spockmyashayam:

lokilenchen:

I imagined what Jim and Bones would look like at Pride and I came up with this

ineffablebuddies:

lenievi:

Here you stand, the perfect symbol of our technical society. Mechanised, electronicised, and not very human. You’ve done away with humanity, the striving of man to achieve greatness through his own resources.

It was last week when I watched The Conscience of the King, and I saved these lines because I found them interesting, particularly in relation to McCoy.

(Obviously, many people have probably said the following before and better, but I kind of need this in my own words. And you know what, approach this as a heavy headcanon territory lol as some random rambling… I also feel like half of this only makes sense if you live in my head, but well… I did write it so I could come back to it whenever I need)

McCoy is the most human, most compassionate person on the Enterprise. He’s the one who connects both Spock and Kirk to their humanity, to their emotions, in different ways and degree. Spock, who struggles between logic and emotions, and Kirk who struggles between what command demands and emotions/his self. *

And it’s not surprising that it’s McCoy who distrusts technology, the basis of their whole society. It is McCoy who is afraid that machines will erase people’s humanity and rob them of their identity.

Spock: You’re the Captain of this ship. You haven’t the right to be vulnerable in the eyes of the crew. You can’t afford the luxury of being anything less than perfect. If you do, they lose faith, and you lose command.

Kirk cannot afford to be too human, vulnerable, soft. And sometimes, McCoy needs to remind him.

Spock, too, thinks he cannot afford to be too human, and sometimes, McCoy needs to needle him, make him question himself.

—

Spock and Kirk can’t act as confidants to one another. Not in a long run and not during the five-year mission.

Kirk needs McCoy to talk to, he needs McCoy’s compassion and emotions and feelings that aren’t hidden. Spock cannot give him the right emotional support McCoy can.

Spock needs McCoy to challenge his views, to remind him that he is part human. Spock cannot have this interaction, the needed kind of interaction, with Kirk due to the power imbalance thanks to their ranks. And McCoy’s approach is what can actually get under his skin, something softer can’t.

—

* this is why, imho, Spock can accept Kirk’s friendship easier than McCoy’s. It’s easier for Spock to accept that Kirk is a human who struggles in a similar way as Spock. (The Enemy Within serves as a good example.) Friendship with Kirk can be explained by logic - it’s a mix of duty, loyalty, professional relationship, admiration. 

But McCoy is different, too human, too emotional, confusing, yet the difference keeps Spock interested - and by Amok Time, McCoy becomes one of his closest friends. Yet, it’s harder to explain that relationship with logic the same way it can be done with Kirk. (and that’s why Spock acts the way he does in Bread and Circuses after he saves McCoy’s life)

Even though, he probably does have some sort of a logical explanation available, eventually, for the peace of his mind: 

However, Doctor, you must remember I am entirely motivated by logic. The loss of our ship’s surgeon, whatever I think of his skill, would mean a reduction in the efficiency of the Enterprise and therefore… (sure)

Allow me to point out that a first officer is more expendable than either a doctor or a captain.

Spock can more easily accept Jim’s friendship, because it is limited by the need to be professional and in command. It’s why we see the conflict arise between them during the films where Spock is constantly trying to refer to him by rank, whilst Jim keeps asking to refer to him by name instead. But in the show, the friendship he has for Jim can be explained as loyalty and duty, and it’s not just him pulling away, it’s also Jim, because Jim needs to be the captain and can’t play favourites. And there proximity is explained by their working conditions. But even in the films his friendship for Jim starts from a referential place - he frequently is seen to relinquish his own rank and command, in order to serve under Jim, and even outside that he initially says “I am, and always shall be, yours”. He sets up the relationship to be unequal, because loyalty and devotion to a superior is okay for a Vulcan. The conflict arises when Jim refuses to accept the power dynamic as inherent to their relationship. Loyalty and devotion to a friend, especially when that devotion is contrary to what he logically should be doing, and when it means he becomes insubordinate as a result, is something else entirely. Interestingly, he only really seems to come to terms with having a friendship with Jim that is equal after he has gained his father’s (however reluctant) acceptance. Spock’s conflicts are rarely just internal - he is very driven by the need to conform. But at the very least he can see the logic in his friendship for Jim - they are bonded, he feels fondness and concern for him, Jim expresses those same sentiments back to him, etc. And Vulcan of course does end up praising their deep bond, so that likely helps.

But Bones is another matter entirely. They are essentially of equal rank (though it is somewhat unclear who outranks who and in what situations) and they have very little reason (outside of scientific research) to interact on a regular basis and there is no need for Spock to have any specific loyalty or devotion to them. And yet they do. To my memory Spock never comments on the fact that Bones is frequently on the Bridge without need, or when he is beamed down to join them without logical reason, though when the AI computer doesn’t include Jim and Bones in the away team because logic dictates they are not necessary, Spock does not seem surprised. And they interact on a frequent basis outside of any professional need, and are seen to deliberately seek each other out (mostly when they are concerned about Jim), even when it is only to bicker. Their relationship is not logical - whereas Jim expresses clear sentiments of friendship, Bones can be aggressive and dismissive, and yet they continue to indulge one another. It’s shown in the films that they enjoy the debates they have, and we get the sense that the animosity between them is to a degree playful. We see how Spock responds to animosity in others - he shuts them down and then retreats. He does not do this with Bones, who he will instead goad and pursue. And they are bonded and care deeply about each other, enough that even Sybok comments on it, but there is no logical reason that Spock can use to explain that relationship. It’s why only as they start getting closer does Spock start arguing that a CMO is more vital to the smooth running of the ship. We don’t really hear that argument from him in season 1, but we do quite a lot later on as they have become closer. It’s also likely why he is more able to refer to Jim as a friend, then he is Bones, even whilst acknowledging them both as important. He denies his friendship with Bones a lot, to the extent that even Jim leaves them a message to make sure that Bones affords him trust and respect, and that Spock goes to Bones for advice. Which is very ironic because prior to that we see Spock approach Bones numerous times for advice, and we see Bones trust and respect Spock in his conversations with Jim, but just never to his face. Spock can’t call Bones a friend because he can’t justify it with logic, and Bones can’t call Spock a friend because we know that Bones is naturally distrustful of intentions and whilst he may think it, he won’t ever risk saying it to Spock’s in case he is wrong. It’s why his compliments and concerns about Spock are most vocal when Spock is not there to tear them down.

I don’t fully know what my point is, but the interactions between these characters are so interesting ah

starfleet-cadet: