it's all in the genes?

Star Trek. The most resonant storytelling vision of the 20th century (or 23rd, if you like).
Who deserves the credit?
It's a childish question really, reflective of an ego-based culture. It should be enough that it exists...and what's more, it's well-established that it was a profoundly collective endeavor. The contributing writers and producers were legion. Add to that a cast who were often strikingly, passionately involved in the creation of their characters.
Yet one name rises above - gene roddenberry. The creator, the great bird of the galaxy. He had final say over all creative matters for the first two seasons. There are voices (well, shatner at least) who offer avowals of his brilliance...the captain said he could always tell when gene's touch finally appeared on a struggling script. Yet there are also voices who say that gene was a middling writer, with conspicuous weaknesses.
So is there possibly a dark horse lurking out there, someone who is as much (or more) responsible for the show's early writing and editing? A person whose untimely death, before the cultural TREK flashpoint that occurred in the 70s, has left his name largely unspoken in the Trek universe?
What about gene coon, a voice says?
Perhaps, at the very least, the two names ought be more oft spoken together? The two genes? Roddencoony? Coonenberry?
How might we even know? Most of those who could say are gone. And many who have spoken, might not have the facts or clarity of perspective to answer truthfully. The little we can do is take a closer look at the evidence we do have. Accepting that both genes had a strong hand in virtually every episode of the first two seasons, what can we further learn from those scripts that bore their individual names?
Of the eighty classic episodes, roddenberry is listed as "story by, written by, or teleplay by" eleven times - and to call them a mixed bag is understatement. Schizophrenic is more like it. He wrote the original pilot "The Cage", and the brilliance is undeniable...thoughtful, compelling science fiction. He contributed the story for "Charlie X" - a fun, albeit middling effort. He contributed the story for "Mudd's Women" - a hoot to be sure, but perhaps due mainly to a stellar guest performance, as the story itself plods a bit. He wrote "The Menagerie", a reuse of "The Cage" with unimpeachable new bits. He wrote the story for "The Return of the Archons", a fine slice of sci fi. He wrote the teleplay for "A Private Little War", which is brisk and tight, with daring social commentary. He wrote "The Omega Glory", which has nice elements, but one or two gaping conceptual flaws. He co-wrote "Bread and Circuses", which has a jarringly bad climax. He wrote the story for "Assignment: Earth", which is a tight delight. He wrote the story and teleplay for "The Savage Curtain", which is top-ten worthy. He wrote the story for "Turnabout Intruder", the worst classic episode ever.
The standouts are lovely, but to have his fingerprints all over two of the three worst TREKs?
And how about mr. coon? He was a prolific freelancer, penning one hundred and nineteen scripts for forty-nine series (which was also the age at which he died). He was a producer on six of those shows. He wrote seven movies. He wrote one TV movie (also with roddenberry), "The Questor Tapes". And on STAR TREK? The prime directive, the klingons, the spock/mccoy banter, and much of the show's pacifism flowed from his pen. He produced thirty-three episodes (but almost certainly had a hand in more). He wrote the teleplay for "Arena", the giddy excitement of which almost makes you forget its superlative social relevance. He wrote the teleplay for "Space Seed", which is far-reaching, breathtaking sci fi. He wrote the teleplay for "A Taste of Armageddon", a seamless offering. He wrote "The Devil in the Dark", which captures the TREK vision more perfectly than any other. He wrote "Errand of Mercy", a grim corker. He wrote the teleplay for "The Apple", which is frightening, tender, and brilliant. He wrote "Metamorphosis", which is both thoughtful and exciting. He wrote the teleplay for "A Piece of the Action", which is just good fun. He wrote "Bread and Circuses" with the other gene...hmm, let's move on. He wrote "Spock's Brain", which at least one reviewer (me) thinks is unjustly maligned. He wrote "Spectre of the Gun", which is rootin'-tootinly dark and dangerous. He wrote "Wink of an Eye", which is merely good. He wrote "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield", which is top-tier iconic.
The two genes. As much as one can glean from the overt evidence, it does feel silly to place roddenberry above coon. Compare their five worst...
RODDENBUSTS - "Turnabout Intruder", "Bread and Circuses", "The Omega Glory", "Charlie X", "The Return of the Archons"
COONSWOONS - "Bread and Circuses", "Spock's Brain", "Wink of an Eye", "A Taste of Armageddon", "Metamorphosis"
...and coon looks a bit better. Compare their five best...
RODDENBURSTS - "The Menagerie", "Mudd's Women", "A Private Little War", "Assignment: Earth", "The Savage Curtain"
COONOVERTHEMOON - "Arena", "Space Seed", "The Devil in the Dark", "The Apple", "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield"
...and coon looks a lot better. Perhaps more to the point, coon's best actually feel more representative of the TREK vision. Is it possible that roddenberry offered up a skeletal idea, which coon fleshed out into something far greater? The truth of what occurred in those Desilu offices may be lost to time. By some accounts, roddenberry could be manipulative and deceitful. Is it inconceivable that he might have been content to take the lion's share of the credit and rewards, never mind the truth? Glen larson, creator of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA and BUCK ROGERS IN THE 25th CENTURY, called gene coon "the spirit and soul of Star Trek".
I stick by my original point that this kind of coffee-table comparison is pointless under most circumstances, and particularly so with the collective effort that was TREK.
But it's fun to bounce it around, isn't it?
Thank you, gene.
Both of you.