Star Trek Tragedy

Aristotlolian Tragedy in Star Trek

The YouTube clip that I selected, was “Star Trek – Journey to Babel – Spock and Mother (full scene)” from the original Star Trek series. The most prominent characters are Spock, and his mother, Amanda. Both of them have opposite viewpoints on what to do in the situation presented to them. Spock’s father needs his son’s blood in order to live, but he refuses to do so because of the situation that the entire ship and everyone on board face. The clip has a dialogue and argument between the two, and the results of it. Looking at this clip through Aristotle’s perspective, this whole scene would be defined as a tragdy. The nature of the tragedy in the clip lies in the character of Spock and Amanda, as well as how they present the argument, and the reversal at the end.

Spock and Amanda are have positions are based solely on who they are, and their differing characters play an important role in their argument. Spock is half human, half vulcan, but chooses to embrace his Vulcan heritage. His mother, Amanda, is human, and she is very emtional and wants Spock to follow that part of himself as well. Aristotle dictates that, “…the characters should be, good…appropriate…life like…consistent,” (Aristotle 100). Spock is “good” in maintaining his personal decision to remain in control of the vessel instead of following his mother’s wishes. His character is appropriate in keeping with his mindset, yet he is life like in showing the internal struggle of his decision. Spock is also consistent in the reactions he gives his mother to her pleas, and at times, irrational reasoning. The character of Amanda also follows the tenets of character as described by Aristotle. She is good in her decision to get Spock to reconsider his decision, she is appropriate in her concerns as both a wife and mother, her human behavior and reactions gives her concerns and pleas a life like quality, and she is consistent in her human inconsistencies. The traits of both characters define them, and they provide the basis of their respective arguments.

The argument between Spock and his mother can be divided into three categories identified by Aristotle. He would have categorized their arguments as, “demonstrative and refutation,…production of emotions, and…[arguments about things’] importance or unimportance,” (Aristotle 104). These three types of arguments are more famously known as ethos, pathos, and logos. Throughout the whole dialogue, Spock is employing ethos and logos in his argument to remain in command of the ship. His ethos stems from his position as the second in command of the Enterprise, and his logos is based on the fact that, “The circumstances are not normal. We are carrying over 100 valuable federation passengers, we are being pursued by an alien ship…there has been murder and attempted murder on board. I cannot dismiss my duties,” (Star Trek – Journey to Babel – Spock and Mother [full scene]). His position on the ship makes gives his argument a lot of weight, and he will follow his duties to the letter. His mother approaches the situation through a different perspective, and employs her arguments differently from her son’s. She also employs logos and ethos, stating that “Any competent officer can command this ship, only you can give your father the blood transfusions he needs to live…Your duty is to your father!” (Star Trek – Journey to Babel – Spock and Mother [full scene]). Her ethos is her position as his mother, and she uses her maternal nature to guide Spock into the right path even going so far as to uses pathos stating that if he lets his, “…father die, then I’ll hate you for the rest of my life,” (Star Trek – Journey to Babel – Spock and Mother [full scene]). In the clip, when Amanda says this line, Spock is visibly affected by it. It indicates that that her use of pathos works, even on one such as Spock. This sets up the climax and the tragic consequences for both Amanda and Spock.

Spock’s ultimate decision from the argument severely damages the bond between Spock and his mother. Aristotle would have seen the whole event as a tragedy, because it was the result of the flaws of the characters themselves. In “Poetics,” he states that the tragedy is, “…a representation on an action, and for the sake of the action above all [a representation] of the people who are acting,” (Aristotle 93). The actions in the clip represent one thing, and that is the differences between humanity and vulcans. The action of Spock defines the vulcan idea that one must follow the logical course of action no matter the cost, and Amanda’s action is the human idea that the right thing must be pursued not matter the cost. Both sides are adamant in their position, and are not willing to yield to the other, which leads to the reversal of the tragedy. When Spock gives his decision, they both lose two important people in their lives as a result. This, and the catharsis that takes place afterward, is what makes Spock and his mother tragic figures.
Logic and emotion are what separate humans and vulcans, and the dialogue between Spock and his mother are an embodiment of that separation. Spock, a person who can do what no human can, ironically confounded by what a human can do. He cannot seem to understand that embrace all parts of himself, and it effectively ruins his relationship with his mother. Amanda, a human, simply cannot give up that part of herself, even though she loves people who have abandoned what makes her human. Aristotle’s idea of tragedy can be seen in this brief conflict between Spock and his mother. It applies all of Aristotle’s principles, and the result is a beautifully performed piece of acting.

Works Cited
Aristotle. “Poetics.” The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism 2nd Edition. Ed. Vincent B. Leitch. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 2010. pgs. 88-115. Print.
Star Trek – Journey to Babel – Spock and Mother (full scene). June 21, 2008. YouTube. July 11, 2010.

Embed code: