When I was a student at Rice University, one of the guest speakers on our campus was Gene Roddenberry, creator – as everyone knows – of the inestimable Star Trek. Roddenberry was a cheerful and energetic guy; while I do not remember the year, the speaking program or the official topic, I remember to this day some of his anecdotes about series content and network suits.

 

Actually, they were not all so much anecdotes as a discussion of cruxes. Vibrant and upbeat, Roddenberry’s talk was still a reminder that their successful show came out of the pit of the Cold War – the same era that boosted designs from Raymond Loewy and Eames (space-oriented and rocket-influenced patio barbecue grills, barware, and ashtrays) but also had its upheavals if you remember your McCarthyism. So, the executives behind the show were, in a word, nervous.

 

That tension probably contributed to the energy and inventiveness of the show, along with the constrained budget and the lack of today’s special effects (when you saw a tray rolling out with some quick-frozen warriors on it, in the “Khan” episode, it was being pushed out from behind by two guys). Nothing like rough edges to push the boundaries of space.

 

In any case, “nervous” was their middle name, and you can see why. Since virtually every significant element in the series was a first, it’s hard to list all the “firsts” without describing the show and particularly the cast of characters.

 

The interdisciplinary, international, ecumenical crew was a first. That all these characters from different nations, continents or planets (Spock) had joined in space exploration was no small matter. There was a Japanese member, so soon after World War II. There was even a Russian, though Roddenberry pointed out the concession to prevailing social attitudes in giving their Russian character what he described as the safest possible Russian name, Chekhov.

 

The crew was also coed: women in space, not as hysterical screamers, damsels in distress, or even primarily love interest, were another first, and the network was aware. According to Roddenberry, “We wanted the women to be dressed like the men,” i.e. wearing space-exploration uniforms, a proposal that would seem on its face not grossly unreasonable. The creators who won so many battles, however, couldn’t win that one: the network prevailed in the interest of sex appeal, and on the Enterprise female officers had to wear those little skating skirts so suitable for intergalactic exploration and combat. Admittedly Lieutenant Uhura – another first, and probably the fashion model for our current Secretary of State – looked very good in them.

 

Speaking of interference, the most profound element in the Enterprise’s explorations was its anthropological directive to learn about other places and other cultures, without interfering in them. The idea was not new to science fiction or to ethnography and not new to the general public – much of which could still remember the years between the two World Wars, and most of which had little knowledge of or desire to get into the internal affairs of either Africa or Asia. But it was relatively new to any kind of television show that pertained to foreign affairs or to military structures of command like that aboard the Enterprise.

 

I wish I could remember how Roddenberry wound up his talk or more about the Q-and-A with the audience, which was undoubtedly good. But memory is spotty. I do recall that another guest speaker I heard as a student was Edward Teller, the “father of the H-bomb.” His topic, the text from which he preached his sermon, was the harm done by a excessive secrecy. Another pleasant, amiable and gentlemanly speaker, Teller pointed out industries in which the U.S. had tried to keep all its secrets – like the Space Race – and had suffered ignominiously in falling behind the Russians (“Sputnik” was a self-explanatory key word for ten years). In contrast, he pointed to the computer industry – where, he said, we freely shared our technology, and in which we led the world.

 

Well, in hindsight, sharing technology – that is, sharing information to receive information – was clearly not the only determinant. You also need a genuine interest in the field of study, the confidence and capability to engage in it, and support and encouragement (not just financial but not just moral support, either) for the individuals, groups and institutions demonstrating those attributes.