Chapter the Seventh: The Cricket
There was a cricket drumming in my ear—the unspoken story buzzing and humming and drumming. I was now listening for “Kirk†and “Spock.†I knew that these names had been given to men in tales about a world that might be. I heard part of the unspoken story under, around and in bits and pieces of the tales of that false world. I began to think of myself as an “editor†of these tales. While I was wordlessly editing cave stories about Kirk and Spock to make them harmonize with the unspoken story, I heard a tale in my brain. It was the cricket.
June 28, 2267 A.D. Pavel Chekov was not in his usual good humor. He had been lobbying Captain Kirk for months to let him take command. It was all part of Chekov’s master plan. Sitting in one of the side rooms at the Dog and Pony, while engaged in a tradition which was over two millennia old, Chekov had spent his last night “on dry land†before shipping out on his first tour of duty aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise, predicting his meteoric rise through the ranks. He would be, for some reason (details didn’t matter, particularly at 4 a.m.), temporarily in command of the Enterprise. An emergency would arise. There would not be time to get Kirk, and Chekov would act heroically to save the ship. Chekov was hardly breaking new ground here, but there is an inescapable advantage of youth: he was blissfully unaware that this particular fantasy was as much a part of the last night ritual as the drink, the companionship and the late hour.
To Chekov’s credit, the dream did not dissipate in the pain and shock of the morning after. That fact alone distinguished him from most of his peers. Chekov even persisted until his imagination began furnishing detail and logic to the fantasy. So much so that his day dream evolved into an obsession, and the childish wish to be grown-up and in charge merged with unadulterated hero worship focused on the man whom Chekov idolized long before Chekov knew he would serve on board the Enterprise under him. Naturally, then, Chekov’s plan focused on making Kirk believe that Chekov was a younger version of himself. Chekov knew Kirk’s reputation—brash, energetic, willing to take risks. At least that was the part of Kirk’s reputation which Chekov’s youth mistook for the whole man. Kirk was the youngest captain in Star Fleet history. In Chekov’s mind there had to be a cause-and-effect relationship between Kirk’s “youthful†qualities and his success, even though it would have made more sense to assume that the qualities which made Kirk rise to Star Fleet captain at such a young age were those qualities which made him seem older and more experienced than he really was. It was important to Chekov that he be right about Kirk, so he decided to trust his instincts. Unfortunately for Chekov, he would have to learn the hard way that trusting an instinct is not the equivalent of understanding an instinct and that youthful enthusiasm is not the key ingredient to a successful career in Star Fleet.
Chekov had plenty of time for introspection. After listening to Chekov’s whining for months, Kirk had given Chekov a taste of what he wanted--the captain’s chair. It was the graveyard shift, and the Enterprise was moving through half a quadrant of empty space on its way to its next mission. Back at Star Fleet Academy, when Chekov passed his Bridge Officer Exam, he was told that his first shift in temporary command of the bridge would be exciting only if he got caught falling asleep, but his fantasy had taken too strong a hold on him to remember such mundane advice.
Under these circumstances, it was highly unlikely he would be presented with an opportunity to demonstrate his command ability. The worst part of it was that he was now completely out of the “keptin’s†gaze. How could he impress Kirk, if Kirk never saw him? There was another problem with his new duty. He missed Sulu. Chekov had been promoted to the senior bridge crew only six months ago, but he had immediately established a special rapport with Sulu. He wished he could hear Uhuru singing to herself while monitoring communications. He longed to see Spock raise an eyebrow in response to one of his premeditated parodies of stereotypical Russian behavior. Most of all, he missed being humiliated by Kirk. He realized he was feeling sorry for himself, but he did not try to block the feeling. It gave him something to do, and it seemed to add the appropriate melancholy tone to his introspective musings.
Chekov may have been young, but he learned quickly. He realized that serving as the proverbial water boy under the watchful eye of James Tiberius Kirk, along with Kirk’s senior bridge crew, would be a shorter path to the captain’s chair than logging meaningless time as a temporary, junior-grade night-shift commander. He then did something quite remarkable and unexpected: he told Kirk that he had learned his lesson and said, with the right amount of grin, “I want my old job back.†Kirk obliged. That night was to be Chekov’s last as the regular commander of the graveyard shift. Under such circumstances, one might almost have predicted that something unusual would occur on Chekov’s watch.
The long-range sensors picked up a small, cigar-shaped object moving at sub-light speed. It was too far away for a detailed scan. Its course would not bring it appreciably closer to the Enterprise. Chekov immediately ordered a course change. Kirk’s standing orders were quite clear. The officer in charge of the bridge had authority to order a course change without asking, or, as in this case, waking the captain. But there would be hell to pay if the change was not warranted. The Enterprise quickly intercepted the object. It proved to be a metallic cylinder resistant to scans of its interior. When the scans revealed indeterminate life signs, Chekov was presented with a real dilemma. He wanted to bring the object on board, but that action would clearly require authorization from the captain. He did not want to wake Kirk, and his recent fit of introspection had not left him immune to the inescapable conclusion that fate had presented him with a chance to impress Kirk. Chekov did the only thing he was capable of doing at that point in his life—he ordered the Enterprise to retrieve the pod.
