RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 140,180
Posts: 5,435,707
Members: 24,947
Currently online: 600
Newest member: CaptainJaymez

TrekToday headlines

Trek Screenwriter Washington D.C. Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Oct 23

Two Official Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Oct 22

Pine In New Skit
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

Stewart In Holiday Film
By: T'Bonz on Oct 21

The Red Shirt Diaries #8
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

IDW Publishing January Comics
By: T'Bonz on Oct 20

Retro Review: Chrysalis
By: Michelle on Oct 18

The Next Generation Season Seven Blu-ray Details
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

CBS Launches Streaming Service
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17

Yelchin In New Indie Thriller
By: T'Bonz on Oct 17


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 > The Next Generation

The Next Generation All Good Things come to an end...but not here.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old March 9 2014, 05:43 PM   #91
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: What did the Enterprise-C look like in the real TNG universe?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
“Like in the episode Yesterday’s Enterprise”
[/thread]
__________________
"But there's no sense crying over every mistake. You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."
Chemahkuu is offline  
Old March 9 2014, 10:53 PM   #92
Mytran
Fleet Captain
 
Mytran's Avatar
 
Location: North Wales
Re: What did the Enterprise-C look like in the real TNG universe?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
Robert Comsol wrote:
Why was it " intentionally inaccurate"? Are you suggesting Guinan was collaborating with the Romulans to deliberately make Picard feel bad somehow?
You misunderstand. I meant the writers intentionally had the characters (well, Guinan) draw slightly inaccurate conclusions. We know her sense isn't perfect, that it's dealt in feelings not facts. Tasha ended up in the past, and Guinan assuming Picard sent her there rather than that she volunteered is an understandable mistake.
After rewatching the scene today, I think Guinan (yet again!) has a lot to answer for. She goes from "I think you sent her there" to emphatically stating it as so within the space of about 30 seconds - "you are responsible for this whole situation". Picard just sits there with a shocked look on his face, struggling to take this all in. Even though he wasn't present for any of the events she accused him of, he has to take responsibility for them? Interestingly, not one of the characters in Redemption mentions time tunnels, alternate histories or parallel universes as an explanation for Tasha's jaunt into the past. So what is Picard to make of all this? Historically, the existence of parallel realities is known about to Starfleet (Mirror, Mirror). So, wouldn't this be a natural conclusion for our captain to come to? If not the Mirror Universe per se, then Sela's mother would probably originate from somewhere a similar source. From the episode Parallels:

DATA: For any event, there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. Our choices determine which outcomes will follow. But there is a theory in quantum physics that all possibilities that can happen, do happen in alternate quantum realities.
Data doesn't present this theory as something newly discovered (unlike the tomographic imaging scanner in All Good Things) so there's no reason to think it wouldn't be available to Picard a couple of years prior. So despite the guilt and accusations piled upon him, I think Picard's final statement to Sela sums his viewpoint up nicely:

Doubts? I'm full of them. But nothing in my experience can persuade me that what you have told me is true.
Mytran is offline  
Old March 10 2014, 03:55 PM   #93
Robert Comsol
Commodore
 
Robert Comsol's Avatar
 
Location: USS Berlin
Re: What did the Enterprise-C look like in the real TNG universe?

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Whether she requested it first or not, Tasha's orders would have been to go the Ent-C. There would have been a crew transfer process, this would technically be "an order". Picard allowing it to happen on his watch makes him the responsible party for the repercussions. So the statement isn't wrong, it's just a question of how you interpret it.
Again, Guinan is not a superior Starfleet officer but Picard's friend. There's no record or hint in the series that she handles things from a military perspective and her message and sour face ("sorry to be the one having to tell you this") clearly suggests that in yet another (unseen) parallel time line or universe Picard did "send" Tasha to the past and therefore "is responsible" according to the undersatanding of normal people.

The series was not made so that for the decades to follow we'll twist every bit of dialogue out of the original context which general audiences were enabled to understand.

