RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 137,861
Posts: 5,328,786
Members: 24,554
Currently online: 517
Newest member: Kastrol

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Inquisition
By: Michelle on Jul 12

Cubify Star Trek 3DMe Mini Figurines
By: T'Bonz on Jul 11

Latest Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Jul 10

Seven of Nine Bobble Head
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

Pegg The Prankster
By: T'Bonz on Jul 9

More Trek Stars Join Unbelievable!!!!!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

Star Trek #35 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Jul 8

New ThinkGeek Trek Apparel
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Star Trek Movie Prop Auction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7

Drexler: NX Engineering Room Construction
By: T'Bonz on Jul 7


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Literature

Trek Literature "...Good words. That's where ideas begin."

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 23 2012, 03:50 AM   #316
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Stoek wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
^Objection, assumes facts not in evidence. Why does everyone assume "Admiral Archer" means an impossibly old Jonathan Archer when it's about a zillion times more likely to be his child or grandchild?
Because the unspoken rule in Trek tends to be that unless it is established in canon that there is offspring of a character that any invocation of that characters name is almost always referring to the original character.
I've never heard of that rule...
__________________
"When I first heard about it (the Enterprise underwater), my inner Trekkie was in a rage. When I saw it, my inner kid beat up my inner Trekkie and made him go sit in the corner." - Bill Jasper
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 04:03 AM   #317
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

On the other hand, I don't think I've ever known anyone to assume that the Captain Sulu who sponsored Chakotay's entry into Starfleet Academy, as mentioned in "Tattoo," was Hikaru Sulu. Jeri Taylor's Pathways made it his grandson Hiromi, while Christie Golden's "Seduced" in Tales from the Captain's Table made it Demora Sulu (and explained away the canonical use of a male pronoun).
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 05:57 AM   #318
Admiral_Young
Fleet Admiral
 
Admiral_Young's Avatar
 
Location: Gallifrey
View Admiral_Young's Twitter Profile
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

I would assume fans think "Admiral Archer" is indeed an elder Jonathan because of the mention of the beagle. We know of Porthos. Now it obviously could have been a different beagle that Admiral Archer owned, but a beagle nonetheless. Plus in The Next Generation we saw an incredibly aged Leonard McCoy and it has been established that life expectancy in Star Trek is somewhat extended than what we have currently.

I read the latest issue...thought it was pretty good, an interesting take on an old classic. Also was it just me, or did the art look slightly different in this issue?
__________________
Admiral Young
Chief of Operations

Ignoring the The Last Stand since 2011.
Admiral_Young is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 08:33 AM   #319
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Lol - I'm traumatised by them extending the range of the transporter and now you want them to let patterns retain their coherence in the matter stream for 6 months?
Now we know who sabotaged the transporter buffer incident that lead to TNG's "Relics" revenge.

Woof!

Stoek wrote: View Post
Because the unspoken rule in Trek tends to be...
so unspoken none of us have ever heard about it before.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 11:19 AM   #320
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Christopher wrote:
The problem with making long distance transporting routine in the Star Trek universe is that it renders the entire format of Star Trek obsolete. If you have interstellar beaming, what do you need starships for?
Stargate always found need for starships, despite having instant and safe travel to many thousands of worlds throughout the galaxy (and beyond)

Also, a transporter is pretty useless when you want to go star charting, or investigate some space phenomena or other.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 11:31 AM   #321
Fer
Commander
 
Fer's Avatar
 
Location: Pittsburgh PA area
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Getting back to the Tribbles...

This issue is a great follow-up to their take on "Return of the Archons." As Allyn Gibson said, this isn't "The Trouble with Tribbles," this is an entirely new Tribble story, and it's great! I especially loved


The series got off to a shaky start with its first two stories being so close to the originals, but from "Operation: Annihilate!" forward I feel they've just gotten better and better.
__________________
http://fersforum.blogspot.com
Fer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 11:34 AM   #322
Scout101
Admiral
 
Scout101's Avatar
 
Location: Rhode Island, USA
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Christopher wrote: View Post
^Well, it wasn't luck. Sure, it was a virtually impossible feat of computational accuracy, but remember: Spock was the one who programmed the coordinates.
Probably more dangerous than you think, in this circumstance. He's beaming them onto the Enterprise, but it's not laid out anything like HIS Enterprise...
__________________
Perhaps, if I am very lucky, the feeble efforts of my lifetime will someday be noticed and maybe, in some small way, they will be acknowledged as the greatest works of genius ever created by man. ~Jack Handey
STO: @JScout33
Scout101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 01:46 PM   #323
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Admiral_Young wrote: View Post
I would assume fans think "Admiral Archer" is indeed an elder Jonathan because of the mention of the beagle. We know of Porthos. Now it obviously could have been a different beagle that Admiral Archer owned, but a beagle nonetheless.
Well, it would've had to be a different beagle, because a beagle's life expectancy is 13-15 years. If Trekverse geriatric science were advanced enough to let a dog live over 107 years, then humans would already have life expectancies in the thousands.

