twishagratzu

[twishagratzu]

Long post about the impact of traumatic experiences on Jim Kirk's behavior, and how the difference in these experiences makes TOS and AOS so not similar

This is a rather subjective topic, but I've thought a lot about it because of my work in art therapy for traumatic experiences, and after reading these two great TOS analyses about Jim is a victim of SA here and here by @sad-trekkie-life I decided to compile my thoughts about this in one place.

tw: mentions of dv, genocide, sa/csa, please be careful

I first encountered how Kirk's character is read through experience as a victim of SA in... AOS fanfictions, and before I started watching TOS, I actually thought it was some kind of only AOS fandom thing, which was strange to me because there were no direct hints of it in the movies. Still, it could be explained considering the time and environment in which AOS was released. People write things influenced by their own life experiences, and what proportion of people experience SA in their lives in modern society? How many experience DV? Especially as children? And how many of them get help? When the first AOS movie came out in 2009, I was 13 and had my own experience of domestic violence in the house where I lived. And I lived in a family of educated middle-class people. Domestic violence is actually something that happens not only in poor neighborhoods, often it can be things that are not as easy to classify as real "violence", and which are not taken seriously when you seek help. I'm sure that the situation with DV in America is even worse than in Europe, and if we are talking about the 21st century, this is undoubtedly part of it.

JJ Abrams is not a director of poetic or philosophical cinema (no one doubts this) and while AOS clearly lacks the depth, subtlety, and sensitivity of the original series, it's very much a product of its time (and for its time, it has well-preserved this “We change. We have to. Or we spend the rest of our lives fighting the same battles” idea of ​​Star Trek about becoming better, kinder, and learning to empathize). Yes, Pines' Kirk is no Shatner's Kirk, but where the hell would you find someone like the original Jim Kirk in all this capitalist cynicism, millennialism, narcissism, self-centeredness, and dystopian sentiment after 9/11? AOS Kirk was very adaptable to the environment in which he was created, and this is the main reason why I think the headcanon of AOS Kirk's childhood/teenage SA experiences isn't that far off the mark.

We are shown a boy growing up without a father on a godforsaken farm in a small town somewhere in the middle of Iowa and having noticeable self-destructive tendencies and a lack of fear of his own death; his mother is not mentioned (except at the very beginning, which makes you wonder if she even figures in his life), but a certain Frank is mentioned, who is apparently the only adult male figure in his surrounding (read: a person who has power), and with whom he has a clearly strained relationship; in one of the cut scenes, we are also shown that his older brother, ran away from their home when he was a teenager and left Jim, who was still a child, alone with the problems he was running away from. These are all just blatant red flags of domestic abuse and emotional neglect, which I consider canon for AOS Kirk. It doesn't confirm, but it doesn't deny, the possibility of SA being a part of this experience. Especially if we add that in adulthood Kirk demonstrates all possible mechanisms for not overcoming traumatic experiences - avoiding responsibility for his own life and thoughts about the future; self-destructive tendencies - alcoholism, aimless fights, promiscuous sexual contacts; lack of trust in people and outright disrespect for authority; and, the most important, lack of any shock at violence against himself as if it's deserved and expected.

Like TOS Kirk, he have a quick reaction in dangerous situations, high stress tolerance and efficiency under pressure, and like TOS Kirk, he easily uses his body to survive, protect others, or achieve what he wants, both in situations where this means flirting and sexual contact, and in situations where it means taking on pain or sacrificing his life; he easily distances himself from his own body, and like TOS Kirk, his survival reaction is instinctive, unconscious, sewn deep under the skin by constant repetition.

But for me, that's where they're perceived so differently: TOS Kirk survival reaction is the result of the Tarsus IV genocide, AOS Kirk survival reaction is the result of domestic violence. This is, of course, my headcanon, but I think that Tarsus was never mentioned in AOS not only because Abrams forgot? didn't know? it, but also because in 2009 it wasn't the kind of experience you could associate yourself with, unlike the 60s. And in fact, the only topic that the AOS really raises, and which is an echo of the early 21st century, is terrorism. Nero, Khan, Edison in AOS were terrorists. Even the Vulcan genocide is perceived precisely as a terrorist act - a quick, uncompromising, instantaneous one, and not the slow psychological and physical torment that Tarsus was. This shift in the focus of the experience of mass tragedy from Kirk to Spock in AOS is undoubtedly intentional, because AOS is constantly playing in reverse, and it further confirms for me the theory that the traumatic experience in AOS Kirk's life is primarily domestic.

