From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos   
   From Address: Brad_Filippone@yahoo.com   
   Subject: Re: Who Mourns for Adonais? my review   
      
   On Dec 23, 10:33aam, Anim8rFSK  wrote:   
   > In article   
   > <84192090-f7f4-4213-a0b0-e6acc13a1...@r26g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>,   
   > aBrad Filippone  wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > > On Dec 20, 4:42apm, "jph...@gmail.com"  wrote:   
   >   
   > > > The episode did apparently have two alterations imposed on it by the   
   > > > networks. One was the removal of a tag which would have revealed that   
   > > > Palamas was pregnant with Apollo's child. The other was a slight   
   > > > alteration to a line in which Kirk offers his initial dismissal of   
   > > > Apollo, telling him, "We have no use for gods." Apparently, in the   
   > > > original script, that was the end of the line. The network asked for a   
   > > > slight follow-up, however, so in the televised episode Kirk adds: "The   
   > > > one is quite sufficient." I have mixed feelings on the first   
   > > > alteration. On the one hand, the cut scene certainly backs up my   
   > > > reading of the scene in which Apollo assaults Palamas. On the other   
   > > > hand, it was clearly a jokey tag scene... and I'm just as happy not to   
   > > > have Trek be among the late '60's/early '70's shows that were a bit   
   > > > too happy to find humor in rape scenes or rape threats.   
   >   
   > > No, sad to say, they had already done that in "The Enemy Within."   
   >   
   > > > The change to Kirk's dialogue is one that I actually favor. It may   
   > > > work against Gene Roddenberry's vision of a future in which humanity   
   > > > has discarded all of its superstitions. But, much like J. Michael   
   > > > Straczynski and Babylon 5, I never can quite buy that utopian future   
   > > > in which humanity is free of crime and conflict, let alone religion.   
   > > > Besides which, the addition is just a better line, far snappier and   
   > > > more quotable than what would otherwise be a throwaway. And in drama,   
   > > > one should never let one's worldview get in the way of a good one-   
   > > > liner.   
   >   
   > > The problem with the "we find the one quite sufficient, on the other   
   > > hand, is that it implies that all other religions have died out. aAnd   
   > > that's just counting Earth religions only. aSo the line comes across   
   > > as unintentionally prejudicial.   
   >   
   > Not if they HAVE died out.   
   >   
   Wouldn't happen in so short a time.  Remember how many centuries   
   they've already lasted.  I'll accept the possibility that they're   
   slowly dying out by Kirk's time, but it's unlikely that one religion   
   of those already established would somehow manage to survive.  And   
   human nature being what it is, new religions would probably pop up   
   while the others were dying.   
   And again, that's not even considering the fact that the Federation   
   has many worlds, each with their own spiritual beliefs.  Considering   
   all this, Kirk's line just comes across as pompous, as if only HIS   
   beliefs matter.   
   Brad   
   --- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp   
    * Origin: http://groups.google.com (1:2320/105.97)   
   --- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux   
    * Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)