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Obviously, it's not an elegant piece of retconning, and it could have been avoided, but it's preferable to the alternative in this case.
Why is it preferable to retcon Andrew Probert's Enterprise-C design on the conference lounge wall as non-canon? (by insisting the Sternbach design is the only one "real" in our universe) It's been there for four seasons of TNG, prominently displayed above the actors and captured in many scenes.

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Be honest: would you be making these same conclusions if you disliked the Probert design?
Unlike some of our "experts" (i.e. deliberate ignorance of the Romulan Star Empire crest featured in "The Enterprise Incident" and "The Neutral Zone") I'd like to think I take treknological research rather seriously and take the onscreen information into account on an unbiased basis, but with the prerogative "first come, first served".

Had it been Rick Sternbach's design on the conference lounge of the "D" he'd equally be entitled, that we first look for imaginative rationalizations before we push his design over the cliff and deem it "non-canon".

It's no secret that I do have an infatuation for Andrew Probert's design, a "continuity freak" in the most positive sense of the word and someone I consider my mentor. This apparently was a motivation that did help to examine the information from "Yesterday's Enterprise" and its changed premise because of "Redemption II" which I unfortunately overlooked in the first parts of the treatise / this thread (Hopefully someone would have noticed it eventually).

Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Except it's not preferable to you because you are intent on clinging to the idea that the Enterprise-C design is different. That's what it comes to: your preferences and desires are fueling your "evidence". These are not conclusions that are naturally and logically reached, they are grasping at straws to justify a preference. It's a classic example of confirmation bias.
No, it is not. From what I read here, it's that "fans" are not willing to take the (new) information from "Redemption II" into account and discredit it (so that the assumption that turned into a myth can remain some kind of "truth").

Alright, then I'll bring in my last two witnesses, the screenplay writer and director of both "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "Redemption II", Mr. Ronald D. Moore and David Carson.

Mr. Moore, I understand that the core theme of "Yesterday's Enterprise" was "meaningful death", one as a justification for the crew of the Enterprise-C to sacrifice themselves to prevent a war costing 40,000,000,000 lives, the other one for the character of Tasha Yar to ask her leave and be assured of a "meaningful death" she didn't get on Vagra II in "Skin of Evil", is that correct?

Ronald D. Moore (screenplay writer): "We brought Denise back to kill off Tasha Yar a second time. It was a great opportunity to send the character off in a big heroic sacrifice because nobody was really happy with the way she left the series in the first season. Nobody on the show really liked it, the fans didn't like it, I'm not sure even she really liked it. So 'Yesterday's Enterprise' was a chance to kill her right."

David Carson (director): “I think it was terrific to bring her back and have her die meaningfully, and give her a good reason to leave.”

Mr. Carson, this is essentially what you said in the "Alternate Lives Part I" documentary from 2008, is that correct?

[David Carson would have to reply "Yes"]

So, by 2008, Mr. Carson still felt that they had given the character of Tasha Yar a meaningful death in "Yesterday's Enterprise"?!

Sorry, this doesn't add up.

Mr. Moore and Mr. Carson collaborated for "Redemption II" and I only see a meaningless death for the character of Tasha Yar, unsuccessfully trying to escape with her daughter and being executed after having been caught. What's "meaningful" about this kind of death? (At least, on Vagra II she did in the line of active duty and on her feet but not tied down for some form of execution).

A few months after “Redemption II” had aired, this is what director David Carson (then) had to say: “I particularly liked the challenge of “Yesterday’s Enterprise” because we were creating the Enterprise in a different and parallel time line: An Enterprise at war.” (Starlog ST-TNG magazine Vol. 19, Spring 1992).

A "parallel time line" is not "our" altered time line, it's parallel to ours, and as such it is practically indistinguishable from an alternate universe.

This clearly indicates a logical premise change:

You can't have Tasha Yar die a meaningful death in (the past of) "our" universe and at the same time bear a daughter in (the past of) "our" universe and later die a meaningless death.

Either she died a meaningful death in our universe or she did NOT die a meaningful death.

Obviously the only way to resolve the problem was to relocate the (parallel) events featured in "Yesterday's Enterprise" into a parallel time line (David Carson) aka a parallel or alternate universe.

