Robert Comsol wrote:
Like Warped9 just stated Gene Roddenberry insisted to keep technical matters vague although that didn't always work.
Now we're getting somewhere! I think we can all agree that the writer/producers left things vague, at least partly to cover a multitude of sins and give themselves a "fudge factor" in regards what does what and what goes where, as far as their fictional starship goes. In fact they’ve said as much in interviews over the years. So this is as much of “the benefit of the doubt” as I, for one, am willing to extend to them.
But in accepting the above, it does not logically follow that they inturn wanted us to take the “Capt.’s. Cabin is on deck 12” (or any other such example) as “gospel”. And I don’t believe for a second that there is a shred of real evidence
that there was any “grand plan” or that the writer/producers used such references because they knowingly meant to, and that they wanted the audience to take it all literally! This is a whole different colored horse; and I don’t think it demonstrates a lack of respect to acknowledge as much.
And I don’t think they had all the details worked out but kept it a big secret, never breathing a word to anyone in all the intervening years, but just dropping hints here and there in the show, for us to try and figure out, as if it were some sort of big “inside joke” on the fans in the viewing audience! To do so stretches “the benefit of the doubt” beyond all reasonable credibility IMHO. And if such were true, I should think that for doing so, they would be more deserving of our disrespect
To sum up; everyone’s entitled to rationalize this stuff any way that pleases them, but it takes a special kind of arrogance propped up by pretzel logic to assume one’s personal preferences are the unique divining of ultimate “truth” in such matters and/or to devalue others chosen preferences as wrong and/or flawed because of a “lack of passion” or “jumping to premature and biased conclusions” etc. etc.
Now, getting back to FJ’s
As far as making it more “accurate” goes, I think the first thing that needs to be done is “separate the wheat from the chaff” and try to determine, based on interviews, preponderance of evidence and such, what things he deliberately
changed per his personal preference (like the rank stripes), and which things are honest mistakes
(like the phaser pistol). This way we can respect his choices (as we should anyone else’s) but at the same time fix some of the things he got wrong?