Alright so we all knew that this day would eventually come. It’s come amidst college and some of the hardest school work I’ve ever had to do in my life. No, I’m not throwing in the towel on this blog. I love you guys too much to do that. No, I’ve found myself asking the really important questions this week. The types of questions that really allow you to peer into a person’s soul. The types of questions that leave Trekkies red in the face after hours of heated debate. That is which captain is really the best captain in Star Trek? It’s a debate that’s raged since September of 1987 when Next Generation premiered and introduced the world to Captain Jean-Luc Picard. It’s a debate that’s led to broken noses, broken friendships and broken families for decades, and now we’re going to examine the debate right here. However, before we get into the meat of it, there are a few things that need to be understood so that we can keep things focused and civil. First, I’ve put painstaking efforts into devising appropriate criteria so that my analysis can be as objective, and empirical as possible. Second, and this can’t be stressed enough, *THIS IS JUST THE OPINION OF THE AUTHOR!* You’re free to feel however you want abou this exercise, but that’s no reason to resort to mudslinging in the comments. Now that we have all of that out of the way, let’s jump into the reason you’re all here!
I’ll admit that devising the criteria for this article presented some interesting challenges primarily because each captain is the hero of their own story so none of them possess any dominant flaws, and for the most part, their crews respect and obey them with little to no question. Also, there were drastically different teams writing these characters under drastically different edicts. For example, the Original Series adhered to a wild west approach to its storytelling a character usage. As such, Kirk plays fast and loose with the rules quite a bit, where Picard and Sisko had to be a bit more subtle when they wanted to bend the rules. This is my round about way of saying that my criteria may seem kind of weird, and they may not be the criteria that you might use, but they represent data points consistent across all of the shows, as much as possible.
First up on the criteria list is relatability as pertains to the viewer. There are all sorts of individual qualities that these characters possess that we can relate to in one way or another, but within that suspension of disbelief, how much can we really relate to them overall. Second, do they inspire the viewer at all? The idea behind a good protagonist, usually, is to inspire the viewer to greater aspirations in some way, be it improving a personal character flaw, or accomplishing a goal, the hero is supposed to help us see the potential within ourselves. Third, we’re going to look at each captain’s arch nemesis because no good hero is complete without a good villain. Finally, we’re going to look at each character’s most defining moment. I know this one will be a huge debate point, and again, this is according to me, but truly good characters need to grow, and so we need to examine those times when these captains did just that. I also know these criteria are somewhat sparse, but seriously, there are a lot of handicaps to overcome if you want your analysis to be more than a battle of witty one liners. If you do think of criteria that I missed, please comment! I wouldn’t mind factoring in new variables to better evaluate the outcome. Speaking of, we’re going to rate each criteria on a scale of 1 to 5 with a half step built into each rating level. “1” will be just absolutely horrible, where “5” will be amazeballs. Alright, now that we’ve got our criteria, let the games begin!
Captain James Tiberius Kirk: Star Trek: The Original Series
Alright, so we’re starting with quite possibly the most iconic captain of the bunch, but I’m going chronologically IRL so deal with it. Kirk is the OG captain. The one after whom all the others were patterned in one way or another. He’s also the one with the least amount of screen time clocking in at only about 103.5 hours (I included the Animated Series for sake of thoroughness). However, he’s also the captain that has had the most impact on our pop culture zeitgeist. So how does he really stack up? Looking at our first piece of criteria in broad terms, it would seem like Kirk should do a flying kick to the chest in this exercise, but don’t queue up that TOS fight music just yet. When you break down Kirk’s individual traits, he’s a fine specimen of the captaincy, and there are individual traits that the viewer can relate to. For example, I like to think that I’m possessing of some decent ingenuity, I’m a pretty honorable person, and I attempt to look at the world through fairly rational eyes. These are all individual traits that Kirk possesses as well. Where Kirk’s relatability starts to break down is when you start combining these individual traits into a whole. Look at his service record as evidence. Kirk was an above average student at Starfleet Academy, and top of his class. He rose to captaincy at an earlier age than any other captain in Starfleet history. Over the course of the shows, he managed to finagle his way out of impossible situations. He’s a Mary Sue. I’m not saying that’s a bad thing because the show, and his character in particular are still wonderfully enjoyable, but what I am saying is it’s really hard to relate to a seemingly perfect specimen of humanity because we are all so far from perfection.