He could not use the transporter. Apparently, the same energy or material which was confusing or shielding the scans was preventing transporter lock. He thought briefly about holding the pod at a safe distance with the tractor beam until Kirk awoke, but the life signs, if they were signs of life, were growing weaker. So, Chekov brought the pod aboard and ordered emergency medical personnel to the docking bay. When the emergency medical team made its preliminary report, Chekov ordered the communication officer to alert Kirk.
Chekov met Kirk outside Kirk’s quarters and brought him up to speed. The pod had contained a female humanoid. She was near death and in a coma or a coma-like state. The medical personnel were convinced that they had to take immediate action to save the woman’s life. They removed her from the pod and took her to sick bay. Their quick reaction not only brought the stranger back from the dead, it also saved Chekov. Kirk was not pleased when he learned that Chekov had violated one of his standing orders by bringing an alien artifact on board without his approval, but he concentrated on the matter at hand instead of disciplining Chekov—at least for the moment.
Kirk and Chekov rode to the bridge in complete silence. As soon as the door of the turbolift opened onto the bridge, Kirk snapped a command: “Mister Sulu, get us underway; Warp Factor six.â€
A light (not a real light, a proverbial light [Is that a meta-cliché?]) came on in Chekov’s cluttered mind. Sulu should not have been on the bridge to hear that command, and Kirk issued the command before he could have possibly seen Sulu sitting at the helm. If anyone had been looking at Chekov at that moment, they would have seen his eyes wide open (not another cliché—it actually happened). His eyes literally opened wide in amazement, as though he were seeing Sulu grown suddenly larger. The sudden shock of respect is not an easy experience for young daydreaming ensigns. Upon a moment’s reflection, Chekov’s increased admiration for Sulu was followed by despair.
Chekov had not told anyone to wake Sulu. Furthermore, since Kirk’s standing orders were the equivalent of a religion with the young officers and crew of the Enterprise, Chekov knew Kirk had not left such orders for Sulu, or anyone else. Sulu must have arranged to be notified whenever Kirk was called to the bridge. Chekov had been aware that Sulu possessed remarkable abilities, but, like most youth, Chekov did not differentiate the ability of talent from the ability to perform, to get the job done, and because of that, Chekov had assumed, since he rated his talents as different but on a par with Sulu’s, that he would be Sulu’s equal as a Star Fleet officer after a few more months in space. Chekov suddenly knew he had a long way to go before he became a respectable ensign, much less a captain. As insignificant as the moment seemed, it was a turning point in Chekov’s career. He stopped playing the role of a Star Fleet officer and started doing the job.
Sulu responded to Kirk’s order before Kirk finished speaking and said, “Captain on the bridge. Aye, sir.â€
Kirk squinted at Chekov: “What do the medics say about the condition of your ‘uninvited guest’? Somebody wake up McCoy.â€
“Her life signs are still very weak, but stable. She remains in an unresponsive state. She has been placed in a stasis field†Chekov answered Kirk’s query and let a very nervous Lieutenant Quinlan Thomas volunteer to wake McCoy. Chekov winced a bit inwardly, because he knew that Thomas preferred the safe anonymity of late night duty.
“What about his craft--this ‘pod’ of yours? Anything?†Kirk asked in the shorthand which is the prerogative of command. Chekov had learned early that Kirk was not a patient man. He usually figured out where you were going with your sentence before you had time to finish it--and he seldom waited.
“Keptin, I ... I have no ... not yet ... nothing to report about the pod.â€
“Well,†Kirk drawled, “Captain Chekov, if you don’t already have a detailed report on the pod, I suggest you invent one in a big hurry.†There was no smile beneath Kirk’s “Captain Chekov.†Kirk waited a nano second for a response from Chekov, and then said, “Somebody get Mister Spock.â€
At that moment, a bleary-eyed ship’s doctor stumbled out of the turbo-lift onto the bridge. “This had better be good. I killed the young ensign who woke me.â€
Moments later, Spock approached the pod with tricorder at a high-pitched hum. He spoke to no one in particular as though conducting an autopsy and making a record of his observations: “The object is an elliptical cylinder, approximately four meters in length, and three meters in diameter at its center. In appearance, it resembles the orbital kayak popular in the Orion culture. The exterior hull is metallic, black in color and, based on visual scanning, seems to absorb rather than reflect light.â€
Chekov interrupted: “The exterior of the pod reflected scans of the interior and prevented transporter lock.â€
“Mr. Chekov,†Spock responded without turning to look at Chekov, “I have already reviewed the automated log concerning the Enterprise’s encounter with this object, as well as your decision to retrieve it. Please withhold comment until I have completed my analysis.†Spock continued, “Unless I am mistaken, the material composition of the pod is identical to the so-called Guardian of Forever; however, it appears to have been recently fabricated. The material itself is ancient but its current configuration is not. Note: existing Federation technology is incapable of cutting, bending or even scratching the surface of Guardian material.â€
“There is a doorway or hatch in the center of the craft. It is essentially a circle, one meter in diameter. There is no hinge or latch. The emergency medical personnel reported that the hatch displaced itself when one of them first touched the exterior of the pod, but that they could discover no mechanism which caused it to do so. They simply lifted the hatch out of its hole in order to access the interior and remove their patient. I will now inspect the interior.â€
Spock poked his head through the opening in the pod. It appeared to those standing nearby that Spock had lost his head. Any part of Spock which extended below the surface of the craft into its interior completely disappeared from sight—despite the intense lighting directed at the object from outside. Spock spoke, though no one could hear.
“There is no interior lighting. Light from outside the craft entering through the hatch is apparently being completely absorbed by the material of the interior. Visibility is zero.†Spock inserted his tricorder into the interior of the pod. It now seemed to others as though Spock’s arm was cut off at the elbow. Spock spoke again but could not hear his own words. “Tricorder scans of the interior do not detect the presence of anything, including the craft itself—nothing but the vacuum of space.â€
Spock crawled through the opening so that he completely disappeared from sight. As he did so, light emanating from the tricorder’s display screen suddenly seemed to bathe the interior in light. To those on the outside, a beam of light now shone from the hole in the object. Spock then noted: “The hull is one-third meter thick throughout the craft. There is no evidence of instrumentation or mechanism in the interior. There is no evidence of a means of propulsion. There are no communication devices. It would appear that the pod is completely empty.†Mister Spock then placed his right hand on the interior surface and bent his face near his hand, as though listening with his fingers. As if in response to Spock’s touch or perhaps his thought, a circle of material, one-third meter in diameter and four centimeters thick, became displaced from the smooth surface of the interior. Spock removed the disk and discovered a storage space containing a recording device and a number of data disks. The recorder was also a light source. Spock collected the data storage disks and the recording device, turned off his tricorder, and climbed out of the pod. As he walked briskly out of the docking bay, he told Chekov, without pausing, that he would complete his analysis by reviewing the disks and inspecting the recorder in his quarters. Spock did not emerge from his quarters for almost a full day despite Kirk’s increasingly shrill “requests†that he do so. While Spock remained in seclusion reviewing the data on the computer disks, the occupant of the intercepted pod remained in a stasis field. Spock asked Kirk to meet him in Spock’s quarters. Spock’s report to Kirk did not please the captain.
Spock: “Based on my review of the information contained on the disks I retrieved from the storage compartment in the pod, I have placed our guest in isolation. I must advise you that my exposure to the Teller’s data has contaminated me and that I now represent a serious threat to this time line.â€
Kirk: “Please don’t tell me she is a time traveler, and quit talking as though you have a disease.â€
Spock: “Star Fleet is quite explicit. I should be immediately placed in quarantine.â€
Kirk: “I understand you are obeying Star Fleet orders concerning contamination of the time line, but you may be over-reacting.â€
Spock (raising one eyebrow in response to Kirk’s suggestion that it was remotely possible for Spock to over-react): “I have reviewed very little of the information in the disks, but I have seen enough of it to know that the information contained there, and most likely in the mind of our guest, could alter the past, present and future of all life on your planet.â€
Kirk: “All right, Mister Spock, you have my attention.â€
Spock: “I know of your distaste for the theoretical analysis of time travel.â€
Kirk: “It gives me a headache.â€
Spock: “I will therefore avoid theory and concentrate on the present circumstances. I will refer to the female as the Teller. The Teller is either from the distant future relative to our current position in the space-time continuum, in which case, we must be somewhere in time between the absolute beginning of the universe and the absolute present of the universe; or, she is from the distant past, in which case, we may be at the absolute present of the universe or somewhere in time between the absolute present and the point in time in our relative past and her absolute present at which she accelerated to the speed of time so that her internal clock did not tick until she slowed to our relative speed in order to intercept us at this point in time.â€
Kirk: “Maybe we should just stick to theory.â€
Spock: “There is a third alternative.â€
Kirk: “Somehow I knew there would be.â€
Spock: “The data I have reviewed from the Teller suggests that we may not exist inside the space-time continuum as a result of a flawed script.â€
Kirk: “Spock, either you’re finally developing a sense of humor or you’ve gone mad.â€
Spock: “I assure you, Captain, I am quite sane.â€
Kirk: “Did you just make another joke? I wish Bones was here.â€
Spock: “As you know, since it is impossible to travel to an absolute future universe from the absolute present universe, we must assume that, if the Teller is from the future, then we must not be currently occupying space-time in the absolute present.â€
Kirk: “You mean we would be ghosts of our own future?â€
Spock: “Actually, that metaphor is surprisingly accurate.â€
Kirk: “Didn’t think I had it in me, did you?â€
Spock: “You are correct; I did not. On the other hand, if she is from the distant past, then we may as well assume we are in the absolute present, because we would never be able to tell whether we were or we were not based on her position relative to ours.â€
Kirk: “She would have had to travel to this present time by keeping time with time between her original present time and this present time so that, for her, there would have been no passage of time while the universe aged around her. How do we know that she wasn’t simply frozen or in some sort of suspended animation?â€
Spock: “Her body would still show evidence of the passage of time, even if her mind was not conscious of it. However, it would be true to say that time was ‘frozen’ relative to her while she was moving at the speed of time.â€
