L.A. Confidential: Good Cop-Bad Cop

The Los Angeles Police Department has representations of both good cops and bad cops in L.A. Confidential. This thesis will focus on Detective Ed Exley (Guy Pearce); the dubious good cop and why he follows the rules and regulations in the line of duty. In addition L.A. Confidential will represent Exley as a police officer who understands the hierarchal authoritative system and tries to benefit from it. He will be depicted later as a public-image conscious figure in this film. There may be more concern on his part about his image and the perception of police legitimacy than whether the political system is genuinely legitimate (Sankowski 2002).

The Los Angeles police department’s representation in cinema and television has been viewed for almost 70 years. From the early days of Dragnet to End of Watch, the L.A.P.D. has been critically analyzed for its use of violence, scandals, corruption and sometimes honesty since the days of the William H. Parker. The toxic mixture of reality and fiction has created a genre that has attracted television and film audiences for decades. The film representation of these men and women in blue has boiled down to a number of characterizations, including murderers, thieves, blackmailers and drug dealers. Amongst the more popular scenarios which may be less glamorous, and emerges in the police genre films are, the good cop goes bad or the good cop faces a moral test and fails the ethical dilemma he is tested with.

 L.A. Confidential is the 1997 film noir classic based on a novel by James Ellroy, with the screenplay written by Brian Helgeland. James Ellroy has also penned several other police dramas including The Black Dahlia, Dark Blue and Rampart. L.A. Confidential explores the darker side of the Los Angeles police force in Southern California in the 1950’s. There are four police officers who closely interact and they have distinctive views and personalities on how police work should be accomplished and administered. On the surface, these officers are very dedicated to the Los Angles police force. Captain Dudley Smith, portrayed by James Cromwell, Officer Wendell “Bud” White played by Russell Crowe, Detective Ed Exley, portrayed by Guy Pearce and Detective Jack Vincennes played by Kevin Spacey. The characters try “to protect and to serve,” the general public, but through the authorship of James Ellroy, the only citizens which are being served are the powerful criminals and political elite, who are intertwined with the dark underbelly of the Los Angeles police force.

 The surface characterizations of good cops/bad cops are hard to define at first, as a layer of mystery and deceit descends upon the first act. Captain Dudley seems like a lifer, a good honest cop, who bends the rules with brutality to get the hard police work done. Bud White is the muscle behind the badge, with an agenda to right the wrongs of abusive wife- beating men. Detective Exley is the outsider, the good cop, and college graduate with glasses, who is more politician than cop, in the eyes of his colleagues. Vincennes is the glamor cop, who has been accepted in the fraternity. He takes bribes or hush money from the editor of Hush Hush magazine for news tips. He is dirty as the rest, but has a sleazy appeal.

According to Cecil Greek, in The Big City Cop as Monster, Greek believes Hollywood depicts law enforcement officers in movies and television as monsters (Greek 1994). The police emerge as rouge monsters, which are sent out like Golem in Jewish folklore to save the population from the scourge of evil (Greek 1994). It was said in the 1600s Hasidic Rabbi’s in Prague created golem out of clay to protect the Jews from Blood Libel and a Jew-hating priest who was trying to incite Christians against Jews (Oreck 2013). At first Golem is an obedient protector, defending the poor, the abused and the weak. But during his fight for justice and protecting the innocent his programing becomes confused. The Golem has a difficult time to determine right from wrong.  He is charged to solve problems of criminal activity, but takes the law into his own hands and solves the problem at any cost. At this point the Golem is no longer a friend of the community, but becomes a feared ruthless authoritative figure in the community.  Unfortunately, once this happens, the Golem becomes uncontrollable and must be restrained or destroyed. What is thought-provoking is the Golem myth was “to protect and to serve” which are the same words displayed on the side of the Los Angeles Police Department’s squad cars.

In many cases, the rouge Golem is similar to the rouge cop, or cops who have been portrayed in L.A. Confidential.  Unfortunately for Exley, he tries to be the humble good cop, and attempts to stop rouge cops. But the actions of the rouge cops are repeatedly overlooked and ignored.  Frequently, they are encouraged with this behavior by the hierarchal order, who wishes to reinforce the rouge cop brand of hooligan-golem justice.

In the first scene Bud White is portrayed in pure noir style. The opening scene dissolves from black to a monstrous close up of Bud, as he stares from his police unmarked squad car into the house of a suspected wife beater.  Bud in dramatic style, rips down the Christmas lights of his L.A.-style bungalow home to attract the attention of the perpetrator inside. The wife beater opens the door to see what the commotion is about. Bud and the suspected assailant get into a fight, Bud administers some homegrown justice, beats the man to a pulp, handcuffs him to a rail and radios the police dispatcher to investigate a disturbance at the L.A. home. This type of enthusiasm for justice goes unpunished at the Hollywood police station.

On the opposite end of the justice scale, Exley is first introduced in L.A. Confidential as a noble police officer. With a Speed Graphic camera snapping photographs, and light bulbs flashing in his face, Exley is asked by a crime reporter why he wanted to be a cop. With the shadow of his fathers excellent career as a police officer cast over him, Exley answers quietly with his glasses smartly placed,” I wanted to help people”. He says with a grand religious zeal, with confidence and without any emotion or cynicism, like a priest at confession. This scene and the following scenes foreshadow the rise of Exley in the department. The photographer and reporter hover over Exley like paparazzi at a Hollywood opening.  The reporter seemingly knows Exley’s fate and how he will be severely tested, morally ethically and emotionally in future events.

Exley, the only bespectacled policemen on the force is also portrayed as shorter and more formal then the rest of the police officers. In the film, the camera, in its establishing shot of Exley, is emphasizing Exley height, by shooting him at upward or downward angles.  This is another device, which allows Exley to stand out in the crowd. Also, Exley is portrayed as smiling and happy, rather than the glum look of the other run-of-the-mill police officers on duty.  This simple device of facial expression helps Exley to be unusual and go against the tide of cronyism and corruption, which exudes in the L.A.P.D.

 In reality, Exley would have been an impeccable cop under Chief Parker’s administration in the 1950’s -- A by the book, police bureaucrat whose mission it was to defend the law. Parker tried to implement an attitude of incorruptibly and unapproachable brashness, of a few good men, similar to the superiority of the Marine Corp. In Parker’s view the Dragnet Detective Joe Friday was the perfect representation Parker wanted. He dreamed of a force that would do battle with the immoralities of Los Angeles (Davis 1990).

Indeed, Exley goes against the grain of the new noir style of the 1990’s, which Sharon Y. Cobb identifies, in her work, Writing the New Noir Film. Exley is not an antihero or is he portrayed necessarily as a desperate character. As the films protagonist, Exley’s initial motives are not dishonorable, and like many noir characters, Exley is not a liar who is not constantly deceiving himself or others. But as the protagonist, Exley is a likeable character, but on an emotive level, like most noir characters the audiences may not connect emotionally to his good guy presentation at first. As the audiences began to understand why Exley is the way he is, and how he will eventually get to a wretched place, the audiences will become interested in his outcome as he becomes an intriguing character in the traditional noir style.

In L.A. Confidential, they’re many opportunities for the good cop Exley to be the bad cop. Police brutality and violent incidents seem to occur at regular intervals, which can be largely due to the geographical location of Los Angeles as a metropolitan area with a dense minority population (Oreck 2013). Particularly in this situation, violence, drugs and crime are acerbated in Los Angeles with its large Mexican and African-American minority communities, which is fertile ground for police brutality and foul play. This scenario of minorities being abused by law inforcement is a crucial backdrop to the bad-cop/good-cop themes that runs through a number of scenes in LA. Confidential.

If we look at the Christmas scene at the city jail we can view the racism in real time. And view Exley, in his calculating role as the protector of justice.

 EXLEY: What’s going on?

COP: They got the spics who japped Helenowski and Brown. Helenowski lost an eye and Brown’s got brain damage.

EXLEY: I have the report right here. They’re home with bruises and muscle pulls--Oh Shit…(Helgeland 1995).

In the Bloody Christmas scene Detective Ed Exley, plays the good cop by following the rules and regulations of standard police protocol, and tries to use common sense to cool down his fellow police officers. Unfortunately the “spics” are taken down stairs and a fight ensues when Bud White’s partner Stenslend (Graham Beckel) who is half tanked from drinking rum and coke on duty, attacks one of the “tacos” for hurting one of his fellow officers. A melee brakes out, with Bud White and Jack Vincennes joining in as they attack the Mexican prisoners. During the confrontation Ed Exley, the good cop, tries to stop the brutal and senseless beating by ordering the officers to stop and threatens the police officers, they’re actions are going in his report.  These idle threats mean nothing to the seething police officers. They knock Exley down on the ground and lock him in a cell, and ignore his pleases to let him out at once. The camera pans to Exley, screaming at the top of his lungs, but can’t be heard in the locked cell. This scene demonstrates that  Exley is out of his league with the rest of the squad, with his fellow police officers and his temporary assignment as the evening watch commander. Captain Dudley Smith plays this situation smartly as the commander of the bad cops. He stays indifferent to the riot down stairs in his police jail, and to the excess of drinking alcohol, with on duty Police officers. At the Christmas party, Smith some how allows the press to photograph the transgressions of his fellow officers.

Unfortunately, the Bloody Christmas scene was a bit of reality, which was ripped from the pages of history. On December 25th 1951, 50 drunken Los Angeles police officers severely beat seven men in custody, including five Mexican-Americans. At the time L.A.P.D.’s new police chief, William Parker launched an internal investigation to examine the misconduct. But in this real version by all accounts, there was no good cop like Exley.

Also as a direct result of this period of blatant racism, the L.A.P.D. closed ranks. They implemented a strict code of silence and conduct in all internal disciplinary matters.  In essence, it was a publicity campaign to assure the public that everything was above board at police headquarters. Unfortunately, these tragic episodes have lead to a strained relationship with the Los Angeles Mexican American community and other minority groups that resided in Los Angeles in the 1950’s (Escobar 2003). Mexicans and other racial and cultural minorities are the most vulnerable faction in the communities of Los Angeles. Many of whom do not speak the language and may be culturally unaware of certain protocols in the U.S. These individuals are the most susceptible to law inforcement criminal activity on and off the screen.   

The result of the Bloody Christmas episode had been a political nightmare for the Police Chief (John Mahon), D.A. (Ron Rifkin) and Dudley Smith. The newspapers have the riot as front-page news, in bold letters “BLOODY CHRISTMAS” is displayed prominently in the Los Angeles Times. The corrupt authoritative hierarchy needs answers and a quick resolution to satisfy the public and other high-ranking city officials. As each officer who was a participant of the riot is brought in and questioned. Not one police officer will testify against a fellow officer. Each police officer is protecting the other police officer, which protects the system of corruption.

 Bud White is brought in and asked to testify to the Grand Jury concerning the incident. Bud states that  he will not testify against his fellow police officers. Bud’s refusal to testify has resulted in the Police Chief asking for his badge and gun and suspends him from duty. In an additional blow, the Police Chief adds that  Bud White is a disgrace to the police force. In the next scene, Exley is shown walking down the hall as he approaches the Police Chiefs office to be questioned.  White, as he leaves the Police Chiefs office, the film is intercut to show both men approaching each other, both have primarily the same type of lighting, with the approximately same camera angle, demonstrating they are both equals at the time of the interview. White had his opportunity; he dismissed it, hiding behind his badge of honor which is shrouded in secrecy.

When the triumvirate interviews Exley, he immediately jumps in and takes the high road and the offensive, “Justice has to be served, of course I will testify”, “ The public will expect the department to sweep this investigation under the carpet. We should shift the guilt to men who pensions are secure, but somebody has to swing, your new department will not tolerate officers who think they are above the law”.  The Police chief accepts Exley proposals, for ending this political nightmare.  Bud White’s partner Stensland will be let go from the department, and Vincennes will take the fall and testify against several of his police officers at the Grand Journey investigation.

During the interview with Vincennes, Exley is behind a one-way glass, watching the cross examination of Vincennes. Exley, the new puppet master is watching his well-played plan come to a conclusion. His image is reflected on the one-way glass observing the impromptu interrogation, demonstrating his ability to take command. It’s a powerful scene, but the power with the placement of images is very subtle. Dudley Smith is somewhat surprised by the acuteness of Exley’s display of cunning. “You may reap the benefit Edmund, but are you truly prepared to be despised within the department, yes sir I am, so be it.”

 Exley is the plotting politician as Dudley Smith pointed out in an earlier scene, “Edmund you’re a political animal, you have an eye for political weakness but not the stomach.” Apparently, Exley has proven Smith wrong by having the stomach and the will to carry his case forward for justice, as he sees it, within the department.

As the plot for L.A. Confidential moves forward another racial incident raises its ugly head, displaying the full force of the good cop/bad cop scenario. A mass murder has been committed at the Nite Owl coffee shop, a late night joint that serves steak and eggs till the midnight hour. Six people have been killed including White’s ex- partner Stenslend. At the scene of the crime, 45 spent 12-guage Remington shotgun shells have been found, it is speculated that three men with five-shot-capacity are responsible.  Earlier that evening, three “negro youths were spotted firing shotguns in Griffith Park from a late model Mercury Coupe” (Helgeland 1995). Captain Dudley Smith holds an impromptu meeting to discuss the investigation strategy of the Nite Owl shooting. He orders his team to search for the coupe and the three Negro assailants.  “Gentlemen go out and get them, use all the necessary force” Exley, then quips, “Why not put a bounty on them”.  Indeed some may say the L.A.P.D. has been permanently haunted by racial politics. Peter Boyer in his article for the New Yorker points out in the nineteen-twenties, the chief of police in Los Angeles, Louis Oaks was a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Also, the L.A.P.D. had a long history of institutional racial profiling before that term had currency (Boyer 2001). Regrettably, the L.A.P.D. did not integrate its police force until 1961, even though the Los Angeles black population quadrupled between 1940 and 1960 (Boyer 2001).

They’re few remaining scenes where Exley retains his good cop image. His protagonist image is quickly going to fade, due to the confrontations he is going to face. In Exley’s case, eventually there will be a set of norms and values that will govern his behavior. He morphs quickly, not by a hostile criminal, but by a stressful situation working with his corrupt fellow police officers. This situation will be enlarged and amplified when Exley discovers his superiors in the police administration and local politicians are orchestrating the police corruption schemes, which are motivated by big money and drug dealing. Fortuitously for Exley, his lonely battle against city hall will be joined by White who will eventually join him, in this up hill battle against the corrupt elite. This union will indeed result to be an intriguing moral struggle for both parties.

As seen in L.A. Confidential, the plot is deeply cynical about the authoritative governmental systems, which appears to be entangled with the mob scene and other unscrupulously activities. The police are barely distinguishable from the criminals they are supposed to keep in check. This cover-up of an illegitimate authority is an essential fragment that engages and entices Exley for his search for truth and justice. But as Exley ultimately becomes the corrupt hero, he must render to a number of moral struggles within himself, with his police enemies and his loved ones (Gustafson 2007).

Exley and Detective Carlisle arrive and 1^st and Olive at a seedy apartment with a tip that three Negroes who escaped from the city jail after being incarcerated and questioned for the murders at the Nite Owl cafe are in hiding. The detectives burst into the apartment and find the three Negroes with two other men. A gun melee ensues and everyone is shot and killed except Exley and the unarmed suspect, Coates. Coates escapes and runs down the hallway to an elevator. Coates enters the elevator, unarmed and the elevator door slowly closes. Exley quickly approaches the elevator door and pumps a round of shotgun shells into the elevator and mortally wounds Coates. Exley pokes his head in and stares at the bloodied body of Coates. Exley crosses the line, from good cop to bad cop by killing an innocent and unarmed man in cold blood. Who would have thought Exley would become “Shot Gun Ed”, as he’s been dubbed by his exuberant fellow officers, welcoming him into their private club. Exley has turned the corner of acceptance with his fellow police officers. He has been ordained into the fraternity of crooked cops, the band of brothers who will do anything to protect each other.  

Exley has slid down the slippery slope of moral uncertainty, and now faces one of his first of many moral dilemmas. He experiences the unannounced test of personal strength and moral judgments, which in this case he failed. If we look back at the Christmas party scene, Captain Dudley Smith tries to convince Exley not to pursue a new position in the Detective division because of his by the book attitude, and proceeds to ask Exley a few pointed questions.

DUDLEY: Would you be willing to beat confessions out of suspects you knew to be guilty?

EXLEY: No.

DUDLEY: Would be willing to shoot hardened criminals in the back to offset the chance--

EXELY: No. I know you mean well, Dudley, but I don’t need to do it the way you did. Or my father.

Who would have thought “Shot Gun Ed”, now the bad cop Ed Exley, turns the corner of acceptance with his fellow police officers and gains the loyalty from the fraternity brothers in blue. When Exley returns to the squad room after his bloody battle, he is welcomed as a hero, as a long lost brother, with blood dripping from his clothes, “You did good kid”. For Exley his work as a murderer will be rewarded with fame and publicity. His compensation for his dirty work for the police department is their highest honor, The Medal of Valor.  Subsequently for Exley the time came for choosing the code, the code of honor, with respect to his fellow officers and to the crossroad of loyalty, brotherhood and silence.

At the hospital, Exley interviews the rape victim who places the three Negros at the Nite Owl café at the correct time. While Exley helps Inez Soto (Marisol Padilla Sánchez) out of the hospital, he discovers Inez does not remember any thing about the night she was raped. You remember what time the Negros left you? Right? In your statement, you said they left you at midnight.  Ms. Soto answers, “I don’t know what time they left me, I wanted them dead, would anyone care they raped a Mexican girl from Boyle Heights?... If they hadn’t killed those white people at the Nite Owl, nobody would care”.  “I did what I had to do for justice”. Exley is shaken by this turn of events; there are doubts in his heroic actions. At least a half dozen people are dead, and the facts are not adding up to the justice Exley desires.

At this point in the plot and story, the hero Exley is feeling uncomfortable with the facts of the Nite Owl case. He begins to question the medial examiner, concerning the truths of the murders. By his surprise, Exley discovers Bud White has also been asking questions concerning the murders with the medical examiner. This interaction with Exley and White is an example of how this contact is an essential element in the narrative structure of the cop-genre film (Brown 1993). In act one, the hero is quickly introduced, along with his superiors and adversaries when Exley does not have a police partner, and he is isolated from the police pack, due to his by the book nature.  In act two, when the plot advances, the conflicts between good and evil become more defined and clearer. Also during this act, the hero will adapt to a new partner. White and Exley, are the polar opposites in police procedures, rules and regulations. Both of these men need to go forward in their personal conflicts to increase the dramatic skirmishes and tensions in this film. Indeed these opposites began to attract each. Their intentions are the same, and as one would expect, but each of their methods are vary different.  But as White and Exley work towards the same common goals, their methods become increasingly identical.

A theme in Exley’s world is the reasons why the characters in L.A. Confidential wanted to become cops. In Exley’s case it’s Rolo Tomassi. Rolo Tomassi is a metaphor for the person he thinks has killed his father. Exley’s father was also a respectable policeman in the L.A.P.D. With Vincennes, who is jaded and corrupt, can’t remember why he wanted to be a cop. Vincennes, also has been taking payoffs from Sid Hudgens (Danny Devito), who has been involved in a blackmail scheme with Hush Hush magazine. Its also worth mentioning for the author of L.A. Confidential James Ellroy's, was motivated by an unsolved mystery "I was ten years old in June of 1958, living in Los Angeles, when my mother was murdered, her death engendered in me a tremendous curiosity for all things criminal-police work”. In L.A. Confidential, shows these characters, which have lost parents as the result of violent acts that went unsolved (Tibbetts 1997).

The dreams however of becoming a policeman are very real for some. If we briefly look at recent history of the L.A.P.D., we can identify Rafael Perez’s, the corrupt cop in the Rampart scandal and member of the elite CRASH unit. Perez as a boy living near Philadelphia with his mother would watch cop shows on TV and imagine one day of having a badge and a gun (Boyer 2001). Granted Perez’s motivations are rather benign. Exley’s on the other had, wants to correct the wrongs of the world. He wants to catch the criminals who thought they could get away with murder. Exley has imagined a scenario to keep his father alive. Since the only facts in his father’s death, were the six bullet holes, which riddled his body. But Exley has also thought about justice, and somewhere along the way he has lost sight of Lady Justice.

The powers of justice seem to sway in Exley’s favor; at least with two of his corrupt associates, as they begin to believe that all is not what it seems to be in the Nite Owl murders. For White it’s his motivation to seek and destroy individuals who mistreat women who may also be involved in the Nite Owl murders. For Vincennes, it’s the thought that he was involved in a photo-op black mailing the District Attorney, which has resulted in a murder. Both of these factors indicate that a corrupt cop with his own rational can justify good and bad in a single instant. But the overall aura of Exley’s good cop intentions has influenced Vincennes and White. Exley’s constant and vigilant search for justice has placed doubts in the minds of his associates.

 Unfortunately for Vincennes, with his trusting nature and need for a clear conscious, he searches out Dudley Smith concerning some facts in the recent murders. Sadly for Vincennes, Dudley is the perpetrator and mastermind of the recent murderous misdeeds. And without hesitation upon answering a few questions from Vincennes shoots him thru the heart a point blank range.

DUDLEY: Have you a valediction, lad?

Dudley leans low, to listen to Jack’s response.

JACK: Rollo Tomasi... Dudley frowns in ignorance at the name.

After the press conference the next day, Dudley stands in front of the waiting police detectives and orders them to administer justice to the killer of Vincennes, “it must be swift and merciless”. Dudley pulls Exley aside and asks him, “Did Vincennes ever mention the name Rollo Tomasi? Exley is frozen in time, and knows Dudley has killed Vincennes.”

With Vincennes dead, Exley needs a partner to eradicate the corrupt Dudley. Bud White is a reluctant partner since he has been shown photographs of Exley making love to Lynn (Kim Basinger). But after a brief fight over Lynn, White accepts Exley’s account of Dudley murderous escapades.

EXLEY: Stay smart, Bud. We build a case. We play by the rules.

BUD: There are no rules!  Why the fuck are you doing this?  The Nite Owl                   made you.  You want to tear all that down.                                 

EXLEY: With a wrecking ball.  You want to help me swing it?

Again we see the bipolar Exley, at one point he wants to obey the law to the letter, then the next moment, he wants to give it all up, and play the corrupt cop. Exley, for example can have many reasons to break the code of conduct by hanging the corrupt District Attorney out the window for a confession. Especially since the District Attorney knew what corrupt and criminal deeds Dudley and Patchett (David Strathairm) were up to. With Exley, there are hints of spiritual growth to be reborn with the personal vendetta to find and kill, Rolo Tomassi. Exley at this point in the film cares little about fame in the department; he wants something new, the blood of Rolo Tomassi.

Exley and White drive to the Victory Motel with its landscape noir style, where Dudley Smith is waiting with his gang of police thugs. There is a tremendous hail of bullets. Bud White and Exley are shot but not killed by Dudley Smith. Exley looks down the barrel of Smith’s revolver and quietly says, Rolo Tomassi, you’re the guy that gets away with it. There is a slight skirmish, and Exley grabs a shotgun, and points it at Dudley.

Dudley: “Are you going to shoot me or arrest me, good lad, always the politician, hold up your badge so they will know you are a policemen”. At this point in the film, Dudley is quite sure of himself. He has killed so many policemen that one less will not make any difference. Dudley than offers Exley a bribe, I will make you Chief of Detective, just let me do all the taking.

Exley, the politician, the man holding the gun pointed at Dudley, is alone with his emotions and jumble of thoughts. The supreme moment has arrived at this critical instant of morality vs. justice. Somewhere one of the two men must remember the earlier conversation at the Christmas party, at the Hollywood percent.

DUDLEY: Would you be willing to shoot hardened criminals in the back to offset the chance --                                 

EXLEY: No.

When Dudley exits the bullet-ridden motel, the police sirens are heard in the background, with Dudley’s arms raised walking toward the oncoming police cars, Exley, shoots Dudley in the back.

In the press, both Exley and Dudley are acclaimed as heroes, an arrangement that Exley has plotted and managed, while he was interrogated for the murders of the police officers at the Victory Motel. Exley seems to have adopted moral blinders in the course of this film. With justice and Rolo Tomassi being the guiding force of his own moral compass, Exley seems to have drifted off course. In Exley’s philosophical view, which has been a driving force throughout this film, Exley has had some significant gaps with his ability to judge what is truthful and what is moral. These decisions, which Exley has made, seem to occur when his own actions are a stake, demonstrating a type of schizophrenia when it pertains to a decision concerning his own activities. This overall behavior of Exley, demonstrates an absolute certainty of his character and to some extent a self-righteousness which may be blinded by his own interpretation of the truth. Or is this simply a way for Exley to grab power for the good of himself and the department?

The picture of Exley, in the integration room, after the shoot out at the Victory Motel is quite interesting. He is at one moment greening from ear to ear, with his uncanny ability to predict what the District Attorney and Chief of Police are discussing  and planning after his wretched account of Dudley Smith’s activities as a murderer, con-artist and drug king pin. Later in the scene, Exley has the crazed look of a mad man, a man who has just escaped death, but sees that life is out of balance situations more clearly.

Exley’s actions seem to make him above the law, due to his father’s murder by Dudley. There is retribution in his blood, for justice and for himself. Obviously, he feels somewhat vindictive in his approach to the police department, by not being recognized as a superior candidate within the department. Exley also scored high in the Lieutenant’s test for the police force, and his ability to ferret out corruption at it highest level. Exley was and is a superior policeman, by some standards, if we consider the situation which was handed to him. But do the ends justify the means for Exley actions?

If we reconsider Exley for a moment, we may find that he maybe fanatical about ferreting out bad cops and he has the responsibility to execute justice, now on his own terms (Grant 2003). In the end Exley uses his information for his own promotion rather then to stop the system of depravity. In fact Exley, the good cop, has keep silent at two award ceremonies, rather than admit his complicit actions. By the final scene Exley consents to the organization and his elevation in the face of all he knows to be true about the police force. This knowledge places him in a category of honorable uncertainty and possibly collusion.

Bibliography

Boyer, Boyer J. "Bad Cops." The New Yorker (2001): 1-14. Web. 6 Apr. 2013.

Brown, Jeffrey A. "Bullets, Buddies, and Bad Guys: The “Action-Cop” Genre." Journal of Popular Film and Television 21.2 (1993): 79-87. Print.

Burns1, Ronald. "JCJPC Template." JCJPC Template. Journal of Criminal Justice and   Popular Culture, 1 July 1998. Web. 19 Apr. 2013.

Cobb, Sharon Y. "Writing the New Noir Film." N.p., n.d. Web. 7 May 2013.

Davis, Mike. City of Quartz: Excavating the Future in Los Angeles. London: Verso, 1990. Print.

Escobar, Edward J. "Bloody Christmas and the Irony of Police Professionalism: The Los Angeles Police Department, Mexican Americans, and Police Reform in the 1950s." Pacific Historical Review 72.2 (2003): 171-99. Print.

Grant, Judith. "Assault under Color of Authority: Police Corruption as Norm in the L.A.P.D. Rampart." New Political Science 25.3 (2003): 385-405. Print.

Greek, Cecil. "American Independent Gothic: Bad Lieutenant (Abel Ferrara, 1994)." The Gothic Imagination. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, n.d. Web. 07 Apr. 2013

Gustafson, Joseph L. "A Descriptive Analysis of Police Corruption in Film." Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture 14.2 (2007): 161-75. Web.

Helgeland, Brian. ""L.A. Confidential", by Brian Helgeland." "L.A. Confidential", by Brian Helgeland. N.p., 16 Nov. 1995. Web. 18 Apr. 2013.

Oreck, Alden. "The Golem." The Golem. American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise,, n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2013.

Sankowski, Edward. "Film, Crime, and State Legitimacy: Political Education or Mis-Education?" Journal of Aesthetic Education Spring 36.1 (2002): 1-15. Print.

Tibbetts, John C. "L.A. Confidential." The American Historical Review Dec 102.5 (1997): 1599-600. Print.

Star Trek ship captains and how these variances in personality construct reflect cultural and social differences.

            It’s the intent of this thesis to highlight the similarities and differences of three Star Trek ship captains and how these variances in personality construct three pivotal characters that reflect cultural and social differences. Each of these captains is created differently with respect with their leadership roles. Captain James T. Kirk (William Shatner), Captain Kathryn Janeway (Kate Mulgrew) and Captain Benjamin Sisko (Avery Brooks) are represented in three crucial Star Trek series which includes, The Original Series (NBC 1966–1969) TOS, Star Trek Voyager (UPN 1995–2001) STV and Deep Space Nine  (UPN 1993–1999) DS9.

Each captain represents a different race and gender:  Kirk, the white male captain; Janeway, the first white female captain; and Sisko, the first black Starship captain.  Each captain is represented as a dominant figure in the Star Trek series from the 1960’s to the end of the 20^th century. The illustrations and definitions of each captain will show how the responsibilities and cultural predispositions will set the tone and personal behavior aboard the respective Federation Starships.

With the selection for each captain in the Stark Trek series, the producers choose theatrically trained actors instead of actors who matured in the genres of television and film production. They believed this would give each captain an additional screen presence of authority and stature. For example, William Shatner was trained as a Classical Shakespearian actor and performed at the Canadian National Repertory Theater in Stratford, Ontario (Shatner 20). Kate Mulgrew studied acting at the Stellar Adler Conservatory of Acting in conjunction with New York University. And Avery Brooks, the first African American to receive an MFA in acting and directing from Rutgers also studied acting at Oberlin College (Rutgers). This distinguished group of actors had an opportunity to enhance their personal interpretations of their roles as Star Trek captains and bring their own original characterizations to this science fiction narrative.

William Shatner wanted to bring to the Captain Kirk’s character the same enthusiasm he always had for life, with a sense of awe and wonder for those feelings he also had about the universe and everything he encountered (Sager).

For Mulgrew, her representation of Janeway was intended to show girls that they could become anyone that they wanted to be (Bowring 178).  Mulgrew also felt her Janeway character could help many young women particularly in the sciences.  Brooks, who was supposed to be a cross between Kirk and Captain Picard from Star Trek, Next Generation,said that one of the reasons that he accepted the leading role was to give a single child a chance to see themselves some 400 years hence (Wilkins). Avery also felt the need to let children know that there are possibilities in the world and that someone is not going to take away or destroy the world before they have a chance to change it.

In its original run Star Trek TOS, never achieved more than lukewarm ratings and only lasted three years until NBC Television canceled the series in 1969. By this commercial standard, assumptions could be made the audiences and sponsors did not resonate with William Shatner’s character Captain Kirk. However, there was a minor social revolt with many dedicated science fiction enthusiasts at Caltech when they voiced opposition to rumored canceling of Star Trek on NBC (Harrison). After the series was canceled, Paramount studios sold the syndication rights to recoup the production costs. The series aired in 150 markets, which unexpectedly created a cult enthusiasm that permeates in today’s popular culture. If we use the sudden rise in popularity of TOS as a bench mark for Captain Kirks popularity, it could be assumed that Captain Kirk flourished in the world of syndication as an iconic authoritative figure to this day.

 In 1968, William Shatner thought Star Trek’s run was over. “I finished Star Trek late one night and everybody said goodbye and off I went, saying, ‘That’s the end of that show.' It was just a good show and that was the end of it."  Little did he know that the fans had other ideas; they wouldn't let the show fade into obscurity. "Star Trek" conventions began in earnest in 1972 with the first taking place in New York City. An early indicator of the series sudden rise in popularity, an estimated 3,000 fans showed up when only 300 – 400 were expected (Jindra 39).

In general, the audiences of the late 1960’s had an overwhelming acceptance of Captain Kirk. His public demeanor as an arrogant womanizer and dilatant had little affect on his overall popularity. In addition, Captain James T. Kirk's sexual exploits have been a long-running joke and point of contention in the Star Trek mythos. Viewers have admired, guffawed at or even been appalled by the Captain's macho method of saving the galaxy, taking off his shirt when ever that arises (Hemmingson 572).

 Although in the world of slash fan fiction, Shatner’s Kirk began a life of its own. The term slash fan fiction refers to stories, written by amateur authors (who are almost solely heterosexual women), which involves placing two television or film characters of the same gender, into romantic relationships with each other (Kuritz 371). Within the slash fan narrative Star Trek fans explored the deep friendship between Captain Kirk and First Officer Spock (Leonard Nimoy). These stories usually were labeled ‘‘hurt/comfort’’ because they involved one of the characters being physically or emotionally wounded and then receiving comfort from the other.

In contrast to Shatner’s machismo, Mulgrew presented a strong and confident female captain.   But even Mulgrew was surprised by how influential her fictional character was. After the Star Trek series Voyager was premiered, Mulgrew was taken aback by the number of mothers who wrote and called her to relay stories of their daughters who were choosing the field of science because of the strength and confidence they drew from Janeway’s character in Voyager (Bowring 178). Indeed the producers and writers for Voyager were initially concerned with the public perceptions of Janeway, because they didn’t have a clue how to write for a female captain (Relke 20).

While Janeway’s brand of post feminism was hardly uncommon among Americans in the 1990’s, Voyager may have been more successful had Janeway possessed at least a basic gender representation. Mercifully for the series the loyal female fans did not concern themselves with her androgyny.  Also, Mulgrew had also grown acutely aware of her gender-neutral status and began singling out female fans with special thanks whenever she had the opportunity to do so. Unfortunately, Janeway has experienced some aggressive negative complaints in a number of online forums. Despite her enormous success with her fan base, a number of disgruntled enthusiasts accused her as a tyrant and murder. Her character has also been suspected as “Mommy” to the crew by sublimating her erotic energies by aggressively stifling her sexual drives as she mothers the crew stranded in the Delta Quadrant (Greven 82).

The popular reception for Captain Sisko in DS9 was one of celebration for the first African American actor to portray a Federation Captain in Star Treks televisual. However, according to one blogger who expressed the racial atmosphere in the 1990’s so succinctly stated, “I was only 11 when the final episode aired and while I vaguely understood the significance of Sisko, I admit to taking his presence–the presence of a starring Black man–on my screen as normal (James)”. For another fan, he always expected Captain Sisko to break into a song & dance routine with his big basso profundo voice-grabbing the nearest alien with a tree growing out of the top of their head and doing a robot waltz singing at the top of his lungs (Star Trek).

But for Sisko and DS9, the fan base has a significant serious emotional investment in this televisual. In terms of time, some followers have spent up to 40 years passionately intertwined with the Star Trek narrative. This series with its two decades of fan loyalty has helped increase the televisual to a cult status. Some research suggests Star Trek has the ability to aid in the memorialization of deceased loved ones, which is characterized in these fan letters from the British Star Trek Monthly magazine.  These letters reinforce the effectiveness in the morning process, and shows how this practice is not restricted to an American audience but rather emphasize how universal it is (Geraghty 1011). One letter writer from the British Star Trek Monthly, whose letter focused on bereavement, describes how her husband and eldest son died in a tragic accident and watching certain episodes of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine became more important, more poignant, because it brought back special memories for myself and my little boy (Bunner 64).

Granted, the hierarchal culture of a white dominant society controlled the Star Trek vision with concerns from its network censors and commercial sponsors.  Regardless, the producers and creators of Star Trek wanted to convey a progressive attitude, which would include a liberal humanism quality that reflected a progressive attitude toward race, gender and a tolerant view of political freedom.

And yet with all the noble social and humanitarian intentions, Gene Rodenberry and company created dominant personalities that conflicted with their utilitarian intentions. Whether this was intentional or accidental, is hard to say. According to David Gerrold, who wrote the Star Trek episode The Trouble With Tribbles, Gerrold, believed the stories were about twentieth century man’s attitude in a future universe, and of course not every episode makes a social commentary, but some individual episodes make strong comments on sexism, feminism, racism and improving race relations (Snyder). Gene Rodenberry also echoes Gerrold’s statement, “I have no belief that Star Trek depicts the actual future, it depicts us now, and things we need to understand about” (Snyder). But some of these lofty ideals do not reverberate with everyone concerned. Karen Blair in her article, Sex and Star Trek, felt that female roles in the series have sought to affirm traditional male fantasies in an unenlightened way. However there are women trapped in low paying jobs or are within a socially isolated sphere as homemakers, who find the connection with a national or international group such as a Star Trek convention in San Francisco or Las Vegas, as a type of emotional safety value which would grant these women an amount of esteem and pride, that they otherwise may be lacking (Jenkins 89).

 Newton Minow the chair of the Federal Communications Commission said in 1961 that television was a “vast wasteland of mediocre programs” that was providing a diet-of “dulling sameness” for the American people. For the fans of Star Trek, mediocre would not be the first thought to describe their favorite science fiction series on television. Especially when we consider the leadership roles that are presented in a quality production such as Star Trek. Each captain in the Star Trek narrative has reached across class, sex, age and race to treat each member of his or her crew as fairly and justly as possible. Alan D. Winegarden, in his article, Using Star Trek: The Next Generation to Teach Concepts in Persuasion, Family Communication, and Communication Ethics, states that the Star Trek series is an excellent example of explicating concepts related to persuasion, family communication and communication ethics.  Good communicators need concepts and principals in team building that will construct trust for a responsible Starship crew and captain. Many of the Star Trek episodes offer possibilities for teaching communication concepts, which are recognized patterns that provide important analytical skills for communications (Winegarden 181).

 James P. Kirk, the youngest Starship captain of the USS Enterprise, is the most visible and recognizable of all the Starship captains. Kirk is vulnerable, in regard to criticism if we render his style of authority by using today’s benchmarks for cultural and social indicators. Kirk’s hegemonic representation has been criticized and cataloged since he first appeared in original TOS in 1966. Brash, indifferent, militaristic and sexually aggressive makes Captain Kirk an easy target for today’s analytical audience. In one specifically sexist episode, The Corbomite  Maneuver (NBC 1966), Captain Kirk’s Yeoman Janice Rand (Grace Lee Whitney) is subjected to serving Kirk salads and coffee in especially awkward moments which emphasis the absurdness of the situation. In a rather rude scene Kirk wonders out loud who assigned him a female yeoman. In another scene in Corbomite Maneuver, Kirk is displayed with his shirt off, parading a well-chiseled torso while enduring a stress test by Dr. McCoy (DeForest Kelly). Kirk is called to the ship’s bridge and walks through the Enterprise with his shirt off.  Most figures of authority (or anyone one else), would have put their shirt back on to demonstrate some concept of decorum, and present themselves on the bridge in a dignified way. But clearly as an indication of Kirk’s machismo and absolute power aboard the Enterprise, Kirk decided it wasn’t necessary that he put his shirt back on, as a sign that he is the supreme commander of the Enterprise.

But what is depicted here is the superficial Kirk, the flip Kirk, not the serious captain who is represented in the turbulent period of 1966. Lyndon Banes Johnson was president and there was a steady escalation in the war of Indochina. At home an estimated 200,000 anti-war demonstrators marched in New York City and young a Buddhist girl committed suicide by setting herself on fire to protest the war in Vietnam (BBC). But in some regard Kirk may act like President Johnson’s predecessor, John F. Kennedy. Captain Kirk represents America and the Free World engaged in a Cold War struggle with ideological enemies like the Klingons and Romulans. President John Kennedy, who began the decade with the promise of a New Frontier, pursued an activist foreign policy aimed at challenging Communism in the Third World, and championed a massive effort to advance national prestige through the manned space program (Worland 20). Kirk is also framed with political and cultural turmoil in the 60’s as he consoles Dr. McCoy in The Man Trap (NBC 1966) after he kills the shape shifting illusionary creature, which McCoy had fallen in love with. Kirk is also the Philosopher King, as in The Corbomite Maneuver as he artfully negotiates with Balok (Chris Howard), the space alien, who threatens to annihilate the Enterprise for their aggressive behavior. Then with a touch of liberal humanism, Kirk befriends Balok, in his damaged spacecraft, which is drifting in space and rescues him.

These are the qualities that rally a ship’s crew and set the humanitarian goals of the Federation. In Star Trek Voyager, another type of style in commanding a starship vessel is presented as the first female ship’s captain, Kathryn Janeway. With an ensemble cast, which is equally represented in gender, Janeway’s character ark is not a dominant feature in Voyager. Major story lines do not necessarily center on Janeway’s authoritative role, as in previous Star Trek episodes which featured Captain James Kirk.

Granted, Janeway takes the lead as the authoritative figure in Voyager, but also allows other members of the cast to develop dramatic story lines, which demands other actors to carry the melodramatic science fiction narrative. This level of inclusion shatters some of the authoritative patterns of Captain Kirk’s style of commanding. This may be interpreted as a maternal side to Janeway allowing her to share her spotlight. For example, in Star Trek Voyager, Seven of Nine (Jerri Ryan) is introduced as Borg who forms an alliance with the Federation to fight Species 8472 in Scorpio (UPN 1997). During the fight with Species 8472, Seven of Nine is separated from the Borg collective, and becomes a permanent member of the Star Trek crew. In accepting Seven of Nine, Janeway shows compassion, grace, understanding and a determined will. In a traditional wartime narrative, Janeway should have destroyed her long fought enemy, and continued their struggled journey to return to the Alpha quadrant. But in a humanitarian effort, Janeway understands Seven of Nine was human before her assimilation into the collective and wants to save and rehabilitate her back into the human race. The addition of a new crewmember such as Seven of Nine would have the added benefit of increasing the coveted 18-24 male audiences and balance out the female cast demographics on Voyager and further move the narrative away from Janeway.

In this innertextual scene, the writers further the distance from Janeway’s authority, by providing lighter moments with Neelix (Ethan Phillips) and Kes (Jennifer Lien), as they watch American television in Futures End.

KES: We've set up a computer algorithm to search for key words and phrases. Anything that might indicate Voyager. 


KIM: Anything so far? 


NEELIX: Not yet, but we have come across some very intriguing televised broadcasts. Take a look at this. It's a form of entertainment called a 'soap opera'. The exploration of human relationships is fascinating. 


KIM: I can't imagine just watching the story and not being a part of it. 


KES: That's because you've been spoiled by the holodeck. There's something to be said for non-interactive stories like this, being swept away in the narrative. 


NEELIX: Oh, I can't wait to see if Blaine's twin brother is the father of Jessica's baby.

This scene demonstrates there is a lighter side to Voyager, and the narrative of returning to the Alpha Quadrant with Janeway at the helm does not dominate the entire script and story.

However the crew does has a sense of family with Janeway at the epicenter as the familial, military and cultural leader. But without the threat of a patriarchal savior waiting in the wings to swoop down and save the day and return the crew home, safe and sound. This scenario would not be fitting for a female commander in the 24th Century. If this was the narrative in pre-feminist days, it would be tolerable that a male hero would emerge and save the crew from their endless wandering in the Delta Quadrant. 

 Janeway in some aspects may fulfill her crew’s everyday emotional needs, as a mother figure.  While this is a blatant stereotype, it is the first Star Trek series that a Federation starship is lost in space. So there is more of a sense of family -- a sense of a collective group that must endure hardships -- during this long journey. Certainly unlike other Star Trek narratives, Voyager does not embark on a journey to explore new space, but its adventure is to return home (Dove-Viebah 598), to the domestic earthly tranquility the crew once experienced in the Alpha quadrant.

The opening scene of Deep Space Nine demonstrates how different this Star Trek series will be. In Emissary, Captain Picard has been assimilated by the Borg and attacks the U.S.S. Saratoga. During the battle the Saratoga’s Captain, Benjamin Sisko’s wife is killed and his only son Jake (Cirroc Lofton) survives the attack. This complex set of events, sets in motion a number of humanitarian, spiritual and social constructs that braves new frontiers for the Star Trek narrative. Captain Benjamin Sisko (Avery Brooks), an African-American, is the first black actor to be cast in a leadership role in the Star Trek televisual series. In addition to portraying the first African-American to lead as a Starship captain, Brooks is also attributed with introducing 20^th-century race issues of allegorical alien stand-ins, because of his involvement in various civil rights organizations. But some film theorist have suggested, in the 1960’s TOS was addressing many social problems that were occurring throughout the county, but with any democratic society change is eminent and the 1990’s was ripe for social equality in television programming. For African Americans the representation in popular culture was a mixture of highs and lows. Astronaut Bernard Harris becomes the first African American to walk in space, and O.J. Simpson was found not guilty in the murder trial of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman.

In Deep Space Nine, Sisko is introduced in dramatic fashion; he is a single parent who shows love and affection for his son Jake. Not that loving your son is unusual, but this is out of character for a Starship Captain, let alone one that is assigned to a space station in Bajoran space.  It is important to note, that Sisko is very close to his son, he shares a physical space with Jake, which is unlike other Starship Captains. Sisko plays, kids and jokes with his son. This relationship is heighted  at this time by Sisko being a single parent, but he deeply misses and longs for his wife Jennifer, which makes Sisko’s vulnerability apparent, a characteristic that is rarely seen in an authoritative figure in a Star Trek narrative. But by giving Sisko a family and permanent love interest in future episodes, the producers created a fully developed character, humanizing him further than any other Star Trek captains (Kwan 63).  This portrayal of Sisko may have been unusual in the 1960’s or 1970’s but for the 1990’s it was an acceptable presentation and evolution of racial equality at this time.

Also, Sisko and his crew on Deep Space Nine represents the most racially and ethnically diverse crew of previous Star Trek presentations. The combination of family, religion and ethnic diversity, shapes Deep Space Nine through several episodes which highlight these qualities in Sisko. But the subtext of Sisko’s racial ethnicity, as once being oppressed and enslaved demonstrates and heightens the plight of the Bajorans with the repressive Cardassians. After sixty years of occupation and resettlement of the Bajoran people by the Cardassians The Cardassians have relinquished control of Deep Space Nine to the Federation and the Bajoran Empire. The key words here are occupation and resettlement. One could equate the Bajoran plight with the first Palestinian Intafada uprising (1987 to1991) in the West Bank in Israel. The similarities are striking, even though Israel is not an Orwellian society like Cardassia or the Palestinians a highly religious society similar to the Bajorans. However the Bajorans had a rebel and terrorist component, which would engage in street-to-street fighting as well as domestic terrorism against the Cardasian invaders. The resistance fighters from Bajor could also be identified as the PLO and  well as the Black September Organization who claimed responsibility for the killing of eleven Israeli's in Munich during the Summer Olympics in 1972 (Callahan 4).

Granted condemnation of the Palestinians or Bajroans can’t be based on actions of a terrorist organization, but sympathies of resettlement does resonate a familiar cord with the Palestinian people. Which demonstrates how far Sisko and his crew must endure tolerance for the Cardassians and sympathy for the people of Bajora. This validates the liberal humanism of the Federation and Sisko. For the Bajorans, Sisko as captain and authoritative leader displays a unique mixture of personality and spiritual leader that is quite unusual for a Federation officer.

Obviously the cultural evolution of Kirk, Janeway and Sisko, has been a hard fought battle in the eyes of the producers and writers in Star Trek’s narrative. It is unclear by some critics and leading academics that the Star Trek narrative broke new ground representing important racial and social benchmarks in our televisual history.

 For example, in 1968 gender and racial history was on display in Plato's Stepchildren network television’s first interracial kiss on Star Trek. This physically forced caress unmistakably subjugates Uhura (Nichelle Nichols). Visibly shaken by this experience, Uhura fights at the notion of kissing, Captain Kirk. Figuratively speaking, the textual content reminds the spectator of a rape scene. Granted this kiss was commanded by Parmen (Eric W. Weisstein) with telekinetic powers and not by Kirk. But one can surmise the sub-text of the kiss, reaffirms the patricidal order in the Star Trek universe and Kirk’s underlying representation.

Janeway is some aspects can’t be identified by her female gender. She is rigid, controlling, emotionally distant and aloof. To be otherwise may jeopardize her authority. Janeway must be a disciplinarian to avoid any repercussions that may harm her authority.  Janeway must also agonize through these minefields of isolation to prove her “maleness” to the crew and her officers. By keeping her private life secret; she instills a mystery about her, a chilling isolation which divides and separates the crew. This division helps Janeway establish order so it does not undermine her gender free authority. 

There are times when Sisko, without relying on a metaphor, can address rasicm directly. However, there are instances when Deep Space Nine prepatuates the racial normatitives found in the first two Star Trek series (Kwan 63). Sisko and Kasidy (Penny Johnson) tour a 1962 Las Vegas Casino on the holodeck. Sisko has reservations because the holodeck program ignores the social environmnet of segreation for blacks during that time period. Kasidy responds that this is what things should have been. Siko is still uncomfortable, knowing full well that blacks at this time were only allowed to be performers or janitors. But what is problematic is that the story is suggesting we can idealize certain  periods of American history without feeling guilty over the racism of our ancestors.

Clearly these three distinct individuals have different visions and interpretations of what Federation life is about. This future setting of Star Trek was one of hope and would be thought of a better place for all species and genders. In some regard, the representation of Sisko, Kirk and Janeway has proven Gene Rodenberry’s vision through these three diverse characterizations and was not lost in a sea of capitalism and containment that often derails story and plot in the eyes of some. But Star Trek and its authoritative representatives have endured and thrived through the eyes of millions of viewers in the television universe. 

.

Works Cited

BBC News. BBC, 31 May 1966. Web. 16 June 2013.

Bowring, Michele A. "Resistance Is Not Futile: Liberating Captain Janeway from the Masculine-Feminine Dualism of Leadership." Resistance Is Not Futile: Liberate... Preview & Related Info. Asper School of Business, University of Manitoba, 2004. Web. 25 June 2013.

Bunner, Sandra. Letter printed in Star Trek Monthly Magazine Jan. 2002: 64

Calahan, Alexander B. "Countering Terrorism: The Israeli  response to the1972 Munich Olympic Massacre and the Development of Independent Covert Action Teams." Master of Military Studies April (1995): 1-41. Print.

Dove-Viebahn, Aviva. "Embodying Hybridity, (En)gendering Community: Captain Janeway and the Enactment of a Feminist Heterotopia on Star Trek: Voyager." Women's Studies 36.8 (2007): 597-618. Print. Erdmann, Terry J., and Paula M. Block. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion. New York: Pocket, 2000. Print.

Geraghty, Lincoln. "A Network of Support: Coping with Trauma Through Star Trek Fan Letters." The Journal of Popular Culture 39.6 (2006): 1002-024. Print. Geraghty, Lincoln. "Living with Star Trek:." Google Books. I.B.Tauris & Co Ltd., n.d. Web. 25 June 2013.

Greven, David. Gender and Sexuality in Star Trek: Allegories of Desire in the Television Series and Films. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, (2009):1- 250. Print.

Harrison, Scott. "Framework." Framework RSS. Los Angeles Times, 6 June 1968. Web. 27 June 2013.

Hemmingson, Michael. "Sex and Star Trek: Amorous Androids, Interstellar Promiscuity." Science Fiction Studies November (2009): 572-77. Print.

James, Kendra. "O Captain, My Captain: A Look Back At Deep Space Nine’s Ben Sisko." Racialicious the Intersection of Race and Pop Culture. Racialicious, 15 Mar. 2012. Web. 28 June 2013.

Jenkins, Henry. "Star Trek Rerun, Reread, Rewritten: Fan Writing as Textual Poaching." Star Trek Rerun, Reread, Rewritten: Fan Writing as Textual Poaching May (2009): 85-107. Print.

Jindra, Michael. "Star Trek Fandom as a Religious Phenomenon." Star Trek Fandom as a Religious P... Preview & Related Info. Oxford Journals, Apr. 1994. Web. 27 June 2013.

Kustritz, Anne. "Slashing the Romance Narrative." The Journal of American Culture 26.3 (2003): 371-84. Print.

 Kwan, Allen. "Seeking New Civilizations: Race Normativity in the Star Trek Franchise." Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 27.1 (2007): 59-70. Print.

Relke, Diana M. A. Drones, Clones, and Alpha Babes: Retrofitting Star Trek's Humanism, Post-9/11. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: University of Calgary, 2006. Print.

"Rutgers University - Rutgers Hall of Distinguished Alumni - Avery Brooks." Rutgers University - Rutgers Hall of Distinguished Alumni - Avery Brooks. Rutgers University, n.d. Web. 25 June 2013.

Sager, Mike. "What I've Learned." Esquire., Feb. 2006. Web. 26 June 2013.

Shatner, William, and David Fisher. Up till Now: The Autobiography. New York: St. Martin's, 2008. Print.

Snyder, J, William. "Star Trek: A Phenomenon and Social Statement on the 1960's." Sixties City. 1995. Web. 28 Apr. 2012.

"Star Trek: Deep Space Nine." TV.com. N.p., 16 July 2102. Web. 28 June 2013.

Wilkins, Brian. "Avery Brooks: Benjamin Sisko Does Not Define Who or What I Am | Star Trek News | TrekNews.net." Star Trek News TrekNewsnet RSS. TrekNews.Net, 13 June 2012. Web. 26 June 2013.

Winegarden, Alan D., Marilyn Fuss-Reineck,, and Lori J. Charron. "Using "Star Trek: The Next Generation" to Teach Concepts in Persuasion, Family Communication, and Communication Ethics."" ResearchGate. Routledge May (2009): 178-89. Print.

Winn, J. Emmit. "Kinema : : A Journal for Film and Audiovisual Media." Kinema : : A Journal for Film and Audiovisual Media. University of Waterloo, n.d. Web. 18 June 2013.

Worland, Rick. "From the New Frontier to the Final Frontier: Star Trek From Kennedy To Gorbachev." Center for the Study of Film and History, 1994. Web. 28 June 2013.