USS Einstein wrote:
I think a big part of the reason why on-screen evidence is taken as literal gospel in Star Trek, is that several publications, such as the 'Star Trek Encyclopedia'
and 'Star Trek Chronology'
advocated this strict interpretation of canon.
People, like me, grew up reading those reference sources, and therefore, the idea of a strict visual canon became embedded in the community. Websites like Ex Astris Scientia further reinforce this, by using the same standards outlined.
So blame the Okudas
I was raised with those books too! But around the time of "Broken Bow", and seeing the modern look of Enterprise NX-01, the other ships, alien makeups and the subtle rewriting of Treks past etc. I realized such a strict interpretation was a waste, and would actually hinder my enjoyment of the shows.
I'll never understand how some fans can happily accept William Shatner and Chris Pine both being James T. Kirk or any ofthe other recasting, BUT a slight difference in one of a ship or set designs constitutes a mistake. If different looking actors can play the same character, then everything else should
be as mutable.
I recently came across the trailer for the Phase II fan film episode "Origins"
, and saw that they've kind of got the right idea - here's a comparison of the Into Darkness
dress uniform and Phase II's 1960's-style "de-imagined" version: