Kirk versus Picard
Since the late 1980s, an influential debate has taken place. The important topic is: Who is the better captain, Captain Kirk or Captain Picard? The two sides of the debate have generally been established entirely by generational lines. Even through objective analysis, a concrete answer is difficult to find, since their respective styles of command differed greatly. Captain Kirk was a stereotypical adventure hero, while Captain Picard was a calm, thoughtful leader. The best impartial examination tells us that they were both great captains even though they ran their ships differently. Ultimately, it is a matter of personal preference. By comparing their fighting abilities, their attitudes towards their crews, and their risk taking, an accurate viewpoint may be established.
Fighting is a necessary aspect of any military command. Someone once compared Kirk's and Picard's different attitudes about fighting. According to that person, Kirk would say, "I'm going to give you the count of three to surrender. If you choose not to surrender, I'll fire. One. Two. Fire!" Needless to say, Captain Kirk was a little trigger happy. But it was at a time where peace would not have worked every time. He met new aliens every other week, many of whom were an obvious threat to his values and his ship. He had to be ready to use violence when it was necessary. But his fighting ability wasn't just limited to ordering Chekov to fire the phasers; he also used physical violence effectively. Many people were afraid of Kirk because of the simple fact that he could use his fists well. This always gave him the upper hand. Captain Picard was the exact opposite in fighting. His attitude was more like, "I'm going to give you the count of three. If you do not surrender, I'll fire. One. I'm really serious about this. Two. You should be afraid now; I'll really fire. Three. Well, perhaps we can find a diplomatic solution to this situation." Picard was an excellent diplomat, so he usually refrained from using violence. He used threats, but he used his tremendous persuasive skill to force his enemy into a peaceful solution. This was appropriate for his time (one hundred years after Kirk) because a quick trigger would mean his quick court-martial. Naturally, he abided by his duty rather than fighting his way out of trouble. Because he didn't want to use violence, his fist fighting left much to be desired. The best comparison of Kirk's and Picard's fighting ability mano a mano was established in the movie Star Trek Generations. Captain Picard was hit so many times that he was nearly knocked out. On the other hand, Kirk fought the same enemy and didn�t get hit once. Overall, Captain Kirk was clearly the better fighter, but Picard's diplomacy worked just as well as Kirk's fighting. Since both methods worked well, a good comparison is difficult to achieve.
A captain�s attitude to his crew is vital aboard any military ship. Perhaps this is why the two captains showed such a deep affection for their crews. They wanted to preserve their crew at all costs. This is one sign of a good leader. They were willing to give their lives for each and every one of the crew. Despite this profound care for the crew, they knew where to draw the line. They each had good personal relationships with some members of the crew, but they separated their duty from their emotions well. They knew that to only go by their friends' advice could put the crew in jeopardy. So, they held the crew above themselves. The best leaders place their crew above their own feelings and their own lives, something that both captains did very well. The attitude towards a crew is one vital area where Kirk and Picard had striking similarities.
The amount of risk taking that Kirk and Picard engaged in was very different. Captain Kirk generally thought of the immediate consequences; he wanted to get out of his current dilemma rather than thinking about the long term effects of his actions. Consequently, he often took risks. He was willing to do everything in his power to get his crew out of a problem. If his actions required him to take action that was risky, Captain Kirk didn't hesitate to take those risks. One cause that led to this view was the fact that the ship was made entirely of trained military officers. There were no young people or families to take care of, so everyone aboard the Enterprise knew the risks of living on the ship and were expected to accept the possibility of death when it came. Picard had a different attitude in risk taking. He always thought about how his actions would affect many areas, like galactic politics and the families of his crew. One of the reasons that he had this attitude was due to the fact that there were families on board his ship. These families weren't entirely educated on the danger involved in living on a starship. Picard wanted to insure their safety at all costs. If he took too many risks and failed, then he would suffer enormous consequences. He didn't only have a crew to answer to, but he had families to explain his actions to. The two captains' attitude towards risk taking were different, yet they still achieved the end product of being good captains.
The debate of the captains will never be resolved. They had differences in risk taking and fighting skill, but they had similarities in the attitude towards crew. Their ways of command were effective despite the obvious differences that separated them. Captain Kirk was the adventure hero, while Picard was the nonviolent, passive leader. A clear answer to the debate is difficult to achieve since the captains were so different. It is a matter that only opinion, not objective analysis, can decide.