View Single Post
Old October 15 2011, 10:08 PM   #44
Re: TOS Enterprise Question...

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
blssdwlf wrote: View Post
CarbonCopy wrote: View Post
For example, the universe should not have to explain why so many people look like Diana Muldaur.
Of course it is explainable in-universe why two people in TOS look like Diana Muldaur - they just do. Do you think it is that uncommon for look-alikes to exist?
At that level, where there are no physical differences whatsoever? Yes, I do. Even identical twins are generally distinguishable on some level, and they are genetically identical (and usually share common nurture as well as common nature).
Then can you show that the characters have no physical differences whatsoever? Are we shown both naked and from all angles?

We both can't, so how can you even "scientifically" make a counter-claim without evidence to show the two characters are both identical in-universe?

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
You can also argue that it's odd that Zephram Cochran changes appearance utterly, and ends up looking like a number of alien characters who showed up on the 1701-D at various times. Or how Spock's dad was such a dead ringer for a Romulan naval commander, or so on and so forth.
Actually, I don't for Zephram. The differences between the TOS Zephram and the TNG-Movie/Enterprise Zephram are enough to waive into alternate universe/timeline territory and as *early* as "The Alternative Factor" Star Trek introduces the existence of alternate universes. You don't have to buy into it, but that "in-universe" explanation works pretty well, IMHO. Spock's dad and the Romulan commander can look facially a "dead ringer". The idea that everyone must look "unique" doesn't even hold true in the "Real World" when there is a whole industry of celebrity "look-alikes".

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
We either abandon all pretense of "willful suspension of disbelief" and never watch it again without viewing it ONLY as an exercise in TV-show production (without regard to the story being told), or we excuse the "wrong" bits in some fashion in our minds' eyes and "rewrite" the objectionable bits... but only rewrite as much as is necessary in order to have it make sense to us.
It's not that black and white. Not everyone will have the same level of "rewrite" to have it make sense. Heck, some folks might not even care and no re-writing is necessary.

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
Something more challenging would be in TOS what the odds of two or more planets developing exactly like Earth, with one even having the same Declaration of Independence If anything, the odds are "out of whack" in TOS
Well, this is either "bad storytelling" (something similar, but not identical, "really" happened?) or it's "incomplete storytelling" (meaning that there should be some science-fiction explanation for how somehow, a space-time event occurred which caused multiple near-identical copies of Earth to be created, which our crew occasionally come across?).

But in the end, I prefer the first option. I can accept that whole episode, if the EXACT WORDING of the US historical documents is removed, and if the people are no longer southern-Californians, and if the "parable" nature of the story is a bit less bluntly in-our-face.

These stories aren't always bad. "A Private Little War," for example ,was a much better parable, and that's in large part because it was less blatantly preachy.

Its only when we say that there is no "personal interpretation" possible, or when there is "official reinterpretation" which CONTRADICTS elements seen on-screen, that we have problems.
Or when different people have different interpretations. You, me, Carboncopy, etc all are approaching the same things we all watch and filtering it with our own set of experiences and beliefs. The main thing to me is laying the facts out so we all know how it's being filtered and not just saying, "Warp can only go forward or backward" or "It's impossible that so many people should look alike" (even though it's only 2 in TOS and an older version in TNG) when we only can study their faces.

Cary L. Brown wrote: View Post
SO... back on topic...

We don't know what the panels really are "in universe," and if you want them to be sensor system windows, more power to you... unless you get onto a production team and try to "formally redefine" this to say that EVERYONE must accept your personal interpretation. Then, and only then, will people have the right to argue with your position.
Actually, I think all items should be on the table since we don't know either way. I've stated I think it's a sensor thing as my own opinion. My specific objection was CarbonCopy's statement of how he thought the TOS Enterprise warp/impulse worked that would limit the sensor direction.
blssdwlf is offline   Reply With Quote