View Single Post
Old May 23 2013, 05:06 PM   #55
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: Updating FJ's technical manual?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
There are at least two ways of approaching TOS- what was onscreen, and what was intended.
I'd say there is a major difference. What is onscreen is the final word that overwrites previous intentions (i.e. changed premises) because it is what everyone can relate to (especially for those that do not follow all the behind-the-scenes development, i.e. general audiences).
The problem with intentions: In The Making of Star Trek we read how the original intentions changed and evolved. At what point in this evolution do you intend to "freeze" the evolution, so you could say this is what they intended (at this point in time)?

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
Was it really intended that one side of Enterprise lacked details and had electrical wires protruding?
No, we saw side-inverted shots of the Enterprise in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" and "The Alternative Factor". Since they went through the hazzle of even flopping the numbers on the hull, it's obvious they intended the port side to be the mirror image of the starboard side regarding those sections we clearly saw.

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
What was intended with the bridge turbolift- on-axis with the main viewscreen internally or off-axis with the bow externally?
According to the examinations in my deck plan thread even at 1,080' length the turbo lift will stick out to the stern, and at 947' length most definitely. Obviously the main viewscreen does not sit on the center stern-bow axis.

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
Was it really intended that the transporter could take matter, convert it to energy, transmit the energy to a location and convert it back to the original matter? Or was the intent just to get the story going as quickly as possible?
According to TMoST it was Gene Roddenberry's intent to get the story going quickly and it was equally his intent to keep these things vague.

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
Franz Joseph tells us he was trying to show us what was intended but for one reason or the other in some cases wasn't shown. Whether Gene Roddenberry was using him and his work to keep Star Trek alive or really agreed he showed what was intended, we don't know.
Today I reread the interviews with Franz Joseph at www.trekplace.com to fresh up my memory. At one point he had access to 800 film stills, at another 100,000. While he apparently met with some people of the production crew, there's no mentioning he received any materials from them. The way it looks his entire work is based almost entirely on TMoST, which is about intentions and various items from the actual series and that's basically what he visualized, nothing less and nothing more.

The story with Gene Roddenberry is that FJ forwarded him the materials but never heard back from GR, apparently being pre-occupied with his next project and, IMO, underestimating the popular success the work of FJ would have. I'm sure GR regretted later not having gotten back in touch with FJ. However, just because GR didn't reply, doesn't mean he agreed with the outcome (and there are a couple of items GR disliked and there are many items FJ disliked about the series and therefore decided to ignore these). I leave it up to the reader which of the two was ethically authorized to dislike the other person's work.

aridas sofia wrote: View Post
I think that looking at the question of Franz Joseph versus canon is best examined in this way: In fact, there is no conflict at all because they are entirely different things.
Yes. Franz Joseph portrayed a vision of Star Trek that might have been, while the original series is what it is. But since Franz Joseph wasn't a member of the production crew and based his vision on a third-hand account (the MoST compilation of Stephen E. Whitfield) it rather qualifies as "fan fiction", IMHO.

Bob
__________________
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth" Jean-Luc Picard
"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
Albert Einstein

Last edited by Robert Comsol; May 23 2013 at 05:25 PM.
Robert Comsol is offline   Reply With Quote