MovieChat Forums > Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) Discussion > What was the President's point?

What was the President's point?

posted 12 years ago by Porpoise01
7 replies | jump to latest

"Just because a thing can be done, it does not necessarily follow that it must be done." (Or something even worse, Spifflock will vet the wording for us.) But what was he saying? In this context, I can only figure that he's arguing AGAINST providing safe haven for the Klingons.

Turns out the whole conspiracy was unnecessary, the President himself intended to lead the opposition.

Thank God Kirk showed up, interrupted his speech and set everyone straight.

And thank god there were no Shakespearean scholars present to sidetrack the debate by pointing out that the quote was entirely inappropriate to the present situation.

"He called peace..." momentary intake of breath indicating his respect for the man's wisdom " 'The Undiscovered Country!'"

Guess that settles the issue over on the Trek IV board about whether Kirk knew Shakespeare well enough to check Spock's cite on a quote from the same play.

Where did that thread go? If this indeed represents rhetorical life from death, then I must go to that place again.

"After years of fighting with reality, I am pleased to say that I have finally won out over it."

[–] Spifflock_Holmes 12 years ago

"Just because a thing can be done, it does not necessarily follow that it must be done." (Or something even worse, Spifflock will vet the wording for us.)

Consider it done. Yes, it's something even worse: "Let us redefine progress to mean that just because we can do a thing, it does not necessarily follow that we must do that thing."

But what was he saying?

What seems to make the best sense in context is that he means that just because the Federation could destroy the Klingon Empire (or just wait while it destroyed itself), they don't therefore have to do so. Or something like that. I think. (Precisely how that constitutes a redefinition of "progress" is anyone's guess. It sounds like he regards that as "progress" by the usual definition.)

Or maybe he means that just because they could rescue Kirk and McCoy from Rura Penthe, it needn't follow that they must.

Or maybe he means that just because the Klingons can use nuclear power, it doesn't follow that they should.

Whatever he means "in-world," in real life it sounds like a lazy attempt to write some stuff that sounds like p'litical speechifyin'.

----

Lazy + smart = efficient.

[–] Porpoise01 12 years ago

In was hoping you'd come along to give us the truly terrible wording. My mind just can't retain a speech that bad. I agree, it's lazy speechifyin'... but it still seems to me, and this is the clip they'll use on the evening news, especially since Kirk interrupted him before he could finish and explain where he's going, and maybe this is what the conspirators really WANTED, and we just didn't give them enough credit for how intricate their plot was, and Kirk actually payed into their hands, because the evening news will now suggest the Federation PRESIDENT doesn't WANT the Klingons......

But my point, and I do have one...

It seems to me that in this context, the most logical interpretation is "Just because we CAN save the Klingons doesn't mean we SHOULD save the Klingons"!

Really, isn't that most logical interpretation, given what we've heard?

"After years of fighting with reality, I am pleased to say that I have finally won out over it."

[–] bjlevine 12 years ago

That's always been my take...the "thing" was signing a peace treaty with the Klingons.

Too bad they cut the shot, right after Kirk, Scotty and Sulu get the standing O, where the camera pans back and you see Aylborne saying "thrusters on full".

"Oh no...they sent the wrong Spock!"

[–] Spifflock_Holmes 12 years ago

That's always been my take...the "thing" was signing a peace treaty with the Klingons.

So are we to understand that the treaty was signed (for surely it was signed) over the objections of the Federation president? Or is it that Kirk's arrival and speech changed his mind?

Not that I want to tug too hard on the threads of this film, you understand; I know all too well how easily it will come apart.

----

Lazy + smart = efficient.

[–] Porpoise01 12 years ago

Why would the conspirators shoot the President if he's supporting their cause? I think we're SUPPOSED to believe the President and all the Federationists supported the peace treaty.

Near as I can figure, it was just meant to be an empty politician's speech-- so Shatner's last Kirkspeech seems all the more eloquent. but the words seem to be saying the opposite of what he's supposed to be saying.

"After years of fighting with reality, I am pleased to say that I have finally won out over it."

[–] AndrewGS 10 years ago

Unfortunately it was a very pretentious line, aggressively worded to suggest he wasn't necessarily for cooperation and assistance just before he did offer specifics on giving assistance and then requiring the interpretation that a lack of humanitarian assistance or presence of outright aggression would initially be considered progress.

[–] da-pauley 9 years ago

I think it means that just because we can have peace, doesn't mean we have to, but they are CHOOSING to have peace. Choosing progress over having it forced upon them. Choosing it makes it far more admirable and true progress.