Kirk: “So much for the past, present and future, now I would like to how it might be possible that we do not exist—and I do not want to hear any sophomoric philosophical or metaphysical nonsense.â€
Spock: “There is an old earth saying: ‘Do not shoot the messenger.’ In order to explain, I must begin by telling you about our young, Mister Chekov. According to one of the Teller’s narratives, Chekov becomes a well known, if not well respected, historian, after he retires from Star Fleet. His ‘histories’ are a fusion of holographic recordings of the actual events and holographic recordings of computer-generated recreations of the actual events. Chekov’s histories prove immensely popular, becoming the equivalent of what was once known in your culture as blockbuster films, but academic historians condemn Chekov’s work. I have viewed the Chekov trilogy: three histories entitled, Wrath of Kahn, Search for Spock, and Voyage Home. The first begins with you facing your mortality and ends with my death. The second begins with my rebirth and ends with you making a leap of faith. The third involves time travel.â€
Kirk: “Fascinating. How do you die?â€
Spock: “Captain, if I told you, I would have to kill you.â€
Kirk: “I was joking.â€
Spock: “So was I. Indeed, it was an old joke from your favorite source—twentieth century America.â€
Kirk: “What can you tell me?â€
Spock: “I intended to make my report to you in a certain sequence and that sequence requires that I withhold specific information regarding our particular involvement in these matters until I have provided you with sufficient background information so that you can properly assess the current situation and take appropriate action.â€
Kirk interrupted: “I hope, for our sake, that time is infinite, because you are certainly taking the long-winded approach. Can’t you simply get to it?â€
Spock: “No. According to the information that accompanied Teller on her journey through space-time, the Chekov trilogy has a complicated relationship with the original time line.â€
Kirk: “You mean he exaggerated? Should we send him to his quarters without supper? Oh, wait, I already did that.â€
Spock: “Captain, I really wish you would begin to take this matter more seriously. In the decade following the publication of Chekov’s last holographic history, historians at Star Fleet began mounting a serious attack on Chekov’s work. Ultimately, Chekov responded to those critics in an essay called ‘The End of History,’ but I was unable to find anything about the content of the essay beyond references to it. Based on my review of the Teller data, there are two versions of our future history. I believe Teller intends to ask us to determine which version of history concerning our own future is the ‘true’ story.â€
Kirk: “Spock, you have reviewed all the relevant data. What are the significant differences between Chekov’s and Star Fleet’s history.â€
Spock: “Very well. Near the end of the first history in the trilogy…â€
Kirk: “The one titled, Wrath of Kahn?â€
Spock: “Correct. I die having sacrificed my life to save the Enterprise and the entire crew.â€
Kirk: “What was I doing while you were saving me and my crew?â€
Spock: “Really, captain. There is no reason for me to contaminate you with extraneous information. I am sorry if this story wounds your human pride. As I was about to say, with regard to the events presented in Wrath of Kahn, the only significant divergence between Chekov’s history and Star Fleet’s history occurs during the memorial service conducted before my body was fired into space inside an empty photon torpedo casing.â€
Kirk: “At least it was empty.â€
Spock: “I have not had time or opportunity to analyze it in any depth, but, on the surface, the difference does not appear significant. Yet, Teller was obsessed with this event in particular and seemed to consider it the starting point of a divergence that ultimately resulted in profoundly incompatible time lines. I will play a recording of your remarks from both histories. Computer, play file, ‘Spock, Exhibit A,’ audio only.†The computer plays a recording that begins with Spock’s voice stating: “Voice recording of James T. Kirk’s remarks on board the starship Enterprise on the occasion of a memorial service for crewman Spock. This recording is the version maintained in Star Fleet’s official archives:â€
Kirk’s voice:
We are assembled here today to pay final respects to our honored dead. And yet, it should be noted, that in the midst of our sorrow, this death takes place in the shadow of new life, the sunrise of a new world, a world that our beloved comrade gave his life to protect and nourish. He did not feel this sacrifice a vain or empty one—and we will not debate his profound wisdom, at these proceedings. Of my friend, I can only say this… of all the souls I have encountered in my travels, his was the most human.
The computer recording continues with Spock’s voice stating: “Voice recording of James T. Kirk’s remarks on board the starship Enterprise on the occasion of a memorial service for crewman Spock. This recording is the version contained in Chekov’s history and purports to be a copy of the original recording in the databanks of Enterprise’s main computer:â€
Kirk’s voice:
We are assembled here today to pay final respects to our honored dead. And yet, it should be noted that, in the midst of our sorrow, this death gave us new life, the promise of a sunrise in a new world. It was that new world our beloved comrade gave his life to protect and nourish. He did not feel this sacrifice a vain or empty one, and we dedicate ourselves to proving his last calculation correct. He would have us believe that his sacrifice was based solely on logic—that the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few or the one—and we will not debate his profound wisdom, at these proceedings, but of my friend, I can only say this… of all the souls I have encountered in my travels, his was the most human.
