Star Trek into Darkness

I saw the latest Star Trek film, got thrilled by the same characters all over again, came out feeling smug.

When you go to see a Star Trek movie you don't go for the cinematic quality. You go to a family reunion -the good sort. There you laugh at the expected behaviour of every single character in your beloved saga. You chuckle and go tsk tsk at Kirk's bed hopping. You forgive Spock his lack of sensitivity, because deep inside you know you'd like to be as aloof as him sometimes. 

Star Trek has always been about escaping into a better world and, above all, away from this one. Why such a big Buddhist as I sometimes like calling myself likes the stuff is one of my many contradictions. I guess I'm not that committed to the here and now, after all, and the there and then continues to allure me.

Anyway, I enjoyed the film. I particularly liked Spock, McCoy and Chekov. Zachary Quinto is one hell of an actor, although I'd rather have my Spocks a bit less round-faced. The by now traditional Leonard Nimoy cameo was more disturbing than anything on this occasion. And uncanny and probably intended was the resemblance of the actors playing James T. Kirk (Chris Pine) and Bones McCoy (Karl Urban) to their 60's originals, William Shatner and DeForest Kelly. 

I heard somewhere, and I agree, that this film could be regarded as a modest beginning for greater things to come. Let's hope so. Given that society seems to boldly go (sorry, couldn't help myself) in the direction of more freedom once again, the saga might be still in time to capture and lead the spirit of the times, just like TOS did back in the 60's.

A reflection

From Return to Diversity: A Political History of Eastern Europe, by Rotschild and Wingfield:

By the winter of 1967/68, most of the Czechoslovak reforms had come to a turning point where they would have to be either pressed more vigorously if their salutary potential was to be achieved or rolled back to halt the disarray that they were generating.

When reading history I sometimes feel frustrated when this or that great man or woman could not have seen that there was only so much they could do, at least for the time being; that they had lacked the vision to put on the brakes a little so as not to jeopardize the implementation of their agenda. However, it seems that once again the internal pace of history sets this inertia in motion which is impossible to resist –even if those riding the wave had wished it.

form is emptiness / emptiness is form

Syria 2013 / Spain 1938

Two years into the Syrian civil war, one development seems to be taking place as the conflict goes on, which bears some comparison with what happened in the Spanish Civil War . In particular, we're looking at how the two sides tend to become ever more polarised, as a direct consequence of the increasing level of violence, with its dynamics of aggression and retribution.

The Spanish Civil War began as a reaction of a combination of forces (traditional conservatives and fascist-inspired elements, mainly) against the policies pursued by a left-wing government. As the war progressed, Anarchist communes sprung all over the Republic, and the Communist Party ended up taking over  the war effort. In the rebels' side, one of the generals leading the rebellion began to accumulate so much power that the process, with the personality cult that ensued, ended up alienating other more moderate elements in his camp (e.g., the supporters of a more or less constitutional monarchy).

In the Syrian conflict we at first welcomed an Arab Spring style rising, which two years later has seen yihadists and terrorists operating with the rebels, and yet more terrorists (most notably Iran-backed Hizbollah) joining forces with the regime. The Syrian situation is also similar to the Spanish in that in both cases one of the sides is so atomised as to seriously compromise its success. In 1937-1938 the republican camp in Spain saw bitter struggle between Anarchists and Communists, as well as between Moscow-led Stalinists against Trotskyites, not to mention the alienation of many supporters of democratic forms of government. Conversely, in Syria it is the rebels' side the one experiencing a paralyzing fragmentation along tribal, religious and ideological lines. I can easily imagine that many Syrian citizens, appalled at the bloodshed that has been unleashed, are now missing the peaceful days of the Assads' clan dictatorship. And who can blame them?