Facebook
Log In

George Takei's Post


George Takei Verified account

July 13, 2016  · Shared with Public
Good morning from Montana! I’ve been here relaxing on vacation, but have noticed that many of you have been following the “gay Sulu” story and wanted to know why I’m being such a sourpuss. I’m writing to set the record “straight,” if you will.
When the news first broke, I gave a lengthy telephone interview, but the headlines have been misleading. Apparently, controversy makes for better sales! Let me be clear: I am not disappointed that there is a gay character in Star Trek. On the contrary, as I made clear, I am delighted that the Star Trek franchise has addressed this issue, which is truly one of diversity. It is thrilling to know that future generations will not see LGBTs go wholly unrepresented in the Trek universe.
On the specific question of Sulu being gay, when I was first approached with the concept, I responded that I hoped instead that Gene Roddenberry’s original characters and their backgrounds would be respected. How exciting it would be instead if a new hero might be created, whose story could be fleshed out from scratch, rather than reinvented. To me, this would have been even more impactful. While I understand that we are in an alternate timeline with the new Trek movies, for me it seemed less than necessary to tinker with an existing character in order to fulfill Gene’s hope of a truly diverse Trek universe. And while I am flattered that the character of Sulu apparently was selected as an homage to me, this was never about me or what I wanted. It was about being true to Gene’s vision and storytelling.
Gene had wanted long ago to include LGBT characters, and we spoke personally and specifically about the lack of them. Gene understandably felt constrained by the sensitivities of the time. Some fifty years ago, even TV’s first interracial kiss, between Kirk and Uhura, caused our ratings to plummet as the show was censored across much of the South for that scene. Gene made a conscious decision to make the main characters heterosexual, and worked within those parameters to tell incredible stories that still challenged many cultural values of the time. So the lack of gay characters was not some oversight by him; it was a conscious decision with which he grappled. I loved Gene as a friend, and I respected his decision and the context under which he created these stories. On this 50th year anniversary of Star Trek, my hope was to honor his foresight and bravery, as well as his ability to create discussion and diversity despite these constraints.
But Star Trek has always pushed the boundaries and opened new opportunities for actors, including myself. I am eternally grateful to have been part of this incredible and continuing family. I wish John Cho well in the role I once played, and congratulate Simon Pegg on his daring and groundbreaking storytelling. While I would have gone with the development of a new character in this instance, I do fully understand and appreciate what they are doing—as ever, boldly going where no one has gone before. Star Trek will live long and prosper.
All reactions:
8.3K
1.5K comments
1.7K shares
Like
Comment
Most relevant

John Swindell
While your point is good, I also understand and agree with why they're making Sulu gay. If they introduce a new character as the gay, that person would be defined by the fact that they're gay, but by taking an established and loved char and making him …
See more
  • 8y
209
View all 18 replies
Tim Mills-Bulleyment
In this world where campaigners for not only LGBT rights but other minority rights, are becoming incresingly strident and hostile, it is gratifying to hear a well balanced and well thought out statement on the issue.
*Doffs cap*…
See more
  • 8y
340
View all 14 replies
Ken Gottlieb
Just curious...if Gene Roddenberry was alive today and was creating the Sulu character from scratch (from the beginning), would he have chosen to develop Sulu as a gay character given the progress of LGBTQ representation in media over the past 50 years…
See more
  • 8y
161
View all 18 replies
Selindrila Shoras
Mainly you don't want to rehash a character in universe just for the sake of catering to an audience. I would've been fine with a new introduction character kinda like 7 was for voyager and that would've been fine.. But a gay sulu... right after we had…
See more
  • 8y
173
View all 27 replies
Rebecca Hubbard
I am more impressed with the respectful and dignified conversation than with the entire issue over whether Sulu should or shouldn't be gay. To me, the exchange of thoughts in a sensible and civil way is a true homage to the Star Trek Universe created b…
See more
  • 8y
94
View all 2 replies
Jake Storey
I understand why Roddenberry couldn't include a gay character in the original Star Trek. But why didn't anyone include a gay character in any of the original movies? Or Next Generation, or Voyager, or DS9 or Enterprise?
  • 8y
45
View all 55 replies
William Waltman
It is interesting, I love this show, I love all the movies, I love every minute of every episode. I love my boyfriend and everything he does for me. But for the life of me, I have nothing to say about this other than, I like this opinion, I have my own…
See more
  • 8y
60
Patricia Kay Heintz
I'm curious... Was Sulu ever really portrayed as unquestionably heterosexual? I've been trying to think back on a scene or storyline or line that actually specified his sexuality.
  • 8y
23
View all 7 replies
Elihu John Vineiz-Cox
That DS9 episode where Jadzia Dax and their former wife reunite briefly, and kiss, remains scandalous to this day. But I found it to be a truly touching and thought-provoking episode. The idea that love is love was made more poignant by the stellar act…
See more
  • 8y
14
View all 2 replies
Katherine Toms
I hope, Uncle George, that you will not object to me disagreeing with you on this one. Gene Roddenberry gave a wonderful gift to the world, and he made a decision which I entirely support not to include an LGBT character at the time. But the great thi…
See more
  • 8y
17