Christine Chapel, Star Trek, and Women Scientists, Then and Now
And the growth of women scientists
I'm rewatching the original Star Trek series for the eleventy-billionth time - as Trekkies do - and something is wrong. I think a dart from out of the past has pierced my heart and it’s now doing a slow bleed onto my modern sensibilities. I still love the show, but nothing will ever be the same now that I’ve also fallen in love with Star Trek: Strange New Worlds.
There’s room in my heart for both. Hell, there’s room enough for every iteration of Star Trek. For any of the haters that inevitably show up, that means Every. Single. One. And my heart will heal, as hearts do. But the wound will leave scar tissue.
In the first season of Star Trek: The Original Series, the character of nurse Christine Chapel is given one of the biggest story arcs she ever got in episode 7: What Little Girls Are Made Of. That’s saying something, considering she was a minor and limited character.
The episode opens with Chapel on the bridge as the Enterprise orbits a barren planet. Captain Kirk says to her, “I understand you gave up a career in bio-research to sign aboard a starship,” and then we learn the crew is trying to locate her long-lost, famous scientist fiancé. Later, when he’s found, and before they discover he’s become an android, he uses the phrase, “as a trained scientist yourself…” His argument is pretty standard fare for mad scientists trying to get people to buy into their madness, but in the context of the time, it’s remarkable.
Star Trek debuted in 1966. Back then, women scientists were as rare as dilithium crystals in the year 3188. But, the crew of the USS Discovery solved the future dilithium crystal problem, and in our timeline, society moved forward. While women scientists haven’t reached parity with men yet, they aren’t as rare as they once were.
A study done in the 1960s and 1970s investigated how children perceived scientists and highlighted the stereotypical views they held – views they, of course, picked up from the adults around them. The children, close to 5,000 of them, were asked to draw a picture of a scientist. From the Scientific American blog:
Their artwork almost exclusively depicted men, often with lab coats, working indoors with lab equipment. Of those nearly 5,000 drawings, only 28 depicted a female scientist, which were all drawn by girls.
I wasn’t one of those girls, but I could have been.
I was only 2 years old when the original series debuted, but I watched it every week with my father – all three years of it. Of course the social aspects of the show flew right over my tiny head, but a decade later, watching it in syndication, I got it. At 12 years old, I saw a future where women were both scientists and objects of sexism. I knew that was wrong. Thank you, feminist parents.
But it was the times, right? Well, yes. It was a time when Majel Barrett, who portrayed Chapel, had been reduced in stature and rank from first officer in the pilot episode to nurse in the series because audiences were put off by a woman with that much authority. Audiences in some parts of the country were offended by Uhura – a groundbreaking role if there ever was one.
Television executives constantly pushed back at Gene Roddenberry’s vision for the series. His vision of the future. It was too progressive for the times, but somehow it got made anyway, even if the roles of the women on the show often suffered.
So, how delightful is it to see the new Nurse Chapel in Star Trek: Strange New Worlds? Massively delightful. This is the Christine Chapel we should have seen from the beginning. The brilliant, capable, kickass scientist who, like her forerunner, made a deliberate choice to serve on the Enterprise, for her own reasons.
This is a show where women are anything and everything. Where women are, of course, scientists and first officers and captains, and where no one is treated with less than respect. Well, officially any way. There has to be some conflict to be a good show.
Deep in Trekland, fans hotly debate how this modern show fits into canon. The Enterprise is familiar on the outside, but inside is another story. Nothing looks the same. It’s technically sophisticated. The CGI and special effects set the show firmly in the now. Since it’s set a decade before the original series, how do we square that?
The argument I side with is that if Gene Roddenberry had the means to do what is being done now, he would have. He did the best he could with what he had to work with in the 1960s. With modern toys at his disposal, his playground would look like this.
Which brings us back to Christine Chapel, and all the other women on Star Trek. These are the women who should have always been there, and it’s a gift to every kid who looks to Star Trek as an aspirational show.
In an interview with TrekMovie.com, Jess Bush, who plays Chapel, explains:
But I think now looking to Majel’s Chapel, I think the responsibility lies in doing the things that she wasn’t able to do. And the things that she probably wanted to do. And the things that women are now able to do that they weren’t able to do then. So using it, using her performance as a reference point to flesh out in the ways that she wasn’t able to do that, I think is the aim.
It’s no secret that Majel didn’t care for the character of Chapel, though she portrayed her the best that she could. She was too meek and subservient and had few exciting moments. I think she would highly approve of and appreciate what Strange New Worlds has done with her. I think little girls, little boys, little people and big people everywhere, are finally getting the representation they deserve with all of the new depictions of beloved characters.
My 12-year-old self also approves. She and I are putting the original series up on a shelf because it’s a worn-out toy that’s too beloved to ever throw away. We have a shiny, new toy now. Several new toys, actually. In time, they may go up on the shelf too, but for now, we’re happy.