The Best of Tyrants, The Worst of Tyrants
by Janice L. Newman
Eugenics—the idea that people can be ‘bred’ to emphasize certain desirable traits the way breeders do with animals or botanists do with plants—is an interesting concept in a science fiction setting. So it’s not surprising to encounter an episode of Star Trek built around the concept. What is a little surprising is that the narrative doesn’t do more to condemn either the concept or the practice.
Space Seed begins with the Enterprise finding an ancient Earth vessel with no crew except a group of men and women in cold sleep, their bodies held in stasis. The arrival of the away team triggers the ship, which is suggestively named the “S.S. Botany Bay”, to awaken one of the sleepers.
Sleeping Beauty
After nearly dying during the revival process, the man is brought aboard the Enterprise. He proceeds to threaten Dr. McCoy (who responds with such chutzpah that I think it’s my new favorite scene with him). McCoy neglects to mention the threat to Captain Kirk, who gives “Khan” access to the ship’s libraries and implicit access to his crew. Khan takes full advantage of both, reading up on the ship’s structure and defenses as well as aggressively seducing and manipulating the ship’s historian, Lieutenant Marla McGivers.
Eventually research reveals that “Khan” is “Khan Noonien Singh”, who was, as Mr. Spock says, “From 1992 through 1996, absolute ruler of more than a quarter of your world. From Asia through the Middle East.” Khan and the rest of his crew were the product of eugenics experiments that succeeded in making men and women who were stronger, faster, and smarter than the average human. A group who were, or at least who were raised to think they were, the next Caesars, Alexanders, or Napoleons.
The conversation between Mr. Scott, Doctor McCoy, Captain Kirk, and Mr. Spock that follows this revelation is…odd, to say the least. Scotty admits to a secret admiration for Kahn. Kirk calls him “the best of the tyrants” (WHAT?) Even McCoy notes that there were no wars under him unless others attacked first. Only Mr. Spock expresses shock and repugnance at “this romanticism about a ruthless dictator”. There is some suggestion that the others are teasing Spock, trying to get an emotional reaction out of him, but there’s also a note of sincerity in their words that made me intensely uncomfortable.
"C'mon, Spock. We're just pulling your ears! You do have to admit, though, that the Nazis had some spiffy uniforms."
Captain Kirk puts a guard on Khan’s quarters, but Khan easily breaks out and, making use of McGivers, he revives the rest of his own crew and easily takes control of the Enterprise. When he enacts a brutal rule, first suffocating the bridge crew when they refuse to give up the vessel to him, then threatening to kill them one by one unless they work for him, McGivers turns on him and saves Captain Kirk’s life. Together, Kirk and Spock take back the Enterprise.
"Who's the superman now, huh?"
Kirk chooses to leave the “supermen” alone on a harsh planet, to try to carve out a colony of their own. McGivers chooses to go with them. I suspect her life with a group of people who believe that she is too inferior even to be good breeding stock will not be a happy one.
As with several other episodes where an arrogant or violent man has gone after a woman, Khan’s relationship with McGivers isn’t particularly romanticized, which I appreciated. He’s shown to be brutal, controlling, and extremely manipulative, which had the majority of the audience in our group revulsed, shouting to McGivers that he wasn’t worth it.
To be fair, Khan is an excellent hairdresser.
On the other hand, the narrative does romanticize eugenics to a distressing degree. Even the concept that the eugenics experiments were actually successful in breeding a group of superhumans is one that is both scientifically implausible and morally disgusting. The very existence of Kahn and his group within the context of the story says that such experiments are not only possible, but that they could work. But even those with only the most basic understanding of dog breeding, for example, know that emphasizing one trait can often lead to other, undesirable ones. [It might be possible to control "breeding" at the cellular level, as is done in Herbert's The Eyes of Heisenberg; that seems a more plausible explanation (ed.)]