Next let’s look at how well Kirk inspires the viewer. This is where Kirk’s overpowered nature actually helps him out, at least for the purposes of this exercise. Kirk is written as a veritable paragon of human existence. As such, he employs a lot of commendable traits that viewers can be inspired by. Those same traits that make him unrelatable as a package, make him exceptionally inspiring when one takes traits in smaller bites. I won’t rehash through points that I just made for the other criteria. Just know that those same points take on a much different light when observed from this other point of view.
Next we’ll look at Kirk’s arch nemesis, and we all know which individual that would be. We’re, of course, talking about Khan Noonien Singh. Khan is an interesting anomaly in and of himself because he’s only featured in two pieces, “Space Seed”, and “The Wrath of Khan”. I had thought to perhaps use the Klingons as Kirk’s arch nemesis, but defining an entire race in that fashion for one would upset things later down the road for the others. So here we are. Khan is a fine villain for Kirk because just like Kirk, Khan is a Mary Sue. Khan was genetically enhanced to be super humanly strong, intelligent, and ingenious. That also made him crazy, and ruthless. The two times that Khan does crop up in the Star Trek mythos, he first tries to kill Kirk, and then, indirectly, kills Spock. I’d say he leaves a sufficiently horrifying wake of destruction behind him. But he’s also a poignant villain for Kirk because he represents all that Kirk could have been if he had been thrust into a different set of circumstances. For all the potential that Kirk has to use his overpowered persona for good, there’s at least an equal chance that he could use them for evil, and Khan manifests the results of that quite well.
Finally, let’s look at Kirk’s defining moment. This actually wasn’t a terribly hard one to tie down, although there were a few in the running so for kicks, let me share the runners up. There was the death of David Marcus, Kirk’s son, which was definitely a heart-wrenching for Kirk. There was pretty much all of “The Undiscovered Country” as that ties up Kirk’s resentment towards the Klingons, and shows him growing towards an acceptance of them. And then there was his death in “Generations”. These are all great contenders for most defining moment, but in the end, they all fall just a little bit short of the death of Spock in “Wrath of Khan”. I looked at this one three-fold. First, in all of the episodes of both TOS and TAS, we never actually saw Kirk have to confront personal loss on such a massive scale. Second, it really brought Kirk back a little closer to the ground. One thing about a Mary Sue character is there’s very little room for personal growth. Kirk skated through life with nary a care because he could, but suddenly he couldn’t anymore. The film acknowledges this in a wonderful way, but by bringing Kirk down a number of pegs, it actually made him a more dynamic character. Also, in 101 TV episodes spanned between two shows, we never saw Shatner act with such finesse and impact. He really dug deep for the funeral scene, and those that followed in that film. It really is a thing to behold, and it sets the stage for that character to continue on with some decent character growth thereafter.
Where does this leave our score for Kirk? Here’s the breakdown:
Relatability: 2
Inspiration: 4
Nemesis: 4
Defining Moment: 5
Total Score: 15
Average: 3.75
Out of a possible 20, 15 really isn’t too shabby. Let’s see if any of our other captains can give the OG a run for his money.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: Star Trek: The Next Generation
As I said earlier, once Paramount announced a new show, and a new captain, debate really started to heat up, and there was definitely some concern on behalf of the production team as to whether or not TNG would be able to gain any traction with fans. However, TNG managed to thrive, and went on the give use 179 regular episodes, and 4 feature films. This puts Picard’s screen time somewhere in the ballpark of a staggering 189 hours, the most out of any captain on this list. Our last entry was pretty involved so let’s not waste any time here.
Looking at Picard’s overall viewer relatability, he fares a great deal better than Kik. Whether this is because of the way he was handled by writers, or because of the sheer amount of time viewers had in order to get acquainted with him is something you can discuss in the comments. However, for a few reasons, Picard ends up being a bit easier to relate to. Part of that has to do with his defining moment, and there’s really no way to proceed without spoiling that so here it is: he was assimilated by the Borg. Now most of the time, Picard is what I like to refer to as the marble statue of a captain. He doesn’t often show his emotions to his crew. He stays pretty cool under pressure most of the time. He’s a heck of a diplomat. He’s intelligent, and resourceful, and pretty ingenious in his own right. We’re given a lot of opportunities to see Picard outside of the command structure, and that gives us chances to see him doing non-Starfleet things, like fencing, or playing out pulp mystery novels on the holodeck. These are experiences that we weren’t able to get with Kirk, and they help to paint Picard as a more well-rounded human being who does his work, but also takes time to be human and escape from the rigors of duty, something that we all enjoy. However, a lot of that gets overshadowed by his assimilation. We’ll talk about this a bit more in a second, but through this experience, and a number of experiences thereafter, the character of Picard suddenly becomes a little bit scared, and for a brief time, loses that patented composure that the viewer is used to seeing. It was handled pretty well throughout the show, and the inclusion of those things in “First Contact” served as a decent bookend to that arc for Picard. But it helped the viewer to see Picard as less of a paragon. It’s not much, but I’ll take it!
Looking at how Picard inspires the viewer, I might be a little biased. I grew up with Picard. He was my captain. Next Generation was my show. Of course the others made an impact, but I always found myself striving towards Picard’s collected nature, and his ability to negotiate diplomatically, and rationally. I’m not a super fantastic physical specimen so fist fights were out of the question, but using my ingenuity, and my ability to empathize and negotiate opened up a lot of alternatives in my mind. And I’d like to think that it was that way for a lot of Trekkies. Picard was a thoughtful captain who looked at all of his options before he settled on a decision. It made him less brazen, and perhaps, less fun in a lot of ways, but it also showed a pattern for good decision making, and good analytical skills.
Now defining Picard’s arch nemesis isn’t terribly hard either, although it plays out differently for Picard than it did with Kirk. We actually meet Picard’s nemesis in the very first episode. Q shows up a number of times, and wreaks havoc on Picard’s life. It’s different from Kirk because where Khan was purely a physical threat to be neutralized, Q was more abstract, and the threats took on many different forms depending on the whim of the character. However, it can be said, pretty confidently, that Q is the one character that really knew how to bring Picard down a few pegs. Picard was many good things, but he could also come across as a bit smug, and Q was always there to call him out on it. Don’t let pretenses fool you though. Although Q’s antics usually seemed harmless, the underlying motivations could be really dangerous. Q is, of course, responsible for introducing Picard to the Borg, but more importantly, he was responsible for introducing the Borg to Starfleet. It was this initial introduction that enticed the Borg to pursue the assimilation of humanity, and that resulted in a lot of loss, and pain for Picard over the years. The only anomaly in this scenario is that Q is, by design, a Mary Sue character. However, the implementation of those qualities actually makes Q an interesting thorn in Picard’s side, and a lot of fun to watch.
We already touched on Picard’s defining moment as a character, his assimilation at the hands of the Borg. But I’m looking at a couple of events in particular that relates to that incident. First, when Data manages to temporarily sever his connection to the collective, and we see him shed the one tear. That always gets me misty eyed because for that brief moment, we get to see the anguish that Picard is feeling at the loss of his humanity and his individuality. Connected to that is his breakthrough argument with his brother in “Family”. It’s at that moment that we see Picard embrace not only the feelings of vulnerability associated with his Borg experience, but we also see him own up to his charmed lifetime of smugness. Layers of confidence are ripped away as Picard begins to realize the limits of his own mortality, and just like Kirk, Picard gets a fantastically relatable starting point for meaningful character growth.
How did Picard do? Here are the stats:
Relatability: 3.5
Inspiration: 4.5
Villain: 4
Defining Moment: 4.5
Total: 16.5
Average: 4.125
Slightly better than Kirk after all is said and done. If you feel a rage boner coming on, I would refer you back to my disclaimer at this point. Feel free to comment, just try to keep it civil.
Captain Benjamin Sisko: Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
I honestly felt going into this exercise that Sisko would win the day as he’s my favorite, and I love watching DS9 more than any other show. However, after tallying up Picard’s score, I’m a little skeptical going into Sisko so let’s see what happens.
Once again, Sisko is featured in the bulk of 179 episodes of DS9 so he shown in about 181 hours of footage. That’s a lot, but what does that mean about his relatability? Looking at Sisko, he’s a family man. Already, that’s something that we all can relate to on one level or another. We get to see at the beginning that he’s not crazy about his assignment to DS9, and so he’s a reluctant hero. He has a temper that he often has trouble keeping in check, he’s willing to do illegal and deplorable things when he feels that the ends justify the means, and he can be pretty callous at times where his crew is involved. Off the bat, he’s not a Mary Sue. He’s probably the most humanized captain to be introduced up to that point. His good traits include knowing when to apologize, and doing so sincerely, being loyal to both Starfleet and his crew, a line that he walks tenuously well. He’s approachable, he’s willing to consider the insights of others and act on those insights when appropriate. He can cook, he loves baseball, and he’s willing to meet his peers on their level in order to gain and retain their trust in him. These are not qualities that any of the other captains lack per se, It’s just that they’re touched upon so much more with Sisko. He’s the captain for the everyman.
How does being the everyman translate when attempting to inspire the audience? It can be a bit of mixed bag, but mostly it helps. We all start off far from perfection in life, and we have to work to master ourselves in various areas in order to become better, and most well-rounded human beings.Sisko represents this extremely well, but not too well. He makes a lot of progress, but he also has moments of digression as well. This fact left me waffling a bit about how to score him in this category. However, I ultimately came to the conclusion that it’s more inspiring to see someone succeeding overall despite their setbacks than it is to see a model of perfection always doing things perfectly.
As far as villains go, Sisko’s is extremely easy to peg. Dukat was established from the very beginning, just as was Q. The big difference between the two characters has a lot to do with the formatting of the two shows though. TNG was episodic for the most part so an episode ran, it was over, and rarely were any of them referenced afterward. On the other hand, DS9 was very serialized so the continuity between episodes had to remain as consistent as possible. This led to Dukat developing quite a bit differently than Q. Everyone can pretty much agree that a Star Trek show requires about two, or three seasons to really find its footing. Because of this, Dukat evolves from persistent nuisance to respectable nemesis, but that doesn’t actually begin to take place until part way through season 2 when the Dominion are first hinted at. Had the show run in a different direction, I could see Dukat easily becoming a vastly different character. However, it did what it did, and Dukat became what he became. He’s ruthless, single-minded, cunning, devious, deplorable, dishonest, and heartless, but he’s also complex, and layered. He’s by far one of the best villains ever to come out of Star Trek. You know his base motivations and usually he’ll stay the course, but just when you think you have him nailed down, he does things that completely surprise you. And then you realize that he was still playing his agenda and all you can say is< “Well played, Dukat. Well played,” as you slow clap during the credits.
Putting my finger on Sisko’s defining moment was a bit harder than with the other captains. He hits quite a few milestones throughout the show, but once I took a step back and looked at the big picture, I realized that there was a nexus to all of it. It surprisingly plays out in the first episode of the show, too. Sisko’s initial meeting with the Prophets, and his appointment as Emissary is an event that really defines him as a character for the rest of the show. Sure you could look to “Far Beyond the Stars” and his reconciliation between being a Starfleet officer and the Emissary. You could maybe look at “In the Pale Moonlight” as the defining moment when Sisko hits an all time low, but none of these events would have happened, and wouldn’t even have been necessary if it hadn’t been for that initial encounter with the Prophets. I don’t feel I can score it terribly high because it was a slow burning thing and it took 7 seasons to finally get the payoff, but it was always in the background guiding Sisko’s arc.
All that aside, how does Sisko stack up? Let’s see:
Relatability: 5
Inspiration: 5
Nemesis: 4.5
Defining Moment: 3.5
Total: 18
Average: 4.5
Better than I had anticipated after my exhaustive analysis! Still, could one of the remaining captains dethrone the Sisko? Let’s find out!
Admiral Kathryn Janeway: Star Trek: Voyager
Yes I’m using her rank from her last canonical appearance. No, I don’t care if you don’t like it. We’re looking at the Prime Universe in it’s entirety so let’s move on. Janeway, just like SIsko, appeared in the bulk of 179 episodes of VOY. This results in roughly 181 hours of screen time. If you’re fuzzy about that, I’m at least attempting to factor in the two part premiere, and finale. Similar to Sisko being captain of a space station, Janeway also gets a bit of spin on her situation in the form of inadvertently becoming the Gilligan’s Island group of the Star Trek universe. It was supposed to be a three hour mission, but then we got stranded in the Delta Quadrant! This leads to some interesting choices being made where her character is involved so let’s look at her under our cobbled together microscope.
