• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

"The Making of Star Trek" by Stephen Whitfield & Gene Roddenberry (1968)

Damian

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
I'm just finishing up this reference work, I believe it was the very first reference book about Star Trek. I was lucky enough to purchase a used first printing copy from 09/1968 a few years back and decided to read it while waiting for new novels to come out. It was written just prior to the 3rd season and focuses a great deal on the creation of the series along with all the details that goes into making an episode.

I'm not as into all the background behind a show as I am in the story itself, but this book was a fascinating read. It starts from the beginning, with Gene Roddenberry, his ideas for the show and his struggles to get it picked up first by the studio (Desilu) and then with a network (ultimately NBC). It includes information as to what goes into the writing of an episode, from the script, to the rewrites and finally to the screenplay. It also gives a lot of information about production design.

It also gives some biographical information taken from the "Star Trek Guide" which was basically the series bible. It includes detailed information about Kirk and Spock, and lesser information about the other main characters, along with information about the actors that played them. It also gives information about Romulans and Klingons (interesting to read that Klingons at that time considered honor 'despicable' and they had few redeeming traits back then).

A great early look at Star Trek though, though the prism of just 2 seasons of the original series, when Roddenberry was much more involved in the oversight of the series. It's fascinating to read all the details that went into it. It also gives me a greater appreciation for everything Roddenberry had to do just to get the show on the air in a vision he wanted for it. Roddenberry wasn't perfect by any means, he had some faults and sometimes he required others to make his visions a watchable reality (such as Robert Justman and Herb Solow, among others). But he had an idea and stuck to his guns. And that idea was to create a smart science fiction show. It's easy to see nowadays but when creating the show he was very particular about the show being smart and believable. Things had to have a purpose, not just because it looked cool. They didn't want the show getting bogged down in scientific and technical terms (probably what we would call technobabble today), but he didn't want those principles ignored either. Just because Scotty didn't go into detail about what the defector shield did doesn't mean the production team didn't have ideas about how a deflector would work. The people involved with the show got to thinking of the Enterprise as a real thing almost.

It has extensive information about a lot of the people involved with the day to day running of the show, including script consultants, production designers, and what each producers responsibilities. DC Fontana was cited as a person in particular responsible for a number of rewrites, along with Roddenberry, and of course Matt Jeffries is credited with a lot of the production design work.

Very interesting to read a reference book written contemporaneously with the show though. It definitely gives you an appreciation for a making of the show, some of which might still apply even today.
 
Great book. I have several editions including the first one from my elementary school book fair. :luvlove:
 
One thing I forgot to mention, the book definitively states Star Trek takes place in the 23rd century, a number of times, including quotes by Gene Roddenberry. I know there is sometimes some dispute about when it was 'meant' to take place (we obviously have those answers nowadays), but in this reference work, including citations by Roddenberry it is the 23rd century---now of course it's not pinned down to the year, or decade. But I would say the century's pretty definitive based on this book.
 
Yeah, The Making of Star Trek was the book that introduced or standardized a lot of things that became accepted lore or were adopted by subsequent screen canon -- the 23rd-century setting, the term "mind meld" as the default (over TOS/TAS usages like mind fusion, mind touch, mind probe, etc.), the idea of Kirk as the youngest captain, the idea of a Klingon/Romulan alliance, the forward dish as a navigational deflector, the Romulans having gender equality, etc.

And yet somehow fandom and later creators overlooked the part about the holographic entertainment/communication center on the ship's rec deck.
 
Yeah, The Making of Star Trek was the book that introduced or standardized a lot of things that became accepted lore or were adopted by subsequent screen canon -- the 23rd-century setting, the term "mind meld" as the default (over TOS/TAS usages like mind fusion, mind touch, mind probe, etc.), the idea of Kirk as the youngest captain, the idea of a Klingon/Romulan alliance, the forward dish as a navigational deflector, the Romulans having gender equality, etc.

And yet somehow fandom and later creators overlooked the part about the holographic entertainment/communication center on the ship's rec deck.


I also noticed in Kirk's 'biography' the note about him rising through the ranks rapidly and being given command while still quite young of an equivalent of a 'destroyer class spaceship). I wonder in your upcoming novel about his first command do you incorporate that information?

It's funny, until you mentioned earlier about his first command not being the Enterprise I never gave it much thought. I just assumed the Enterprise was his first command. In retrospect it makes sense that he had a prior command, and nothing on the show or subsequent movies, shows or even novels if I recall state the Enterprise was his first command.


And yeah, I noticed the part about the holographic rec deck also. The Enterprise always was supposed to have one, it just wasn't featured on the show---I think maybe for budgetary reasons. It actually sounded like a forerunner of what would become the holodeck in TNG the way it was described. It almost sounded like 3-d TV the way it was described, in that the action takes place around you in 3-d (but perhaps lacking the interactive elements of the more advanced holodecks by the time of TNG). There were some things in the Enterprise section of the book they hoped to feature in the then being produced 3rd season, but unfortunately some of it obviously never came to fruition.

