BGR: You are well known to be the person who started the "Save Star Trek" campaign in the '60's...can you tell us about that campaign?

BT: It's been written up in my book, "On the Good Ship Enterprise" (out of print, but I own the copyright), in David Gerrold's book about Star Trek (title escapes me right now), William Shatner's "Star Trek Memories" and even in Bob Justman's and Herb Solow's book. Unfortunately, the latter book claims that Gene Roddenberry not only thought up the idea, but paid me to run the campaign. Patently not true. So here's the story:

My husband, John, and I were visiting the original series Star Trek set about mid-second-season, when we realized that the actors were being their usual cheerful or saturnine selves before the lights, and very glum when they stopped being ST characters. A bit of questioning showed that they'd somehow gotten the word that ST was going to be cancelled. Herb Solow, an NBC man assigned to Trek to keep an eye on that "loose cannon" Roddenberry, claims that can't happen - ask any military person who got the news first! Anyway, as we were driving home, John says "There should be something we can do about this." So we talked about it, and when we got home, I called GR to see if he wanted to have us do anything. It wouldn't have done much good if he'd already thrown in the towel. Well, turns out he had been saying to Bob Justman that they needed to reach the fans if Star Trek was to be saved, and here is our phone call! We went back to Hollywood (at the time we lived in the Bay Area) and talked to GR in person. First, we wanted him as far away from the project as possible, because we knew NBC would claim he was behind it (and so it proved; they never believed two plain everyday citizens could mount such an endeavor!) We contacted several people who had large fan mailing lists: a book dealer, a science fiction convention. We asked friends for donations of stamps, envelopes, money and their time to help print, fold, label, stick... all the things one used to do with a mass mailing. I'm so envious of today's campaign directors, who can push one Internet button and reach thousands!

Gene Roddenberry did not pay for the Save Star Trek campaign. It was done entirely by fan donation (something else the corporate minds could not understand), except for a final $100 we needed for a last batch of mail. GR paid for that.

BGR: What was it that motivated you to become involved?

BT: We liked Gene, we liked the actors, we enjoyed being on the set, and we particularly liked what Star Trek was doing. It gave us, for the first time, scripts that an adult could enjoy, not kiddie fare. We liked that it wasn't a "there's an ugly alien, let's kill it!" TV show, as far too many had been.

BGR: What was it about Gene Roddenberry's vision that inspired you?

BT: Star Trek came along during the Cold War. Many people today can't even remember the harrowing time when fingers were hovering over red buttons, and we were just as likely to be blown to molecules the next day. But it was nerve-wracking enough that many young people "dropped out" and decided that since they'd likely not live to see their old age, they might as well dope themselves to the gills. The average "hero" of movie and TV was someone who blasted everything in sight; the anti-hero. Star Trek not only gave us unabashed heroes, but postulated we had a future 200 years from now, and that we were trying to get along.

BGR: Though The Original Series lasted for only one more season...do you think that the campaign laid the foundations for Star Trek's eventual return to the Big Screen & Television?

Absolutely! In fact, had we not run the Save Star Trek campaign, it would likely not lasted another couple of years. Back in the 1960s, a TV show needed 3 full seasons before it was put into re-runs. Anything less, and the show ended up in archive vaults, perhaps never to be seen again. So all the efforts on the campaign did lay the foundation for all the future Treks that have happened.

BGR: What has been your general opinion of the Star Trek movies?

BT: Some are good, some are not. My opinion is that had Paramount gotten off its fat apathy, and started putting out movies like James Bond movies, we'd be up to at least #22 by now! But no, they wait years between movies, watching the actors age, and then say "Well, they're too old to be interesting to the new generation of fans, so now we just won't make a movie." Interesting logic..... Anyway, if we had that many movies on hand, the odds would still be the same: some good, some not. I like the TOS movies; still not too sure about the TNG ones (especially since Kirk dies at the hands of a wimpy little whiner, instead of someone like Khan!). The holes in Insurrection's logic are too big for even this science fiction fan's willing suspension of disbelief!

BGR: And also your perspective on the various Star Trek Television shows?

BT: I liked TNG, loved DS9, and sorta enjoy Voyager when I remember to turn it on. Unfortunately, it's not an imperative with me to watch Voyager, since they are caught in the "bottle show" syndrome of having to wait for things to come to them. I also hate endings where I sit there, wondering what the heck just happened? TNG had good scripts, by and large. DS9 tried some very brave things, not all of which succeeded, but all of which were very courageous for them to try. I very much liked the characters, and the concept of DS9, and I'd have liked to see it continue, even if it had another commander.

BGR: Do you think that Star Trek...as it stands now..has moved away from Gene's original premise?

BT: Without doubt. I understand the reason for some of the moves away; today's movie and TV watchers can't seem to exist without some form of violence in each episode of any show. That's why we have so many car crashes and explosions (where nobody gets even a bloody nose!). I was in a single-car crash where the vehicle rolled end over end for 65 feet; gotta tell ya: lots of blood all over the place (mostly mine) and nobody got out and walked around! But I digress... anyway, some of the differences between GR's concept and today's Trek are excusable as updates of contemporary viewpoints. However, there is no excuse for taking GR's positive outlook on the future, and making it into a dark, and somewhat hopeless future.

BT: Well, Gene didn't do all the scriptwriting himself, nor was it done by a staff; he went to the science fiction community and asked established SF writers for story ideas (what a concept; going to the source!) He picked brains, and tried his best to keep Star Trek as science fictional (or science fantasy) as possible. That's what made the show so enjoyable, and what's missing now. I give Rick Berman points for wanting to keep Trek a viable "franchise" for Paramount, and for himself, of course. It's paying the bills, after all. However, I don't know how much Berman wants to hear from the fans. Brannon Braga doesn't want to hear from us, so far as I can see. I think there should be a major outreach to SF writers for story ideas and for other suggestions to help bring the concept back on course. I think there should be a real fan liaison between the Star Trek offices and fans, to continue getting reactions that could help keep the concept on course. But since you folks are the only ones who have asked me, it's not likely to be taken under consideration by Paramount.

BGR: You've been involved to some extent with the Excelsior campaign...where do you see that going?

BT: I don't see it succeeding in getting a Captain Sulu aboard the Excelsior, but I applaud the effort, because it is rattling a few cages over at Paramount, and that's always a Good Thing. Several problems here. First, the fans want it, which immediately puts everyone's back up at Paramount. Second, it means building the Excelsior from scratch; few of the standing sets would work. A terribly expensive proposition. Third, we're back to ageism, where The Powers That Be are convinced that TV series leads must be young, unless you are doing a cop or law show, where people can be any age (now why is that?) The last point can't be discussed by Big Corporations like Paramount without legal repercussions: the suggested lead is an Asian, not a Caucasian or person of color. Fans don't care; lots of Higher Ups don't believe that. They simply can't conceive of a hero in any other color than black or white.

BT: I like Bill Shatner; he's a strange and wonderful person with a serious tender spot for handicapped kids (none of which he mentions in either of his books; I asked him why not, and he seemed surprised that fans might want to know this!) But I have to say that he must lose weight before he could be considered for a TV hero again. And again we have the ageism problem. Should fans give up on the idea? By no means! Again, it keeps Par on its collective toes, and that's always a Good Thing. I like keeping Big Corporate Heads wondering!

BT: There are many, many problems in getting a show back on TV. First, there is the thought that the second try is, historically, never as good as the first one. TNG proved them wrong on that, but it was an exception. Some series are tangled in legal disputes, some series' actors are long gone or on other projects with no intention of returning. Here, the Corporate Heads always worry if fans will accept new actors in a favorite old TV show. And sure enough, Trek fans managed to mess up the Excelsior campaign by going beyond a simple request for a new series with Capt. Sulu and the Excelsior. Fans had to add just who else should be in the series, and they all disagreed! So Paramount was perfectly within its rights to say, "Well, gee, if you guys can't agree on who you want in the series, then we can't do it, because we're sure to piss off someone!" Then there is the financial expense of re-mounting and updating an old TV series. So with so many new (or supposedly new) ideas coming along, why would a studio bother returning to an old idea?

BGR: There has been a telecommunications revolution since the original mailing campaign to save Star Trek...how do you see the Internet changing the dynamic of revival efforts?

BT: As I said above, I'm very envious of the ease with which today's campaigners can reach thousands of people in one evening! It took days of planning to get as many people together as our house would hold. Then we had to print the pages, bring them home with the boxes of envelopes (or lots of staples if we weren't using envelopes), and lots of stamps -- none of which were the peel-and-stick type. When Collating Day came, we'd have a big pot of spaghetti sauce started, lots of soft drinks and coffee, and then the first fans would arrive. They'd start around the big dining room table, collating the pages, stapling them together, and folding them. Other fans would stuff envelopes, or label the stapled pages with address stickers. Others, with small sponges, would seal envelopes and/or apply stamps. John would zip-sort by hand, and helpers would tie bundles together (later, the Post Office decided we could use rubber bands, which added a new element when a lot of fans got their hands on giant rubber bands!) We'd put the bundles of mail into labeled mail bags, which John would take to the Post Office the next Monday. Record mailing was 23,000 pieces we mailed for the Space Program. I can reach that many people via the Internet in one day, given that most of you will take the message and relay it to at least a dozen other fans. What a world we live in! I love it!