Janeway set a benchmark right off the bat because she was the first prominently featured female captain in Star Trek. No, I’m not making this a gender issue. I’m simply stating fact. There’s a reason that women are referred to as “the fairer sex”. Now I’m invoking a little gender typification, deal with it. Women are, in my opinion, generally more pleasing to look at. Their features tend to be softer, and this mimics their personalities a little in that there are a decent number of women living with that maternal instinct. This instinct can result in women being more compassionate, more empathetic, and more nurturing. I know, I know, some of you are going to see that as a gross generalization. I can’t please all of you. Anyway, these qualities definitely manifest themselves in Janeway. Her situation magnified them a great deal as well. Stranded 70 years from home, she led with a style that exemplified each of those qualities exceptionally well. However, when things got out of hand, she could come down with an iron fist. She didn’t tolerate insubordination in any way. She was a shrewd negotiator, lacking the tact and the grace that Picard often showed. She had a heck of a poker face, too, which helped. However, she always tried to remain true to her oath as a Starfleet officer, eve when circumstances made betraying that oath easy, and justifiable. And even when her crew were suggesting otherwise. She did try to remain rational as much as she could, but there were times when she was definitely governed by her passions, and she walked the line pretty well. If Sisko was the everyman captain, Janeway was the cool parent who wouldn’t let her kids abuse the system. I’d say that makes her pretty relatable. Most of us have been there. We want to be the cool boss, but we have to also maintain order and productivity.
How does this dance serve to inspire the viewer. Janeway certainly exemplified some admirable qualities, and as a result she had moments where she could teach the viewer lessons about honesty, integrity, and dignity. These are qualities that define a strong character overall and make for the type of person who can be considered reliable and trustworthy, both qualities that we should see to possess ourselves. Janeway displayed compassion, empathy, and understanding. These are fine qualities to strive for as well. She was a woman of science. She liked to look at situations from as many perspectives as possible before drawing any conclusions. We should all seek to do the same. I’d say that if we look at individual components, Janeway presents qualities that could definitely inspire the viewer to better things.
Just like Sisko, Janeway’s villain isn’t difficult to pin down, although she didn’t crop up until pretty late in the show. I’m referring to the Borg Queen(s). I’m skating by on a technicality here, sort of, because technically the Queen is one individual, but she represents a species that, by their very nature, also kind of operate as one individual. The Borg are definitely a formidable nemesis. However, I felt that I had to mark off points because as a villain, they’re a bit contrived. Also, in choosing to make them such a huge focus, the team involved in production kind of dulled the teeth behind them, and also diminished the mystique that made the Borg such an intriguing element in the Star Trek mythology.
Finally, let’s look at Janeway’s defining moment. Once again, this was not hard to pin down, and once again, it happens in the very first episode. The crew of USS Voyager are flung 70,000 light years to the Delta Quadrant after a freak accident that Janeway herself could have avoided. At this point, everyone aboard the ship is looking anxiously at Janeway for both comfort and direction. To her credit, she handles this situation exceptionally well. However, this is a moment that will define her for the rest of the show, and not just in the astronomical sense. Sure, they were 70 years from home, but over the course of the show, we see Janeway struggle with whether or not she made the right decision marooning her crew. It forces her to doubt herself, which by this point is just a little cliched, but it still works. She’s left wondering what would have happened if she had chosen differently, and I think we can all relate to that in some way or another. But she had a tough call to make, and she made it for better or worse. I do kind of feel that her moment is diminished somewhat by the fact that we literally have to slog through the repercussions of that moment in every episode, and where VOY is concerned, that can really be a mixed bag.
Now that the evidence has been laid before us, how does Janeway sit?
Relatability: 4
Inspiration: 4.5
Villain: 2.5
Defining Moment: 3
Total: 14
Average: 3.5
By comparison, Janeway doesn’t do bad, she just doesn’t do well. She’s kind of a middle of the road specimen for a Star Trek captain, but for a regular human being, still quite above average.
Captain Jonathan Archer: Enterprise
Yes, I called it just Enterprise. No, I don’t accept the addition of the Star Trek super title. Deal with that too. Now we’re at the crux of what kicked off this internal debate. I was actually contemplating this exercise on my way to school one morning this week, and thought, “I should write an article about this!” I’ve been struggling a bit with classes because they are hard, and I was looking for a little Trek related inspiration, which got me thinking about which captain I found most inspiring. I won’t spoil the process, though so let’s jump in!
ENT ran for 98 episodes, and Archer was in all of them. This puts his total screen time at around 100 hours. That’s still the least out of all the captains so disregard my remarks about Kirk, and his lack of screen time. I humbly admit that I need to learn to math better. Anyway, just how relatable is Archer? Well, to be honest, Archer’s personality is kind of bland, but that does actually help his cause in my opinion because how many of us are huge personalities? I’m willing to bet that not many of us see ourselves as personalities around which other orbit. Archer has some good qualities overall. He’s loyal to his crew, he attempts to follow a moral compass, he’s trusting, and he’s willing to listen to his crew when they come to him. He likes water polo… okay… can’t really swim so… He enjoys a good cut of steak, which I can appreciate, for sure. On the negative, he’s whiny, he’s way too focused on his family legacy, he’s irrational, judgemental in all the wrong ways, and he’s overconfident. However, these qualities weave a tapestry of a character that’s not terribly far removed from people we may actually know. I’d say that makes him pretty relatable where the viewers are involved.
How Archer inspires the viewer, in my opinion, ends up being the inverse effect that we see with Kirk. Kirk, remember, is a Mary Sue character. Therefore, he’s going to be oozing with qualities that inspire the viewer to try and be better. Archer on the other hand, is so run of the mill, that while he’s relatable, he’s somewhat unremarkable. Because of this, there are very few times, at least for me, where I said, “I totally want to emulate that quality that I just saw Archer exhibiting!” And actually, I can’t think of one, but I’ll still allow for the possibility that maybe it happened. That said, Archer didn’t start off from a great place, and he did improve over time so if you can endure the slow burn of his character arc, then you may find his tenacity inspiring.
Archer’s nemesis is somewhat interesting, but less so for how he’s built and more for how he’s used. I’m talking about everyone’s favorite Andorian Shran. Played by Jeffrey Combs, he’s just a delight to watch. Where I think he becomes a bit more interesting that maybe he should be is that, like Dukat, he’s willing to work with the hero when it serves his purposes. But then, by the end, he’s a full fledged ally. This fact is diminished somewhat by the fact that the allegiance was technically inevitable. However, during the run of the show, this made Shran somewhat interesting. He too was duplicitous, and calculating, and cunning. He wasn’t quite as ruthless as Dukat. He knew when to walk away, a quality that Dukat did not possess. Shran wasn’t so self-deluded as take his own impact on the universe for granted. This showed a level of humility that we don’t often see in a villain. But again, I think this was tempered by the fact that the production team knew going in that he would eventually become an ally. Still, it makes for a complex and interesting relationship between the hero and villain.
It’s incredibly hard to nail down one moment that really defines Archer. I always felt that this character was, to an extent, pretty directionless. However, if I had to put a label on it, and I do, I would have to say that the death of his father is the event that most defines Archer. Interesting since that’s not something that we ever actually see, but it’s referenced a number of times. I chose this one because Archer resents the fact that his father never got to see a warp 5 engine take to the stars pretty bad. This fact drives him to do what he does, for better, or worse. He is defined by that experience, or rather, he defines himself via that event in his life. It’s not the most interesting device ever employed to build character, but it is one of the more interesting things about Archer’s character.
How does Archer do in our exercise? Let’s find out shall we:
Relatability: 4
Inspiration: 2.5
Villain: 3.5
Defining Moment: 3
Total: 13
Average: 3.25
Well, there you have it. Archer is somewhat mundane by StarTrek captain standards, but certainly not run of the mill where the numbers are concerned.
It’s been an interesting exercise, to say the least, and while I’m not surprised by who the victor was, I am surprised to so how everyone scored overall. I will admit that there may have been bias involved, but I’d like to see you do an exercise like this without at least some bias. I assure you though, I did try to remain as objective as I humanly could. However, at the end of it all, Sisko is our big winner! I’m curious to hear what you think. Who’s your favorite captain, and why? Are there criteria that I overlooked that maybe should be considered? Let me know in the comments, and stay tuned to see what shenanigans we get into next week!