Second, it's not like it's unusual for pet preferences to be passed down from generation to generation. After all, children grow up with the pets their parents keep. So the beagle reinforces that it would be someone in Archer's family, yes, but not Jonathan himself, not when he would have to be 146 years old, which would break all canonically established records of natural human longevity. The probability of Jonathan Archer being the oldest human in recorded history is vanishingly low, while the probability of Jonathan Archer having descendants who followed him into Starfleet and inherited his love of beagles is extremely high. There's only one reasonable interpretation here.

Oh, and another thing: According to Archer's bio in "In a Mirror, Darkly," he retired from Starfleet in 2169 to become ambassador to Andoria, then became a Federation councillor, then the President of the UFP. Granted, that wasn't stated in dialogue so it isn't strictly canonical, but if you accept it, then nobody is going to refer to a former president as "Admiral Archer" instead of "President Archer." So it would have to be someone else.


Plus in The Next Generation we saw an incredibly aged Leonard McCoy and it has been established that life expectancy in Star Trek is somewhat extended than what we have currently.
We saw a McCoy who was nine years younger than Archer would've had to be, and he was portrayed as exceptionally ancient. And that was with the benefit of geriatric science more than a century beyond what Archer would've had available. By analogy, it would be far more reasonable to postulate a character from a present-day series living to age 100 than it would be for a character from a Western.



KingDaniel wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote:
The problem with making long distance transporting routine in the Star Trek universe is that it renders the entire format of Star Trek obsolete. If you have interstellar beaming, what do you need starships for?
Stargate always found need for starships, despite having instant and safe travel to many thousands of worlds throughout the galaxy (and beyond)
But Stargates were limited by needing a receiving station.


Also, a transporter is pretty useless when you want to go star charting, or investigate some space phenomena or other.
You could beam probes there. The reason for sending live explorers out in ships is because you need sentient beings on the scene in case something goes wrong, and then you need large crews to support the social and psychological requirements of those beings on long journeys. With interstellar transporters, you could just send probes everywhere, and just beam experts to the scene if there were a particular need for it.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 02:34 PM   #324
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Christopher wrote: View Post
^Objection, assumes facts not in evidence. Why does everyone assume "Admiral Archer" means an impossibly old Jonathan Archer when it's about a zillion times more likely to be his child or grandchild?
Abrams/his Cohorts did say Admiral Archer was meant to be Jonathan Archer. And Archer's file in IAMD did say he was eventually promoted to Admiral, and even lived until 2245. Of course, that would mean Scotty's been on Delta Vega over a decade.

But even if we ignore this, Admiral Archer must have been someone prominent in Starfleet, if even his dog is well known to a cadet. Therefore, my point stands that Scotty wouldn't have taken the celebrity pet of a well-known Starfleet admiral and used him in his transporter experiment unless he was 100% confident it would work.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 03:01 PM   #325
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Abrams/his Cohorts did say Admiral Archer was meant to be Jonathan Archer.
If it's not onscreen, it's not canon. Lots of creators have had intentions that were later contradicted, and this is an intention that, as I've explained, is vanishingly improbable. Heck, Mike Sussman's intention in the IaMD bio was that Archer died in 2245, so the two extracanonical intentions pretty much cancel each other out. It's arbitrary to take one as gospel and ignore the contradictory one. So we should disregard intentions and go by the actual evidence and probabilities.


And Archer's file in IAMD did say he was eventually promoted to Admiral, and even lived until 2245.
And, again, that he later became president, and nobody is going to refer to a former president as "Admiral." So if you accept the IaMD bio as evidence, it's compelling evidence against the admiral in question being Jonathan Archer.

As for his date of death, that could of course be different in the timeline that diverged in 2233, but as I've explained, the demographics are profoundly against it. Living to 133 in that era? An extraordinary feat, but not entirely out of the question. Living to 146, longer than any established human being in Trek other than Flint? With each added year, his continued survival gets more and more unlikely.


But even if we ignore this, Admiral Archer must have been someone prominent in Starfleet, if even his dog is well known to a cadet.
Yes, thank you, that's what I'm trying to say. It stands to reason that Jonathan Archer had heirs, descendants. There could be a lot of Archers in Starfleet service. (It's even possible that the Valerie Archer impersonated by a member of Species 8472 in VGR: "In the Flesh" was based on a real person.) The idea that Archer left such a vibrant, living legacy in Starfleet is a very appealing one, and I don't understand why so few people even imagine the possibility.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 03:25 PM   #326
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

FWIW, here's what Mike Sussman himself had to say, when I brought the subject up in the Enterprise forum last year:

MikeSussman wrote:
As the author of the Archer bio, I can confirm that -- at least in the prime timeline -- Archer clung to life just long enough to personally witness the launch of the NCC-1701 in 2245, and died peacefully the next day. In the alternate timeline, he held on an extra thirteen years in order to see the maiden flight of the Enterprise-JJ in 2258 -- after which he promptly dropped dead.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 05:27 PM   #327
Kruezerman
Fleet Captain
 
Kruezerman's Avatar
 
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
FWIW, here's what Mike Sussman himself had to say, when I brought the subject up in the Enterprise forum last year:

MikeSussman wrote:
As the author of the Archer bio, I can confirm that -- at least in the prime timeline -- Archer clung to life just long enough to personally witness the launch of the NCC-1701 in 2245, and died peacefully the next day. In the alternate timeline, he held on an extra thirteen years in order to see the maiden flight of the Enterprise-JJ in 2258 -- after which he promptly dropped dead.
And according to Mem Alpha.
__________________
*Tim Duncan fills glass with milk*
"Hm, you know what..."
*adds squirt of chocolate syrup*
"Tonight's a special night."
Kruezerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 07:35 PM   #328
Fer
Commander
 
Fer's Avatar
 
Location: Pittsburgh PA area
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
FWIW, here's what Mike Sussman himself had to say, when I brought the subject up in the Enterprise forum last year:

MikeSussman wrote:
As the author of the Archer bio, I can confirm that -- at least in the prime timeline -- Archer clung to life just long enough to personally witness the launch of the NCC-1701 in 2245, and died peacefully the next day. In the alternate timeline, he held on an extra thirteen years in order to see the maiden flight of the Enterprise-JJ in 2258 -- after which he promptly dropped dead.
__________________
http://fersforum.blogspot.com
Fer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 23 2012, 09:11 PM   #329
RPJOB
Commander
 
RPJOB's Avatar
 
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

Christopher wrote: View Post
Oh, and another thing: According to Archer's bio in "In a Mirror, Darkly," he retired from Starfleet in 2169 to become ambassador to Andoria, then became a Federation councillor, then the President of the UFP. Granted, that wasn't stated in dialogue so it isn't strictly canonical, but if you accept it, then nobody is going to refer to a former president as "Admiral Archer" instead of "President Archer." So it would have to be someone else.


Plus in The Next Generation we saw an incredibly aged Leonard McCoy and it has been established that life expectancy in Star Trek is somewhat extended than what we have currently.
We saw a McCoy who was nine years younger than Archer would've had to be, and he was portrayed as exceptionally ancient. And that was with the benefit of geriatric science more than a century beyond what Archer would've had available. By analogy, it would be far more reasonable to postulate a character from a present-day series living to age 100 than it would be for a character from a Western.
Using your criteria then we don;t know for sure that it was McCoy we saw in Encounter at Farpoint. We know that the person was saw was an admiral in Starfleet. That he had a certain affection for ships named Enterprise and he was familiar with Vulcans. He's never referred to by name. He was played by DeForest Kelly but many actors have played multiple roles. At best we can say that it's possible, even likely, that it was McCoy but we don't know for sure.

BTW, Dwight Eisenhower was and is often referred to as General Eisenhower as well as President Eisenhower.He wouldn't be referred to formally as General while he was president but quite often and informally he was referred to as General after his presidential tenure was over.
RPJOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 24 2012, 12:52 AM   #330
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: NEW ONGOING STAR TREK SERIES FROM IDW!!!

RPJOB wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
Oh, and another thing: According to Archer's bio in "In a Mirror, Darkly," he retired from Starfleet in 2169 to become ambassador to Andoria, then became a Federation councillor, then the President of the UFP. Granted, that wasn't stated in dialogue so it isn't strictly canonical, but if you accept it, then nobody is going to refer to a former president as "Admiral Archer" instead of "President Archer." So it would have to be someone else.


Plus in The Next Generation we saw an incredibly aged Leonard McCoy and it has been established that life expectancy in Star Trek is somewhat extended than what we have currently.
We saw a McCoy who was nine years younger than Archer would've had to be, and he was portrayed as exceptionally ancient. And that was with the benefit of geriatric science more than a century beyond what Archer would've had available. By analogy, it would be far more reasonable to postulate a character from a present-day series living to age 100 than it would be for a character from a Western.
Using your criteria then we don;t know for sure that it was McCoy we saw in Encounter at Farpoint. We know that the person was saw was an admiral in Starfleet. That he had a certain affection for ships named Enterprise and he was familiar with Vulcans. He's never referred to by name. He was played by DeForest Kelly but many actors have played multiple roles. At best we can say that it's possible, even likely, that it was McCoy but we don't know for sure.
Excellent point, it is universally accepted that that is Leonard McCoy in Farpoint even though on screen dialogue only refers to him as "the Admiral." Hell, even the end credits just say "Special Appearance by DeForest Kelley" with no mention of his character's name. Granted the guy hates the transporter and makes snide comments about Vulcans, but really there is as much canon evidence that "the Admiral" is meant to be McCoy as there is that "Admiral Archer" is Jonathan Archer.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.