Kirk (who finally had on his “game faceâ€): “The Star Fleet version contains references to a specific new world instead of the metaphorical one in Chekov’s version. How much do you know about the circumstances surrounding this alleged future death of yours?â€
Spock: “Sufficient to know that there was indeed a planet nearby that would definitely qualify as a ‘new’ world. However, the reference does not make sense, because there is no doubt that my sacrifice was intended to save ship and crew—not the nearby planet.â€
Kirk: “So, based on internal evidence, we might conclude that the official version maintained by Star Fleet was somehow falsified.â€
Spock: “On the other hand, you might have been so emotionally overwrought by my death that you were not speaking rationally.â€
Kirk: “In which case, Chekov might have edited the recording to make his old captain look better for posterity’s sake, so to speak.â€
Spock: “Precisely my conclusion.â€
Kirk: “What do you mean—that you agree with my assessment of the situation or that Chekov was trying to make me look good?â€
Spock: “My conclusion concurs with your assessment.â€
Kirk: “What are the divergences in the second history, the Search for Spock?â€
Spock: “Before we continue, there is one other matter we must discuss. There was a young female lieutenant on the bridge crew.â€
Kirk (speaking rapidly): “Look, Spock, I’m sorry if I…â€
Spock: “Please, captain, let me continue. Her name is Saavik. According to Chekov’s history, her ancestry was a mix of Vulcan and Romulan. She was quite attractive. In Star Fleet’s history, there are subtle indications that she is not a typical Vulcan, but nothing is declared regarding her Romulan background. Chekov’s history provides considerable background. She was my protégé. I apparently rescued her from a deplorable situation arising from the fact that she had been orphaned at a young age and became homeless, fending for herself on a small moon. Due to her mixed blood, neither the Vulcans nor the Romulans would claim her. She ultimately enrolled in Star Fleet Academy, performed admirably and no doubt patterned her career after mine.â€
Kirk: “You don’t need to explain why you would empathize with her situation.â€
Spock: “I appreciate the fact that you did not attribute the cause to an emotional response on my part. It is fortunate that Doctor McCoy is not present. In any event, there is a significant omission involving Saavik in the Star Fleet history that is included indirectly in Chekov’s history. Following my death, but prior to the main events covered in the Search for Spock, you and the young lieutenant had a brief sexual relationship.â€
Kirk: “I am sure we were both trying to cope with the overwhelming emotional loss we suffered as a result of your death, my friend.â€
Spock: “Yes, well, in your case, you were also dealing with another type of loss. You had hoped that you were going to renew a romantic relationship with your son’s mother, but she rejected your entreaties.†Kirk exploded with questions and protestations but Spock ignored him and continued. Spock: “I would not have mentioned it at all but it becomes significant later in the histories. What I am about to tell you may seem like a far-fetched science fiction story, but the details are the same in both versions of the history. My body is regenerated on the planet that was near the Enterprise when you fired the photon torpedo. You organize a heroic search to recover me risking your career and your life. At the end of the Search for Spock, you and I are alone on the planet with a fierce Klingon warrior. The planet is moments from total disintegration. You defeat the Klingon in hand-to-hand combat…â€
Kirk: “I like this story better than the one where you save me and the crew while I am sitting on my ass.â€
Spock: “I thought you might. Unfortunately, as you knock the Klingon into a fiery chasm, he drags me along with him over the edge of the precipice. Without hesitation, you leap after me into the abyss and what seems certain death, but as you catch up to my falling body, you speak into the Klingon’s communicator which you had wrested from him and we are both transported an instant before being vaporized.â€
Kirk: “Wow. Please don’t tell me that was Chekov’s version.â€
Spock: “Why, yes, captain, it was.â€
Kirk: “What happened according to Star Fleet?â€
Spock: “Very similar until the moment you dispatch the Klingon into the abyss. I was at a relatively safe distance. You pick up the Klingon communicator, and the rest, as they say, is history.â€
Kirk: “You know, Spock, this really seems to be a waste of my time. Chekov has a flair for the dramatic and is prone to romantic flights of fancy. I remember discussing his personality profile with you and McCoy before we brought him on board as a new recruit. Teller’s journey here is a unique occurrence in the history of the universe. You have told me that this situation has far-reaching consequences for all of human history, and, so far, all I have heard is inconsequential bull …â€
Spock: “I can appreciate your frustration, but bear with me a moment longer. You must then decide if it has been a waste of your time, but, Captain, the Teller came here because your time has been wasted. There is something else you must hear, something presented in both versions of the Search for Spock. Without going into unnecessary detail, while my body was regenerating, I matured from rebirth as an infant through adulthood in a matter of hours. During that process, I was, for the most part, alone on the planet with Saavik. I experienced pun far, the Vulcan mating obsession, and she assisted me.â€
Kirk: “By ‘assist’ I assume you mean…â€
Spock: “Yes, Captain. Now, moving on to the third history, Voyage Home, there is something in the Chekov version that will test our relationship. Saavik’s pregnancy is referenced in Chekov’s history as an explanation for why she is not actively involved in the main events reported. She appears fleetingly in the Star Fleet version, but she is not with child.â€
Kirk (haltingly): “Whose child…?â€
Spock: “That information is not provided in Chekov’s history. Based on circumstantial evidence, the child could obviously be yours or mine. The situation involving Saavik is, of course, of great interest to us personally, but one would imagine that it would be of little import to Teller or to the universe. I believe Teller is here because of the extraordinary divergence of the time line that arises from the consequences of the time travel I mentioned to you at the beginning of my report. It is probable that Teller incorporated the information from the first two parts of the trilogy solely to provide background. So, the events involving Saavik should not concern us here today.â€
Kirk: “If you really believed that, you wouldn’t have mentioned her or anything involving her, and given the nature of the disclosures, I know you well enough to know you would have spared me the embarrassment if you felt that you could. So, before you tackle what you believe to be the real reason Teller is here, go on and finish with Saavik. What is it you have yet to tell me?â€
Spock: “In Chekov’s later histories, Final Frontier and Undiscovered Country, Saavik resurfaces as a protégé of mine and we appear to share an intimacy of an undefined nature. She ultimately proves to be working with a faction of humans, Vulcans, Romulans and Klingons who assassinate the Klingon Chancellor and plot to assassinate the President of the Federation in an attempt to disrupt negotiations with the Klingons to establish a lasting peace. I expose her participation in the conspiracy. In Star Fleet’s version of the same events, there is a female Vulcan occupying the same role relative to the events but she is not Saavik. Chekov’s version makes Saavik’s motivation explicit. She became obsessed with preservation of Star Fleet’s role in the Federation as a consequence of her experiences following the birth of the child and our competing parental interests. Though we both offered to provide support and involvement, she declined and refused to disclose the identity of the father. The child was male and had Vulcan, Romulan and human characteristics, but the human genes could have come from either of us. It was evident that the circumstances placed a strain on our relationship. In fact, I seemed to drop out of sight for a time, only to reappear on the Romulan home world working for the reunification of Vulcans and Romulans. Checkov’s histories suggest that I was motivated in part by the situation involving Saavik and the child. As a result of my efforts in the Romulan underground working for reunification, you and I are separated during the events leading to your death. Had you and I not become separated, I have little doubt that those same events would not have resulted in your death. At a minimum, had you died despite my presence, I believe I would have undertaken a successful search for you much as you did for me.
Kirk: “Wait a minute. I thought you said I was dead. Why would you search for me?â€
Spock: “The details are not important. Your status was somewhere between dead and missing, though everyone believed you were dead. My point is that I would not have been satisfied, and since subsequent events proved that you were in fact missing rather than dead, I assume I would have found you and prevented your second death.â€
Kirk: “Am I really supposed to be following all this? Just shoot me now—a quick, painless death—and forget about it.â€
Spock: “I only mention it so that you will understand that the Star Fleet official history provides no rationale for the disruption in the symmetry of our livesâ€
Kirk: “Why, Spock, I had no idea you held such a strong belief in our joint karma.â€
Spock: “You have always known that I have faith that the universe shall unfold as it should. The story of our joined paths has always possessed a certain symmetry, and I see no reason why that symmetry should not have continued—unless there was a significant asymmetrical event. For example, something occurs between the conclusion of Voyage Home and the beginning of the main events presented in Final Frontier. You are mountain climbing and fall from a great height. I happen to be nearby wearing anti-gravity boots. I rescue you by a powered descent using the anti-gravity boots. We should have both been killed, but we somehow violate the laws of physics and survive. This fall and rescue are identical in Chekov’s and Star Fleet’s versions, but in Chekov’s version there is a flashback, shown as an interruption during my dive to catch you, to the moment in Search for Spock when, in Chekov’s version, you dive into the abyss to save me.â€
Kirk: “Well, even if it didn’t happen that way, Chekov certainly tells a whale of a story, doesn’t he?â€
Spock: “Now you are sounding like Teller. You dove into the abyss to save me. I dove to save you. You searched for me following my death. I should have searched for you. The official history provides no evidence of the asymmetrical event; the Chekov history does. Our triangular relationship with Saavik is the key difference. There is one last detail involving Saavik I should mention. Based on your response to the daring rescue of me at the end of the second history, I assume you are prepared to conclude that Chekov’s histories are the more ‘artfully’ edited versions. But consider this: in Star Fleet’s history, Saavik’s personal appearance undergoes a radical transformation from the first to the second part of the trilogy. It is inexplicable, since these histories—both Star Fleet’s and Chekov’s—are based on the same photographic records. She does not appear to be the same woman, and seems to have had the Romulan personality excised in the Star Fleet version of history. In Chekov’s histories, there is no transformation, and she continues a prominent participation in the history—except for her time spent immediately surrounding the birth of her child. Since I can think of no likely explanation for the incongruity in Star Fleet’s history, I must conclude that it is Star Fleet’s history that has been altered for some reason.â€
Kirk: “Then Chekov preserved the true story of what happened?â€
Spock: “Perhaps. There is one final matter. In Voyage Home, earth is endangered by an alien probe that is, as I subsequently discover, scanning the planet to hear whale stories—specifically, songs sung by humpback whales.â€
Kirk: “What kind of stories?â€
Spock: “There was no data on the content of the stories sung by the whales.â€
Kirk: “You must be mistaken. That would have been the first thing I would have wanted to know. You know what I mean—get behind the veneer of the 23rd century technology and focus on the real meat and bones of the story.â€
Spock: “You really do sound like Teller, but, as I indicated, there was no data regarding the subject matter of the stories sung by the whales. For purposes of my tale to you of these events, it is only necessary you know that the scans are disrupting the planet, threatening all terrestrial life.â€
Kirk: “So the probe’s scan was actually an attack?â€
Spock: “There is no report of a malevolent intent on the part of the probe. Though no one makes the statement in these histories, I have concluded that the probe must have been damaged and was malfunctioning. No civilization capable of creating such a machine would fail to anticipate its environmental impact. In any event, we happen to be returning to earth at the very moment the probe is disrupting things. You and the others under your command violated Star Fleet orders in searching for me on that planet during the events presented in the second part of the trilogy, and you were returning to face court martial. We determined that the only way to answer the probe and save earth was to travel back in time to capture two humpback whales and bring them back.â€
Kirk: “Because the probe wanted to hear real stories told by a story teller to a story listener.â€
Spock (raising one eyebrow): “We succeed. In addition to the two whales, we bring back an attractive female marine biologist who could not bear to be parted from…â€
Kirk: “You could have just skipped that part.â€
Spock: “Who could not bear to be parted from the whales. Up to the point that we return with the whales, the two versions are identical. In Star Fleet’s version, we are given a hero’s welcome. All the charges are dropped and you are returned to command of the Enterprise. In Chekov’s version, we return to find that there is no emergency. Apparently, our trip to the past altered the time line. The disappearance of the female biologist and the two whales under mysterious circumstances led to a world-wide movement to save humpback whales from extinction. It succeeded. So, when the probe appeared, there were plenty of whales to sing back to it. The mood at Star Fleet was completely different. There was no emergency and we simply looked desperate and foolish. The Klingons were on the war path, and Star Fleet offered you up as though a sacrificial lamb. You spoke up for those under your command, but only Sulu was spared. The lead attorney for Star Fleet approached both you and Sulu before trial and offered to let Sulu off with a reprimand in exchange for his testimony against you. The attorney knew Sulu wanted a captain’s chair, but he also knew that Sulu would not agree to do it unless you told him to do so. You did. The court martial found you and the others guilty and you were all dishonorably discharged from Star Fleet.â€
Kirk: “The needs of the one outweighed the needs of the many.â€
Spock: “In the Star Fleet official time line, the triumphant return paradoxically initiates a slow but inevitable decline. James T. Kirk had become the protagonist of a story and the story had reached a final climax. By definition, the events that followed were anticlimactic. In Chekov’s time line, the anticlimactic return and banishment resulted in continuing struggle and, eventually, renewal.â€
Kirk: “I am confused. In the official version preserved by Star Fleet, I receive a hero’s welcome; I finish my career with Star Fleet and retire; and Star Fleet declines. According to Chekov, I am dishonorably discharged and Star Fleet thrives. Is there an actual divergence in the time line? I thought we were discussing the differences between two histories, not two realities.â€
Spock: “Your question brings us to the real crux of the matter, and to answer it I must disclose to you the details surrounding your deaths.â€
Kirk: “I was hoping you would get to that. You did say deaths—as in more than one?â€
Spock: “Yes.â€
Kirk: “Was I regenerated like you?â€
Spock: “No, but as I am fond of saying, there always are possibilities.â€
Kirk: “Fascinating.â€
The computer beeps and Spock peers at the screen. He looks at Kirk and raises one eyebrow.
Spock: “Jim.â€
Kirk: “Yes, Spock?â€
Spock: “It is Teller. She is awake. She wants to speak. Before we do, I want you to review the data.â€
The universe is a game of connect-the-dots. Consciousness requires a leap of faith. Faith may not move mountains but it moves time. Time narrates words into stories—my story, her story and history. There were cave stories as to which the writer and reader believed and behaved as though the word was a picture of the thing that had happened in the world under the sun. It was as though the story was not a story at all but a transcription of things never spoken. I had been a story teller in my world too long to become comfortable with the relationship between world, story teller and reader in the cave-story world. I had no way of determining what, in the semiotic of the cave, was a “real†or an “invented†history. To a Teller, there is only story. Myth, history, fiction, science, encyclopedia—it was all story to me, and the Teller mind knows story. Book after book, film after film, sounds, pictures, words, the stuff of story flickered unceasingly in front of me, framed by the window, held in the cave, and I found order; I heard the pattern in human history, a pre-linguistic grammar, existing outside the cave, in the mind of the Teller. Why was the story telling mind drawn to Star Trek? As a result of the accretion of semantic detail built up through multiple episodes and the series’ popularity, Star Trek evolved into a coherent mythology. The coherent mythology was not a consequence of the consistent artistic/creative vision of the show’s writers/directors. The simple truth is that the audience did it. The mass audience transformed a mediocre, short-lived television show into a coherent mythology—despite glaring inconsistencies in the shows themselves. Details inconsistent with the fable elements in the foreground dissolve into the background or are completely ignored. The audience put the raw story material into the soup pot and cooked it until it became myth.
[Insert the first six chapters.]