TOS Kirk's traumatic experience is that of a survivor of a mass tragedy, one of a thousand, where his own trauma is depersonalized, if not devalued, in the face of such unmitigated grief. AOS Kirk's traumatic experience, on the other hand, is isolated in its individualism, and although domestic violence affects almost one in three people, it's a very personal trauma, something that remains behind closed doors between you and your abuser. Traumatic experiences are not measured in percentages, and while their impact on a person can vary, it's impossible to say which is actually worse: being a victim of war, or your own caregiver; being isolated in an entire city that is slowly dying from hunger and bullets, or in the house where you live that has turned into a house of horrors. These are all experiences that should not be. Something that cannot be endured without losing something in oneself.

Therefore, I tend to think that AOS Kirk doesn't so much crave captaincy (and the sense of control it gives) as the sense of belonging and acceptance that the ship and close people give. That's why he tries to leave the captaincy in Beyond, because in reality he continues to feel this inner emptiness even on the ship, a disconnection from the people around him; because it's not the role of captain that gives meaning to his life, but the connection with people, the opportunity to change the situation through his own actions (which noticeably distinguishes him from TOS Kirk, for whom captaincy and responsibility, on the contrary, are what really ground him). In this regard, I consider Leave No Soul Behind (in which Jim gives up the captaincy, remaining in the role of a point in the thick of things, and finding his sense of belonging) not just the best reading of the AOS dynamic, but better than it has even been done in the films. AOS Kirk's traumatic experience is easier to read; he can't really hide it, he's not very subtle about it, it lies closer to the surface, visible through his sharp angles and actions. It's the personal nature of his traumatic experience that makes it so obvious, it's like a broken bone that long ago healed incorrectly and can't be fixed, and it's immediately apparent when you get closer, and he knows it because it's personal, and he carries this scar without pride, just doesn't know what the hell to do with it.

It's more difficult with TOS Kirk, because he's much more subtle and adept at concealment. He's a really well-written, multi-layered character, and his traumatic experiences are built on the experiences of people who went through WW2 and who saw things that we would have had a hard time imagining in the real world before the events of recent years. When I started watching TOS, I didn't really associate him with any traumatic experiences at all. Part of this was influenced by how often in AOS fanfiction he is referred to as a happier, luckier version of Jim who had everything that AOS Kirk didn't have, which I now find to be just a blatant misunderstanding of his character (and what can I say, if even in SNW he's read through this lens). And he really gives that impression. But if you look at him through everything we know about his experience, his trauma is much deeper and more complex. But it's less personal, and therefore not as noticeable at first glance. From TOS we know that he survived Tarsus IV as not just a child, but a child at the beginning of his transitional age, when you already understand very well what is happening to you, and this experience is already conscious. A genocide where thousands of people were executed, where there was hunger and disease, and the fear of being killed, where he was isolated, alone, and had to quickly learn to do everything to survive. In his 20s, he witnessed half the crew of the starship he served on, along with the captain, being killed, and he had to live with the constant feeling that it was his fault because he couldn't stop the killer in time, even though logically he understood that he couldn't have done it, that it would've been impossible for anyone.

TOS Kirk is a good actor, as is repeated over and over again throughout the series, and his flippant demeanor is more often a game than a real comfort. This becomes especially noticeable over time as you begin to better read Shatner's acting, which is built on undertones and eye contact. And as a boy-from-a-good-family-with-a-happy-childhood, he slips into survival mode all too easily and does it unconsciously, naturally, practically domestic, which indicates an experience deeper than the experience of a command track. Many things speak to the influence of Tarsus IV on his behavior. His well-known belief in the impossibility of a no-win scenario stems from his fear of not being able to influence the situation, because as long as he can do something, there is always a chance. His behavior often reflects the trauma of a survivor, in how demanding he is of himself, in his obsessive sense of guilt towards the people he failed to protect. The inability to truly build a stable relationship, not so much because it's really impossible for him as a starship captain (because despite certain difficulties, it's obviously possible), but because he denies himself this, because what he really seeks in love, this complete acceptance, the merging of two essences (which he says in S2EP9 “Metamorphosis” - "You haven't the slightest knowledge of love, the total union of two people") is almost impossible to find, and no other relationship will be sufficient for him, won't give him the feeling of finally being seen, of being heard. This isn't allowed by his inner loneliness, which he is terribly afraid of and wants to stop feeling, but which is such an integral part of him, part of his survival, that letting it go for him means remaining defenseless before another, believing that this other person won't abandon, won't leave him alone, which he cannot afford to believe, because it means returning to his deepest fears.

He really easily uses his own body to survive, protect others, and achieve what he needs, often doing so (again) unconsciously, as if without thinking about alternative options. And he easily distances himself in these moments, which is really indicative of the SA victim's experience. Tarsus IV leaves room for this, given that it was a famine stretched over time in constant fear, surviving in something like that meant using pretty much everything you could, especially if Jim was responsible for someone besides him. There are many uncomfortable scenes in TOS where Kirk has no control over his own body, and which are really taken as scenes of violence towards him, and we always see how hard it is for him. While he flirts easily with both women and men, and often manipulates another person's affection for him, he's not a manslut and he doesn't get pleasure from it. From what we are shown more than once, he really understands women and sympathizes with them. He really understands what it means when you say no and mean no, and the other person thinks you mean yes. But truly, I think surviving genocide and famine is also enough to learn to adapt to any inconvenience and distance yourself from your feelings, to simply survive the moment, because that's how the self-defense mechanism works during a traumatic experience. All of these things also make me wonder what the situation is with TOS Kirk's parents, considering they are NOT mentioned in the original series, and taking it as canon alone, I have no positive theories for that.

Whatever TOS Kirk experienced on Tarsus IV, it had a strong impact on his later life and on his moral views. But it doesn't define him. It has an impact, it causes damage, it determines many patterns of behavior, but the trauma doesn't define him (and it doesn't define you). I think what defines every Jim Kirk is his capacity for compassion, his humanity, his empathy, his belief in people, and that there are no situations that are impossible to overcome. And his traumatic experiences didn't take that away from him. On the contrary, the harder it is for him, the stronger he holds on to his belief in a better world. That's why we love him so much.

[twishagratzu]

Transferring an old twitter thread of mine here to make it easier to read: I had some dipshit straight Spock truther in my mentions, so in the group chat we were talking about the Hays Code and how Star Trek began before it was abolished in 1968.

By 1966 when it premiered, there was already a lot of pushback, but showrunners were still at the mercy of whatever studio was putting their work out there, and especially with something that was already pushing the envelope, the studio likely wouldn't let them get away with too much. So even if Roddenberry and/or the writers had wanted to make Spock's queerness more obvious, the studio would have shut it down. Star Trek got away with a LOT of the progressive/queercoded stuff they did by making it look innocuous to a casual viewer, but obvious to anyone watching closely. For example, in "City on the Edge of Forever", you have Jim saying how "let me help" is an even more powerful statement than "I love you", and then in the very NEXT episode Spock is saying "let me help" to Jim. But I digress. There's a lot in S3 that's less subtle overall. For example, there have always been instances where it’s implied that Jim seduced someone on mission in order to get information or gain trust (honeypotting), but the first time it’s really clear that sex occurred is in "Wink of an Eye" when we see him sitting on the bed putting his boots back on, and the woman at his dresser fixing her makeup. By this point, the Hays Code has been abolished in favour of the MPAA rating system. With that in mind, I want to talk about how all of Spock's mind melds with Jim occur in S3, which ran from late in 1968 to 1969.

We've seen Spock perform mind melds before, but not until "The Paradise Syndrome" do we see him do so with Jim. Context implies this is not only the first time we are shown it as viewers, but also the first time they've done it. Spock is visibly affected by Jim's mind, to the point that by the time he breaks the connection, he's disoriented, panting and limp. When McCoy asks if he's all right, he says, "His mind... he is... an extremely dynamic individual." You don't have to try very hard to view this as sexual. And we know that touching minds is a form of intimacy for Vulcans, because we've been shown and told this previously, in "The Enterprise Incident" when Spock and the Romulan Commander touch fingers rather than kiss in the human way, and in previous instances where Spock performs a mind meld.

The first time we as viewers are shown the meld is in S1, with "Dagger of the Mind". This one is presented as very mystical and witchy, with Spock explaining the act to McCoy, who looks on in sort of a terrified fascination as he melds with Dr van Gelder. But even here there is an energy to it that is very sensual. And in this, and other instances of Spock performing the meld before "The Paradise Syndrome", it's always very clear when he's totally in control of it and when he isn't. Melds are presented as emotionally draining for him, yes, in "Devil in the Dark" and "The Changeling", but it's not until his meld with Jim that we get the impression he was affected on a personal level. And we can believe at this point it's because he and Jim do have a very close relationship. It's been set up throughout the entire series! Of course having their minds join would affect him personally!

Even if it's simply a coincidence that this aligns with the abolition of the Hays code, this couldn't really have been shown earlier than it was, because they'd set up this incredibly meaningful and flirtatious relationship between Jim and Spock throughout the series. If they'd done what they did in "The Paradise Syndrome" in S1, there might not have been a S2! Can you imagine if the first meld we see were between Spock and Jim, after Spock goes on and on about the intimacy of mind melds and how it's a sacred act for Vulcans? After we've watched the two of them in episodes like "The Naked Time" and "The Enemy Within"? There's no way it couldn't be read as sexual, or at least deeply emotional. They had to first establish that Spock could perform a mind meld for many other reasons and purposes without it having a lasting effect on him.

By the time we reach "Turnabout Intruder", Spock needs only a second or two with his fingers on the face of Janice Lester to determine that it's Kirk's mind inside her body. The argument, of course, is that it would be obvious to anyone who was able to touch his mind that it was him and not Lester, but the surrounding context is also important. Just before the meld, Kirk says, "You are closer to the captain than anyone in the universe. You know his thoughts." This, again, on the surface, might read to a casual viewer as just the expected closeness of a captain and his devoted first officer. But the ease with which Kirk uses this particular choice of words indicates that Spock is by this point familiar with his literal thoughts via the mind melds they've shared (explicitly in "The Paradise Syndrome" and "Spectre of the Gun", and others perhaps not shown but implied by action or dialogue), and that Kirk feels comforted by this.

Spock is the only one who can truly see him in this incredibly vulnerable moment— what could be more intimate than that?

[twishagratzu]

Chapters: 1/? Fandom: Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023) Rating: Explicit Warnings: Graphic Depictions Of Violence, Major Character Death Relationships: Edgin Darvis/Zia Darvis, Edgin Darvis/Xenk Yendar Characters: Edgin Darvis, Zia Darvis, Xenk Yendar Additional Tags: Vampires, Blood Drinking, Non-Consensual Blood Drinking, Vampire Turning, Character Turned Into Vampire Summary:

Instead of litches, what if the Red Wizards were vampires instead?

Ed comes home from a raid on a vampire lair to find that the enemy has gotten there first. His daughter is missing and his wife is…changed.

And waiting to welcome him home.

[twishagratzu]

there’s been a really bizarre trend in the past couple years of TERFS/radfems getting pissed off about biology posts. posts about the bilateral gyandromorph cardinal (one half male, one half female), posts about older hens beginning to crow and act like roosters, posts about animals being animals. and it’s hilarious because they interpret these posts as some kind of agenda. no! these are animals not choosing any gender identity or sexuality but being born into bodies they have no control over. weird how that happens in nature huh

[twishagratzu]

Remember that time Catwoman angrily stomped on Captain Kirk's foot in front of Mary Poppins and Gimli?? :D

my creation: text

gif: https://giphy.com/

[twishagratzu]

[twishagratzu]

[twishagratzu]

i say this in all seriousness, a great way to resist the broad cultural shift of devaluing curiosity and critical thinking is to play my favorite game, Hey What Is That Thing

you play it while walking around with friends and if you see something and don't know what it is or wonder why its there, you stop and point and say Hey What Is That Thing. and everyone speculates about it. googling it is allowed but preferably after spending several minutes guessing or asking a passerby about it

weird structures, ambiguous signs, unfamiliar car modifications, anything that you can't immediately understand its function. eight times out of ten, someone in the group actually knows, and now you know!

a few examples from me and my friends the past few weeks: "why is there a piece of plywood sticking out of that pond in a way that looks intentional?" (its a ramp so squirrels that fall in to the pond can climb out) • "my boss keeps insisting i take a vacation of nine days or more, thats so specific" (you work at a bank, banks make employees take vacation in long chunks so if youre stealing or committing fraud, itll be more obvious) • "why does this brick wall have random wooden blocks in it" (theres actually several reasons why this could be but we asked and it was so you could nail stuff to the wall) • "most of these old factories we drive past have tinted windows, was that just for style?" (fun fact the factory owners realized that blue light keeps people awake, much like screen light does now, so they tinted the windows blue to keep workers alert and make them work longer hours)

been playing this game for a long time and ive learned (and taught) a fuckton about zoning laws, local history, utilities (did you know you can just go to your local water treatment plant and ask for a tour and if they have a spare intern theyll just give you a tour!!!) and a whole lot of fun trivia. and now suddenly you're paying more attention when youre walking around, thinking about the reasons behind every design choice in the place you live that used to just be background noise. and it fuckin rules.

