Monday, November 13, 2017

The Most Interesting Article In The World

Still from "The Corbomite Maneuver" (1966)
If you follow William Shatner on Twitter, you may have seen this tweet last month:
Tweet by @WilliamShatner (screenshot taken October 8, 2017)
In the age of social media and pop culture-related clickbait, this story has been shared and retold many times; Mr. Shatner's tweet is only the most recent example. Lauren Davis offered this variation of the tale for io9 in 2012:
It sounds like a bit from the Dos Equis commercials, but in this case, it appears to be true. Jonathan Goldsmith, who plays the beer company's Most Interesting Man in the World, appeared in the second episode of the original Star Trek series, "The Corbomite Maneuver." He only appears on screen for a moment, but he also doesn't get a death scene.1
“The Corbomite Maneuver” was the third episode of Star Trek to be filmed and the tenth to air, not the show's “second episode.” However, is it possible that the rest of the account is true? Today, Jonathan Goldsmith is a famous pitchman (better known as The Most Interesting Man in the World), but in 1966, he was a working actor, mostly appearing on episodic television. Perhaps he once had a small part on Star Trek?

Not if Jonathan Goldsmith has anything to say about it.

During a 2013 Reddit AMA, Goldsmith offered a cheeky denial that he had ever appeared on the series:
Jonathan Goldsmith: Let me set the record straight... I have never appeared on Star Trek, if I remember correctly that is, which is always dubious.2
In a later interview with the Television Academy, Mr. Goldsmith dismissed the story again, this time with less ambiguity:
David M. Gutiérrez: It's fitting you're being sent to Mars, considering you're credited as being a "Redshirt" in the original Star Trek. 
Jonathan Goldsmith: No, I wasn't. I've never done that show. I can't convince the fans of that. They keep sending me pictures of a guy in a red shirt, but it ain't me.3
Since the actor himself has twice issued a denial, it begs the question — how did the rumor get started in the first place?

The answer to that question begins not on the web, where the story has become a popular meme, but in the pages of the 1995 edition of The Star Trek Concordance (this information is not present in previous editions of the book). In that book, the following names are included as part of the cast list for "The Corbomite Maneuver":
Crewmen: Bruce Mars, John Gabriel, Jonathan Lippe, Stewart Moss, George Bochmane4
There are two things of note about these five names. First, Lippe was the surname of Jonathan Goldsmith's stepfather, and the name Goldsmith used professionally until 1975.Second, none of the actors listed actually appear in "The Corbomite Maneuver." Bruce Mars and Stewart Moss appeared in other episodes, while John Gabriel and Jonathan Lippe/Goldsmith didn't appear on Star Trek at all. "Bochmane" is probably a misspelling of George Backman, who had a brief acting career in the late 1960s, but never appeared on Star Trek.

Where did Bjo Trimble, author of The Star Trek Concordance, come to believe that these five men appeared in "The Corbomite Maneuver?" The following portion of the author's note (emphasis added) pointed me in the right direction:
For this new edition, I used video- and audiotapes, shooting and editing scripts, the UCLA Special Collections Library collections, private files and notes, interviews, letters from fans, books, help from people inside Paramount Studios, and computer bulletin board edit, expand, add to, and rewrite the original handful of notes into this book. 
-Bjo Trimble, The Star Trek Concordance (1995), p.vii
When I sent him the following in a batch of documents to Dave T., one of the minds behind the terrific Star Trek History website, he realized the importance of the following memo almost immediately — it has all five of the names listed as crewmen in The Star Trek Concordance, including one Jonathan Lippe.
"The Corbomite Maneuver" casting schedule (May 1966)6
It turns out that Bruce Mars, John Gabriel, Joanthan Lippe, Stuart Moss, and George Backman (here, spelled "George Bochman") all auditioned for the role (Lieutenant Dave Bailey) that eventually went to the second actor on the above list — Anthony Call. Bjo Trimble must have seen this document and assumed that all of the actors listed actually appeared in "The Corbomite Maneuver."

As often happens with inaccurate information, these erroneous cast listings later ended up in other publications. When Michael and Denise Okuda updated The Star Trek Encyclopedia with a second edition in 1997, for example, they included the following in their cast list for "The Corbomite Maneuver":
Bruce Mars, John Gabriel, Jonathan Lippe, Stewart Moss, George Bochman, Crewmen. 
- Michael and Denise Okuda, The Star Trek Encyclopedia: A Reference Guide to the Future (Updated and Expanded Edition, 1997), p.88
The book's acknowledgments confirm that this information, which is not present in the first edition of The Star Trek Encyclopedia, most likely came from Trimble:
We would like to thank Bjo Trimble for permission to use some of her cast list research from the original Star Trek series that was incorporated into our cast appendix.
- Michael and Denise Okuda, The Star Trek Encyclopedia: A Reference Guide to the Future (Updated and Expanded Edition, 1997), p.v
Eventually, the claim that Jonathan Goldsmith appeared on Star Trek would make its way to IMDb (as early as 2010, though this listing has since been removed), as well as many other online sources. It was in one of those online sources that this myth would take on a new dimension.
Popular meme about the Jonathan Goldsmith Star Trek rumor (circa 2012)
That source? An October 8, 2012 blog post by Joey deVilla, which identified a specific extra from "The Corbomite Maneuver" as Jonathan Goldsmith. Previous sources, like the Concordance and the Encyclopedia, claimed that Goldsmith played an unnamed crewman in the episode, but did not identify him with an actor on screen. Mr. deVilla, however, claimed that the extra in question was a red-shirted Enterprise crewman who only briefly appears (and I do mean briefly — the man in question, who has no lines and receives no screen credit, is on screen for less than five seconds).

Mr. deVilla's claim quickly caught on. Not only did it form the basis of a popular meme (pictured above), but it was subsequently reported — without much scrutiny, and often without attribution — by these other online news outlets:
  • October 13, 2012: I Don't Always Play a Red Shirt on Star Trek. But When I Do, I Survive The Whole Episode (Neatorama)
  • October 14, 2012: The Most Interesting Man in the World played a red shirt on Star Trek—and survived (io9)
  • October 14, 2012: I Don’t Always Play a Red Shirt on Star Trek… (Patheos)
  • September 17, 2013: Image Of The Day: The Most Interesting Star Trek Redshirt In The World (SyFyWire)
  • March 9, 2014: Did You Know ‘The Most Interesting Man In the World’ Was On ‘Star Trek’? (KEKB-FM)
  • March 2, 2016: 31 Actors And Celebrities You Didn’t Know Appeared In ‘Star Trek’ (UPROXX)
  • June 23, 2016: Dos Equis' 'Most Interesting Man In The World' Has a Most Interesting Link to 'Star Trek' (Mic)
  • June 23, 2016: Dos Equis' 'Most Interesting Man In The World' Has a Most Interesting Link to 'Star Trek' (Yahoo Music)
  • June 24, 2016: 'Most Interesting Man' Worked as an Extra on 'Star Trek' (Project Casting)
Unfortunately, I don't have access to the documentation necessary to identify this extra. Star Trek's daily production reports identified most speaking parts and stunt performers, but they never provided the names of any background performers. Only the total number of extras who appeared on any given day, their pay rates, and their hours worked would be listed.
Daily Production Report for "The Corbomite Maneuver" (June 2, 1966)7
Thus, the daily production reports for "The Corbomite Maneuver" do not help to clear up this rumor. The relevant section above, marked "ATMOSPHERE, WELFARE WORKERS, AND SIDELINE MUSICIANS," does not identify any of the background performers who worked on June 2, 1966, when the shot identified by Mr. deVilla was taken.

However, even though archival documentation cannot be used to debunk this rumor, there are other reasons — beyond the actor's firm denial — that make it highly unlikely Mr. Goldsmith appeared on Star Trek in a background role.

In 1966, Jonathan Goldsmith appeared on at least five different TV programs in eight different roles (and received screen credit). These were speaking roles, and Goldsmith was in the Screen Actors Guild (SAG). Extras received considerably less than SAG actors (both upfront and on the back end; extras did not receive any residuals if a show was rebroadcast, while SAG actors would receive payments for the first few reruns). Moreover, until 1990, background performers were represented by their own guild (SEG, the Screen Extras Guild) and crossover by SAG actors into background work was rare.

The reverse, however, was more common. On Star Trek, for example, Eddie Paskey was a background actor who appeared in 58 episodes, but he ended up with lines in five of those and screen credit in two. Jonathan Goldsmith himself says he received his first speaking role — on The Doctors, a soap opera — when the producers gave him a line of dialogue while he was working as an extra.By 1966, however, there's no evidence that Goldsmith was pursuing work as an extra, and no evidence that he appeared on Star Trek.

From reading Jonathan Goldsmith's memoir, however, it turns out that he's not without a few Star Trek connections. When he first moved to Hollywood (after acting in New York), Goldsmith stayed with a young actor named Walter Koenig ("His role on Star Trek and his success were much deserved and truly could not have happened to a nicer guy," says Goldsmith).Marc Daniels directed him in a 1966 television episode — not Star Trek, but Gunsmoke. And he shared the screen with both William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy — with the former on three episodes of T.J. Hooker and the latter on an episode of Mission: Impossible.

There's no evidence, however, that he ever appeared on an episode of Star Trek.


1 Lauren Davis, "The Most Interesting Man in the World played a red shirt on Star Trek—and survived," io9, October 14, 2012

2 Jonathan Goldsmith, "I don't always post to Reddit, but when I do, I do it from Central Vietnam's former DMZ. I am Jonathan Goldsmith, I play the Most Interesting Man in the World. Ask Me Anything," Reddit, August 1, 2013.

3 David M. Gutiérrez, "A Most Interesting Interview with a Most Interesting Man," Emmys, June 17, 2016

4 Bjo Trimble, The Star Trek Concordance: The A-To-Z Guide to the Classic Original Television Series and Films (1995), p.14

5 Jonathan Goldsmith, Stay Interesting: I Don't Always Tell Stories About My Life, but When I Do They're True and Amazing (2017), p.50

6 Casting Schedule for "The Corbomite Maneuver," Joe Sargent, May 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 3, Folder 9

7 Daily Production Report for "The Corbomite Maneuver," June 2, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 3, Folder 9

8 Jonathan Goldsmith, Stay Interesting: I Don't Always Tell Stories About My Life, but When I Do They're True and Amazing (2017), p.50

9 Jonathan Goldsmith, Stay Interesting: I Don't Always Tell Stories About My Life, but When I Do They're True and Amazing (2017), p.121-125


The Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection (1964-1969)

The Star Trek Concordance (Bjo Trimble, 1995)

The Star Trek Encyclopedia: A Reference Guide to the Future (Michael and Denise Okuda, 1997)

Monday, August 28, 2017

"The Alternative Factor" — What The Hell Happened? (Part 2)

Still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
Part One of this piece, first published in December of 2016, can be read here. Please note that all passages from the revised edition of These Are The Voyages - TOS: Season One (2013), by Marc Cushman with Susan Osborn, have been italicized. All other sources are cited in the endnotes of this post.

Part Two begins in the second week of November, 1966. John Drew Barrymore had just been cast in the role of Lazarus. With a production start date rapidly approaching, a staff rewrite attempted to turn Don Ingalls' work into a script that was ready to go before the cameras.
John Drew Barrymore, now signed to play Lazarus, had more going for him than his legendary family name -- he had achieved stardom in his own right. This Barrymore had shared the lead on the big screen with Steve McQueen in 1958's Never Love a Stranger, and with Julie London in 1959's Night of the Quarter Moon. He then traveled to Italy to top the bill in numerous films there, such as 1960’s I’ll See You in Hell and, as Ulysses, opposite Steve Reeves' Hercules, in 1961's The Trojan Wars. Between films in the early and mid-Sixties, Barrymore was always given choice television guest star roles, in series such as Gunsmoke, Rawhide, The Wild, Wild West, and now, tentatively, Star Trek.
No credit for Steve McQueen (1958)
These Are The Voyages significantly exaggerates the star power John Barrymore, Jr. brought to Star Trek when he was cast in "The Alternative Factor." To begin with, John Drew Barrymore and Steve McQueen did not share the lead in Never Love a Stranger (1958). Made early in McQueen’s career, the film arrived before Wanted: Dead or Alive (1958-61) and The Magnificent Seven (1960) turned the actor into a star. Not only was McQueen fourth-billed, but his name did not even appear on the film’s theatrical poster in the United States. (When the film was eventually released in Italy, McQueen was billed above the title, an indication of just how high his star had risen in a short time). None of these details should come as a surprise to Mr. Cushman, who for several years has claimed to be preparing a biography of Steve McQueen.

