Do We Indeed Have a Future? George Takei on Star Wars.
- by Bil Simser
George Takei (rhymes with Okay), probably best known for playing Hikaru Sulu
on the original Star Trek, has always had deep concerns for the present and the
future. Whether on Earth or among the stars, he has the welfare of
humanity very much at heart. I was digging through my old copies
of Famous Monsters of Filmland, a great publication on monster and films
that I grew up with, and came across this. This was his reaction to
STAR WARS from issue 139 of Famous Monsters of Filmland and was written
June 6, 1977. It is reprinted here without permission but I hope since
the message is still valid to this day and has never been reprinted
anywhere, nobody will mind me sharing it.
STAR WARS is the most pre-posterously diverting galactic escape
and at the same time the most hideously credible portent of the future
yet.While I thrilled to the exploits that reminded me of the
heroics of Errol Flynn as Robin Hood, Burt Lancaster as the Crimson
Pirate and Buster Crabbe as Flash Gordon, I was at the same time aghast
at the phantasmagoric violence technology can place at our disposal.
STAR WARS raised in my mind the question - do we indeed have a future?It
seems to me what George Lucas has done is to masterfully guide us on a
journey through space and time and bring us back face to face with
today's reality. STAR WARS is more than science fiction, I think it is
science fictitious reality.Just yesterday, June 7, 1977, I read
that the United States will embark on the production of a neutron bomb -
a bomb that will kill people on a gigantic scale but will not destroy
buildings. A few days before that, I read that the Pentagon is fearful
that the Soviets may have developed a warhead that could neutralize ours
that have a capacity for that irrational concept overkill to the nth
power. Already, it seems we have the technology to realize the awesome
special effects simulations that we saw in the film.The political
scene of STAR WARS is that of government by force and power, of
revolutions based on some unfathomable grievance, survival through a
combination of cunning and luck and success by the harnessing of
technology - a picture not very much at variance from the political
headlines that we read today.And most of all, look at the people;
both the heroes in the film and the reaction of the audience. First,
the heroes; Luke Skywalker is a pretty but easily led youth. Without any
real philosophy to guide him, he easily falls under the influence of a
mystical old man believed previously to be an eccentric hermit.
Recognize a 1960's hippie or a 1970's moonie? Han Solo has a philosophy
coupled with courage and skill. His philosophy is money. His proficiency
comes for a price - the highest. Solo is a thoroughly avaricious
mercenary. And the Princess, a decisive, strong, self-confident and
chilly woman. The audience cheered when she wielded a gun. In all three,
I missed qualities that could be called humane - love, kindness, yes, I
missed sensuality. I also missed a sense of ideals and faith. In this
regard the machines seemed more human. They demonstrated real affection
for each other and an occasional poutiness. They exhibited a sense of
fidelity and constancy. The machines were humanized and the humans
conversely seemed mechanical.As a member of the audience, I was
swept up by the sheer romantic escapsim of it all. The deering-dos, the
rope swing escape across the pit, the ray gun battles and especially the
swash buckle with the ray swords. Great fun!But I just hope that
we weren't too intoxicated by the escapism to be able to focus on the
recognizable. I hope the beauty of the effects didn't narcotize our
sensitivity to violence. I hope the people see through the fantastically
well done futuristic mirrors to the disquieting reflection of our own
society. I hope they enjoy STAR WARS without being "purely entertained".