And Moore and Carson elegantly avoided to explain the various inconsistencies and oddities I've mentioned throughout this thread / treatise, necessary to explain before even coming up with the assumption that "Yesterday's Enterprise" Tasha travelled back to our universe.

Apparently Ronald D. Moore deliberately and consciously made [another] Picard sent [another] Tasha Yar to the past with the Enterprise-C which inevitably must have taken place in another (unseen) alternate universe and thus created a believable context so that Tasha could somehow give birth to her half-Romulan daughter Sela (instead of rotting in a Romulan detention cell with all the Federation technology information in her head which would have been the likelier outcome of her travelling to the past and being captured by the Romulans instead of being killed at Narendra III).

And from a story-telling perspective it’s totally irrelevant, who sent Tasha Yar back to the past and is responsible. Guinan could have just said “And I think I sent her there. I just know I did. If I’m right, then I am responsible for this whole situation”.

We are apparently looking at a (too) subtle suggestion of Ronald D. Moore that the events of "Yesterday's Enterprise" had been relocated into an alternate universe by the time of "Redemption II" which previously no one noticed.

I'd suggest we better deal with it, rather than to come up with all kinds of convoluted theories why that shouldn't be the case and stop discrediting the characters and people concerned unless you really want to read the vitriolic satire The Enterprise-"C"onspiracy I wrote over this weekend (from a strictly Cardassian point of view).

And so from February 19, 1990 (airdate of “Yesterday’s Enterprise”) until September 23, 1991 (airdate of "Redemption II") Tasha Yar had a meaningful death in the past of our universe – and the Enterprise-C of our universe apparently looked like the starship featured in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” (a remarkable cosmic symmetry and irony: these events in “our” universe were almost as short-lived as the “universe at war” itself, featured in “Yesterday’s Enterprise” ).

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
Robert Comsol is offline  
Old March 11 2014, 10:34 AM   #94
Start Wreck
Fleet Captain
 
Start Wreck's Avatar
 
Re: What did the Enterprise-C look like in the real TNG universe?

Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
Again, Guinan is not a superior Starfleet officer but Picard's friend. There's no record or hint in the series that she handles things from a military perspective and her message and sour face ("sorry to be the one having to tell you this") clearly suggests that in yet another (unseen) parallel time line or universe Picard did "send" Tasha to the past and therefore "is responsible" according to the undersatanding of normal people.
Well, thanks for the thinly veiled insult that I'm not a "normal" person, but I continue to not take that particular dialogue exchange in the same manner that you have.


Robert Comsol wrote: View Post
The series was not made so that for the decades to follow we'll twist every bit of dialogue out of the original context which general audiences were enabled to understand.
It seems to me like that's what you're doing, though.


Start Wreck wrote: View Post
Why is it preferable to retcon Andrew Probert's Enterprise-C design on the conference lounge wall as non-canon? (by insisting the Sternbach design is the only one "real" in our universe) It's been there for four seasons of TNG, prominently displayed above the actors and captured in many scenes.
The model is canon, because it exists on screen. But it's still just a model. We've seen the Enterprise-C for real on screen, and it looks different. Therefore, out of the two possible explanations (the model is inaccurate or the ship is from a different universe where it was created in a different shape), I'm going for the simpler one, as Occam's Razor would demand.
__________________
Fallen Star - My home-made sci-fi TV show
Start Wreck - My Star Trek spoof web comic
Doctor Who From The Start - A n00b does a blog
Start Wreck is offline  
Old March 11 2014, 12:50 PM   #95
Mutai Sho-Rin
Moderator
 
Mutai Sho-Rin's Avatar
 
Location: Orange, CA USA
Re: What did the Enterprise-C look like in the real TNG universe?

This has become a hair-splitting pissing contest and has gone on too long. All this semantic wrangling has worn thin.

Closed.
__________________
Into the sands of blood comes the Sho-Rin, master of the Mutai. Babylon 5 - TKO
Mutai Sho-Rin is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
ambassador class, andrew probert, enterprise c, guinan, yesterday's enterprise

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 05:32 PM.

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