How were you first brought into the Star Trek fold? How much did you know about Trek in advance of your first book? How much research did you do?

Crispin: I was a Star Trek fan from the early days of the show. I’d watched all of the episodes many times. I had read many of the novels and all of the James Blish novelizations. So I knew Star Trek inside and out when I wrote Yesterday’s Son on a whim. I did some research to write the book, mostly about arctic terrain and survival in arctic regions. But since I used established settings, mostly I only wrote about what I already knew from watching the show for all those years.

In your Trek books -- and the comic book you co-wrote -- you really explored the inner lives of Spock and Sarek. What intrigued you most about the characters? And what do you think you added to the lore of Vulcans in general and to Spock, Sarek and Zar specifically?

Crispin: From the beginning I was fascinated -- pardon the pun -- by Mr. Spock and Vulcan. As a child of the 60’s, the idea that Vulcans were strong, and capable, anything but wimps, yet their entire planet embraced pacifism, really inspired me. Also, Mr. Spock was smart, and I identified with his intelligence, yet (also) his “apartness.” He was a character pulled between worlds… this is a characterization a writer can really sink her teeth into! So I worked very hard at being able to set inside the skin of my Vulcan characters, and write them in a way that was true to their nature, yet made them understandable and allowed readers to empathize with them. I also loved Mr. Roddenberry’s optimistic vision of the future. I wanted to go live in that future, and I was able to, at least for as long as it took to write my novels. As for Zar, it seemed to me when I watched “All Our Yesterdays” that the episode cried out for a sequel… so I sat down and wrote it. Regarding adding Trek “lore”… I suppose I was able to add a bit. I recall inventing a rather nasty weapon from the time of Surak that Romulans still used for Sarek… a senapa, I believe it was called. That was fun.

Let's be cruel here and ask you to do the following: please give us two sentences summing up your thoughts -- what you felt worked best, what readers responded to most, etc. -- in each of your Trek stories.

Crispin: Yesterday’s Son; I think readers were hungry in that era for stories that explored the inner lives of the Trek characters, and my book did that. Especially in the case of Mr. Spock. Time for Yesterday; I’m proudest of that book, out of all four of my Trek novels, because it was a prequel to Wrath of Khan, my favorite Trek film. Also, it was fun to write a love story for Zar. The Eyes of the Beholders; When The Next Generation aired, I decided to do something I’d never pursued before, and submitted a treatment for a teleplay about an ancient artifact that was causing a certain area of space to become a sort of outer-space Sargasso Sea. Then the Pocket editors put out a call to all their writers begging them to write a Next Gen story, and I figured a bird in the hand was worth two in the bush, as they say, and converted my teleplay treatment into a novel. Sarek; I met Mark Lenard many times at Star Trek conventions over the years, and was always fascinated by the character he portrayed. We were talking about Sarek’s character at one point, and he said, “Why don’t you write a novel that tells Sarek’s story?” I felt so honored that Mark would say that, that I pitched it to my editor, and that’s how I came to write the novel.

How cool was it that Leonard Nimoy and Jimmy Doohan did the dramatic readings for a couple of your stories? And what feedback did you get from Leonard about your treatment of Spock and Sarek?

Crispin: I’ve met Mr. Nimoy a number of times over the years, and he was always polite and gracious, but the only time he ever commented on the reading he’d done for Yesterday’s Son and Time for Yesterday was to ask me once at a party whether I’d gotten my royalties from the audio department yet that year. And yes, they were running a bit late, which wasn’t all that unusual. Jimmy Doohan did read Yesterday’s Son, and told me he liked it very much, even before he was tapped to do the reading on the audio tape. MarkLenard told me he really liked Sarek. As you say, hearing that was pretty cool.

Source: Star Trek.com

Take us back to December, 1968, and the shooting of your episode.

Hartley: When I did my episode, I just loved the script, loved the idea that this strange man (Spock) was finally going to be schtupped and I was going to be the one to do it, and that I was going to be the one to teach him how to not be a vegetarian. So I loved the idea. Then, when they showed me the costume, I thought I was going to die. But I sensed that it was a very special thing when I was doing it. I don’t know why. I don’t know if it was because of the script or the costume or the makeup, but there was a special-ness to it. I mean, who had any idea that it’d become what it has? I don’t think Leonard (Nimoy) or Bill (Shatner) had any idea, either.

What else do you recall of the actual production?

Hartley: I’m surprised how many memories I have of it, really. But when you kiss Spock, I mean, come on! I remember De Kelley. I remember the whole thing vividly. I remember taking off that huge coat, the fur coat, and people going, “Oh, wow.” I had no idea that I had a figure. I come from Connecticut. I had no idea what sexuality was. I was doing Shakespeare.

Everything you learned about sex, you learned from Star Trek?

Hartley: Absolutely (laughs). Absolutely. And Leonard, too, quite clearly. But I do remember it vividly. I remember being in the cave. I remember the lighting in the cave. Marvin Chomsky was a terrific director, very caring, and Jerry Finnerman, who unfortunately recently passed away, was a wonderful director of photography. He came in with this kind of magic, and I was fascinated with that, too, because the only things I’d done up until then were black and white, except for Ride the High Country, the Peckinpah film. I remember that the cave was lit with red and green. I remember that De was asleep and ill, and one time I was thinking, “Well, we’re going to be making a lot of noise, Mr. Nimoy and I. Aren’t we going to wake up De in the middle of all this?” And there was the whole thing about getting back into the time (portal). I just loved the brilliance of the imagination. I’ve been lucky, because I’d also worked on The Twilight Zone with Rod Serling. So I’ve been at the peak of these shows.

Source: Star Trek.com

Berman: It was kind of naïve for myself and Brannon (Braga) and Ron (Moore) to jump into the movie business with really very little experience on how it worked. We had a bit of a falling out with (potential Generations director) Leonard Nimoy, in retrospect, over the procedural elements of how the development, writing, production, and direction of a feature film are different from television.

Source: Star Trek.com

Soup for Spock

What does a Vulcan eat when he's in town?

By Julie Van Rosendaal, For The Calgary Herald April 28, 2010

Soup, as it turns out. And sandwiches. And Leonard Nimoy wasn't the only one. Try Malcolm McDowell, Sid Haig, Brent Spiner and Erin Gray, to boot.

(...)

It was so much fun that when I left on Saturday, I told the guys to give me a challenge -- if I was going to cook for them, it may as well be something beyond soup and sandwiches.

"Don't say that," said Sid Haig (you may recognize him from Rob Zombie movies), "or I'll ask you to cook Greek food."

And so I made slow cooked leg of lamb overnight Saturday night for their Sunday lunch. With a double batch of naan and tzatziki. They were thrilled.

But Leonard still wanted soup, so I made an old standby -- Spolumbo's Italian sausage with lentils and barley. This time, he made so many mmmmmm sounds, it made my 12-year-old niece, with me this time to help (and perhaps meet the guys from Twilight, methinks) giggle.

I was amazed when they told me how surprised and grateful they were to be fed food made from scratch, right there in the green room, according to their mood and dietary needs (several, including Brent Spiner, were vegetarians): they're more used to a platter of muffins and sandwiches or to fend for themselves at conventions and media events. Truly, it thrilled me that these simple dishes -- that you can easily make at home -- made a difference in their day.

In a ruling on Robinson v. Crown Cork and Seal, an asbestos lawsuit, the Texas Supreme Court struck down a lower court decision and declared a provision of recent legislation to be unconstitutional. As explained by the South East Texas Record, the court found that the legislature should not enact a law which in effect protected a single company.

Where things get interesting is in the written opinion where, in the section on "how the Texas Constitution allocates governing power" , Justice Don R. Willett cites a certain science officer:

"Appropriately weighty principles guide our course. First, we recognize that police power draws from the credo that “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Second, while this maxim rings utilitarian and Dickensian (not to mention Vulcan (21)), it is cabined by something contrarian and Texan: distrust of intrusive government and a belief that police power is justified only by urgency, not expediency."

And it gets better, footnote 21 reads:

See STAR TREK II: THE WRATH OF KHAN (Paramount Pictures 1982). The film references several works of classic literature, none more prominently than A Tale of Two Cities. Spock gives Admiral Kirk an antique copy as a birthday present, and the film itself is bookended with the book’s opening and closing passages. Most memorable, of course, is Spock’s famous line from his moment of sacrifice: “Don’t grieve, Admiral. It is logical. The needs of the many outweigh . . .” to which Kirk replies, “the needs of the few.”

So apparently Justice Willett is a Trekkie. Could this kind of thing catch on? There have been a number of Star Trek related classes at colleges and universities, perhaps it is time for Star Trek to be taught at law school.

WASHINGTON -- He shows a fascination with science, an all-too deliberate decision-making demeanor, an adherence to logic and some pretty, ahem, prominent ears.

They all add up to a quite logical conclusion, at least for Star Trek fans: Barack Obama is Washington's Mr. Spock, the chief science officer for the ship of state.

"I guess it's somewhat unusual for a politician to be so precise, logical, in his thought process," actor Leonard Nimoy, who has portrayed Spock for more than 40 years, told The Associated Press in an e-mail interview. "The comparison to Spock is, in my opinion, a compliment to him and to the character."

(...)

"We knew he was a Trekkie," Orci said in a telephone interview. He said he watches the White House regularly for insight on the Spock character.

Orci said Star Trek's captain, James T. Kirk, was "based on a young new president in Kennedy" and that the Obama administration is part of a 1960s-type revival. Except this time, Kirk isn't in charge. Spock is.

MF: That’s another one of my early things, but that was a lot more fun. Being a Star Trek fan from the beginning, it was such a thrill. I read for Leonard Nimoy, who was one of my big childhood heroes, and he gave me the role. I got to wear the Starfleet uniform, and there was Mr. Spock directing the picture. I remember when he directed my scene, he didn’t even have time to take off his ears, so there he was with his pointy ears behind the camera, telling us what to do. It was a small part, but one of the great, great thrills of my life. Something that I’ll never forget. It was just a great day.

Mr. TAKEI: I did a run in Equus here in Los Angeles. And Leonard came to see me. Leonard Nimoy.

SIMON: Yeah.

Mr. TAKEI: ...who had done the play in New York. And he came back stage, and grinned his wry and very diplomatic grin at me, and said, You were better.

SIMON: Aw. Yeah.

Mr. TAKEI: I mean, what else could he have said?

SIMON: Well, what a compliment.

Mr. TAKEI: He is such a great diplomat.

Source: NPR

Shatner: "Well, ah..."

(Roddenberry offers to cut this part out, if Shatner is uncomfortable with the question.)

Shatner: "(Laughs) No. I really love Leonard. I really care for him a great deal. He is a very fine human being. He stays behind what he says with his total character. When he says something he really means it. I mean, you can take him at his word. He is slyly humorous, and very affectionate in his own way that is remarkable. And to address myself to the elements of friction on the stage - I would put it in a way that two children in the same family might squabble over something. Loving each other, but squabbling. I mean, any member of a family would know what I mean and that means all of us. If you can say 'No, I don't think that's right' in that querulous tone and be angry at the moment and then forget it the following [morning?] because you care for that person."