Consider the Simpsons episode where two of Homer's atomic reactor colleagues duel with light sabres while debating the merits of The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. Revenge of the Sith outshines both, the critics agree. But the question is whether Star Wars as a whole is worse than the rival space opera that also inspires fanaticism, Star Trek?
Hmm. Something about Star Trek makes me feel uneasy. It may just be the fact that a friend, who is no William Shatner, likes to parade in a skin tight yellow Star Ship cat suit and attend conventions where women swoon over the Romulans, or is it the Ferengi? I shudder to think.
The other thing that bugs me about Star Trek is the quality of the entertainment it provokes. It is responsible for the most annoying split infinitive to infect the English language and the worst novelty pop record to tarnish the charts.
In the first instance, I am referring to Captain Kirk's mission statement for the USS Enterprise - 'to boldly go where no man has gone before'. As every pedant knows, strictly speaking, Kirk should have said 'boldly to go' or 'to go boldly'.
Kirk's mistake paved the way for the notorious real-life extraterrestrial goof committed by Neil Armstrong. When he set foot on the moon in 1969, the space cadet muffed his line, saying: 'That's one small step for man; one giant leap for mankind'.
He should have said 'a man' because man and mankind mean the same thing, but doubtless did not give an asteroid's tail because of the Star Ship Enterprise captain's poor example.
To be fair, AskOxford.com defends Kirk's blunder, saying that had he said 'to go boldly' or 'boldly to go', he would have ruined 'the rhythmic force' of the original. But who cares about fair? Balance has never been this column's strong suit.