Cushman and Osborn also overlook the fact that Never Love a Stranger and Night of the Quarter Moon were harshly dismissed by major film critics. Writing about Never Love a Stranger for The New York Times, Richard W. Nason said, "The consistency of good style that lent dignity to Harold Robbins' sadly missing from the film version."1 Mae Tinee complained in The Chicago Daily Tribune that, "[the] film has as much sparkle as a wet match...Many of the characters, including the star, also behave as if they were very, very stupid."2  Variety's review was also harsh, describing the movie as, "so ineptly and unprofessionally done, especially in its handling of such volatile subjects as race and religion, that it has nothing else to recommend it except a vague topicality."3
No credit for Steve McQueen here, either (1958)
The notices for Night of the Quarter Moon (1959) weren't much better. Variety declared that the picture was "fairly well premised but burdened with a trite story."4 Howard Thompson of The New York Times called it a "misguided film."5 Mae Tinee of The Chicago Tribune dismissed it as "one of the most inept films I’ve ever encountered."6 The film was a box office failure that reportedly lost MGM $146,000.7

In regards to Barrymore's subsequent career in Italy, Cushman and Osborn make a number of errors in their brief summary of this period. John Drew Barrymore did not have top-billing in 1961's The Trojan Wars (released outside of Italy as The Trojan Horse); he was second-billed to Steve Reeves, who played Aeneas, not Hercules. Barrymore was billed second in I'll See You In Hell (1960), too — Hungarian actress Eva Bartok had first billing. In fact, of the thirteen films Barrymore made while he was in Italy, he received top-billing in only three: A Game of Crime (1964), Arms of the Avenger (1963), and Natika (1963).
Barrymore second-billed for The Cossacks (1960)
These Are The Voyages presents Barrymore's roles in Italy as the next step in the career of an actor who had already achieved stardom. Other accounts are far less generous. In Myrna Oliver's obituary for the actor in The Los Angeles Times, for example, she presented a much dimmer view of Barrymore's Italian career:
Hoping to improve his image, in 1958 he changed his name to John Drew Barrymore, substituting one family name, Drew, for the other of Blythe. 
He employed the new billing in the films "High School Confidential!" and "Never Love a Stranger," but the new name did not seem to help. So he went to Italy for six years and played leading roles in a dozen low-budget, equally low-quality films.8
By 1964, even Barrymore himself did not reflect positively on his Italian film career:
Five years ago he left for Rome's dolce vita. His billing became John Drew Barrymore, possibly an escape from his father's overwhelming shadow. John, now home town, 32, is back in his perhaps to stay. What has he been doing in Italy? 
"Sixteen or seventeen pictures," he reported. Any of them good? He shook his head sorrowfully. "They started out that way," he said. "But unfortunately the Italian directors don't know how to cut. Well, Fellini knows what he is doing; he envisions the film while he is shooting it. Perhaps one other. But the rest don't know how to put a picture together."9
    Earlier in their chapter about "The Alternative Factor," Cushman and Osborn state that, "Roddenberry knew who the right actor was. He suggested John Drew Barrymore for the role...Where John Drew went, free publicity followed." While it’s certainly true that Barrymore often found his name in the press, the kind of coverage the actor often received was probably not what Roddenberry wanted to be associated with Star Trek. Consider the following stories about Barrymore that were printed in both national newspapers and the Hollywood trade papers:
    • In 1953, "Barrymore pleaded guilty to failure to appear on three old traffic citations-having no driver's license, changing lanes in traffic unsafely and having no registration for his automobile."10 The young actor was only 20 years old at the time of the incident.
    • In 1954, Actors' Equity considered charges against Barrymore for "conduct unbecoming an Actors' Equity member," citing him for "insubordination and the use of obscene language."11 As a result of never appearing before the union to answer these charges, Barrymore was ultimately "suspended from Actors' Equity for a year" in 1957.12
    • In 1958, Barrymore spent three weekends in jail, "after pleading guilty to charges of disturbing the peace and being drunk in a public place."13 Police found the actor loudly arguing with his then-wife, Cara Williams, after several local residents "complained of hearing a woman screaming."14 When officers arrived on the scene and attempted to restrain Barrymore, the actor "struggled violently and abused the Beverly Hills air with unseemly language," according to police reports.15
    • Later that same year, Cara Williams filed for a decree of separation, custody of their 4-year-old son, and alimony. Her suit alleged that Barrymore, now 26, had inflicted "grievous mental cruelty" upon her.16
    • In 1959, Barrymore "was released on $1500 bail...after being booked on suspicion of felony hit-and-run and drunk driving."17 The actor, according to police reports, had “smashed his new white sports car into the rear of [another vehicle]."18
    • In 1960, Barrymore received a year-long suspension from Actor's Equity for the second time in five years, and was "slapped...with a $5,000 fine for his walkout...on a co-starring stint in the touring production of 'Look Homeward, Angel.'"19 Barrymore had blamed illness for breaking his contract with the production, but Actors' Equity was unconvinced, since Barrymore began working on a motion picture in Europe only shortly thereafter.
    • Later that same year, Barrymore spent eight days in an Italian jail after being found, "guilty by Rome court of resisting and insulting the police" (he had been sentenced to eight months in prison, but this sentence was suspended).20
    • According to The Los Angeles Times, "In 1962, after being involved in a series of street brawls in Rome, [Barrymore] told [the] Associated Press: 'I'm not a nice, clean-cut American kid at all. I'm just a human being. Those things just happen.'"21
    • That same year, Weekly Variety reported that Barrymore had been picked up by police "on drunk charges."22
    • Finally, on October 15, 1966 — only a few weeks before agreeing to appear in "The Alternative Factor" — Barrymore and twelve other people were arrested during a narcotics raid. Barrymore was released on $3,300 bail.23
    Janet MacLachlan in a still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    Getting back to Star Trek...
    For the part of Lt. Charlene Masters, Joe D’Agosta and Gerd Oswald liked the idea of hiring an up-and-coming black actress -- Janet MacLachlan. 
    There's nothing in the files at UCLA indicating who selected MacLachlan for the part; Cushman and Osborn's statement here appears to be purely speculative. Moreover, a memo from Gene Roddenberry to Joe D'Agosta (the show’s casting director) dated November 3, 1966 — just prior to when casting was done for "The Alternative Factor" — suggests that Oswald probably was not the one who chose MacLachlan:
    Particularly I want more of your suggestions and help on supporting roles. I do not believe in leaving these selections up to directors and this has been happening quite a bit lately, and we almost invariably get hurt by the director's choice. If I had my way about it, I would have almost a positive rule that we never use a supporting actor suggested by a director.24
    Regardless of who picked MacLachlan to appear as Lt. Charlene Masters, the 33 year-old actress was hired to play the part, for which she received $750.25 To read more about the significance of MacLachlan being cast in the part, which was not specified by ethnicity in the script, this blog post by Robert J. Sawyer is worth reading. 1966, MacLachlan was mostly known for her work on the stage. She had yet to achieve any standout recognition on television, so there was no real name value in hiring her, only color value.
    For roughly two years (from 1964-66), MacLachlan was a contract player for Universal TV, appearing on such programs as The Alfred Hitchcock Hour, Chrysler Theatre, Run For Your Life, and The Fugitive.26 From 1961-1964, she had appeared on and off-Broadway alongside "such acclaimed and established actors as James Earl Jones, Louis Gossett, Jr., Maya Angelou and Roscoe Lee Browne."27 Although she was not a "name" when she was cast in "The Alternative Factor," it strikes me as rather insulting to dismiss her as having "only color value" in the way that Cushman and Osborn do here.
    But the attitudes within the Star Trek buildings and stages were not representative of all of America in 1966, and the domino effect which took most of the good out of "The Alternative Factor," began first with Coon’s decision to trim back some of the romance, now intensified with the casting of Janet MacLachlan to play opposite John Drew Barrymore. It was still one year before the release of the controversial Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner?, in which black Sidney Poitier and white Katherine Houghton fight for their right to be married - and win. As NBC became aware of the casting, the network programmers expressed misgivings. Even with the success of I Spy and its equal-status casting of Robert Culp and Bill Cosby, and the love story in “The Alternative Factor” now pushed into the background, many were nonetheless wondering how the affiliates in the South might react to this interracial pairing. With only a few days left before the start of production, Gene Coon began receiving off-the-record phone calls suggesting that either Janet MacLachlan be replaced with a white actress or that the script be changed to remove the remaining scenes depicting sexual or romantic interest between Lazarus #1 and Charlene Masters. The simplest solution would have been to pay MacLachlan a “kill fee” with the promise of future work. Coon, however, zigged when he should have zagged. 
    The paragraph above is not supported by the evidence I have found to date. Consider the following:
    • No archival documentation is cited or referenced in These Are The Voyages in which any "network programmers" express misgivings — or opinions of any kind — about the casting of Janet MacLachlan in "The Alternative Factor." In my own research, I have been unable to find any primary sources that support this claim.
    • Moreover, it is unclear who Cushman or Osborn mean to identify when they refer to "network programmers." This title is used sparingly in These Are The Voyages, and never in reference to a specific person. For the sake of argument, I have assumed it could be anyone at NBC with input regarding Star Trek's place on the network’s schedule.
    • Between Don Ingalls' November 7, 1966 second draft and the staff re-write completed between November 14-18, 1966, no intermediate draft was written. These Are The Voyages claims that Gene Coon completed a revised final draft teleplay on November 14, 1966, but the files at UCLA do not support this. Some page revisions were completed on that date, but many contained only minor changes, and there is no record of a revised final draft on November 14, 1966.
    • Additionally, the page revisions at UCLA confirm that neither Gene Coon nor anyone else on staff produced a version of the script in which the love story between Masters and Lazarus was "pushed into the background." Every version written by Ingalls had the Masters/Lazarus romance; all of the pages rewritten by the staff removed it entirely (see part one of this piece for memos from Gene Roddenberry and Stan Robertson on this issue).
    • I have been unable to locate any evidence documenting phone calls from NBC to Gene Coon (or anyone else on the Star Trek staff) urging the replacement of Janet MacLachlan with a white actress or the elimination of the Lazarus-Masters love story following MacLachlan being cast. Cushman and Osborn do not cite a single source in support of this claim.
    • Indeed, it is unclear what "off-the-record phone calls" is supposed to mean in this context. While a journalist may receive phone calls from sources that are on or off the record, in the context of a television production, phone calls are by their very nature off-the-record.
    • Finally, despite publicly blaming NBC for a multitude of sins for years after Star Trek was cancelled, Gene Roddenberry did not once describe what Cushman and Osborn allege about NBC in the quoted passage.
    Still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    With Coon’s November 14th Revised Final Draft, the last traces of the love story were removed. Lazarus #1 had lost all his charismatic traits and, because of this, was now intolerably annoying.
    Again, no revised final draft for "The Alternative Factor" was completed on November 14, 1966; only 48 individual page revisions were completed on that date. Some of these were newly typed, but many were taken from Don Ingalls' November 7, 1966 draft, with scenes crossed out and dialogue revisions (both major and minor) made by hand. Gene Coon may have completed these pages, or it may have been someone else on the Star Trek staff — the archival record does not indicate the author of the revisions.

    Cushman and Osborn argue that Lazarus went from being charismatic in the Don Ingalls version of the script, to "intolerably annoying" in the staff rewrite. In truth, the staff rewrite retained much of Lazarus' dialogue from Ingalls' second draft teleplay. Although the revised version eliminated a few pages that constituted a half-baked romance between Lazarus and Lt. Masters that was present in Ingalls’ second draft, the substance of Lazarus' character was largely the same in both versions.
    The character of Charlene Masters, no longer a chemist but instead a member of engineering, became pointless. She was left with so little to do that one has to wonder why she is even in the story, representing the engineering section in place of Scotty. 
    Masters was never described as a "chemist" in any version of the script. Instead, she was identified as a "chemoscientist," an odd description, but one that appears in every draft of the script. In Ingalls' first draft teleplay, she had worked in the ship's "energizing lab," but Bob Justman recommended changing her workplace to engineering, a change Ingalls made in his second draft.28 In addition, Gene Roddenberry disliked presenting another female scientist on the show, suggesting in his comments about Ingalls' revised story outline that he’d prefer to do something different with the character:
    We have had lady scientists on this show galore. Let's have her in some other job. about a lady navigator or engineer?29
    Thus, Masters' workplace became engineering. Ingalls made this change in his November 7, 1966 second draft — it did not happen in the staff rewrite, as suggested by Cushman and Osborn.30

    As for why Lt. Charlene Masters was is in the final script rather than Scotty, it's possible James Doohan was simply unavailable. During the first season of Star Trek, Doohan was not a regular, and his deal was on "a non-exclusive basis subject to his availability."31 At the time, he was still booking gigs on other programs, including a recurring role on Peyton Place.32 It's also possible that by the time the Masters-Lazarus romance was being written out of the show, MacLachlan had already been booked for the role. To be fair, I can only speculate on the matter; the archival record does not have any clear-cut answers.
    With filming due to start in two days, the new script was sent to the director and the regular cast members. John Drew Barrymore was not scheduled to work that first day of filming. For the moment, he was unaware of the drastic story changes. 
    According to a memo written by Joe D'Agosta during the filming of this episode, the account above is not true. In that memo, D'Agosta states that, "Mr. Barrymore received script changes on November 14."33 What D'Agosta recorded at the time seems only logical. Why would the production withhold script revisions from a principal guest star scheduled to begin filming in just a few days?

    I must also dispute the claim presented in These Are The Voyages that the staff rewrite of "The Alternative Factor" contained "drastic story changes." The Star Trek staff doesn't appear to have viewed the changes as considerable. Don Ingalls received a solo "written by" credit for the episode, and there's no record of the producers challenging that credit through arbitration with the Writers Guild of America (the same cannot be said for "A Private Little War," Don Ingalls' other Star Trek effort — that episode did go through WGA arbitration, which split credit between Ingalls and Roddenberry, leaving Ingalls to use a pseudonym on the finished product).

    Stay tuned for the next part of this piece, which will take a closer look at the seven turbulent days spent filming "The Alternative Factor" in late November of 1966.

    (To Be Continued in Part 3)

    Certain images courtesy of Trek Core.


    1 Richard W. Nason, "Local Theatres Offer Story of Rackets," The New York Times, November 22, 1958

    2 Mae Tinee, "Tho the Novel Sizzles, Film Just Sputters Out,"  Chicago Daily Tribune, October 24, 1958, p.B7

    3 Daily Variety, June 27, 1958, p. 3

    4 Weekly Variety, February 11, 1959, p.6

    5 Howard Thompson, "Racial Love Story," The New York Times, March 5, 1959

    6  Mae Tinee, "Inept Movie Tells Sexy, Sordid Tale," Chicago Daily Tribune, June 15, 1959, p.39

    7 The Eddie Mannix Film Ledger, Margaret Herrick Library, Center for Motion Picture Study

    8 Myrna Oliver, "John Drew Barrymore, 72; Troubled Heir to the Throne of the Royal Family of Acting," Los Angeles Times, December 1, 2004

    9 Bob Thomas, "New Barrymore—With Profile," The Lincoln Star, November 1, 1964, Page 59 (this profile was syndicated in dozens of newspapers; Bob Thomas, who died in 2014, had a long career covering Hollywood for The Associated Press)

    10 "Young Barrymore Pays Traffic Fine," Los Angeles Times, May 14, 1953, p.A1

    11 "Equity Mulls Charges Against Barrymore, Jr.," Daily Variety, August 11, 1954, p.2

    12 "Barrymore Given Suspension by Equity," Weekly Variety, May 29, 1957, p.68

    13 "Barrymore Jr. Turns Shy on Jail Week End," Los Angeles Times, January 5, 1958, p.2

    14 "Barrymore Jailed In Row With His Spouse," Los Angeles Times, January 1, 1958, p.6

    15 "Barrymore Jailed In Row With His Spouse," Los Angeles Times, January 1, 1958, p.6

    16 "Barrymores Again Strike Marital Storm," Los Angeles Times, September 27, 1958, p.B1

    17 "John Barrymore Jr. Held in Hit-Run Case," Los Angeles Times, March 8, 1959, p.32

    18 "John Barrymore Jr. Held in Hit-Run Case," Los Angeles Times, March 8, 1959, p.32

    19 "Equity Suspends, Fines Barrymore," Weekly Variety, July 13, 1960, p.57

    20 "Barrymore Convicted," The New York Times, October 16, 1960, p.83

    21 Myrna Oliver, "John Drew Barrymore, 72; Troubled Heir to the Throne of the Royal Family of Acting," Los Angeles Times, December 1, 2004

    22 Weekly Variety, January 10, 1962, p.54

    23 "Dope Raiders Seize Actor Barrymore," Chicago Tribune, October 17, 1966, p.3

    24 Memo from Gene Roddenberry to Joe D'Agosta, November 3, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 35, Folder 5

    25 Cast Sheet for "The Alternative Factor," November 15, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 3

    26 Daily Variety, December 14, 1965, p.6

    27 Steve Ryfle, "Janet MacLachlan dies at 77; prominent African-American actress in film, TV since 1960s," Bright Lights Film Journal, October 18, 2010

    28 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, October 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    29 Memo from Gene Roddenberry, undated (approximately September 14, 1966), Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2

    30 "The Alternative Factor," Second Draft Teleplay by Don Ingalls, November 7, 1966, From a Private Collection, Also Found in the Donald G. Ingalls Collection of Scripts, Box 4, Folder 16

    31 Memo from Joe D'Agosta to Gene Roddenberry, May 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 35, Folder 6

    32 Stephen Bowie, "Who Are Those Guys #3," The Classic TV History Blog: Dispatches From the Vast Wasteland, May 13, 2011

    33 Memo from Joe D'Agosta to Herb Solow, November 18, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    Monday, March 13, 2017

    Did D.C. Fontana Get Her First Professional Script Assignment on Star Trek?

    Still from "Charlie X" (1966)
    Herb Solow and Bob Justman's Inside Star Trek : The Real Story (1996) is one of my favorite books about television production, but when rereading it recently, a couple of paragraphs about Dorothy C. Fontana's writing career before Star Trek raised my proverbial fact-checking antenna:
    Prior to her job as secretary to Roddenberry, Dorothy C. Fontana worked as a secretary for writer-producer Sam Peeples on the series Frontier Circus. Before that, she had sold a spec story entitled "A Bounty for Billy" to Peeples for the Tall Man series. But Dorothy’s goal was to work as a professional filmwriter [sic], and as yet she had never actually been hired to write a script.
    Justman was impressed by the intelligence and orderly thought processes she revealed in her story analyses. He convinced Roddenberry to give her a trial assignment to write the script of "Charlie X." Roddenberry had written the story, then "junked" it, feeling the story didn’t contain enough "action" and, therefore, wouldn’t be acceptable to the network. But Fontana’s script contained another kind of action, dramatic action that came from well-drawn characters.
    --Herbert F. Solow and Robert H. Justman, Inside Star Trek: The Real Story (1996), p.132-133
    The first thing I did to verify the claims about Fontana's writing career from this passage was check the Internet Movie Database. IMDb relies on user-submitted information, so anything found on it should be thoroughly cross-checked, but it’s a good place to start.
    D.C. Fontana's early writing credits on IMDb (accessed March 12, 2017)
    D.C. Fontana’s IMDb page gives her two "story by" credits, one "teleplay by" credit, and three “written by” credits on a total of six television episodes produced before early 1966, when NBC placed Star Trek on its schedule.The same page gives Fontana "written by" credit on three more episodes produced during the 1966-67 broadcast season in addition to her work on Star Trek. Many of these credits would seem to directly contradict Solow and Justman's claim that "Charlie X" marked the first time Fontana was hired to write a script. My next question, of course, is this: are Fontana's early credits as listed by IMDb accurate?

    To answer that question, I first turned to several interviews Fontana has given about her early writing career. Here's what she had to say about her writing career from 1960-63 in this interview from 2013:
    History here - most people ignore the fact that I was a writer before STAR TREK. Between 1960 and 1963, while working for Samuel A. Peeples, I sold two stories and two scripts (produced) to THE TALL MAN series, done a rewrite on a SHOTGUN SLADE script (produced) and sold a story of FRONTIER CIRCUS (produced). In 1963, Samuel A. Peeples left MGM (where he had written a movie script) to move on to other projects, and I decided to stay at the studio.2
    Before getting to the matter of Fontana’s credits, I should issue a small point of correction — Samuel A. Peeples (primarily known to Star Trek fans for writing the program’s second pilot, "Where No Man Has Gone Before") actually wrote two movie scripts when he was at MGM in 1962, not one. Boxoffice noted that Peeples had begun work on a movie called Company of Cowards (based on the novel by William Chamberlain) in April of 1962.3 It was eventually filmed and released as Advance to the Rear in 1964. In May of 1962, Boxoffice reported that Peeples was working on another screenplay for MGM called Recollection Creek, based on the novel by Fred Gipson.4 By November, Boxoffice reported that Peeples had "completed the first draft of the screenplay of MGM’s 'Recollection Creek' which Richard Lyons will produce early next summer."5 Lyons had planned to reunite actors Randolph Scott and Joel McCrea, recent stars of Ride the High Country (1962), for the movie, but it was never made.

    Only about half of Shotgun Slade has been released on home video. When I asked Fontana via email about the episode she rewrote, she told me that, "I did not get credit on the script."6 She did, however, receive credit on four episodes of The Tall Man and one episode of Frontier Circus. Since both of those programs have been released in full on home video, those credits can be easily verified.

    D.C. Fontana's four screen credits for The Tall Man (all 1960)
    When it comes to The Tall Man, IMDb and Fontana present the same account — that she sold two story outlines, which were then scripted by other writers, followed by two additional story outlines, which she scripted herself. The screen credits on The Tall Man match this account.
    D.C. Fontana's screen credit for Frontier Circus (1961)
    When it comes to Frontier Circus, on the other hand, Fontana and IMDb present different versions of what happened. According to IMDb, Fontana shared a teleplay credit with Lawrence Kimble on an episode called "Lippizan." Fontana, however, says she only wrote a story outline, not the teleplay. The screen credits settle the matter; Fontana wrote the story outline, while Lawrence Kimble wrote the teleplay. In this case, the listing on IMDb is incorrect.

    After The Tall Man, Shotgun Slade, and Frontier Circus, Fontana remained a full time secretary (in fact, she was introduced to Gene Roddenberry when she went to work as his secretary on The Lieutenant at MGM), but she also moonlighted as television writer. Once Fontana adopted the professional name of "D.C. Fontana" (her earlier stories and scripts were credited to Dorothy C. Fontana), she made additional script sales. In a 2013 interview, she recalled:
    From 1964 through the making of two STAR TREK pilots, plus two other pilots Roddenberry produced, to beginning of STAR TREK production in 1966, I wrote a script for BEN CASEY (produced), SLATTERY'S PEOPLE (bought but not produced as the series was cancelled) and THE ROAD WEST (produced).7
    Fontana’s script assignment for Slattery's People is not listed on IMDb, which does not include unproduced material, but it was mentioned in a 1965 article from The Los Angeles Times (her script for Ben Casey was also mentioned):
    She's been signed by Producer Irving Elman to script an episode of Slattery's People. Her story, titled "Question: Who Steals My Name?", involves a smear campaign against Slattery, who must decide if he will fight or ignore it. 
    This is not the first teleplay for Miss Fontana, who is secretary to Gene Roddenberry, Desilu writer-producer. Last season she wrote a play for Ben Casey.8
    In short, Fontana was hired to write a television script at least five times before Star Trek was even on the the NBC broadcast schedule (in addition to three other assignments in which she provided the story outline only). There’s simply no way that the account presented by Inside Star Trek : The Real Story could be true.

    "Charlie X" and Fontana's other Star Trek credits were not even her only writing assignments during the 1966-67 season. She also scripted an episode of The Road West (a Western that aired for one season on NBC) that year called "Never Chase a Rainbow." Contrary to the listing on IMDb, however, there's no evidence that Fontana wrote two episodes of The Wild Wild West under the pen name "Michael Edwards" that year.When I asked her if these credits were correct, Fontana flatly dismissed them, telling me:
    No - they are totally wrong. My pen name at the time was Michael Richards. I did not write THE WILD WILD WEST.9
    In light of all these facts, I am also skeptical that Justman was needed to convince Gene Roddenberry to hire Fontana to write the script for "Charlie X." By 1966, Fontana had been working for Roddenberry for over two years, and her desire to make a living as a professional writer instead of a secretary was not a mystery to the writer-producer. I find her version of what happened to be much more plausible:
    So when we came to production on STAR TREK's first season, Roddenberry assigned me to pick one of the stories in the bible and write the script. I chose "Charlie X," and that was the start of my science fiction writing. I was far from being a novice writer, and STAR TREK was not my first credit - far from it.10
    Whether or not Roddenberry needed convincing, it did not take him long to give Fontana the script assignment. By the week ending April 22, 1966, only a few weeks after Star Trek's first story assignments were handed out, Fontana had the job.11

    Author’s Note: In addition to the interview cited in this piece,, The Archive of American Television, and the Writers Guild Foundation also have valuable interviews with Dorothy C. Fontana about her life and extensive career in Hollywood. 

    Special thanks to Maurice M. for introducing me to D.C Fontana, who graciously took the time to answer all of my pesky questions via email.

    Image from "Charlie X" courtesy of Trek Core.


    1 Telegram to Andre Richardson, February 27, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 27, Folder 17

    2 Interview with D.C. Fontana,, May 18, 2013

    3 "George Marshall to Direct 'Company of Cowards,'" Boxoffice, April 30, 1962, p.12

    4 "Three New Productions Added to MGM Slate," Boxoffice, May 14, 1962, p.16

    5 "Drafts ‘Creek’ Play," Boxoffice, November 12, 1962, p.W-4

    6 Author Interview with D.C. Fontana (via email), February 28, 2017

    7 Interview with D.C. Fontana,, May 18, 2013

    8 "Secretary Knows Her Business," Los Angeles Times, May 31, 1965, p.C15

    9 Author Interview with D.C. Fontana (via email), February 28, 2017

    10 Interview with D.C. Fontana,, May 18, 2013

    11 Writers Report, Week Ending April 22, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 35, Folder 15


    Monday, February 13, 2017

    A Little Monkee Business

    Not a member of The Monkees (Still from "Catspaw," 1967)
    This piece is in response to several claims made by Marc Cushman and Susan Osborn in These Are The Voyages — TOS: Season One about the overall popularity and fan mail response to Star Trek and The Monkees (1966-68). This material was originally part of a much longer fact check about the production history of “The Alternative Factor,” but since it is largely irrelevant to the making of that episode, I have elected to publish it separately.

    In both the original and the revised edition of These Are The Voyages — TOS: Season One, the authors write:
    Wednesday, November 16, 1966... The “pre-fab four,” as the press was calling them, had the No. 1 album in the nation and their TV show was on its way to winning an Emmy as Best Comedy. However, as popular as the pop music sitcom was, Star Trek’s ratings were higher. And out of 90 primetime TV series, the two that received the most fan mail by far were The Monkees and Star Trek, neck and neck.
    --Marc Cushman with Susan Osborn, These Are The Voyages — TOS: Season One (eBook Edition, December 2013)
    First things first — no one in the press was referring to The Monkees (either the band or the television series, only the latter of which I have italicized in this piece) as the “prefab four” in 1966. That was a nickname coined by Eric Idle for The Rutles (a Beatles parody group) in the 1970s; journalists did not begin applying it to The Monkees until the mid-1980s (the earliest example I have found is a July 27, 1986 article in The Washington Post).

    Cushman and Osborn correctly note that The Monkees had the number one album in the United States when “The Alternative Factor” began filming. In fact, their debut album was number one for thirteen consecutive weeks, until it was surpassed by the group’s second album, More of the Monkees, which held the number one spot for an additional seventeen weeks. It’s also true that The Monkees (the television series) was on its way to winning an Emmy Award for Outstanding Comedy Series, which was presented on June 4, 1967. The Monkees also won that night for Outstanding Directorial Achievement in Comedy (award to director James Frawley for the episode titled "Royal Flush"); Star Trek had five nominations, but went away empty-handed.1

    Cushman and Osborn’s claim that The Monkees and Star Trek attracted the most fan mail out of all 90 primetime shows during the 1966-67 season, however, is impossible to substantiate. The three networks were competitors, and were not sharing fan mail figures with each other beyond what they leaked to the trade papers for publicity purposes. Moreover, according to a late 1967 column by Los Angeles Times entertainment critic Hal Humphrey, the three networks were not even measuring fan mail in the same way, making comparisons of their numbers into a pointless exercise:
    Do the TV networks get mail from viewers? Yes, but not as much as one might guess. ABC receives approximately 30,000 pieces of mail a year, CBS averages 20,000 and NBC counts phone calls and mail together for a grand total this year of 187,000. Kathryn Cole, manager of NBC's department of information, does not have a mail and phone call breakdown.
    If the CBS 20,000 mail count seems extraordinarily low, it may be due to the fact it counts only that mail addressed to the network, and not that addressed to the programs in care of CBS. At NBC and ABC that line is not so finely drawn.2
    What can be verified is that Star Trek and The Monkees appear to have attracted the most fan mail of NBC shows during the 1966-67 broadcast season, which is an important distinction. According to a draft of an NBC booklet prepared in May of 1967:
    Second only to The Monkees among NBC programs in the volume of fan mail it attracts, STAR TREK has been the recipient of nearly 27,000 letters of support and encouragement from one of the most loyal and articulate viewer followings currently attracted by any television series.3
    If the 27,000 letter figure is to be believed [see first note], The Monkees may not have been “neck and neck” with Star Trek in terms of fan mail received during the 1966-67 broadcast season, but well ahead of it. According to a February 1967 article in Weekly Variety, The Monkees had accrued 66,024 pieces of fan mail by the end of January 1967 alone — more than double what Star Trek had reportedly brought in three months later — and had been the network’s leading show in terms of fan mail since October of 1966.4 (For those interested in the difference between the size of a dedicated fan base willing to write fan letters and the size of a show’s overall viewing audience, the title of this article is a provocative one — “If Mail Were Ratings ‘Monkees' Would Shine”).

    Appearing to cast some doubt on these figures, however, is a May 6, 1967 letter from Gene Roddenberry to David Hedley (Director of Program Presentations for NBC), in which Roddenberry disputed the claim that Star Trek was still second to The Monkees in terms of fan mail: can forget STAR TREK being second in fan mail, it’s now first. According to ours and NBC’s counts on the West Coast we surpassed THE MONKEES LAST week.5
    The following month, this information (perhaps leaked by Roddenberry) made its way to Ted Green, a columnist for Back Stage, who wrote in the trade paper that, “Desilu's ‘Star Trek’ now is the Number One fan mail puller on NBC-TV, outdrawing ‘The Monkees.’”6

    Roddenberry appears to have been mistaken about the information he received from NBC regarding Star Trek's mail pull, however. On May 16, David Hedley replied to Roddenberry's letter from earlier that month and disputed the assertion that Star Trek had pulled ahead of The Monkees in fan mail:
    While STAR TREK's mail count in one of the recent weeks may have exceeded that of the Monkees, the respective totals of favorable letters for the season through April 30 are: Monkees - 172,853 and STAR TREK - 26,817. Because of the vastly different appeal of these programs, we think that the STAR TREK figure is probably more significant. However, in the interest of accuracy, we cannot bill it as our top mail puller.7
    Other archival evidence also suggests that Roddenberry was mistaken. In August of 1967, for example, the Los Angeles Times reported that The Monkees was still ahead of Star Trek in fan mail received:
    Except for The Monkees, the greatest mail puller among TV series the past season was NBC's Star Trek. According to executive producer Gene Roddenberry, Star Trek's weekly mail averages 4,000 pieces.8
    Additionally, it was not until October of 1967 that Roddenberry sent the following memo to the cast and crew of Star Trek:
    NBC informs us that STAR TREK has now passed THE MONKEES and is the Number One show in all the nation in Fan Mail received!
    Not only this, but every report is that STAR TREK’s fan response is by far the most devoted and enthusiastic by all measurements.
    Thank you for all you are doing to make this possible.9
    Further complicating the issue, two months after Roddenberry’s internal memo quoted above, the Los Angeles Times again reported that NBC’s mail leader was The Monkees, followed by Star Trek:
    For the past year and a half at NBC the biggest mail puller has been The Monkees. Star Trek is next, and so much of its mail is from scientists and clergymen that the NBC sales department has been able to use this fact in making its sale pitch to particular potential sponsors.10
    Regardless of if and when Star Trek overtook The Monkees in the number of fan letters received, none of these sources are indicative of how many letters either program received relative to the shows on the other two networks (ABC and CBS). Cushman and Osborn's claim that the two programs received the most fan letters out of all prime time programs during the 1966-67 season is simply unverifiable.

    Moreover, Cushman and Osborn’s claim that Star Trek had higher ratings than The Monkees (the latter of which they identify as a “popular” show) during the 1966-67 season is not true. In point of fact, The Monkees was never a hit in the Nielsen ratings. The half-hour show was highly profitable, but this was not because of the size of its viewing audience — it was because the program was inexpensive to produce and its merchandising was very, very lucrative:
    American video's most profitable show of the current network season isn't on the Nielsen hit parade, or even near it. And it doesn't even cop it’s Monday night time period...
    But the "Monkees" is easily the biggest smash — merchandising, that is — since the Daniel Boone parlay emptied tot piggybanks. For the show’s mod foursome (three Britishers and a Yank [sic—see second note], assembled via audition and then audience-tested), its been virtually instant international fame. But the big winnah [sic] is Screen Gems as producer of the teleshow, owner of the combos name, and ringmaster of all Monkeeshines [sic]...
    The combo's NBC-TV series, moreover, is one of the vid semester's cheaper freshman entries, figured to hit around $45,000 or thereabouts a segment (the web pays around $75,000 a show), the result of well-pared costs all around — talent, production, script, etc...11
    That said, even though The Monkees was not a Nielsen ratings hit — it did not win its time slot or place in the top thirty during either season it was on the air — the program still outperformed Star Trek, at least during the 1966-67 broadcast season. According to Nielsen NTI figures published in Television Magazine, The Monkees finished 42nd for the 1966-67 season, with a 31.2 share, while Star Trek placed 52nd with a share of 28.2.12 Although I have been unable to locate year-ending Nielsen figures for the 1967-68 broadcast season, I have been able to locate a two-week NTI report from October of 1967, which was reprinted in Daily Variety. That report has The Monkees finishing 66th (with a 28.1 share) and Star Trek finishing 68th (with a 24.8 share) — a dismal showing for both programs, though with The Monkees still slightly ahead of Star Trek.13

    Image courtesy of Trek Core.

    First Note: When the brochure finally went to press, the figure had been adjusted to 28,000 letters (thanks to Dave T. for confirming this). A variety of books and online sources have cited the number in the brochure as being 29,000 letters, but I have been unable to corroborate this larger figure with any primary sources.

    Second Note: It should be pointed out that The Monkees' "mod foursome" was made up of three Yanks (Michael Nesmith, Peter Tork and Micky Dolenz) and one Britisher (Davy Jones), not the other way around. Thanks to Neil B. for correctly noting this.


    1 "Emmy Winners," Daily Variety, June 5, 1967, p.14

    2 Hal Humphrey, "TV Networks Get Mail From Home," Los Angeles Times, December 7, 1967, p.D23

    3 Letter from David Hedley to Gene Roddenberry with attached draft of descriptive sheet for returning shows, May 1, 1967, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 30, Folder 5

    4 "If Mail Were Ratings 'Monkees' Would Shine," Weekly Variety, February 22, 1967, p.32

    5 Letter from Gene Roddenberry to David Hedley, May 6, 1967, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 30, Folder 5

    6 Ted Green, "Main Street," Back Stage, June 30, 1967, p.4

    7 Letter from David H. Hedley to Gene Roddenberry, May 16, 1967, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 30, Folder 5

    8 Hal Humphrey, "Star Trek's upward flight," Los Angeles Times, August 13, 1967, p.A39C

    9 Memo from Gene Roddenberry to All Concerned, October 17, 1967, Roddenberry 366 Vault (document 050/366)

    10 Hal Humphrey, "TV Networks Get Mail From Home," Los Angeles Times, December 7, 1967, p.D23

    11 "No Biz Like 'Monkees' Biz," Weekly Variety, January 25, 1967, p.27; 45

    12 Walter Spencer, "TV’s Vast Grey Belt," Television Magazine, August 1967, p.54

    13 "Nat'l Nielsen Boxscore," Daily Variety, October 25, 1967, p.24


    The Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection (1964-1969)

    These Are The Voyages: TOS, Season One (Marc Cushman with Susan Osborn, 2013)

    Monday, January 16, 2017

    Was Star Trek The First Show To Say "Pregnant" On Television?

    Still from "The Trouble with Tribbles" (1967)
    In "The Trouble with Tribbles," when asked about the furry creatures that have begun to infest the Enterprise, Dr. McCoy explains to Captain Kirk that, "The nearest thing I can figure out is they're born pregnant, which seems to be quite a time saver."

    This was the only time the word "pregnant" was uttered on the original Star Trek. McCoy had been scripted to say, "I just finished examining her. She's pregnant," at the end of "Who Mourns for Adonais?" — but the scene was cut during editing. And although "Friday's Child" was centered on a pregnant woman (played by Julie Newmar), neither the word "pregnant" nor the word "pregnancy" were said on air.

    Nearly fifty years after the episode was made, however, "Tribbles" writer David Gerrold is making a much more grandiose claim about it:
    This was the first time the word 'pregnant' was used on TV. Lucy couldn't use it when she got pregnant.
    - David Gerrold, Commentary track for "The Trouble with Tribbles," Star Trek: The Original Series - The Roddenberry Vault (2016), 32:35-32:40
    Gerrold's anecdote about I Love Lucy has been confirmed by multiple people involved with the famous sitcom. In his posthumous memoir, for example, producer Jess Oppenheimer wrote:
    The network [CBS] had already issued a firm edict that we could not use the word "pregnant" on the show. We could say she was expecting." She could be "with child." But never "pregnant." They were still deathly afraid that some segment of the public would find something offensive in our pregnancy shows.
    - Jess Oppenheimer with Gregg Oppenheimer, Laughs, Luck...and Lucy: How I Came to Create the Most Popular Sitcom of All Time (1999), p.198
    The episodes covering Lucy Ricardo's on-screen pregnancy were filmed and broadcast in 1952 (during I Love Lucy's second season), fifteen years before "The Trouble with Tribbles" first aired on NBC (on December 29, 1967). When it came to the emerging medium of television, much had changed, both creatively and technically, between 1952 and 1967. Is it really possible that the word "pregnant" went unused on TV until Star Trek?

    As it turns out, the answer is a definite no. Although I've hardly done comprehensive research in this area, the word "pregnant" shows up at least five years earlier on The Dick Van Dyke Show. In "Never Name a Duck," written by Carl Reiner (who also created the series), an eccentric character says of her cat, "She thinks she's pregnant." The episode first aired on September 26, 1962, and the relevant line can be viewed here.

    It's possible, of course, that "pregnant" appeared on television earlier. I certainly don't know enough about the subject to claim with any certainty that The Dick Van Dyke Show was the first show to say "pregnant" on television, but it certainly precedes the use of the word on Star Trek. If you know of earlier examples, I'd love to hear about them in the comments below.

    Image courtesy of Trek Core.


    The Robert H. Justman Collection of Star Trek Television Series Scripts (1966-1968)

    Laughs, Luck...and Lucy: How I Came to Create the Most Popular Sitcom of All Time (Jess Oppenheimer with Gregg Oppenheimer, 1999)

    Monday, December 12, 2016

    "The Alternative Factor" — What The Hell Happened? (Part 1)

    Still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    On March 8, 2013, a press release formally announced These Are The Voyages - TOS: Season One. The forthcoming book promised to reveal, "the surprising and dramatic story of how Season One’s most criticized episode, The Alternative Factor went awry and became a jumbled mess." Shortly thereafter, a Kickstarter campaign was launched to fund the book, and the same language regarding "The Alternative Factor" was used as part of the project’s description.

    Following the success of that campaign, the book's author, Marc Cushman, told Trek Core that one of the unanswered questions that drove him to write the book in the first place was, "What the hell happened to 'The Alternative Factor'?" Mr. Cushman reiterated this account in an interview with Trek Movie, and went on to outline his claim that, "The network got nervous at the last minute about 'The Alternative Factor' because it would have had the first interracial love story."

    Mr. Cushman's website for These Are The Voyages has at least three different pages dedicated to "The Alternative Factor" (here, here, and here), and the books' Facebook page has had at least seven posts about the episode since it was launched in 2013. Considering the way Mr. Cushman continues to discuss the episode while promoting These Are The Voyages — it came up again on the Standard Orbit podcast, for example — he seems to believe his chapter on "The Alternative Factor" is one of the highlights of the book series. He certainly has treated it as a key selling point.

    In light of this, Mr. Cushman's chapter about "The Alternative Factor" seems more suited for a comprehensive fact check than any other chapter in These Are The Voyages. Having forced myself to watch the episode multiple times in preparation for this piece, I find myself in agreement with Mr. Cushman on at least one point — one of the big unanswered questions about the production history of Star Trek has to be this: what the hell happened on "The Alternative Factor?"

    Before I get down to answering that question, a brief explanatory note: to avoid being bogged down by constant citation, I have chosen to italicize passages taken from the revised edition of These Are The Voyages - TOS: Season One, by Marc Cushman with Susan Osborn, originally published in November of 2013. Other sources are cited in the endnotes of this piece.

    Still of Don Ingalls' writing credit for "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    Don Ingalls was a former cop and a friend of Gene Roddenberry. He was also one of Roddenberry’s peers, having worked as both a writer and then producer on Have Gun - Will Travel. Ingalls continued to work as a writer/producer in television on the western Whiplash, where he farmed script work out to Roddenberry, and then on to The Travels of Jaimie McPheeters, The Virginian, 12 O’clock High, and Honey West.
    Don Ingalls was, in fact, a former police officer and a friend of Gene Roddenberry. The two men first met while serving together in the Los Angeles Police Department in the early fifties. Both had flown B-17s in the Second World War and aspired to become professional television writers. According to Roddenberry biographer David Alexander, Ingalls and Roddenberry also shared "an appreciation of beautiful women and failing marriages."1

    Cushman and Osborn's timeline of Ingalls’ television credits, however, is somewhat jumbled and oversimplified. Ingalls' first staff assignment was as the story editor of Have Gun – Will Travel, for the show’s 1958-59 season.He was offered the job after Roddenberry gave an Ingalls spec script to the show’s producer and co-creator, Sam Rolfe, who, "[liked] the way [Ingalls] handled the Paladin character."After a single season on Have Gun – Will Travel, Ingalls departed for London, to work for Lew Grade’s Incorporated Television Company (ITC) as a "script editor."In August of 1959, while at ITC, Ingalls was named the "head writer and script supervisor" of Whiplash, an Australian Western starring future Mission: Impossible star Peter Graves.5 Ingalls was not the show’s producer (that was Ben Fox, with John Meredyth Lucas as associate producer), but as head writer, he was able to give Roddenberry work writing four episodes of the series (Ingalls wrote four episodes of the series himself). Later that year, Ingalls and Roddenberry were linked to a proposed Western anthology series called The Weapon. Had it gone to series, Ingalls and Roddenberry would have had "ownership stake and production roles," but the project appears to have been abandoned by early 1961.6

    Don Ingalls’ first recorded producer credit in the Hollywood trade papers (as associate producer) was for Thunder Wagon, an unsuccessful pilot, which he was first linked to in September of 1961 (it is unclear if it was actually produced).7 Several months later, in early 1962, Ingalls returned to Have Gun – Will Travel, where he was named story supervisor and associate producer of the show’s 1962-63 season.8 When Robert Sparks departed before the end of that season (the program’s last), Ingalls was promoted to full producer.9
    Stills from The Virginian, "Duel at Shiloh," January 2, 1963
    After Have Gun – Will Travel had wrapped production, Ingalls served as the producer and principal writer of a single episode of The Virginian, called "Duel at Shiloh," in November of 1962.10 He then reunited with Robert Sparks to serve as the associate producer of The Travels of Jaimie McPheeters in early 1963. When Sparks died suddenly on July 22, 1963, Ingalls was again elevated to full producer mid-series, and again his tenure was short, as he resigned midway through the program’s only season due to "creative and artistic differences with the network."11 Within a few weeks of his resignation, Ingalls returned to The Virginian as a "staff producer," and was tasked with producing four episodes.12 A year after the conclusion of that assignment, Ingalls was hired as the associate producer of Honey West (1965-66), which he worked on for 21 episodes. Soon thereafter, in May of 1966, he became the associate producer of the third (and ultimately final) season of 12 O'Clock High (1964-67). To be clear, Ingalls never had the title of producer on either program. The producer of 12 O’Clock High was William D. Gordon (with Quinn Martin as executive producer) and the producer of Honey West was Richard Newton (with Aaron Spelling as executive producer).

    To be fair, Cushman and Osborn shouldn’t be fully blamed for misstating some of Ingalls’ credits, as Ingalls himself appears to have been prone to exaggerating his own resume. An undated list of credits in the Gene Roddenberry papers at UCLA, for example, lists Ingalls as the co-creator and associate producer of Danger Man.13 In reality, Ingalls co-wrote a single first season episode with Ralph Smart (the only credited series creator), and never received credit as a producer on any episode. That same list of credits indicates Ingalls was the "associate producer" of Whiplash, a position he didn’t hold, either.14 Later, when he was interviewed by Lee Goldberg for Starlog, the resulting article claimed Ingalls had been a writer/producer on both The Big Valley and Gunsmoke.15 In fact, Ingalls was only a freelance writer for those series (writing five episodes for The Big Valley and two for Gunsmoke). He was never a producer for either program.
    Roddenberry wanted his friend to write for Star Trek and approved the pitch concerning a man’s obsessive hunt for his other self (a self that exists in an alternate universe based in anti-matter) and Kirk’s efforts to solve the mystery regarding the hunter and the lookalike hunted, thereby preventing universal annihilation.
    What Cushman and Osborn present here is rather speculative; there's no archival evidence indicating that Gene Roddenberry, rather than Gene Coon, heard or bought Ingalls’ pitch. At one point, Cushman and Osborn point to a Bob Justman memo as evidence that Ingalls pitched to Roddenberry:
    Justman, also writing to Roddenberry, since Roddenberry had given out the assignment, said:
    I have just read this story premise. I am extremely confused. I have just read Gene Coon’s memo on the premise. I agree with everything he says. I find that he seems less confused than I do. I congratulate him.
    In actuality, however, Justman directed his memo to Gene Coon, not Gene Roddenberry:
    Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, September 6, 196616
    A quarter century after the episode was made, Starlog reported that:
    When Roddenberry sold Star Trek, he gave his friend a call. Ingalls had a number of ideas, but the only one he remembers is the one he sold—"The Alternative Factor."17
    This passage implies that Ingalls pitched and sold “The Alternative Factor” shortly after Star Trek was picked up by NBC as a weekly series, but this is unsupported by the archival evidence. NBC's pickup of Star Trek was announced in Daily Variety on March 1, 1966.18 Archival sources indicate that the series order was finalized a few days prior to the public announcement. On February 27, 1966, for instance, Roddenberry sent a telegram which read, in part, "HAVE PERSONAL ASSURANCE FROM NBC WE ARE FIRMLY SCHEDULED TUESDAY 730."19

    Don Ingalls, however, did not receive a story assignment on Star Trek until the week ending August 19, 1966, more than five months after NBC put the series on its schedule.20 Roddenberry may have called his close friend when the series sold, but it seems unlikely that Ingalls pitched any story ideas until several months later, when he was given the untitled story assignment that would become "The Alternative Factor."

    Ingalls was most likely preoccupied by other commitments when Star Trek was first picked up by NBC. From May of 1965 until sometime in early 1966, Ingalls was the associate producer of Honey West, which wrapped production after a single season in March of 1966 (Ingalls departed before that date, only producing the first 21 of 30 episodes).21 Shortly after Honey West was cancelled, Ingalls was announced as one of nine writers assigned to prepare teleplays for the forthcoming season of The Big Valley.22 Less than six weeks later, Daily Variety announced that Ingalls had been signed as the associate producer of the third season of 12 O'Clock High, which would come to an early close when it was cancelled mid-season, while Ingalls was writing "The Alternative Factor."23 From June to September of 1966, Ingalls was also busy working as a freelancer, turning in two scripts for Gunsmoke ("The Favor" and "Fandango!") and a script for The Virginian ("An Echo of Thunder").24

    The substance of Ingalls’ pitch is not recorded in the show files preserved at UCLA, but his memory a quarter century later largely matches what he delivered in his first draft story outline:
    I had in mind parallel universes, in which there are positive and negative forces, and you have to keep the two universes separate, because if they're drawn together, you have annihilation...You have the bright side, the positive world we know and the negative world, where everyone's a villain. My idea was that one person from the negative world tries to break through—and if he succeeds, he destroys everything.25
    Still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    The story outline, in which the Enterprise crew encounter Lazarus "shipwrecked" on a planet devoid of humanoid life, arrived on August 29, 1966.
    Although the outline was dated August 29, 1966, the weekly writers reports indicate that it was actually delivered a day later, on August 30.26 (It would have been unusual for material from a freelance writer to arrive on the same day it was completed).

    Cushman and Osborn go on to quote a portion of Ingalls’ first draft story outline. For reasons that escape me, they have altered Ingalls' original punctuation a number of times. This appears less purposeful than it is sloppy — the meaning of the quoted passages is largely unchanged. Here is the version printed in These Are The Voyages:
    [Lazarus] is an interplanetary hunter. His game? A creature -- a humanoid monster that destroyed his civilization on a far distant planet. He is dedicated now to destroying the destroyer. Underlying the surface likeableness, the twisted grin, the deep blue eyes that look sadly into yours, is the visible memory of his horror, fighting up from the depths within him. The sympathies of Captain Kirk and the others go out to him.... Especially attracted and sympathetic is Charlene Masters, a pretty space chemist, nearly thirty and never before having met a man who might become more important to her than her test tubes and her formulas.... To the Enterprise crewman, Lazarus is a swashbuckling, tragic figure with hair on his chest and a chip on his shoulder and a girth of arm and chest to slay a dragon! He is a natural leader who infuses the young crewmen with a lust for the hunt and, like the harpooners and mariners of a bygone age clustered about their Ahab, so they find themselves mustering to the siren call to the hunt of this fantastic anachronism of a man.
    And here are the same portions from the original outline, dated August 29, 196627:
    The passionate writing, while confusing the producers, nonetheless seduced them into keeping the assignment alive -- just as Lazarus confused and seduced the crew of the Enterprise into keeping his quest alive.
    In truth, none of the show's producers (in the late first season, executive producer Gene Roddenberry, producer Gene Coon, and associate producer Robert Justman) were particularly impressed with the quality or passion of Ingalls' writing. All three men, in fact, complained that the outline was difficult to follow. Roddenberry wrote, for example, "I am in a state of confusion over the whole story and not quite sure who is doing what to who."28 In a memo to Gene Coon, Justman remarked about the first draft story outline, "I am extremely confused."29 Gene Coon, in a memo to Gene Roddenberry, quipped, "The first paragraph on page 12 is completely beyond my feeble powers. I don't understand a word of it...and believe me, if I don't, nobody at NBC will, except perhaps a bright page boy. Unfortunately, they don't give our story outlines to page boys to read. VPs get them."30

    Granted, the tone of these memos was not completely negative. Justman, for example, liked the idea of Captain Kirk waking up on board the Enterprise in a parallel universe:
    However, a very fine idea contained within these pages. Kirk wakes up on board the Enterprise and it is the same Enterprise and yet at the same time, a different Enterprise. It is an Enterprise which exists in time parallel with the Enterprise we all know. I submit that he has swapped places with a parallel Captain Kirk, who has taken his place on the original Enterprise. Both fellows and ships now exist concurrently. How do they manage to get back to their own time and swap places? What happens to them in the meantime?31
    Essentially relegated to a single scene at the beginning of Act Four — which I have reproduced below — this idea was barely developed in Ingalls' first draft story outline, and all subsequent versions of the story and script abandoned it completely. Jerome Bixby would tackle similar material with greater success in "Mirror, Mirror," written and produced the following season.
    Excerpt from "The Alternative Factor" story premise32
    In this draft, following the scene pictured above, Kirk retires to his cabin aboard the alternate Enterprise in a state of total confusion. There, he meets the "positive" Lazarus, who sets him straight with a page of exposition.

    Even Gene Coon, in a four-page memo that was highly critical, found something to like in Ingalls’ story outline. At the end of his memo, he wrote, in part:
    Don’t misunderstand this memo. I love the idea of Ahab pursuing the whale, which turns out to be himself. I love the idea of alternate worlds, of the stepping from dimension to dimension. It is simply that there are many things in this outline which must be explained and resolved BEFORE we go to screenplay.33
    Cushman and Osborn suggest that Gene Coon "was careful to be gentle in his criticism" in this memo. After reading the document in its entirety, I have to disagree. Over the course of the four page memo, Coon frequently expresses his confusion and frustration with the story. In the following passage, for example, he grows more and more exasperated by the story’s lack of logic or explanation:
    The device that Lazarus the Bad is building inside the time craft. What is it? Why is he building it? Is it a trap for Kirk, or does Kirk simply stumble into something designed for Lazarus the Good? Is it an attempt to get Kirk off his trail, without even knowing that Kirk is on his trail? And when Kirk appears, to go into the time craft, is this what Lazarus wanted? To send Kirk into another dimension? Or did he plan it for Lazarus the Good? Or what? Or?34
    Roddenberry himself had no positive comments to offer about his friend’s first draft story outline, writing, "Don is rather vague about a good many sections of action and progression in this story. Recommend he come back with a more explicit and definative [sic] revision."35
    A revised story outline arrived on September 12, gratis. Ingalls was resisting making the changes asked for. In trying to retain the magnetism Lazarus #1 had over Lt. Charlene Masters, and over Kirk and his crew, Ingalls was not putting in the negative personality traits needed to differentiate between this Lazarus and his anti-matter self -- the "good Lazarus." Both were on a mission, both were charismatic, both looked alike, both spoke alike and, adding to the confusion, Ingalls often neglected to add "#1" or "#2" to the character’s name.
    In point of fact, Ingalls did not add a number next to Lazarus’ name at any point. That’s a convention that would only emerge when someone on the staff rewrote the script. In his revised story outline, Ingalls chose to differentiate between the two characters by calling them the "gentle Lazarus" and the "other Lazarus."

    Cushman and Osborn go on to quote two passages from a Roddenberry memo about the revised story outline:
    Kirk is leading another search party. This is all he seems to do in this story. Let's get him really involved. There has got to be some jeopardy and danger to our people. So far we’ve just been walking through this piece. 
    I still cannot easily follow Lazarus "good" and Lazarus "bad" and who’s really where. The audience has to know who’s who and who’s where at all times -- as we found in “The Enemy Within.”
    In both cases, the authors have misquoted Roddenberry’s original memo, the relevant portions of which can be seen in the image below:
    Roddenberry's comments on Don Ingalls Revised Story Outline36
    Again, most of these errors are minor. The authors quote "this" instead of "the," use a double hyphen instead of an ellipsis, add the words "got" and “some” when they do not appear in the original, and so on. The most egregious mistake is the deletion of two sentences from Roddenberry’s comment about pages 11-12 of the outline, with no indication that any text has been removed.
    Ingalls' second free rewrite, from September 14, attempted to put more Kirk into the story -- double the Kirk, in fact. In this version, there were now two Kirks, with the "door" between Universes 1 and 2 swinging open far enough for Kirk to meet his own alternate self.
    There was no third draft of the story outline, period. Ingalls turned in a revised draft on September 12, 1966, which was then re-typed, probably for submission to NBC for story approval. That re-typed draft was dated September 14, 1966, and can be found in the show files at UCLA (along with the draft Ingalls turned in, dated September 12). Here you can see that the text of the September 12 and September 14 outlines is identical:
    The Revised Story Outlines (top, dated September 12, 1966; bottom, dated September 14, 1966)37
    This is not the only time this mistake is made in These Are The Voyages. I wrote about the same issue when I discussed D.C. Fontana's story outlines for "The Enterprise Incident."

    Suffice it to say, Kirk does not meet his double in this or any other version of "The Alternative Factor." As previously discussed, Ingalls' revised story outline drops Kirk traveling to the alternate Enterprise completely, and in this and all subsequent versions of the story, the only person from the antimatter universe that appears is Lazarus' double. Kirk coming face to face with his antimatter double would seem to violate the very rules Ingalls has set up (convoluted as they are). In this draft, in fact, Ingalls says what would happen if Lazarus met his double, stating, "the very act of meeting face to face would destroy them both and bring down the universe itself!" Presumably, the same rules would be true for Kirk, as well.
    Coon liked the addition and sent the retooled story outline to NBC.
    Gene Coon, of course, couldn't have liked the addition of Kirk meeting his double to the story, since there was no such addition. It’s also unclear that Coon, rather than Roddenberry, sent the story to NBC for approval, since Stan Robertson's comments were directed to Gene Roddenberry — not Gene Coon, as Cushman and Osborn claim.38

    On These Are The Voyages' website, there are additional claims about this stage of the development process that are not found in any edition of the book:
    Justman recommended they "cut the assignment off" and toss the script out. But then something happened. The NBC executive they answered to sent Coon a memo saying that he found "The Alternative Factor" to be "a very fine story outline," and added, "If the writer of this outline, Don Ingalls, instills the same exciting elements and sheer beauty of writing into the screenplay as are contained in this treatment, this should make for a fine Star Trek episode."
    With the network behind the episode, it was no longer an option to pull the plug.
    Bob Justman did not, in fact, recommend cutting off Don Ingalls' story assignment — and, even if he had, it would have meant tossing a story outline, not a script (tossing out a script was a much more expensive proposition, and it rarely happened). Moreover, the implication of the above passage is that the show's producers were backed into a corner once Stan Robertson gave script approval, but this makes little sense. For one thing, either Roddenberry or Coon submitted the outline to NBC for approval. If they didn't want to move forward with the story, they could have simply "junked" the outline without ever submitting it to the network, which happened in a number of other cases.
    Stan Robertson, however, was not keen on this new gimmick, which he saw as being an old gimmick. Kirk had already met a duplicate of himself in "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" and "The Enemy Within." Otherwise, Robertson was very optimistic about what he described as "a very fine story outline, writing Coon..."
    Robertson, unlike the show’s producers, did find much to praise about Ingalls' writing, calling the revised story outline both "a very fine story outline" and "an excellent story idea" in his letter to Roddenberry. He did, however, have two points of caution about the script, in both cases advising the producers not to repeat story ideas previously used that season:
    1) As we discussed, I think it would be a critical mistake to visually show on camera "two" Kirks or "two" Lazaruses when they "slip through the warp of the alternative factor into a parallel dimension." This device is too closely paralleled to those in "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" and "The Enemy Within". This is such an excellent story idea that I know we both agree that it would be unfortunate if the viewer received the impression that we were relying upon previously utilized plot points to tell it. 
    2) In the same vein, I think that it would again be a mistake to portray the girl, Charlene, as a member of The Enterprise crew. We have had other stories in which a member of the crew becomes romantically involved with our "heavies" and works in their favor against the best interests of our ship and command. Possibly she is a civilian who is being transported to another planet for one reason or another?39
    It is unclear to me where Robertson imagined the story could go without Lazarus meeting his double, but it is clear from this memo that Robertson wasn't simply opposed to Kirk meeting a double of himself — he was opposed to any character meeting their duplicate. In his view, Star Trek had gone back to this well too often in its inaugural season. Robertson's commentary about the character of Charlene Masters will become relevant later.

    Cushman and Osborn next quote a memo Bob Justman sent to Gene Coon regarding the revised story outline. Again, they misquote the source, although in this case, only slightly. Here’s the version found in These Are The Voyages - TOS: Season One:
    I have ambivalent feelings about the Story Treatment. I enjoyed the Teaser and part of the First Act and found it very intriguing. The mystery of Lazarus and what he is doing on that little planet and the start of the relationship between him and the girl are somewhat compelling. However, as we begin to find out more about the story and about Lazarus, I find my interest waning rather rapidly. Also, the more we know about Lazarus and his counterpart, the more confusing the story becomes to me.... I see that you have already put Mr. Ingalls to work on a First Draft screenplay. Therefore, I will reserve any further comment until he turns in this draft.
    And here is the original:
    Bob Justman's memo to Gene Coon about the Revised Story Outline40
    The First Draft teleplay, dated October 14, arrived on the 17th. The duplicate Kirk was out and, in his place, a stronger romance between Lazarus #1 and Lt. Charlene Masters, someone he could woo and then use to gain access to the energy source of the ship’s dilithium crystals.
    Cushman and Osborn are correct about the October 17, 1966 delivery date — that matches the information from the writers report for the week ending October 28, 1966.41 They are also correct about the date on the teleplay itself (October 14, 1966).42 As for the romance between Charlene Masters and Lazarus, since it closely follows the beats laid out in the revised story outline, I would hesitate to call it "stronger." Their romance certainly doesn’t replace a duplicate of Kirk, which, again, was never present in any version of the story outline. Finally, "the ship’s dilithium crystals" are not found in this draft of the script at all. Instead, the MacGuffins of choice are "negative space packets," the same as in the revised story outline.
    In the scene where Masters and Lazarus #1 meet, she is in the recreation room, sitting alone. Sulu notices a sad expression on her face and approaches. He asks, "Lonely?" She invites him to join her, but her attention quickly shifts to a man who enters -- a man she has never seen before. He is the type of man a woman of her era might rarely have a chance to meet, a throwback to a more romantic time -- a rugged, driven man. When Sulu, in an attempt to flirt, asks what she is doing "in a place like this," Masters replies, "Waiting for someone like ... you." But her eyes are clearly focused on Lazarus. Ingalls writes:
    Her eyes have never left Lazarus and there is that almost imperceptible something in her manner that comes alive when a woman sees the man approach her. ANGLE WIDENS as Lazarus reaches their table. He looks at Charlene and, for the first time, he smiles. A small, gentle little smile, softening the hawk-like features.
    These passages are not from Don Ingalls' first draft teleplay at all — they're from his second draft. Indeed, all of the passages in this chapter purporting to be from Ingalls' first stab at the teleplay are actually from his revised attempt. It's unclear why Cushman and Osborn identified this script as the show’s first draft, since the actual first draft is available in the show files at UCLA. Their error may stem from David Eversole's summary of the second draft (originally published by Orion Press, and now available on this site here), which at one time misidentified the script as a "first draft" (this error has since been corrected, at least on the version published on this site).

    Upon review of Don Ingalls' actual first draft teleplay, a number of things become clear. For one thing, Masters' encounter with Lazarus in the recreation room is not the first time the two characters see each other — in either version of the script. In the first draft, Lazarus and Masters first see each other when they pass each other in the corridor, and there is an immediate attraction between the two:
    Page 9 of Don Ingalls' first draft story outline (October 14, 1966)43
    In the second draft, Masters sees Lazarus for the first time in the gym, vigorously exercising, which impresses her and several other members of the Enterprise crew:
    Page 14 of Don Ingalls' second draft story outline (November 7, 1966)44
    In another minor, but persistent error, the authors misquote their source yet again in the above passage. Sulu’s line, in both the first and second draft, is not, "Lonely," but, "Lonesome?" (In subsequent revisions, Sulu does not appear in the episode at all).

    Comparison of first and second draft scripts by Don Ingalls
    Lastly, and most significantly, Cushman and Osborn have misidentified which version of Lazarus appears in this scene. It is not Lazarus #1 (who has a recent head wound and has been driven insane), but Lazarus #2 (the sane one sans head wound). Both of Ingalls’ drafts of the script make this point clear:
    Comparison of first and second draft scripts by Don Ingalls
    In another scene, Lazarus #1 is again with Masters. The script reads: "She stares at him, a strange look in her eyes. He stares at her. Then, softly, he tells her, 'I have moved through eternity to find you. You know that, don’t you? When we first saw each other ... you must have felt it.' She says, ‘You were like a wounded eagle.' He says, 'An eagle looks a long time for his mate ... and, once he finds her, he never leaves her. I have looked a long time.' He pulls her close. She draws back for a moment, but his force, though gentle, is relentless. He tells her, ‘You have no idea what it’s like ... eternity unrolling before you ... and to be alone, through all time ... and then I saw you.' Hungrily, he sweeps her into his arms and kisses her. For a moment she resists...and then she melts.... He says, 'I knew it the moment I saw you. You belong to me. It is as inevitable as my struggle.... Charlene... I can't be alone any more. When the Enterprise leaves here, I will stay. I want you to stay with me.'" 
    Later, Lazarus #1 tells her, "With your love, and help, I can end this terrible quest, then live a real life again, anywhere you say, together, the two of us."
    At risk of belaboring the point, once again, this dialogue has been sourced from Ingalls’ second draft teleplay, not the first. And, once again, there are several errors in the authors' transcription of that script. In Don Ingalls' first draft teleplay, the scene plays out in much the same way, but with different dialogue (I've included a portion of that scene below).

    Page 48 of Don Ingalls' first draft story outline (October 14, 1966)45

    Masters conspires to help Lazarus. She sets the fire in the department of the engineering deck where she is assigned -- the dilithium recharging station -- creating a smokescreen so Lazarus can steal the crystals. She even travels to the planet where his "inter-dimensional ship" is located, then accompanies him into the "corridor" separating the two universes. As she becomes trapped with him, she discovers too late that he is mad.
    In Ingalls’ first draft teleplay, Masters works in the “energizing lab.” In his second draft, Masters simply works in “engineering,” specifically in “the area where the Lithium crystals are kept (her regular working station).” The term "dilithium recharging station" appears to have been coined by Cushman and Osborn; dilithium crystals themselves would not be introduced into the script until the staff rewrite. In the first draft, the script deals with "negative energy packets" and in the second draft, it deals with "lithium crystals."

    Moreover, in both of Ingalls’ teleplay attempts, Lt. Masters doesn’t start the fire to create a distraction so that Lazarus can steal the crystals — she creates this distraction so that she can steal the crystals herself. Lazarus simply waits for her in the transporter room.

    Finally, in no version of the script does Lt. Masters accompany Lazarus into the negative magnetic corridor. Masters does accompany Lazarus down to the planet, but once she’s there, Ingalls completely sidelines her from the action. "Charlene is frightened," writes Ingalls in both drafts; in the second draft, he goes on to describe her as "little girl lost." In both versions, she is relegated to watching helplessly throughout this sequence.
    Kirk's personal stake in the story is hinged on his need to solve the mystery of the hunter and the hunted, save Masters from herself, and not save Lazarus from himself, thereby preventing the annihilation of two universes. To do this, Kirk enters the corridor and encounters Lazarus #2 -- the “good” Lazarus -- hard at work on a means to close the doorway for all time. He tells Kirk that he will catch Lazarus #1 when he enters, preventing him from making it through to the other end, and, at the same time, buying Kirk the time he needs to find Masters and pull her from the corridor. Kirk does so, and then uses the ship’s phasers to destroy the inter-dimensional ship and seal the doorway for all eternity. The ending is poignant. Lazarus #2, a man Kirk had looked-up to, will spend eternity at the hands of a raving madman, for the good of two universes. The other, damned to the same fate, is Lazarus #1, the man Charlene Masters had loved despite his self-torture. 
    Cushman and Osborn imply that, in Ingalls’ first draft, Kirk enters the negative magnetic corridor purposefully, to stop Lazarus. In fact, in both the first and second drafts of Ingalls’ teleplay, Kirk enters the negative magnetic corridor accidentally, when he lunges to enter Lazarus’ time craft (which is a much larger vessel in both of Ingalls’ drafts than it is in the final episode) and is sent through the invisible portal that Lazarus #1 had been preparing for himself.

    As previously indicated, Lt. Masters is not trapped in the negative magnetic corridor in any version of the teleplay. She never even enters the corridor, so there is no need for Captain Kirk to save her in the way Cushman and Osborn describe. And, just as in the final episode, Kirk meets Lazarus #2 in the anti-matter universe, not in the negative magnetic corridor, which he only travels through briefly before reaching the other universe and Lazarus #2.

    Finally, the destruction of the time craft plays out differently in Ingalls’ first draft than it does in the revised version (and the completed episode). Rather than the Enterprise using its phasers to wipe the vessel out of existence, Kirk orders Sulu to aim the ship’s engines at the vessel, and it is destroyed in “a ROARING INFERNO OF NOISE, DUST, FLAME AND FLYING DEBRIS.” In his memo analyzing this draft, Bob Justman wrote, “If Kirk has to destroy the Spaceship down on the planet, he'd better blast it with a phaser beam.”46 In his own memo, Roddenberry made a similar point:
    Blasting the time craft with backwash from the Enterprise engines is (a) impractical since our engines don’t work that way (b) the Enterprise is too high up in orbit to do it (c) Bob J. will say it can’t be done on our budget anyhow. So why don’t we just phaser it?47
    Following this input, Ingalls’ second draft has the Enterprise use its phaser banks to vaporize the time craft, a change which would be retained in the episode as aired.
    Robert Justman, now believing he was able to follow who was who, liked the positive/negative tragedy in space and wrote to Coon, "I must admit, I’m rather intrigued by this property."
    Justman, in fact, still expressed concerns in his memo about identifying which Lazarus was which, writing:
    When Kirk finds the other Lazarus at the beginning of Act IV, should the other Lazarus be black or white? If he was the one who was fighting the original Lazarus, then he would be all black, wouldn't he? Also, why does the Time Craft have to be in a different spot? Also, if we don't make some sort of a difference between Lazarus I and Lazarus II, I think the audience will go fruit trying to figure out where they are and what is going on.48
    Still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    Justman’s intrigue soon turned to trepidation. He continued: 
    On here , I get to my first major hang-up with the show. Lazarus’ strange-looking spacecraft. As you may be aware, Gene, the Shuttlecraft exterior and interior mockups that we have probably cost well over $30,000. Unless we can find a way to re-use the Shuttlecraft for this show, we are going to end up with a pretty cheap-looking Spacecraft for Mr. Lazarus because we can’t afford to spend $30,000, or even $5,000 for this exterior and interior set.
    Cushman and Osborn’s transcription of Justman’s memo here includes a couple of errors, but the differences are minor:
    Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon (October 19, 1966)49
    Justman went on to propose a potential solution, ultimately unused, to the budgetary problem of Lazarus’ time craft:
    Also, if we establish here that his people and his civilization were from a far-out Earth Colony, perhaps we can thereby alibi the use of our Shuttlecraft sets, rather than having to build a new space vehicle for Lazarus.50
    This was far from Justman’s only budgetary concern in his six page memo, which also advised where Ingalls could cut visual effects, reduce the number of sets, and eliminate speaking parts in order for the show to come in on budget.
    Roddenberry was also satisfied. Kirk was more proactive. A non-regular was still the central focus, but this had been done before with "Charlie X" and had worked. With the right actor playing Lazarus, as it had happened when Robert Walker Jr. was cast as Charlie, the story could very well succeed.
    This paragraph is purely speculative. Roddenberry’s memo about Ingalls’ first draft, sent on October 18, 1966, did not speak to his overall satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the script, but instead focused on specific moments he found to be problematic. Likewise, Roddenberry's memo did not discuss whether or not Kirk was more proactive or not in the teleplay compared to the revised story outline.
    Roddenberry knew who the right actor was. He suggested John Drew Barrymore for the role. Barrymore, a gifted and somewhat offbeat performer, was the son of famed stage actor John Barrymore and film legend Dolores Costello. Where John Drew went, free publicity followed.
    Cushman and Osborn are correct about Roddenberry suggesting Barrymore for the role — in a one-line memo to Joe D'Agosta, the executive producer wrote, "How about John Barrymore Jr. as 'Lazarus?'" Cushman and Osborn probably overestimate the value of the type of "free publicity" that usually followed Barrymore, but more to come on that subject in Part 2.
    A few days later, Bob Justman wrote to his colleagues, suggesting that the "corridor" which separates the universe of matter from that of anti-matter could be created through the use of reverse polarity, turning a positive image into a negative one, allowing white to turn to black and black to white -- an effect which, in its simplicity, served as a metaphor for the story being told, where good is bad and bad is good. It was also an effect Justman knew Star Trek could afford, and one which would be effective on both black-and-white and color TVs. 
    I cannot speak to Justman's opinion of the metaphorical value of using a reverse polarity effect, but Cushman and Osborn's version is a roughly accurate summary of the substance of Justman's memo, which said, in part:
    As per our discussion this afternoon, I think it would be a good idea if we used a reverse polarity on the above-mentioned script. However, you cannot easily obtain a reversal of polarity in color, so let's take advantage of this drawback. Let's do the reverse polarity sequences in black and white for insertion into our regular color footage. It will be an added thrill for the people who view our show in color, and we will also get a good Optical Effect for the poor souls who can’t afford a color TV.51
    Still from "The Alternative Factor" (1967)
    Ingalls turned in his 2nd Draft teleplay on November 7. The story, for the most part, seemed to work; the writing was certainly fluid and dramatic, enough so for Coon to tell Ingalls he had fulfilled his contract. This version of the script was sent to John Drew Barrymore and succeeded at interesting the actor into playing Lazarus ... and Lazarus #2.
    According to a memo from Joe D'Agosta to Herb Solow, "On November 10, upon reading a script, John Drew Barrymore...agreed to portray the role of Lazarus..."52 The archival record does not specify which draft of the script Barrymore read when he agreed to take the part. Given that Roddenberry suggested Barrymore's name as early as Thursday, November 3rd, four days before Ingalls turned in his second draft, it's possible the actor could have been sent and read either existing draft when he agreed to take the part. There's no memo indicating Coon’s reasons for telling Ingalls he had fulfilled his contract, or even a memo indicating when Coon told Ingalls his contract had been fulfilled — Cushman and Osborn's reasons are, once again, merely speculative.
    Now that Barrymore was locked in, attention turned back to the script for additional polishing by the staff. Four things needed to be accomplished: 1) the dialogue required finessing so that the recurring characters sounded more like themselves; 2) the technology on the Enterprise had to be faithful to what was already established in the series; 3) greater emphasis had to be made to create a difference in the personalities between Lazarus #1 and Lazarus #2 to prevent audience confusion, something Ingalls had been reluctant to do; and 4) Lt. Masters could no longer betray her captain. This last change came about because of a memo from Roddenberry to Coon.
    Roddemberry [sic] wrote: 
    In both "Space Seed" and this story, we have a crew woman madly in love with a brawny guest star and flipping our whole gang into a real mess because she is in love. Isn't that really pretty selfish, which is not to say that women in love don’t do strange, stupid and/or selfish things... but do they have to do them in two of our scripts?
    Roddenberry wasn’t suggesting "The Alternative Factor," first to film, be altered. His criticism had more to do with "Space Seed" using the same plot device. Regardless, one had to be changed.
    At the time Roddenberry wrote this memo to Gene Coon, "The Alternative Factor" and "Space Seed" did not have production numbers and had not been scheduled for filming. Cushman and Osborn's claim that one of the two episodes was intended to film before the other at this time is simply false. In fact, Roddenberry's memo was sent on September 12, 1966, the same day NBC provided story approval for "The Alternative Factor," and more than a week before NBC provided the same approval for "Space Seed." Here's the original comment, made in reference to Don Ingalls' revised story outline:
    Roddenberry's comment about the Masters/Lazarus romance53
    As previously noted, and unmentioned by Cushman and Osborn, Stan Robertson also had issues with the Masters/Lazarus romance, which he commented on when he signed off on sending the story to teleplay. Robertson didn't suggest dropping the storyline completely, but did object to Charlene Masters being a member of the Enterprise crew. As a potential solution to this problem, he proposed that she might be a civilian character instead. This advice went unheeded in any version of the script.
    To Coon's thinking, the betrayal element was more essential for "Space Seed."
    There's no archival record indicating Gene Coon's thoughts on the matter. All we know is that the "betrayal element" was retained in the final, filmed version of "Space Seed," and removed from "The Alternative Factor" before filming.
    With "The Alternative Factor," the story elements which intrigued [Coon] the most had to do with the idea of an obsessed hunter hunting himself, and the villain being of our universe -- the positive side -- and the one who is willing to sacrifice his life for the good of all being from the negative side. This amused him. 
    As previously quoted, Gene L. Coon did tell Gene Roddenberry that, "I love the idea of Ahab pursuing the whale, which turns out to be himself."54 That much from this passage can be substantiated; the rest cannot. There's simply no evidence of Coon's feelings, amusement or otherwise, regarding the origins of Lazarus #1 and #2.
    He also liked how Kirk slowly came to realize he was dealing with two different men -- one sane, one mad -- each stepping back and forth between two incompatible worlds. Finally, he was taken by the tragic example of self-sacrifice, by Lazarus #2, and the burden on Kirk’s shoulders in allowing the sane one to give up his life in such a horrific manner.
    The archival record contains no indication of Gene L. Coon's opinions of these aspects of the story; Cushman and Osborn appear to have woven these claims out of whole cloth.

    Indeed, only one memo from Coon about "The Alternative Factor" can be found in the archival collections at UCLA (dated September 2, 1966, it covers Don Ingalls’ earliest story outline; there is no record of how Coon felt about subsequent drafts). Since Cushman and Osborn do not reference any additional correspondence from Coon about the episode, or cite it in their memo/letters index, it seems unlikely that they had access to any additional material.
    The changes were made for the November 11 Final Draft, likely by Steven Carabatsos.
    Although a "final draft" script bearing the date of November 11, 1966 has circulated among fans (David Eversole's review of that draft can be found here), the archival evidence indicates that much of this draft was actually finalized during the following week, from November 14-18, 1966. Indeed, when comparing this draft to the individual page revisions at UCLA, about 75% of the material matches typed and hand-written page revisions dated November 14, 15, 16, and 18, 1966. The remaining 25% of the material closely matches Don Ingalls' revised draft teleplay from November 7, 1966. The evidence at UCLA indicates that no script material for "The Alternative Factor" was completed on November 11, 1966. There certainly does not appear to have been a final draft prepared by Steven Carabatsos, or anyone else for that matter, on that date.55 As to the substance of the staff revisions, that's a matter for the second part of this piece.

    (To Be Continued in Part 2)

    Certain images courtesy of Trek Core.

    Special thanks to Neil B. and Maurice M. for reading various drafts of this piece, and offering a number of helpful suggestions (any mistakes that remain are entirely my own). Additionally, I must thank Dave T. and David E. for helping to verify various script drafts.


    1 David Alexander, Star Trek Creator: The Authorized Biography of Gene Roddenberry (1994), p.114.

    2 "Ingalls 'Gun' Story Head," Daily Variety, May 13, 1958, p.7 ("Don Ingalls has been signed by CBS-TV as story editor of the 'Have Gun, Will Travel' vidpix series starring Richard Boone and produced by Sam Rolfe.")

    3 Lee Goldberg, "Don Ingalls, Paladin in Blue," Starlog 179, June 1992, p.36

    4 Daily Variety, July 8, 1959, p.7 ("ITC script editor Don Ingalls back from England.")

    5 Daily Variety, August 4, 1959, p.8 ("Don Ingalls will be head writer and script supervisor on the series, which concerns the Australian gold rush days of the 1860s.")

    6 "Scribe Trio Joins Hal Hudson In New 'Weapon' TV Oater," Daily Variety, December 11, 1959, p. 16 (“Trio of television writers in association with 'Zane Grey Theatre' producer Hal Hudson will produce a new western anthology series titled 'The Weapon.' The three writers are Gene Roddenberry, Harry Julian [Fink] and Don Ingalls. In addition to part ownership stake and production roles, they will contribute at least five scripts each for the series.")

    7 Daily Variety, September 8, 1961, p.11 ("'THUNDER WAGON' Prod., Robert Hinkle; Dir., Robert Hinkle; Assoc. Prod., Don Ingalls...")

    8 Weekly Variety, February 28, 1962, p.34 ("Don Ingalls will join the production staff of the series as associate producer and story supervisor.")

    9 "Bob Sparks to MGM-TV," Weekly Variety, August 8, 1962, p.36 ("Sparks had been exec producer of the web's ‘Have Gun- Will Travel’ series since January, replacing producer Frank Pierson, and had nine more ‘Guns’ to helm when he was overtured by MGM. Don Ingalls, who has been story [editor] and associate producer on ‘Have Gun,’ takes over as producer.")

    10 Daily Variety, November 12, 1962, p.8

    11 "Ingalls In Policy Row With ABC-TV, Quits McPheeters," Weekly Variety, October 9, 1963, p.23

    12 Daily Variety, November 6, 1963, p.1

    13 Undated Don Ingalls list of credits (probably late 1965 or early 1966), Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 31, Folder 15

    14 Undated Don Ingalls list of credits (probably late 1965 or early 1966), Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 31, Folder 15

    15 Lee Goldberg, "Don Ingalls, Paladin in Blue," Starlog 179, June 1992, p.37

    16 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, September 6, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    17 Lee Goldberg, "Don Ingalls, Paladin in Blue," Starlog 179, June 1992, p.37

    18 Daily Variety, March 1, 1966, p.10

    19 Telegram to Andre Richardson, February 27, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 27, Folder 17

    20 Writers Report, Week Ending August 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 35, Folder 15

    21 Weekly Variety, March 16, 1965, p.35 ("Four Star has a real headache. 'Amos Burke,' 'Honey West' are out at ABC, with only 'Big Valley' still going. No new product anywhere from FS.")

    22 Daily Variety, March 22, 1966. ("Four Star has assigned nine writers to prep as many teleplays for next season's 'Big Valley' series on ABC-TV. Scribes are: Jack Curtis, Robert Lewin, Don Ingalls, Harry Kronman, Margaret Armen, Lou Morheim, Mel Goldberg, Palmer Thompson, Jay Simms.")

    23 Daily Variety, May 5, 1966, p.3 ("Producer William D. Gordon has signed Don Ingalls as associate producer on 20th-Fox's '12 O'clock High' series, now going into its third ABC-TV season. Ingalls was formerly head writer for 'Honey West.' Prior to that, he produced 'The Virginian' and 'Have Gun, Will Travel.'")

    24 Gunsmoke - "The Favor," June 13, 1966 (first draft), November 8, 1966 (final draft); Gunsmoke - "Fandango!" September 23, 1966 (final draft); The Virginian - "An Echo of Thunder," June 20, 1966 (revised final draft), Donald G. Ingalls Collection of Scripts, Box 3, Folders 2-3; Box 4, Folder 38

    25 Lee Goldberg, "Don Ingalls, Paladin in Blue," Starlog 179, June 1992, p.37

    26 Writers Report, Week Ending September 2, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 35, Folder 15

    27 "The Alternative Factor," Story Premise by Don Ingalls, August 29, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 1

    28 Undated Story Notes on August 29, 1966 story outline for 'The Alternative Factor,' Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2

    29 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, September 6, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    30 Memo from Gene Coon to Gene Roddenberry, September 2, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    31  Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, September 6, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    32 "The Alternative Factor," Story Premise by Don Ingalls, August 29, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 1

    33 Memo from Gene Coon to Gene Roddenberry, September 2, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    34 Memo from Gene Coon to Gene Roddenberry, September 2, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    35 Undated Story Notes on August 29, 1966 story outline for 'The Alternative Factor,' Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2

    36 Undated Story Notes on September 12, 1966 story outline for 'The Alternative Factor,' Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2

    37 "The Alternative Factor," Revised Story Premises by Don Ingalls, September 12 & 14, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 1

    38 Letter from Stanley Robertson to Gene Roddenberry, September 21, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    39 Letter from Stanley Robertson to Gene Roddenberry, September 21, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    40 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, September 22, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    41 Writers Report, Week Ending October 28, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 35, Folder 15

    42 "The Alternative Factor," First Draft Teleplay by Don Ingalls, October 14, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 1

    43 "The Alternative Factor," First Draft Teleplay by Don Ingalls, October 14, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 1

    44 "The Alternative Factor," Second Draft Teleplay by Don Ingalls, November 7, 1966, From a Private Collection, Also Found in the Donald G. Ingalls Collection of Scripts, Box 4, Folder 16

    45 "The Alternative Factor," First Draft Teleplay by Don Ingalls, October 14, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 1

    46 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, October 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    47 Notes on October 14, 1966 story outline for 'The Alternative Factor,' October 18, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2

    48 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, October 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    49 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, October 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    50 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, October 19, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    51 Memo from Bob Justman to Gene Coon, November 9, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    52 Memo from Joe D'Agosta to Herb Solow, November 18, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    53 Memo from Gene Roddenberry, undated (approximately September 14, 1966), Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2

    54 Memo from Gene Coon to Gene Roddenberry, September 2, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 4

    55 "The Alternative Factor," Page Revisions (Author Unknown), November 14, 15, 16, and 18, 1966, Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection, Box 10, Folder 2


    The Gene Roddenberry Star Trek Television Series Collection (1964-1969)

    The Donald G. (Don) Ingalls Collection of Scripts (1957-1992)

    Inside Star Trek : The Real Story (Herbert F. Solow and Robert H. Justman, 1996)

    These Are The Voyages: TOS, Season One (Marc Cushman with Susan Osborn, 2013)