Kirk: “Teller has narrated a story about her village and her discovery of the story cave. It may be a coincidence without significance, but I wrote an essay at the academy comparing Thoreau and Tolkien, or it may be Teller chose that particular cave story precisely because I once told a similar “story.†Do you remember what you said about time when we encountered the Guardian of Forever? You said that there may be currents in time causing McCoy and us to arrive at a pivotal moment in time. Perhaps there are similar currents in story. If so, could it be that space-time and story become real in the same way or have a similar relationship with the perception of reality? Who I am or whether I am, at this moment in space-time from my perspective, is irrelevant—and you know how I hate being irrelevant, but that’s beside the point since I have decided to play the game according to the rules… just this once. Here is where it stands. I am even beginning to think like Teller. Can you imagine what she could do with my last sentence, deconstructing the words ‘here’, ‘where’, ‘it’ and ‘stands’? I am standing still here in this spot on the deck of a ship moving through space and time faster than space-time can move, but I can tell an absolutely true story about ‘where’ ‘it’ ‘stands’. At any rate… okay, well, not at any rate, but at this rate… I can understand now why Teller says that, for the teller, ignorance is power. I don’t know if I will be able to get through this… I can’t even complete a single, unambiguous sentence. Spock, I have been infected with the Teller virus. You have to take over command. Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead!â€
Spock: “The Teller has given us a story. We are part of that story. These words we are speaking this moment and in the moments to come (assuming there are moments to come) are part of that story. Our mission—I might as well call it that because that is how the story would present it—our life-time mission is to discern or discover or divine our true history, the true story of who we are and where we stand. We are therefore in the same relative position to that story as any other reader.â€
Kirk: “Are you suggesting that you are not real?â€
Spock: “I am as real as you.â€
Kirk: “That doesn’t answer my question.â€
Spock: “Let us examine that question by testing equivalent expressions. First: is Teller’s point of origin relative to her current position past space-time or future space-time? Second: is her village’s position relative to the bio-engineered road past space-time or future space-time?â€
Kirk: “My headache is back. The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind. On the road, again. The answer is the road. The answer, my friend, is lying in the road. The answer lies in the road. The answer lies. The answer is a lie. The road is a lie. The road lies. Does it matter? Do I matter?â€
Spock: “Whose baby is it squashing?â€
Kirk: “According to these future histories, I have a son I will not know until he is an adult and as soon as I meet him, he will be killed. You tell me I may have another son or he may be your son. Now, you want to know whose baby is it squashing? What is IT?â€
Spock: “I was thinking of something I read by a late 20th century author.â€
John Gardner, On Moral Fiction:
The language of critics, and of artists of the kind who pay attention to critics, has become exceedingly odd: not talk about feelings or intellectual affirmations—not talk about moving and surprising twists of plot or wonderful characters and ideas—but sentences full of large words like hermeneutic, heuristic, structuralism, formalism, or opaque language, and full of fine distinctions—for instance those between modernist and post-modernist—that would make even an intelligent cow suspicious. Though more difficult than ever before to read, criticism has become trivial. The trivial has its place, its entertainment value. I can think of no good reason that some people should not specialize in the behavior of the left-side hairs on an elephant’s trunk. Even at its best, its most deadly serious, criticism, like art, is partly a game, as all good critics know. [However,] fiddling with the hairs on an elephant’s nose is indecent when the elephant happens to be standing on the baby. The traditional view is that true art is moral. It seeks to hold off the twilight of the gods and us. As for poetry and fiction, since the days of the New Critics (not all of them were bad) we’ve been hearing about technique, how part must fit with part, no matter to what purpose. Not only can such an approach tell us nothing about great works of art that are clumsily put together, like Paradise Lost or Piers Plowman, to say nothing of The Brothers Karamazov or War and Peace, it cannot even show us the difference between a well-made vital work like John Fowles’ Daniel Martin, and an empty but well-made husk like John Barth’s Giles Goat-boy. Structuralists, formalists, linguistic philosophers who tell us that works of art are like trees—simply objects for perception—all avoid on principle the humanistic questions: who will this work of art help? What baby is it squashing?
Kirk: What is it about fiddling with the hairs on an elephant’s trunk that makes me think about rabbits on a quest for a new home?
Spock: I know of your fondness for antiques.
Kirk: During one part of that story the questing rabbits ran into a warren of well fed rabbits who had developed a formalistic, abstract culture of art for art’s sake while being systematically trapped and killed by the farmer who was feeding them. They avoided all mention of the unspoken story going on outside their cave. In other words, they had struck a quiet bargain with the devil. The questing rabbits did not adhere to the prime directive requiring non-interference. They tried to get the rabbits who were locked in that diseased culture to recognize that they were not being true to their rabbit nature. In doing so, they stirred up quite a ruckus and then continued on their mission. So here we are, a couple of starving rabbits trying to find the true story of our lives, and I am certain that it matters a great deal to me whether the elephant is squashing my or your baby.
Well, you said Teller is awake and wants to speak. Let’s go find out what kind of rabbit she is.â€
My mind raced trying to assimilate the stories given me by the cave, and I was overwhelmed with such vertigo that I wondered whether it was possible to vomit the stories back into the cave. Could I? Should I? My instinct is to swallow it all whole, digest the bits and pieces of true story to nourish the Teller mind and shit the rest. What if it was all shit? Worse yet, what if I could not tell the difference between true story and shit? It is an unspoken fact, known by all Tellers but never taught by one generation to the next, that there is only one Plot—the grist in the Teller mill that digests true story and discards the rest. Now, for the first time, I realized that there had also always been an unspoken fear in the Teller mind that there was another, an alien Plot, a second Plot that, once consumed, would destroy forever the Teller’s ability to know true story. Then I realized that that fear was also the engine of our hunger for story. That hunger and that fear were prompting my urge to swallow and to vomit. I waited for the battle to be decided.
Then I heard the music. The buzzing bee, the thunder bug, the humming bird, and the drumming cricket had been making music together, and I found the story. I knew the unspoken story of the cave world.