|
|
|
|
|
|
by topkai22
4133 days ago
|
|
|
I don't think it is celebrity worship. I don't know a thing about Nimoy outside his work, although other posts make it seem that he was a interesting, likable, and good man. We are affected by Nimoy's passing because we enjoyed his work, identified with his character, and because Star Trek and Spock represent ideas that we wish to hold on to. The world of Star Trek TOS and TNG normally felt unambiguously better than ours, but it felt better in ways that were achievable. A world focused on exploration, with a society that did not shy away from conflict but worked to resolve it peacefully. It felt like what a steadfast belief in modernity could lead to. In the word's of Neal Stephenson (who I think borrowed the term from someone else) Star Trek and Spock serve as forms of cultural hieroglyphs, recognizable symbols of a great possible world developed from an unshakeable faith in modernity and progress. I think we morn in part because we will miss our hieroglyph. While there have been a number of unamibigously pro-science/modernity movies lately, Spock stood out for generations. He stood for progress and goodness. He managed to be absolutely moral and absolutely logical. And I think it is the blow to those ideas we mourn as much as the man. |
|
|
If you are nerd enough :), you will have caught all you could of the interviews with Gene Roddenberry. Gene was caught genuinely by surprise that Spock was such a hit. If you look at how Nimoy played Spock in "The Menagerie", where they (rather crassly ) reuse footage from the rejected pilot, the evolution of the character is startling.
Leonard Nimoy simply hit that part and the creation of that character out of the park.
One of the things that Frank Zappa used to use to talk about the space-between-the notes in art was "put the eyebrows on it". Isn't that a Spock reference? Were there eyebrows in theater or film before Nimoy?