yes, he chews huge holes in the scenery as the 'double' - but - in terms of the story - he HAS to. This double HAS to be directly opposite of the 'other' Kirk. Shatner also does the 'normal' Kirk perfectly also - a man obviously missing SOMEthing....trying to reach for something that is not there, and not knowing why he cannot find it - all in the middle of a crisis. And the double, totally free from the restraints of command and responsibilities runs wild, BUT, when needing to, can almost act civilized long enough to 'pass' - showing that he possesses the cunning part of the personality. And the climax on the bridge at the end, with the confrontation between the two halves, the negative Kirk breaking down without the control the other half has, and confessing he needs the other side, and NEEDS to go back to survive ( ' I want to LIVE!!') is STILL amazing. The idea I can still watch this after 40 years, and still be affected by it, is a testament to Shatner's ability as an actor.

3. With all the respect that Shatner deserves, let us not forget this is a pivotal episode for Nimoy as Spock, also. Remember this is the show where Nimoy made a point of telling the director, "Spock will NOT be so crude to use a phaser butt to cold cock someone, instead, Vulcans have a far less crude, much more 'civilized' method of subduing people' thus, we got the FSVNP. But more importantly, confesses, the he too is CONSTANTLY fighting a war inside himself between his relatively calm Vulcan side, and his crude (to Vulcans at least) emotional human side. His opening up to Kirk - and McCoy is letting both of them know that he is, in a very curious way, as human as they are!

And as far as the stupid Spock remark to Rand after, it is directly related to the dumb remarks that Pike makes in The Cage - the first at the beginning where Pike says that he isn't used to having a female on the bridge, and then at the very end in the full version, where Pike makes the remark about 'all doctors being dirty old men' One can almost bet the Spock 'redeeming qualities' bit was a rewrite by Roddenberry....

Still an amazing show though....

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

It's an excellent episode for Shatner. His talent is allowed to shine there.

 

[Doug Otte]

plynch, I'd be interested in reading some of your students' remarks pertaining to the psychology of this episode as well as any general comments they had about Star Trek.

If you get a chance, why don't you post a few quotes here?

Thanks,
Doug

 

[Ssosmcin]

Second, this is Shatner at his absolute best - yes, he chews huge holes in the scenery as the 'double' - but - in terms of the story - he HAS to. This double HAS to be directly opposite of the 'other' Kirk. Shatner also does the 'normal' Kirk perfectly also - a man obviously missing SOMEthing....trying to reach for something that is not there, and not knowing why he cannot find it - all in the middle of a crisis. And the double, totally free from the restraints of command and responsibilities runs wild, BUT, when needing to, can almost act civilized long enough to 'pass' - showing that he possesses the cunning part of the personality. And the climax on the bridge at the end, with the confrontation between the two halves, the negative Kirk breaking down without the control the other half has, and confessing he needs the other side, and NEEDS to go back to survive ( ' I want to LIVE!!') is STILL amazing. The idea I can still watch this after 40 years, and still be affected by it, is a testament to Shatner's ability as an actor.

{applause} Totally agreed. For all the Shatner bashing from the Great Unwashed, the fact is the man has done some great and very subtle work, especially on Star Trek. His mannerisms, low key facial moves, and a masterful control of his voice are not only underrated, but completely ignored. Even as far along as The Enterprise Incident, you can see the layers in his "Kirk going nuts" characterization.

As far as The Enemy Within, yes he was over the top. He wasn't just playing sinister, evil Kirk, he was a true animal. Animals are quite often over the top and wild. But the "good" Kirk, the one with the halting voice, the unsure stance, the vulnerability… That stuff tends to be overshadowed by the OTT work and missed by all but the most ardent fans.

 

[plynch]

plynch, I'd be interested in reading some of your students' remarks pertaining to the psychology of this episode as well as any general comments they had about Star Trek.

If you get a chance, why don't you post a few quotes here?

Thanks,
Doug

Howdy. I suspect that would entail some messy legalities, even with the student's permission. Maybe I will do some paraphrasing and pass along some general ideas. Haven't graded them, due to a lag time so that kids can make-up if they were absent (the bane of our existence in education . . .but I digress.)

One point a girl raised in class was that maybe there's a good "id." An urge to do good stemming from biological processes. So I was able to a) compliment her on thinking, and b) respond about our being social organisms, thus inheriting empathy and an urge to cooperate in our mental bag of tricks, which help us pass on our own genes, yada yada. But it was a nice springboard. I'll keep ya posted.