Add to this the fact that most of the leadership of the Enterprise seem enamored of the idea of these faster, stronger, better men and women, with only Mr. Spock being the (derided) voice of reason. Even at the end, Kirk says, “What a waste to put them in a reorientation center.” And so they are explicitly sent to the planet not because they are too dangerous to house on a penal colony, but because it would be a “waste” of their strength and potential to do so. This group repeatedly said they were superior to humans. They were arrogant, cruel, condescending, and incredibly dangerous. Yet it would be a “waste” to try to retrain them and to teach them empathy? Wouldn’t attempting to make them productive members of society who don’t believe that they’re superior to everyone else be a better use of their potential?
Space Seed was a well-made episode, and Ricardo Montalbán was excellent as Khan. But the inclusion of genetically-created “supermen”, and the framing of them as anything other than the tyrants and dictators they were, knocked my rating down a little. I give the episode three and a half stars.
Not My Superman
by Jessica Dickinson Goodman
When Mr. Spock (or any Vulcanian) sees a Romulan, he can safely think, there but for the grace of logic go I. In "Balance of Terror", he describes the relationship between his homeworld and the people of Romulus:
Spock: And if Romulans are an offshoot of my Vulcan blood, and I think this likely, then attack becomes even more imperative.
McCoy: War is never imperative, Mister Spock.
Spock: It is for them, Doctor. Vulcan, like Earth, had its aggressive colonizing period. Savage, even by Earth standards. And if Romulans retain this martial philosophy, then weakness is something we dare not show.
Spock's distant cousins, the ones we don't talk about
Warfaring, brutal, brilliant, manipulative, brave, self-superior, male-dominated – that describes both Khan Noonien Singh's comrades and the Romulans we have met. In both episodes, we had the pleasure of viewing the crew of the Enterprise meeting their match; struggling, failing, and ultimately overcoming the putatively superior foe. Even the temporary betrayal of Dr. McGivers – under deeply disturbing coercion by Singh – resolves when she frees Captain Kirk.
The historian's equivalent of "the Spock pinch"
Perhaps this comparison is why Spock reacts so quickly and so strongly to the maybe-teasing of the crew about Singh and his comrades. As Janice notes, that scene was uncomfortable, particularly when it immediately followed the brutal conversion of Dr. McGivers to Singh's way of thinking. Just as there was no romance in that scene, like Spock and like Janice, I would have preferred less romanticization about the Eugenics Wars.
But where Spock seems secure in his people's relationship to Romulans as well as confident that unmodified humanity is superior to overbred and overweening demi-tyrants, there is an insecurity humming under the interactions between the humans on the ship and Singh's cadre. Perhaps that is why Kirk does not even try to hold them accountable for their violence against the crew of the Enterprise or integrate them into their society.
I prefer Spock's dismissiveness to Kirk's initial admiration; aside from pretty looks, I didn't find much to recommend Singh as a leader or a "superman."
Not my Clark Kent
Since long before Nietzshe set quaking pen down to yellowing paper, a certain style of man has yearned for the emergence of what have been called übermensch, or supermen. One of my favorite innovations of our century has been the re-working of that concept in comic books like Captain America and of course, Superman. In those, sure, the title characters are as Kirk describes "[s]tronger, braver, certainly more ambitious, more daring." But they are made heroic not by those differences of species and medical intervention, but by Steve Roger's commitment to fighting for the little guy, for defending democracy and freedom, and Clark Kent's dedication to doing anonymous good. Values I cannot see Singh being guided by. Likewise, I cannot imagine Clark Kent – who would easily best any of Singh's cohort in a fist fight with his laser eyes blindfolded and one bullet-proof hand tied behind his back – taking over entire continents of people as Singh did in the far-off 1990s.
A real Superman
A humble reporter; an artist and friend. These are the übermensch I grew-up with. Like Spock, I do not see the value in men like Singh.
But I did value the chance to see this corner of future history so thoroughly explored. I hope, if we ever see Singh again, he will be singing a different tune – maybe something about "truth, justice, and the American way."
Four stars.
by Andrea Castaneda
We all love a good villain. They neither ask permission nor forgiveness as they break the rules, challenging the hero in an effortlessly charming way. Khan is such a villain. And in his short time aboard the ship, he was able to seduce, manipulate, and deceive his way into controlling the Enterprise. This feat, combined with Ricardo Montalbán's phenomenal performance, is what made him such a compelling character. In fact, it would appear that his magnetism not only affected the crew, but also the writers themselves.
There’s a scene midway through the episode that illustrates this point. When we learn this 20th century guest was actually a former tyrant from his original time, Scotty admits– in an almost giddy way– that he admires him on some level. Kirk echoes this, saying he was in fact the best, though he adds it's what makes him dangerous. It’s a very human sentiment. And I think many of us have fantasized about what it is like to relinquish the restraints of civilized society, taking what’s “ours” as we please.
With that said, I was relieved to see Spock’s shock and horror at how his colleagues romanticized the autocrat. A part of me wonders if Leonard Nimoy’s Jewish heritage played a role in how his character reacted. After all, the very real tyrants from our time, who terrorized the world and sought to wipe out the Jewish community, are not ghosts from very long ago.
It seems that with the buffer of time, we as a society tend to sanitize the actions of bad men from yesteryear. We still acknowledge that a man like Attila the Hun was ruthless. Yet we saw Anthony Quinn play him in 1954, alongside the beautiful Sophia Loren, portraying him as an alluring leader and formidable foe against the Romans. Then we have men like Blackbeard, once considered a dreaded and despicable outlaw of the high seas. Yet today, the pirate has been rehabilitated for family consumption, via Disneyland’s upcoming attraction “Pirates of the Caribbean” (opening next month).
The nicer pirate
I’m not trying to be a party pooper and say people aren't allowed to enjoy those things. Nor am I saying villains should be bland and one dimensional. But it does make me wonder if we will treat the villains from our time, such as Adolf Hitler or Joseph Stalin, with the same sanitized view. It’s a paradoxical standard we seem to return to, where we condemn them for their merciless ways, yet admire them all the same for it. As Kirk put it, “We can be against him and admire him all at the same time.” But it’s important to ask ourselves if we’d feel the same way if those very tyrants placed a boot upon our neck, not once letting up.
Despite my philosophical quandaries, I give this episode four stars. It had its imperfections, but it captivated me all the way through. The audience loves a good villain, and Khan is a great one. I only ask, both to the writers and ourselves, do we condemn these men for the harm they’ve caused or condemn them because they– in the end– lost?
by Gideon Marcus
On the Third Hand
Kirk ended "Space Seed" looking awfully generous. After all, Khan had just tried to turn him inside out in the vacuum chamber, threatened his true love (the Enterprise), and didn't even thank the captain for sharing his limited stock of Windex. Yet, instead of sending Khan and his troupe of Hollywood Palace acrobats to Tantalus for rehabilitation, or kicking the problem upstairs to Commodores "Mendez or Stone, Kirk exercises his broad authority to maroon the "supermen" on a rude, backwoods planet.
"We've got this bell; we gotta get some use out of it!"
I don't think this was done as a courtesy or an amelioration of sentence, however prettily Kirk puts this to his prisoners. The fact is, Khan and his people are dangerous. They can't be killed–there's only one death penalty on the books. They probably can't be rehabilitated–Khan's nature is clearly deeply ingrained–and given his magnetic effect (on women and men), chances are they'd just launch a revolution from wherever they were stashed.
So Kirk, instead, used his discretion (and McCoy notes that it's a rather extreme interpretation of his powers), to sweep Khan (and McGivers) under the rug where they can't do any harm. No muss, no fuss! It's actually rather brilliant.
However much I admire this creative thinking on Kirk's part, I can't say "Space Seed" was my favorite of episodes. I quickly grew fatigued of Khan and his imperious nature (not helped by seeing Mr. Montalbán just two days later as a heavy on Mission: Impossible). I enjoyed Mr. Spock and the 1990s history lesson, but beyond that, the episode left me curiously cold.
Three stars.
It looks like Kirk is traveling to modern Babylonia this week. Join us tomorrow at 8:30 PM (Eastern and Pacific),
Here's the invitation!
This was an episode that grabbed me as a viewer and pulled me along. That was largely due to the excellent performance by Ricardo Montalbán and another fine directorial job by Marc Daniels. It's only later that the flaws begin to make themselves apparent.