It was also interesting to read that Spock was always the first officer. I've heard it indicated that maybe Mitchell was his first officer in WNMHGB, and even a novel here and there stated that (My Brother's Keeper for instance), but in The Making of...but I thought it was pretty clear in The Making of....that Spock was always the first officer under Kirk.
 
Last edited:
I also noticed in Kirk's 'biography' the note about him rising through the ranks rapidly and being given command while still quite young of an equivalent of a 'destroyer class spaceship). I wonder in your upcoming novel about his first command do you incorporate that information?

Yes, that was my inspiration. Hardly anyone's ever explored that part of Kirk's career.


And yeah, I noticed the part about the holographic rec deck also. The Enterprise always was supposed to have one, it just wasn't featured on the show---I think maybe for budgetary reasons.

Maybe, but it wouldn't really have cost that much -- holocharacters could've been actors that were faded/jump-cut in using an extremely simple visual effect and then just been standing there on the set for the rest of the scene, the same as TNG holodeck characters. And it could've been used in much the same way TNG and VGR used it, as a way to save money by showing "historical" programs set on backlot sets or the like. So it's weird that they didn't use it.
 
I've read TMOST at least a dozen or more times since it came out in 68; always an enjoyable read.
 
Maybe, but it wouldn't really have cost that much

Yeah, I guess that's true. Maybe it was just simply they never got around to it, at least until the animated series.

But it does put to rest I would think of the complaints about Discovery. I'll admit I was one of those initially, until I gave it a bit of thought and realized it really wasn't a continuity error. "The Making of Star Trek" made it clear it was something they at least considered for the original series.

Yes, that was my inspiration. Hardly anyone's ever explored that part of Kirk's career.

Should be a good read. At least it's an area where there have been few stories. "My Brother's Keeper" was a good read on Kirk's formative years, but even that series omitted Kirk's first command. I'm not sure if Michael Jan Friedman was going with the common misperception that the Enterprise was his first command, or if it was just that it wasn't part of his plan to cover that. In any event it left the door open ;).

I guess that leads to another question (my last I promise-- ;) ). Does "My Brother's Keeper" factor at all into your book from a historical context? I read it about a year or so ago and was just curious would/could that trilogy and your book exist in the same sort of continuity generally (sort of like how your "Buried Age" followed the Stargazer series--at least from a continuity perspective).
 
I've read TMOST at least a dozen or more times since it came out in 68; always an enjoyable read.

Yeah, I'm not usually big into reference books (though I have a copy of Allan Asherman's Compendium---which is coming in handy since I'm watching the Blu-Rays in production order and they are in airing order---with NO FREAKIN NUMBERS on the discs--ugh) but I really enjoyed this book. Gene Roddenberry, whatever his faults may have been, really had some great ideas for Star Trek and he made a top notch show. I'm glad he stuck to his guns on how he wanted the show to appear.

Next up I have a copy of David Gerrold's "The World of Star Trek" I'd like to read now. I'll probably try to read that in between "Available Light" which hopefully I'll get by the end of the week and "The Captain's Oath"
 
"My Brother's Keeper" was a good read on Kirk's formative years, but even that series omitted Kirk's first command. I'm not sure if Michael Jan Friedman was going with the common misperception that the Enterprise was his first command, or if it was just that it wasn't part of his plan to cover that.

Well, he only had a trilogy, and it probably made more sense to focus the last book on the Enterprise for familiarity's sake.


I guess that leads to another question (my last I promise-- ;) ). Does "My Brother's Keeper" factor at all into your book from a historical context? I read it about a year or so ago and was just curious would/could that trilogy and your book exist in the same sort of continuity generally (sort of like how your "Buried Age" followed the Stargazer series--at least from a continuity perspective).

The only allusion I made was mentioning that Kirk served on the Constitution at one point in his career, but that's mainly because I think that's been referenced in some other Novelverse work. I don't think Keeper is reconcilable with current canon or novel continuity. It offers an (implicit) explanation for ridged Klingons that clashes with what ENT later established, and its version of the trip back from the galaxy's rim after "Where No Man..." is incompatible with Vanguard: Harbinger. I think it also says that Kirk hadn't encountered Klingons before book 3, which seems unlikely given what we now know from Discovery (that there was a Klingon war at the time Kirk was serving on the Farragut). Suffice to say that Kirk does have some dealings with the Klingons in a portion of The Captain's Oath.
 
The only allusion I made was mentioning that Kirk served on the Constitution at one point in his career, but that's mainly because I think that's been referenced in some other Novelverse work. I don't think Keeper is reconcilable with current canon or novel continuity. It offers an (implicit) explanation for ridged Klingons that clashes with what ENT later established, and its version of the trip back from the galaxy's rim after "Where No Man..." is incompatible with Vanguard: Harbinger. I think it also says that Kirk hadn't encountered Klingons before book 3, which seems unlikely given what we now know from Discovery (that there was a Klingon war at the time Kirk was serving on the Farragut). Suffice to say that Kirk does have some dealings with the Klingons in a portion of The Captain's Oath.

