9

In the episode Operation: Annihilate! Kirk finds his brother dead. He didn't seem very upset (definitely no tears, was able to continue with work immediately). Was there any reason in particular for this? Or did the director make the choice because it would have been boring to see his sadness played out for too long?

EDIT: I somewhat disagree with the answers given. Kirk does show emotion, including negative ones. For example in the episode Miri he gets mad when they weren't finding a cure to the disease fast enough and smashes some flasks, and this episode happens prior to "Operation: Annihilate!".

Celeritas
  • 3,186
  • 3
  • 24
  • 41
  • 32
    It has to be said, William Shatner is not frequently accused of under-acting. – Daniel Roseman Jan 14 '14 at 12:26
  • 5
    I have zero knowledge about US TV audience tastes in the 60s (hence this is a comment, not an answer), but I’d naively suspect that romantic male leads were expected to be strong in those days, rather than sensitive like blubbing Picard in First Contact. – Paul D. Waite Jan 14 '14 at 12:40
  • 15
    Showing emotion would have actually required Shatner to act. I believe there was a clause in his contract precluding that. – terdon Jan 14 '14 at 12:50
  • 1
    I'm late to the party here, but in answer to Kirk getting mad and smashing flasks in Miri -- he was under the influence of the illness they were trying to cure. In general, Captain Kirk did not allow his feelings to (too greatly) interfere with his job, when on duty. In public, and on duty, he was pretty contained. He would have mourned privately, when the emergency was over. So I agree with the answers; this was indeed in character. – Basya Feb 11 '21 at 16:58
  • 1
    @PaulD.Waite you're absolutely right. Real Men (especially Real Leaders) don't just stop and cry in the middle of a mission. – RonJohn Jun 02 '21 at 04:58
  • @RonJohn: well, just to clarify — I didn't say that, I said I thought that's what 60s US TV audiences expected. – Paul D. Waite Jun 02 '21 at 11:19
  • @PaulD.Waite your suspicions were correct. – RonJohn Jun 02 '21 at 12:40
  • @RonJohn: [citation needed] – Paul D. Waite Jun 02 '21 at 13:46
  • 1
    @PaulD.Waite citation: I watched a lot of 1960s TV. There was an absolute dearth of men who broke down and cried in the middle of a mission. Those who did were usually young. Blubbering Picard did not exist. – RonJohn Jun 02 '21 at 14:24
  • According to the novelization of The Motion Picture, the other person who died in the transporter accident with Sonak was Kirk's gf or wife, and Kirk acted like nothing happened then too. It seems to be pattern with him. – J Doe Jun 02 '21 at 23:36

2 Answers2

19

Kirk is known to be based on Horatio Hornblower. Hornblower considered it an important part of leadership not to let feelings interfere with his command decisions, and that showing his feelings would be setting a bad example to his men, who he also expected to get on with their tasks despite any feelings. It's a philosophy shared by many (most?) commanders outside of Hollywoodland. In real life SEAL teams don't get to stop and cry because they have found something that upsets them. It's reasonable to assume that the writers wrote Kirk like that, at least in the early days. Later on he was allowed to express his feelings rather more.

DJClayworth
  • 10,111
  • 3
  • 37
  • 54
13

Not everyone wears their heart on their sleeve. Any soldier would tell you to mourn your comrades when the mission is over, also some would say honor them by completing the mission.

Meat Trademark
  • 8,239
  • 4
  • 47
  • 80
severa
  • 1,000
  • 6
  • 8
  • While not strictly in-universe, this attitude is consistent with Kirk's typically unflappable, no-nonsense demeanor. In fact, this is part of why his final encounter with Kahn in The Wrath thereof was so important. He finally lost his cool. – Matt Jan 14 '14 at 16:04