[twishagratzu]

How am I looking at the ice cream now that the prices are so fcking high

[twishagratzu]

please stop writing "viscous" when you mean "vicious", it produces the weirdest mental images ever

[twishagratzu]

Chapters: 4/? Fandom: Star Trek: Alternate Original Series (Movies) Rating: Teen And Up Audiences Warnings: Major Character Death Relationships: Crew of the Starship Enterprise & James T. Kirk Characters: James T. Kirk, Hendorff | Cupcake, Scotty, Hikaru Sulu, Nyota Uhura, Pavel Chekov, Leonard "Bones" McCoy, Spock (Star Trek), Spock Prime, Carol Marcus Additional Tags: Mentions of temporary character death, Medical Procedures, Injury Recovery, Hurt James T. Kirk, Post-Movie: Star Trek: Into Darkness (2013), Kirk’s recovery, Kirk’s death, the crew love their captain, emotional support beagle Summary:

The Crew of the Enterprise visits Kirk as he recovers from his experience in the Warp Core.

[twishagratzu]

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves (2023)

[twishagratzu]

villain going to the goon shelter to pick out a new henchman

[twishagratzu]

I'm afraid that I have the worldbuilder's disease and it is terminal.

[twishagratzu]

Reasons why Tarsus IV happened on AOS Star trek too - an analysis

Jim Kirk went to Tarsus IV. And survived.

While it’s never confirmed or commented on the reboot Star trek movies, you can see many hints about it if you take a closer look.

Many people have wondered whether the movie version of Jim Kirk went to Tarsus IV. I’m sure he did. On this analysis, I will tell you why.

For those of you who don’t know, here’s a summary of what Tarsus is about:

“In 2246, Kirk was living on the planet Tarsus IV during a food crisis that was starving the colony of eight thousand people. Governor Kodos, sympathetic to old eugenics philosophies, tried to save a portion of his colony by killing the four thousand colonists he deemed least desirable or able to survive.

Kodos was unaware of the imminent arrival of relief ships. The thirteen-year-old Jim Kirk was one of only nine eyewitnesses to the massacre. (x)

In the movie version, our first glimpse of Jim is when he is born on the Kelvin and his father dies. 

Then the movie jumps to Jim’s teenage years, showing us Jim stealing his dad’s antique car and his step-father Frank shouting at him through the speakers. Sadly, the original scene  - which showed Jim’s brother Sam leaving - was cut from the final movie.

But it shows that Jim’s step-dad Frank isn’t really the father-of-the-year type. The atmosphere in the house has become so poisonous that Jim’s brother Sam decides to leave. This scene is very interesting because it addressed the fact that

Sam: (to Jim) “You’re gonna be okay, you always are. Always do everything right; good grades, obeying every stupid order.”

It’s clear that up until now, Jim has been the perfect little boy - never misbehaving, always following rules, always searching for approval. But Sam - the last member of the family Jim really has left since their mother is up in space - and him abandoning Jim makes something crack in Jim. So Jim takes the Corvette and drives it over a cliff.

It can be even argued that Jim’s stunt with the car is suicidal. He is driving fast, but changes his mind at the last minute and turns the card around while jumping out of it. The automatic police robot catching him suggest that Jim will get in trouble because of this. But Jim doesn’t seem apologetic. For the first time in his life, Jim has stopped being good and quiet.

I don’t think Frank took this too well. I am betting that Frank had a taste for violence, and wasn’t afraid of hitting Jim when it came to it. And since this moment is shown as kind of a drastic turn in Jim’s life, I bet the movie is trying to hint something. And that something is Tarsus IV.

Think about it. Jim has no family left, and Frank probably wanted to get rid of him, telling the social workers and such that Jim is too rebellious for him. What would be the most logical solution? To send him away. Somewhere far away - even to another planet.To send him on Tarsus.

At this point, Jim was abandoned by everyone in his family. His dad died while saving him, Winona ditched Jim and Sam to Iowa with an abusive step-father, and even Sam left Jim behind. This is the spark for Jim’s abandonement issues that follow him althrough the movies.

But I think it’s clear that the car incident and Jim’s rough childhood isn’t the main reasons behind his behaviour. The next time we see Jim, he’s picking a bar fight in Iowa. The year is 2255 (source) so that makes Jim 22 years old.

Now, there is a big hole in the timeline. We are not told what happened after Jim’s car stunt. It’s not referred in any way in the actual movies. But interestingly enough, there’s this:

“According to the Star Trek app accompanying Star Trek Into Darkness, John Harrison’s bio claimed he was one of nine survivors of a 2246 attack on the (Tarsus) planet, his parents Richard and Sara perishing. It was not made explicitly clear if this “attack” was the same event that happened in the regular timeline.” (x)

Naturally, this seems odd because Khan said he was born sometime in mid-20th century, and Admiral Marcus was supposed to have revived him after the destruction of Vulcan (about a year before Into Darkness’ events). But if we dismiss the inconsistensies of this, it still says that Tarsus DID happen in the movie verse.

And what’s important - it happened in 2246. Jim was born in 2233. Which - yes - would make him thirteen at the time of the genocide - like he is in the original version. And when he see Jim at the bar in Iowa, it’s been about 9 years since Tarsus.

It all fits. The timelines, everything.

Still not convinced? Okay, let’s go on.

Remember how tragic and messed up the whole Tarsus incident was? I’m not an expert in the original series trivia, but from what i’ve gathered, Jim lived on Tarsus IV and witnessed the food starvation, most likely suffered from it himself, too. He witnessed the genocide of 4000 people. He has seen Kodos’ face, and he is one of the nine survivors of Tarsus. He has seen bodies, killing, Hunger Games - styled government, probably even cannibalism. I think that’s where Jim learnt how to fight - because he probably had to fight for his life or for others more than once.

Jim is damaged. When we see him at the bar, he’s all boasting confidence and arrogance. But you must realize that it’s all a facade. Jim knows what people think of thim - that he’s a ‘dumb hick’, a needy bar loser, primitive asshole and condescending towards everyone. Jim knows this, and he uses it as his armour, as a shield against other people.

But as well all know, the stereotypes people hold of him couldn’t be more wrong. For example, he instantly knows what xenolinguistics are, even though Uhura thinks he’s too dumb for that. And like Pike says:

Pike:‘Cause I looked up your file while you were drooling on the floor. Your aptitude tests are off the charts, so what is it? You like being the only genius level repeat offender in the Midwest? Jim: Maybe I love it.

Not to mention how much of a genius Jim is in engineering and coding - he even managed to write a subroutine to the Kobayashi Maru. And then there’s of course this:

(source)

Why does Jim conciously dumb himself down in front of others? I think it’s a self-protection mechanism.

Now, this isn’t the only clear personality trait Jim has. Besides of avoiding letting people too close, Jim fears abandonment and detests failure. I think this also hints at Tarsus, since everyone Jim has ever cared about have either abandoned him or died on him.

Jim being ‘a horndog’ and all playboy-ish, and the movies repeatedly showing it, I think that it could also intepreted as another Tarsus-related trait. It could speak of Jim’s constant search of approval and abandonement issues. I think Jim’s afraid of falling in love, because everyone that he has ever cared about has always either abandoned or died on him. Jim has no shortage of warm beds, like we are shown. But what if he hides his real reasons of doing one-night stands? What if Jim is just afraid that he’ll grow caring about someone? 

Also notice how Jim reacts when Bones is about to leave him during Vulcan’s distress call: 

(source)

Jim pretends it’s alright, but it’s clear how hard the situation is for him.

And like Jim says - he doesn’t believe in no-win scenarios. Failing isn’t an option. Because Jim simply doesn’t know how to deal with it. He has always been best at everything he has put his mind into. In Tarsus, failing meant dying. Or getting other people killed. So that’s not an option - Jim doesn’t accept the possibility of it. If he can’t beat a test, he codes it in a way so he can. Spock claims Jim should face the concept of fear in the face of certain death, Jim says he doesn’t need to. I wonder where that came from? Jim always thinks there is a choice. Getting his whole academic career on the line to prove that isn’t a problem for him.

That’s how we get to to the third big thing: Jim’s authority issues. He openly dislikes authorities. It starts with talking back to Cupcake/Mr.Hendorff, even if Jim risks getting his ass kicked and seriously injured. Then along comes Pike (eventhough Pike wins Jim’s trust). But Jim continues to disrespect Starfleet and Federation authorities and things like security staff on the Enterprise - not to mention how he totally walks over people during the whole Vulcan chaos. Including Spock. Especially Spock.

It’s also both poignant and interesting how strongly Jim reacts to Old Spock’s mind meld. But I don’t think it’s just a ‘emotional transference’ like Old Spock says. Does experiencing the destruction of a whole planet and thousands of people dying sound familiar?

Yes. Exactly. I think there is bleak foreshadowing here. I think Jim’s impressive motivation to save Vulcan wasn’t just about his reluctance to failures, but also the memory of the heartbreak from Tarsus. And this goes along with Jim’s rather unorthodox methods to save Earth - no matter the consequences. Jim has had to watch helplessly two genocides, and he won’t let that ever happen to Earth.

One more thing that also clearly points to Tarsus is Jim’s complete fearlessness of violence.He doesn’t care about himself getting hurt. Starting with the bar fight

to the reckless rescue attempt of Sulu

which could have killed him.

Or not to mention the fact that when Spock attacks Jim and almost kills him

Jim isn’t as terrified as any normal person who has been nearly been choked to death a minute ago

instead, he justs gets on with it like such a close brush with death and colorful violence is nothing new to him. Which of course it isn’t.

Of course, this doesn’t change when we come to Into Darkness. For example, when Khan attacks the Starfleet Headquarters, Jim runs straight into attack instead of laying low.

He totally overlooks his own safety.

Pike’s death is something Jim sees as a personal failure, and doesn’t know how to deal with it. So he doesn’t. He just makes a bunch of reckless decisions (accepting Admiral Marcus’ offer, firing Scotty, promoting Chekov and so on).

But you know what really drew my attention? When Jim attacks Khan even after Khan has already surrendered. Jim says that it’s because of Pike, which mostly it definitely is, but then again - think about it. Khan is a mass murderer - strikingly similar to Kodos. He is intelligent, brutal, and not afraid of collateral damage to achieve his goals.

And not to mention Admiral Marcus later on and his likelessness of Kodos.

When Into Darkness reaches its climax - the absolute no-win scenario where everyone in the Enterprise and lots of people in San Fransisco are doomed to die - Jim still refuses to let it happen.

(source)

Jim is ready to rather get himself killed than letting a mass destruction happen again.

So in summary - Tarsus IV happened on the movie verse. Timelines match, and the official movie materials refer to the event.

And most importantly, Jim Kirk is just too damaged and complex in his actions and behaviour without a dark past lurking behind it. Jim is extremely smart, but hides it. Instead, he keeps up an arrogant facade while constantly doubting his own choices (especially in Into Darkness, when he confesses to Spock that he thinks he’s a bad captain).

Also, Jim has some self-destructive tendencies and sometimes absolutely no self-preservation instinct. Jim is not afraid of violence or dying - he seems to have gotten used to it. Instead, Jim suffers from abandonment, authority and slight trust issues, and he is absolutely terrified of failing.  Besides speaking of lonely childhood, this all also speaks of experiencing tragedy and losing important people. It speaks of witnessing death and cruelty. And very importantly, it shows that Jim has had very bad experiences when it comes to authorities and leaders - from his step-dad to Kodos.

Remember that Jim is one of nine eye witnesses that actually has seen Kodos’ face and can regocnize him. And since Kodos is only mistakenly thought to be dead - who would be more amazing villain for the third movie than him? Of course everything in this analysis is just speculation, but imagine if all of this would be observed in the third film? And more interestingly - if we got to see both Jim facing his old demons AND his crew learning of his dark past and trying to save him from Kodos. That would be a movie I would definitely watch.

I would have loved so much if the movies properly addressed the Tarsus backstory. I think their main reason not do it has been the fact that Tarsus is such a cruel and gory storyline. It would have forced the movies to present the flashbacks/scenes of Tarsus rather vaguely if they want to keep their age-ratings low.

I mean, they would have had to show things like murder, chaos, starvation, cannibalism and genocide. Including Jim’s painful struggle through it and all the damage that the Tarsus left in him.

Once again, this is all speculation but I would really like to think that the writers really acknowledge how amazing character they have in their hands - and that they give Jim Kirk the background story we know he has.

But in the end, we’ll just have to wait and see.

Thank you for reading. Reblogging, liking and commenting are always welcome and appreciated!

Screencaps from x and x. (Edited by me)

[twishagratzu]

I really like this headcannon. Baby tos Jim would have been all over that shit. To make it even more heartbreaking I imagine young Jim might have initially thought of Kodos as an inspirational figure, and well, yeah,…

On the other hand, I imagine that in the Kelvin universe, which is basically just a few shades darker than tos, Tarsus was more a juvenile rehabilitation program as opposed to an enrichment program. As far as I can tell, the agreed upon fannon explanation is that aos Jim was sent there after he pulled the stunt with the car.

I think that’s one neat way to justify some of the differences between the man tos Kirk became and the one aos Kirk became.

For more of my thoughts on this, I do happen to write fanfic…😂😂😂

(Yes, this is shameless self promotion but my point stands)

https://archiveofourown.org/works/64855678?page=6&show_comments=true&view_full_work=false#comment_928083235

my Tarsus IV headcanon

The federation used to have a program for young people to go to fledgling colonies for a period of time to assist with tasks such as sinking wells and clerical work.

Of course Jim applies and gets accepted and he’s just so stoked that he gets to go to another planet all by himself and help people and…well…

[twishagratzu]

Wow. This is a pretty damn accurate description of the plot of FF7.

when I think about Jenova as being sapient it's less because I want her to be a replacement villain for Sephiroth and more because can you just imagine how this whole situation would be to a sapient Jenova.

Like okay you're a an alien virus, you just hop from planet to planet, eating whole population,s doing your thing, you're just chilling vibing, and then you get to another planet and you're gearing up to do your normal things and then this species of tiny soft single-formed bipeds who haven't even developed telepathy between themselves yet just intercept you and utterly rock your shit. Like 97% of your biomass destroyed levels of getting your ass beat. They literally put you in the ground and you're like "Ah well them's the breaks" except no not really because the ground itself is alive and it hates your fucking guts so you can't actually die (assuming you can be killed and don't have the single celll regeneration thing going on).

So you just sit frozen in a glacier for 2,000 years, possibly fossiziling alive, and Eventually you get pulled out and it's THE FUCKING GUYS AGAIN. except this time instead of killing you they put you in a tank and start stealing your cells and turning each other into vessels? and they're weird this time, because unlike your former vessels who you could basically just jump between controlling at will, these ones, unless they have a lot of your cells, just??? Do their own fuckass thing????? You have to focus really hard to make them do anything, and it's almost not even worth it because it puts so much strain on them they start straight up dying??????

So you're just sitting in a tank while this is happening and THEN the strongest and most fit of your new vessels shows up to the oldest piece of biomass you have and you're like "Oh finally we do a little reunion, start rebuilding the body" except this one doesn't seem to know what it's supposed to do and before you can get the ball rolling, he gets stabbed and dies and falls into the ground that hates you, at which point all you can do is try to maintain a connection with him, and this one is really weird because whatever they did to him made him like a perfect hybrid of them and your cells, so now instead of the normal semi-independent reasoning that you can easily overpower, this one's mind. Will not dissolve into the collective. You bring him in only to that he just starts piloting and directing the vessels the same way you normally do. The humans dicked around and managed to give themselves fucking admin privileges in YOUR HIVE MIND

So you just say "okay you take the wheel I'm gonna focused on recovering the main body" because that's really all you can do in this situation and he just spends all his time being like "Mother... we'e finally together...". you're an alien so you only kind of know what the fucking he's talking about, but he's really really into this idea of you being his mother, and it's easier to just not correct it. Then he goes about trying to obtain biomass and hijack the planet the way you normally would but you frequently have to remind him that eating the planet is your main goal and not "revenge against all humanity" or whatever he's going on about this week

And there's also this like. Spiky yellow vessel that he's REALLY focused on. Like he just keeps coming back to this one specifically. You're not really sure why, but hey, you've had favorites before too, it's fine. It's fine, until you turn your back for two seconds and when you turn around again he's using ALL OF YOUR BIOMASS TO FIGHT THIS LITTLE YELLOW THING AND THEN HE FUCKING LOSES AND YOU BOTH DIE