Rewatched Star Trek VI this morning. The scene where Spock forces a mind meld on Valeria is actually pretty disturbing. Maybe it's just been a few years since I've seen it, but, jesus, I'm having a hard time seeing the scene as anything other than Spock raping her.
Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
I think the proper term is "Mind Fuck".
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
This is actually something that's often bothered me about Trek. For a show that's supposedly all about ethical quandaries, they never really got into the true social implications of telepaths.
B5 did a much better job of thinking it all through and showing how it could work (or not, as the case may be) in a society where telepaths and non-telepaths must co-exist. JMS was careful to make sure there were legal safeguards in place to (in theory) prevent exactly this kind of violation. Scans of criminal suspects for any reason requires a court order and even then only after a person has been sentenced to death of personality. Anything the telepath sees while inside a defendant's mind is considered inadmissible. Even in business dealings, the use of a telepath (who must also be a licenced commercial teep) requires the express permission of both parties and only surface scans to establish if responses to direct questions are true or false are permitted.
Things are much looser in Trek, which if you think about it makes no practical sense. The only time I think it ever came up was with Betazoids and even then, going into someone's minds was treated more like a social taboo and less like a criminal violation of privacy, to say nothing of their basic sentient rights.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
There was the T'Pol mindrape, that went into ethics territory.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
And it took them how many decades to get around to it? Actually, I'm not sure I would even count that at all. If memory serves (haven't watched Enterprise since it ended) they just used it as a straight up sex assault allegory. I think they may have muddied it even further with the whole mind-melders = social deviants/homosexual allegory.
What I'm talking about is the wider social and practical ramifications of dealing with individuals who are innately more powerful (not merely "different") living as a minority. Though admittedly, their is some overlap with aforementioned melder/deviant thing, but it's still not quiet the same thing.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
But part of the reason why B5 justified those laws governing Human telepathy was because it was a rather sudden development out of nowhere. Compare with the Minbari telepaths; those are the ones I'd compare to Vulcan telepathy. Vulcans are generally quite moral, and with very few exceptions the use of the mind meld and associated techniques was used quite appropriately.
But that mind rape scene was really creepy. I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the things that Roddenberry was most pissed about (if rumors about his hating The Undiscovered Country are true).
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Since there wasn't anything sexual going on, I'm not sure that rape is really the best analogy. It was more of an "enhanced interrogation". If anything, Spock was performing Vulcan waterboarding (with the difference being that it actually worked).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Well, I don't think that's such a great analogy, either. It's not as if Spock is intimidating or frightening her into giving him the information, nor is he deliberately inflicting discomfort on her to coerce her into it. He's forcing his way into her mind and taking the information he wants directly out of it.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
It's a violation. It's not sexual, okay, but how is it not as psychologically damaging as rape?
Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. While there can't be any justification for rape, that mind-meld was a necessary evil to prevent an interstellar war. At least, thats how I see it.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Well, I don't think that's such a great analogy, either."
No, it's not perfect, for the reason you mentioned. But it seems closer to the mark.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by shikaru808: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. While there can't be any justification for rape, that mind-meld was a necessary evil to prevent an interstellar war. At least, thats how I see it.
What if they just started breaking her fingers instead? Or pulling her teeth? Maybe waterboarding her or sticking needles under her fingernails?
How long untill the main characters become worse than the villans?
Yeah, I can see why Roddenberry hated STVI- they threw out all the "bright shiny moral future" in favor of a military "ends justify the means" solution.
It was 24 in space...
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
What bothered me wasn't so much what was done or how it was done so much as the fact that the immorality of it wasn't even acknowledged, let alone discussed. Does Starfleet and the Federation not have rules concerning the treatment of prisoners? Do they not have the presumption of innocence until a formal trial is held?
I might even argue that this was *worse* than a rape. As horrendous as it might be to endure such a thing, it is still "only" physical in nature. Given enough impetus, you can block out pain and physical sensation, turn your mind inward and go somewhere else in your head. I'm not saying that makes it OK, but by contrast there's no getting away from someone literally crawling around inside your mind.
I mean, when you get right down to it, the only trauma that ever really matters and has a lasting effect on a person is psychological.
It should also be worth remembering that from the way the scene was played, Spock clearly not being gentle and Valeris was clearly distressed. I'm pretty sure the actors and director knew full well what the subtext of this scene was.
Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
Jason: Perhaps being in the military has given me a "whatever it takes" attitude. Truth be told, I really do see your points in the whole matter. No matter how you spin it, it wasn't right.
But frankly, at what point does holding the moral high ground justify the loss of life of potentially billions of people? It may not have been okay, but it was definitely neccessary IMHO.
Rev: How could a forcefull mind meld be any worse than a violent sexual assault such as rape? Whats the worse that could have came with that mind-meld? Spock (and only Spock) knew of Valeris' deepest, darkest secrets? I wonder if he was able to bypass "unneccessary" memories and just dig to the info he needed?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"I mean, when you get right down to it, the only trauma that ever really matters and has a lasting effect on a person is psychological."
Well, unless you start cutting bits off. That can be pretty lasting.
"Does Starfleet and the Federation not have rules concerning the treatment of prisoners?"
One thing that might be of note here is that Spock and Valeris were both active members of Starfleet, which is portrayed as being run as a military, with their own judicial system and everything. The Federation may have rules regarding the treatment of prisoners, but the rules may be very different for Starfleet treatment of Starfleet officers on a Starfleet ship out in space.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
quote:the rules may be very different for Starfleet treatment of Starfleet officers on a Starfleet ship out in space.
Zathras agrees with sentiment that Zathras likes. There is symmetry.
I agree with "rules may be different". It's like Jack Ryan foregoing the Geneva Convention and calmly putting seven bullets into the KGB-agent on the Red October (sure he may have had live wires, but man that was cold).
MM:
quote:But that mind rape scene was really creepy. I wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the things that Roddenberry was most pissed about
I'm gonna play Spock's Advocate here and say that the scene carries tremendous dramatic value and potent character progression. The "gloves off" atmosphere also helps revitalize what had been a very lukewarm, lackluster streak of movies script-wise (IV, V).
This "arm wrestle" mind meld was also a bit of fan service, in the "I didn't know he could do that" category, almost similar to Superman getting shot in the eye.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by shikaru808: Jason: Perhaps being in the military has given me a "whatever it takes" attitude. Truth be told, I really do see your points in the whole matter. No matter how you spin it, it wasn't right.
But frankly, at what point does holding the moral high ground justify the loss of life of potentially billions of people? It may not have been okay, but it was definitely neccessary IMHO.
What the point of TOS if they dont do what's morally right? Without that moral elevation, it's just a WWII submarine movie.
Moral ambiguities work great on DS9...with TOS, not so much. Rather than showcasing the character's realism, it diminishes them- like seeing Superman roast someone with heat vision- it's beneath what the character would ever consider as a means to an end.
Posted by shikaru808 (Member # 2080) on :
So you're saying that if old TOS Spock was put in that situation he would let the war happen just to protect a traitorous Vulcan's innermost thoughts and fears from being exposed? I would think that he would do the logical decision, the one that was shown on screen
Roddenberry not liking STVI is definitely no surprise though. Not very utopian.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
The good old "needs of the many" definitely is in Spock's favor. The key difference, though, was that Spock volunteered for the job in TWOK, whereas his meld with Valeris was definitely nonconsensual.
I think the debate arises not from the fact that it's the wrong decision, but because the ramifications are rather glossed over in the movie.
And the sad thing is, like many other "enhanced" interrogations, it was all for nothing anyway; Valeris didn't know what they needed to know. So they had to call Sulu anyway.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Exactly- the ends did not justify the means- Sok raped her and for nothing. In TOS, they'd have made that a plot point about the dangers of becoming what you fight against or how you should really take a victim someplace private before raping them- the bridge is no place for such nonsense.
And the overall theme of the Trek movies remains "violence solves everything"....well except TMP which just goes on and on and on untill you fall asleep or hit fast forward thinking "Why the hell did I buy this movie anyway?"
And of course, they did not show any aftermath of STVI- a sweeping investigation into who knew what and who Cartwright's accompices were- surely far more people were involved than we saw onscreen.
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
Well, the Trek movies wouldn't be very interesting if they were about exploring some gaseous anomaly while talking about their feelings would they?
Let's face it, we want our Trek movies with scenes of the Enterprise blasting away at some unrepentant baddie.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Valeris was sorta unrepentant...though the blasting...well, maybe back in Spock's quarters between scenes.
STVI needed James Hong and Kurt Russell.
Posted by Nim (Member # 205) on :
Any movie gets better with James Hong. Also, M. Emmet Walsh and Harry Dean Stanton. Of course.