But the point is internal consistency. And I think that there is a lot more than a Lost in Space fan like FJ had given Trek credit for. FJ had some great ideas, but I really do question how much respect he actually had for MJ and the rest of the Trek staff throughout his life. Both the technical manual and the blueprints were more to show off his abilities (and they are amazing) than to accurately document the show.
I just noticed this, and I have to demur. I have made my reputation on this BBS, such as it is, as a proponent of the "Matt Jefferies
thought this stuff out reeeaaal
well" school of thinking. And yet, I know fully well that Franz Joseph
had no such lack of respect for Jefferies
. He met the man, and they shared a love of aviation. I think that he believed that the deck-by-deck description in TMoST
was gospel and that he needed to fit those decks in a ship shaped like the one seen on the show. He did it by being a little loose with the outward configuration. Jefferies
himself was much, much looser with his own work when confronting a similar task in Phase II
The right way to do this is to go back, as I did and Shaw
is now doing, and retrace the mental process Jefferies
went through to come to the description of the ship he ended up with. He calls small spaces "decks" in order to get the number of decks he ends up with, and has an offset bridge to get a filmable set to mesh with a symmetrical model. And it works. It might not have been a process immediately understandable to FJ
, who no doubt had been told by Jefferies
that the latter would do it differently if given the chance. (And who might have taken Jefferies'
comments as carte blanche to be a little loose with things.) But that in no way should be taken to mean he disrespected Jefferies
. In fact, everything I know would indicate quite, quite the opposite.