#tarsus iv/the conscience of the king is my mental chew toy

[favvn]

The Conscience of the King: A Closer Look at Humanity and Tools

Initially, this was to be a post using excerpts from Georges Bataille's writings about work and tools as the things that contain humankind's urge for violence paired with how Jim Kirk and Anton Karidian/Kodos view tools and what that reveals about each character. I made the post but kept typing up the meta since this episode has so many layers to examine. As a warning, yes, this is long. I do not know brevity :)

Something that I keep thinking back to is how Kodos/Karidian confronts Jim Kirk for using tools and argues that Kirk's adherence to a society built by tools is not only "mechanized" but "not very human" as a result. Kodos' argument is that humans don't need tools, lest humankind grow weak and accustomed to devices aiding them. It is humankind's struggle against life itself that defines humanity for Kodos as a eugenicist. Only the strong may survive in this scenario, by their own innate strengths. The use of tools and technological developments gives everyone a chance at living, not just those who fit Kodos' ideals, so tools and the progress made with them are to be rejected.

Yet Spock's research into the Tarsus IV massacre reveals that it was "painless," which suggests some tools were used to prevent the pain of death, be it lethal injection or disintegration chambers like those used by Eminiar VII in A Taste of Armageddon.

As an aside, it is possible the official record is incorrect, although I argue against that idea if only because it makes sense for each survivor (be it Leighton, Riley, or Kirk) to speak of the massacre as a butchering or outright murder. They witnessed the events, saw their loved ones die, and were to be killed themselves. It is not so much a bias on their part but their own humanity decrying the inhumanity of Kodos. It would be shocking if they, of all characters, were to not refer to the massacre in explicitly violent terms. (Of course, by referring to the event and naming it as a massacre, the cruelty and violence inherent to it becomes implied, even if pain was absent.)

This would suggest that Kodos is not only a hypocrite (tools can be used so long as they serve his goals alone) but that Kodos is also projecting his own crimes and moral failings onto Jim Kirk as a Starfleet Captain. ("I find your use of the word mercy strangely inappropriate [...] You've done away with humanity.") Kodos had to be merciless and inhuman to choose to kill the people he was to govern. (He was not the elected governor of Tarsus IV given his statement in the death summons, "The revolution was a success." He seized power.) When Kodos specifically calls Kirk's mercy into question before declaring humanity has been done away with by Kirk's mechanical society, he inadvertently links the two concepts together: to have mercy is to be human. (This claim is further supported by Kodos' later conversation with his daughter once it is revealed that Lenore has been killing the survivors. He exclaims, "By killing seven innocent men!")

Jim Kirk, of course, views tools as they are: not something to hinder humankind but an aid to help. He argues that society has "armed man with tools," which is an interesting phrasing for him to use. (Consider: "society has given man tools") One hopes the intent is arming for defense rather than murder or war, but with an episode like The Conscience of the King, one which uses Shakespeare to hide the plot in plain sight and extended metaphor to recall the horrors of the Holocaust, either intent can be accepted. Kirk could also be recalling the revolution of Tarsus IV, arming oneself against further despots, or admitting to his own desire to kill Kodos. ("If I had gotten everything I wanted, you might not walk out of this room alive.") For all of Kodos' vitriol to Kirk and the tools of society, it is Kirk who ultimately shows him mercy by not yeilding to vengeance (or to Kodos' goading for it).

It is important to note, however, that Kirk is not above using other people for his personal gain. He puts on the act of a charming love interest for Lenore just to get to her father. Lenore is correct when she confronts Kirk about being used as a tool and referring to his cruelty as a result. Of course, there is a dark irony to this in that Lenore is using Kirk in order to fully close the chapter of Tarsus IV in her father's life by killing the survivors. She's the pot calling the kettle black.

The episode ends with Lieutenant Riley sneaking backstage to kill Kodos during the Karidians' production of Hamlet. Kirk stops him, but it leads to a larger confrontation between Lenore and Kodos, and it reveals her to be the murderer all along.

In what is perhaps the most striking three-pronged twist of irony, Kodos is killed:

He is killed by his daughter, Lenore. ("The one thing in my life untouched by what I'd done [...] I never wanted the blood on my hands ever to stain you.")

He is killed by a phaser gun—a tool of the society he rejects—and a highly mechanized tool at that.

Kodos steps in front of Jim Kirk, the same Kirk who he planned to kill 20 years ago, and takes the shot that was intended for Kirk.

As an aside, Kodos had to die due to the Hayes Code. Evil can not go unpunished according to it. However, I think Barry Trivers, the author of the episode, did a fantastic job to make what could otherwise have been a black-and-white morality tale into something compelling, nuanced, and wonderfully human. (In other words, the layers. Wow.)

One can wonder if the ending is meant to push beyond the limits of the Hayes Code with the questions it raises. For example, did Kodos intend to protect Kirk, or did he assume his daughter would never shoot him? Does Kodos' death change anything 20 years after the fact, when his daughter has killed seven of the nine survivors? How can Lenore Karidian survive yet lose part of her memory, enabling her to forget her father's death and (possibly) her own crimes by extension? How can Jim Kirk live with knowing his life was saved by the man who wanted to kill him in the past? How can Kirk live with knowing the woman who tried killing him has survived and possibly doesn't remember any of it?

The show, of course, does not and will not answer these questions owing to its self-contained story format. In the end, it is up to the viewer to draw their own conclusions as to the humanity of these characters.