Captain's Log Stardate 102916: Make Love Not War

What would history and human life have been like without war?  “A Private Little War”, an episode in the original Star Trek TV series, begs the question. Kirk and McCoy go to a planet of humanoids that were originally peaceful, but after some were given flintlock rifles by the Klingons, they began to kill other natives. Kirk and McCoy are faced with the dilemma: should they give the other natives flintlocks to balance the playing field, or would that only increase the conflict?

War is central to human history. Here’s for some depressing statistics. Between 315-755 million people have died either in direct conflict or of other war-related deaths such as from epidemics. Humans have been at peace (no major conflicts were fought) during eight percent of the 3,400 years of recorded history. War is the pinnacle of human suffering. It’s easy to say that human history would have undoubtedly been better without war.

But war is a double-edged sword (pun intended). War has driven innovation, from ancient defensive architecture to the microwave oven and the Internet. War plays a key role in art, technology, religion, politics, the economy, etc. Also, some wars are justified in my eyes; rising up against an oppressor causes short-term destruction and sorrow, but can lead to greater happiness for the civilians.

If I could and did choose to live in a world without war, it would mean sacrificing my relatively awesome life for a potentially primitive one, because I find it hard to believe that a technologically advanced society could be entirely peaceful. I don't have an answer as to whether war makes life better in the long term. I'm content to sit in my room and think about it.

Captain's Log Stardate 102616: Relationships to Parents

In Frozen Journey by Philip K Dick, the protagonist (Victor) is forced to relive his childhood memories and discovers his buried guilt over helping his cat to kill a bird. He has anxiety issues, it seems, and the guilt about this and other little things has screwed him up. This is based off the Freudian mind, that the unconscious mind has trauma buried within it which could potentially affect the conscious mind. Also, Victor feels guilty about the death of the bird and feels like he should have been caught by his mother, but simultaneously doesn't want to have the wrath of his mother turned on him, which would likely lead to punishment.

The idea of wanting love and attention, not punishment, from one's mother is definitely Freud-derived. However, I think that child-parent relationships have changed quite a bit since Freud's childhood and even since 1980, when Frozen Journey was written. For most of human history, children were cherished as gifts from deities but also had to do manual labor to help their parents make a living. Often, 15-year olds were treated as adults (they fought in wars, they were married, they had to work, etc.). After the first Industrial Revolution in the 19th century (in First World countries), children were more expensive than profitable to their parents, and so they either worked or were sent to school or just to run around. In the 60’s, many parents were content to sit on the couch and let their kids run around and do irresponsible things like smoke cigarettes. Nowadays in American middle-class society, most parents are more involved with their kid’s lives (some form of a soccer mom), and are both loving and protective.

To me, it’s clear to see a trend in human history that parents are paying more attention to their kids (and hopefully showing them affection) but also that kids are losing independence. I personally think that this is a good trade-off: if you have a good relationship with your parents, like I do, they can help you out in a lot of ways as a kid. My parents help me deal with my problems, drive me around, encourage me to do well in school, and are there for me. If I did run around being irresponsible, I would lose that relationship with my parents, which may be worth it in the short term but is not in the long term (when they’re helping me pay for college after they helped me get into college).

Back to Frozen Journey, I can understand how not being loved by a parent could cause emotional trauma that would be buried in your subconscious and could eventually come back to bite you in the ass. I always feel bad hearing about people with uncaring or even abusive parents (shoutout to the Breakfast Club). Parents are an essential part of a kid’s life (though many teenagers would debate if they are a helpful one), and they should be a home base you can turn to during rough patches.

Thoughts on 2001: A Space Odyssey

Thoughts on 2001: A Space Odyssey

I thought the ape story was hilarious, having seen a rip-off of it in Mel Brooks' History of the World. Jokes aside, I could go into critiques of the story, such as the the unrealistic idea of apes living in barren desert devoid of water instead of, you know, a jungle. However, I appreciate the idea: that in one moment, an ape picked up a bone and turned it into a tool, forever changing the course of mankind. This was seemingly caused by the ominous alien monolith. Are aliens controlling our technological or societal advances? Maybe. If so, thanks guys!

HAL. At first he's creepy, then downright ominous, then full-blown psycho killer. Why did he do it? If we assume that he's intelligent enough to believe he is sentient and thus is sentient, he probably did kill Poole out of self-defense because he knew Poole and Bowman were planning on deactivating him. HAL is a computer without the 1st rule of robotics (don't kill humans or allow them to come to harm through inaction, Asimov reference). But why did he kill all of the other crew members? That was NOT just a malfunction, for sure. My theory is that HAL thought that if he killed Bowman and Poole then maybe the other astronauts would be awakened somehow and deactivate HAL. Alternatively, it could have something to with the secret message HAL was carrying. I think that only a pre-programmed order to kill those men (more conspiracies!) or self defense would have led HAL to kill the crew in their comas. Still, whatever the case, HAL deserved what he got in the end: the computer version of death.

This film is a work of art for its use of cinematography, special effects, and audio (think Poole's heavy breathing). That being said, like some great art (Mona Lisa?) it doesn't make sense to the average viewer, which I am. Given the choice, I would re-watch only the ape scenes and the HAL scenes, because I'm an American who likes to be entertained enough not to be bored and I felt like I generally understood those parts. This movie does make a nice change from the hero cycle and movie cliches that encompass almost every other movie I watch.