 

[Greg Cox]

Well, I think Matheson has always been interested in psychology. His story "Button, Button" (recently filmed as THE BOX) was based on a discussion in his wife's college psychology class . . . .

 

[Doug Otte]

Howdy. I suspect that would entail some messy legalities, even with the student's permission. Maybe I will do some paraphrasing and pass along some general ideas. Haven't graded them, due to a lag time so that kids can make-up if they were absent (the bane of our existence in education . . .but I digress.)

I didn't mean direct quotes, but some of the general responses and ideas...

One point a girl raised in class was that maybe there's a good "id." An urge to do good stemming from biological processes. So I was able to a) compliment her on thinking, and b) respond about our being social organisms, thus inheriting empathy and an urge to cooperate in our mental bag of tricks, which help us pass on our own genes, yada yada. But it was a nice springboard. I'll keep ya posted.

Very interesting. Thanks.

Doug

 

[netrefugee]

I am pretty sure the Enterprise was based upon popular images of space craft and real-world space tech at the time... the saucer and cigar shape was very common amongst reports of what UFO craft looked like in the 60's, and the warp nacelles are obviously based on a rocket-type of look.

 

[EEE]

]Sometimes a nacelle is just a nacelle.

Point, set and match! LOL!

 

[sonak]

I'm not sure your question as set up would actually have opposing points if the episode is understood properly.


It's clearly shown that it is NOT "good Kirk" vs. "Bad Kirk," but rather that it is the personification of Kirk's id(natural impulses and instincts) vs. the personification of his superego(internalized social conscience)

So.... your comparing Freud to Freud here, not "good and bad" vs. Freudian psychology.


The episode was showing that the superego without the id is just weak, passive, intellectual and lacking in decisiveness and strength. The id without superego is unrestrained instinct, aggressive, but undisciplined and unintelligent.

The balanced person needs both.

 

[EnsignHarper]

I'm not sure your question as set up would actually have opposing points if the episode is understood properly.


It's clearly shown that it is NOT "good Kirk" vs. "Bad Kirk," but rather that it is the personification of Kirk's id(natural impulses and instincts) vs. the personification of his superego(internalized social conscience)

So.... your comparing Freud to Freud here, not "good and bad" vs. Freudian psychology.


The episode was showing that the superego without the id is just weak, passive, intellectual and lacking in decisiveness and strength. The id without superego is unrestrained instinct, aggressive, but undisciplined and unintelligent.

The balanced person needs both.

And, apparently, this transporter malfunction was minutely 'imperfect' in its division of Kirk's personality - the 'superego Kirk' retained JUST enough decisiveness to survive, and the 'id Kirk had JUST enough intelligence to finally understand what had happened and what was needed. BUT - it did not allow him the intelligence to accept the remerge in transport - that HAD to come from the superego Kirk. This was not implied but laid out in detail with the failure of the remerging of the dog creature, which did not have the advanced intelligence to accept the remerging of both its halves. Indeed, it probably had no real awareness of what had happened at all.

Also what never gets discussed is the idea that what had happened was a cloning of sorts, and Trek, in all of its versions in the future, would be very consistant in the matter of clones being at best, a temporary 'solution'. Here, this was basically a very uncontrolled 'accidental' cloning, so the DNA of both Kirks would be so weak that this would be the unstated (in 1966, way before DNA was understood by more than a handful) reason both of them would not be able to survive long.

This episode also has a great 'sequel' of sorts. In the first book of Trek 'New Voyages', there is a story , Ni Var, in which a scientist somehow hears of what happened to Kirk, and using the Alfa 177 ore, 'perfects', a dividing apparatus....and uses it on Spock - creating one who is pure human (internally - still had pointed ears!), and one who is pure Vulcan. Its done very well, and actually could have made a decent episode in of itself...

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I'd say both were pretty much equally intelligent, fully possessing Kirk's ego--the bestial Kirk, ego driven by soley by id, lacked the courage to take the risk by himself. Gentle Kirk, ego driven by superego, could find that courage in himself and extend it to his lost other. In a scene that is truly heartbreaking when you think on it, the terrified bestial Kirk surrenders and lets himself be held and consoled by his better self. Only then can integration take place, when both halves of the divided self agree that they need each other. Bestial Kirk's "I don't need you!" is nothing more than a child telling his mother "I hate you!" He knew it to be untrue even as he said it.