Aside from the problems which the reviewers have pointed out, the biggest flaw in the episode was the way in which Lt. McGivers was written. Her obsession with powerful men and the way that makes her apparently view the men of her day, the attitude that leads to her being exasperated at being called to duty, the ease with which she betrays the ship, these are things that really should have gotten her washed out of the United Earth Space Agency or Starfleet or whatever they're calling it this week. This was a terribly written character.
Then there's the issue of the timing. If Khan was a man in his 40s when he fled Earth in 1996, then he's only a year or two younger than the Young Traveler. That means many of these supermen walk among us now. Just where are these amazing breeding programs? I suppose he might have been grown in a vat and be subject to accelerated aging, but the writers obviously didn't think about his takeover of southern Asia being a mere 25 years from now.
Let's end on a high note. Nichelle Nichols gives a standout performance with very little to work with. Her amusement at the banter between Kirk and Spock before they get the CQ signal is wonderful. She looks like she's watching a tennis match. Later when Khan's man hits her for refusing to put the captain's torture on the screen, the look of defiance she gives him as she stands up is fantastic. She's definitely being underused on this show.
I have nothing but nice things to say about Nichols, Takei, and Nimoy. Shatner is often hit, sometimes miss. Ditto Kelley (I think it's the writing more than anything). Doohan's fun, too.
>He proceeds to threaten Dr. McCoy (who responds with such >chutzpah that I think it’s my new favorite scene with him).
Yes. McCoy is the real superman in this episode, doing his doctorly duty without fear.
I like this episode, mostly for the amazing charisma of Ricardo Montalban.
To be fair to Star Trek, the SF imaginary has been dominated by such positive representations of genetically enhanced “superman” for some time. Just consider the back catalogue of Analog/Astounding. Indeed, even the more nuanced representations of difference that appear in SF—I’m thinking about the common trope of the telepathic “other” for example—can often assume many of the questionable moral hierarchies that appear more explicitly stated in the worst of Campbellian competent-man-meets-Eugenicist-fantasy. By which I mean, the assumption that any species that comes after us, or descends from us, is necessarily “superior”.
I am certainly no fan of the “we can be against them and admire them” school of thought that deplorably existed among those of us that fought the Nazis in the last war. But in finding such unfortunate thoughts in Star Trek, surely we are only reckoning with the ambiguous heritage of that genre we often love and occasionally loathe: SF.
Just because he's our uncle doesn't me we gotta love him!
Sure, no argument here. What I was driving at though is that the problem of the “superman” is deeper than the more egregious, quasi-fascist iterations littered throughout Analog and elsewhere. For instance, the common idea that a new human species with other attributes would necessarily be “superior” by virtue of these attributes. I feel this is the real problem with the episode of Star Trek under discussion. The episode’s troubling expression of the really existing desire for such a “superman” indicates, to me, that the problem is wider than the Van Vogts and Campbells of this world—or any other for that matter.
So as we will soon see, all experts in the liberal arts aboard a Federation starship apparently have to be very attractive women who fall for the first charismatic man from the past they come across. Perhaps Starfleet should rethink their hiring policies for this position.
I recently saw this episode again after several decades. I was surprised at how outright abusive and manipulative Khan was and yet this is supposed to be taken as his strength and charm. Blame it on the era if you want, but we now have more than ample enough examples of the global consequences of tolerating macho male attitudes and behavior. If there is a World War 3 as a result, I am betting we won't recover like they did in the Star Trek universe later on and have some guy in a refugee camp able to build and launch a warp driven starship. Nuclear holocausts tend to wreck most everything, let alone the infrastructure to make such a thing happen.
And why was Khan allowed to roam around the Enterprise without so much as a single red shirt as escort? He might have stopped what Khan did to McGivers and subsequently the whole ship, or at least alerted the rest of the crew before Khan would have undoubtedly backhanded him across the room.
And oh yeah – brilliant idea to give Khan complete access to every technical manual and blueprint about the Enterprise… not! Even if Kirk et al didn't quite realize how super smart Khan was at first, you don't give some stranger who showed hostility almost from the start the keys to the house, as it were.
I also agree that what Khan and McGivers did was more than enough to get them put away for life. I just hope the planet they put them on will be monitored for the remainder of their lives so that nothing happens to them that might force them to take drastic action.