RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,119
Posts: 5,400,959
Members: 24,742
Currently online: 533
Newest member: Gakimer

TrekToday headlines

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25


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 > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 28 2013, 02:18 AM   #16
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Timewalker wrote: View Post
The Abramsverse crap happened in a different universe, so why contaminate REAL Trek with it?
Exactly.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 02:51 AM   #17
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Warped9 wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
The Abramsverse crap happened in a different universe, so why contaminate REAL Trek with it?
Exactly.
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 02:59 AM   #18
Timewalker
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
 
Timewalker's Avatar
 
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
The Abramsverse crap happened in a different universe, so why contaminate REAL Trek with it?
Exactly.
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
__________________
"Let's give it to Riker. He'll eat anything!"

For some great Original Series fanfic, check out the Valjiir Continuum!
Timewalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 03:09 AM   #19
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

It's quire a monumental piece of work. I liked the FASA timeline from the 80s but obviously that's out of date anyway since it was based on the Spaceflight Chronology (Prob my fav Trek book ever along with The Making of ST(60s), World of ST, and the first Art of ST book. I do accept the new Chronology but if I were to give people relatively new to Trek a primer, I'd show them the brand new Visual Dictionary.

RAMA
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 03:13 AM   #20
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
Exactly.
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
Not seeing the problem, myself. And I know both versions of Trek backwards.

But then, I don't have pathological anti-Abrams hatred blinding me.
__________________
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 March 28 2013, 03:19 AM   #21
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
Not seeing the problem, myself. And I know both versions of Trek backwards.

But then, I don't have pathological anti-Abrams hatred blinding me.
JJTrek is a two movie chronology!
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 03:23 AM   #22
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
Exactly.
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
Its called a branching timeline. The split happens in 2233 at the birth of James T. Kirk. Pretty sure that was covered in the film it's self. You'd think a guy named "Timewalker" could wrap his brain around that. You don't need to "reconcile" them, because they are parallel. A Chronology would reference both timelines, because both are Star Trek.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 04:06 AM   #23
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Whatever happened to James Dixon?

This place was never the same after he disappeared...

http://stexpanded.wikia.com/wiki/Fan...rek_Chronology
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 05:29 AM   #24
Timewalker
Cat-lovin', Star Trekkin' Time Lady
 
Timewalker's Avatar
 
Location: In many different universes, simultaneously.
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

King Daniel wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
Not seeing the problem, myself. And I know both versions of Trek backwards.

But then, I don't have pathological anti-Abrams hatred blinding me.
It's not pathological. It's based on a well-founded opinion that his version of Star Trek is utter crap.

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post
Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Because none of it is any more or less real than the other and its part of Star Trek. Star Trek isn't a timeline or universe, its a collection of films and TV shows.


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
Its called a branching timeline. The split happens in 2233 at the birth of James T. Kirk. Pretty sure that was covered in the film it's self. You'd think a guy named "Timewalker" could wrap his brain around that. You don't need to "reconcile" them, because they are parallel. A Chronology would reference both timelines, because both are Star Trek.
Anybody attempting an updated Chronology book would find it difficult to reconcile both versions of Star Trek in the same book as THE definitive chronology.

And... you'd think that anybody who takes the trouble to bash me over my anti-Abrams opinions could bother to be observant enough to notice that I'M NOT A GUY. Think you can wrap your brain around that?

I forced myself to watch this piece of garbage that calls itself "Star Trek" and was not the slightest bit impressed. If Abrams wanted to make an outer space movie, why didn't he create something original instead of ripping off something that didn't need "re-imagining"?

As for my username, I'm also a Whovian, a fan of the old Voyagers! series, and I'm very fond of alternate history and time travel novels in general. But that doesn't mean I have to automatically like some lazily-imagined ripoff of Star Trek (damn, Leonard Nimoy really is a trooper for appearing in this movie - or else he needed the money...).
__________________
"Let's give it to Riker. He'll eat anything!"

For some great Original Series fanfic, check out the Valjiir Continuum!
Timewalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 06:07 AM   #25
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Nerys Myk wrote: View Post
Timewalker wrote: View Post


Oh, please. It's IMPOSSIBLE to reconcile nuTrek and Original Trek chronology-wise.
Its called a branching timeline. The split happens in 2233 at the birth of James T. Kirk. Pretty sure that was covered in the film it's self. You'd think a guy named "Timewalker" could wrap his brain around that. You don't need to "reconcile" them, because they are parallel. A Chronology would reference both timelines, because both are Star Trek.
Anybody attempting an updated Chronology book would find it difficult to reconcile both versions of Star Trek in the same book as THE definitive chronology.
Why? Explain that. If its definitive it has to include every incarnation of Star Trek. That would include entries on all alternative timelines and parallel universes.

And... you'd think that anybody who takes the trouble to bash me over my anti-Abrams opinions could bother to be observant enough to notice that I'M NOT A GUY. Think you can wrap your brain around that?
I didn't bash you at all. I've no recollection of you mentioning your gender or your opinions on Abrams previously. So neither one has bearing on what I posted. All I said was the new films are part of Star Trek and should be included in any definitive chronology. "Guy" is somewhat gender neutral anyway.

I forced myself to watch this piece of garbage that calls itself "Star Trek" and was not the slightest bit impressed. If Abrams wanted to make an outer space movie, why didn't he create something original instead of ripping off something that didn't need "re-imagining"?
That's fine. Still not a good enough reason to not include it in a definitive chronology.

As for my username, I'm also a Whovian, a fan of the old Voyagers! series, and I'm very fond of alternate history and time travel novels in general. But that doesn't mean I have to automatically like some lazily-imagined ripoff of Star Trek (damn, Leonard Nimoy really is a trooper for appearing in this movie - or else he needed the money...).
Didn't say you should. Just that with such a name you should understand the concept of things like alternate universes, branching timeline and the multi worlds interpretation and how that might be included in a definitive Star Trek chronology. That you're a fan of Doctor Who, alternate history and time travel only re-enforces that.

There are certain movies, individual episodes and one entire series I don't like. I would however include all of them in any chronology, no matter how much I might despise them, because they are Star Trek.
__________________
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.

Last edited by Nerys Myk; March 28 2013 at 06:23 AM.
Nerys Myk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 06:31 AM   #26
Lance
Fleet Captain
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

I was a little tough on the Okudas earlier in the thread, but all the same I would seriously still buy an updated copy of this. There's so much more new material that could be added since the last edition (1996?), including of course that Paramount has now pronounced the TAS as canon, or near enough to it.

I do still take whatever the Chronology actually says with a grain of salt, however. It's a great book, but not a definitive text IMO.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 07:15 AM   #27
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

SchwEnt wrote: View Post
No. I prefer the earlier Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology.
It was a Paramount-licensed, first published accounting of the years between now and the 23rd century.

I prefer that book's account of historic events and the sequence in which they unfolded.

Some argue this book's timeline is shifted 50 years behind the official history, or similarly incompatible. Aside from that, I like that history of events rather than the Official Chronology. The actual years of events aren't as important to me as the depiction of which historic events happened in relation to each other
(e.g. Romulans encountered before Klingons, Star Fleet formed after UFP founding, and so on).

If you're talking about the one published in 1980, I think that one is terrific.

John Ford used it as a reference for his novels, and that's about as good as it can get IMO. Plus it has the refit as ENTERPRISE-class, so that puts it over the top, since I don't believe the Okuda version of all that (what he had put on screen in TUC ) in the slightest.

EDIT ADDON: Man, I miss Dixon. I got a few warnings defending his views, and didn't mind those in the slightest. Guy really had a good line on the whole Enterprise-class thing as I recall.

Can't imagine why anybody would care to add the Abramsverse into this at all, since it has precious little to do with TREK. It doesn't seem to jive with TREK even before Kirk's birth, given what we see of the KELVIN, but I am no expert on it, since I found the movie so utterly sucky (one dvd viewing and most of one streaming viewing) I'm not likely to give it another view in this lifetime.

Last edited by trevanian; March 28 2013 at 07:21 AM. Reason: just saw reference to James Dixon
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 08:40 AM   #28
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Ensign_Redshirt wrote: View Post
ZapBrannigan wrote: View Post
Paramount considers it canon.
No, they don't.
At the time of its publication, then-Paramount Licensing and later Viacom Licensing (now CBS Consumer Products), were telling the editors of the Star Trek tie-in books, novels and RPGs to consider the dates in the Chronology as canonical for them, to start keeping things consistent. But the writers for the varis ST TV series and movies were not constrained by the Chronology and can (and did) make many changes to the Okudas' "conjectures".

Lance wrote: View Post
It's a great book, but not a definitive text IMO.
It was never intended to be. Neither was the Goldsteins' version.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 09:56 AM   #29
aridas sofia
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

trevanian wrote: View Post

EDIT ADDON: Man, I miss Dixon. I got a few warnings defending his views, and didn't mind those in the slightest. Guy really had a good line on the whole Enterprise-class thing as I recall.
It's been awhile, Trev! Good to see you still fighting the fight.

Yeah, Dixon- for all his faults- really defined what it meant to be a Trekkie. He was the "fan" in "fanatic" to be sure. And because his inversely iconoclastic views were from a different era of Star Trek fandom, his prowling a place like the TrekBBS was like letting a velociraptor loose in Time Square. It was never bound to end well. But hell, that chronology of his... Wow. Just... Wow.
aridas sofia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 28 2013, 10:55 AM   #30
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Do You Believe the Official Chronology?

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Anybody attempting an updated Chronology book would find it difficult to reconcile both versions of Star Trek in the same book as THE definitive chronology.
Not at all. At the end of the Prime-chonology Romulus is destroyed by a supernova, and Nero and Spock fall into the black hole.
Next chapter: Alternate Reality. Beginning 2233 and documenting events from the new movies and notable divergences from the old timeline.

Fan sites like Memory Alpha have shown that an encyclopedia could incorporate both without trouble, merely noting which entries are unique to the new version of history.
I forced myself to watch this piece of garbage that calls itself "Star Trek" and was not the slightest bit impressed. If Abrams wanted to make an outer space movie, why didn't he create something original instead of ripping off something that didn't need "re-imagining"?
I've wanted to see a new take on the original Star Trek since 1989. I loved how it turned out and can't wait for the next one. And I still love The Original Series as much as ever. Each to their own.
(damn, Leonard Nimoy really is a trooper for appearing in this movie - or else he needed the money...).
EliyahuQeoni has a quote from Leonard Nimoy in his sig, which sums up the difference between your mindset and his:

Canon is only important to certain people because they have to cling to their knowledge of the minutiae. Open your mind! Be a Star Trek fan and open your mind and say, 'Where does Star Trek want to take me now'
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
book, chronology, dates, okuda, timeline

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 04:23 PM.

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