Gotcha. Yeah, I remember the post WNMHGB segments and Vanguard didn't jive well together. The main thing I took from the post WNMHGB frame that was interesting is that the Enterprise was headed for Earth for a refit (to explain the differences in ship appearance starting with "The Corbomite Maneuver" and it explained some of the crew turnover between WNMHGB and Corbomite including Sulu's transfer to helm). Also, if I remember correctly My Brother's Keeper at least seemed to imply WNMHGB was a pre-5YM mission and they were going for a refit in preparation for the 5YM (I always thought that made better sense, esp. in universe if you consider the changes in the production design and changes in crew).

I also remember Keeper went with the idea that Mitchell was his first officer, whereas other works went with Spock was always First Officer under Kirk. Though I guess in Keeper's case that made some sense because it was also a trilogy about Mitchell.

I guess in my 'head canon' as folks around here like to call it, I'll consider the parts of My Brother's Keeper that don't conflict as part of Kirk's back story and the rest as sort of an alternate timeline sort of thing.
 
Also, if I remember correctly My Brother's Keeper at least seemed to imply WNMHGB was a pre-5YM mission and they were going for a refit in preparation for the 5YM (I always thought that made better sense, esp. in universe if you consider the changes in the production design and changes in crew).

That's long been my belief, and I think Vanguard, Foundations, and some other things align with the idea. Although I was advised to avoid making that explicit in TCO so as not to confuse people, so I sort of tiptoed around it in my phrasing.
 
Thanks for the rundown on The Making of Star Trek book, @Damian. I've heard good things about it, and I've occasionally liked to dabble in behind-the-scenes books. I've been trying to keep an eye out for it for a while at used bookstores, but maybe I should just bite the bullet and order a copy from amazon.

Any recommendations for which edition to go for, or are they all pretty much the same with different covers?
 
Thanks for the rundown on The Making of Star Trek book, @Damian. I've heard good things about it, and I've occasionally liked to dabble in behind-the-scenes books. I've been trying to keep an eye out for it for a while at used bookstores, but maybe I should just bite the bullet and order a copy from amazon.

Any recommendations for which edition to go for, or are they all pretty much the same with different covers?

I believe the contents are all the same. I think later editions just had different covers.
 
Another amusing point I read in the book was about NBC not caring for Spock at first. I think most of us were aware NBC was a bit, um, concerned about Spock's appearance and the infamous airbrushed publicity photo.

But what's amusing is that by the time Roddenberry was working on "The Menagerie" NBC was quite pleased Spock had a prominent role in the episode due to his growing popularity at the time. A note...by the same people that asked Roddenberry to drop Spock :rommie:.

And I never realized until reading the book that "The Menagerie" was a show to almost allow the production team to catch a breath. They were starting to fall behind schedule and Roddenberry had earlier come up with the idea of "The Menagerie" almost as an emergency get out of jail free card should it be needed (which he felt it would). They started out good but in a good bit of foresight he held the idea of "The Menagerie" in his bag of goodies to use because he was concerned with all that was required for an episode of Star Trek they'd start to fall behind. Since "The Menagerie" included a good amount of content already filmed, it allowed the team to catch a breath and get caught up. And it ended up winning a Hugo Award.

The studio and network were probably pleased also that the original pilot didn't go to waste. That all that money spent on "The Cage" was put to good use. And early in the book it was noted that for a time "The Cage" was renamed "The Menagerie" until that episode was released and the pilot reverted to its initial name--I was aware of that little tidbit from the original VHS release of "The Cage" but the book gives some more detail about it.
 
Last edited:
I have a used copy of this book I think it's a really interesting book. I also have the making of the Trouble with Tribbles by David Gerald.
 
It also gives information about Romulans and Klingons (interesting to read that Klingons at that time considered honor 'despicable' and they had few redeeming traits back then).

The switch to Klingons spouting about honour (Valkris, Kruge, Maltz) happened when "Return to Genesis" became "The Search for Spock". A switch of bad guys, from Romulans to Klingons, hence Klingon Neutral Zone and Klingon bird of prey. Probably because it was harder to address in a major motion picture why Saavik, Sarek, T'Lar and the resurrected Spock looked exactly like the Romulans trying to steal the secrets of Genesis.
 
The Klingon Neutral Zone was established by the Kobayashi Maru at the beginning of Star Trek II. I suppose it could've been the RNZ, but that would've made Klingons hanging around a lot stranger. Or maybe not. The Romulans and Federation are both forbidden from the Neutral Zone, so the Klingons fly through with impunity picking fights.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top