NCC = Not Constitution Class?

[FatherRob]

Mr. Laser Beam wrote:

---

- "Starship class" clearly doesn't make sense (if taken literally, it would require the existence of a "USS Starship"). Clearly the sign should have said Starship TYPE, not Starship CLASS.

Well, in WWIi the Brits had Town class and County class cruisers. Not one of them was named HMS Town or HMS County. All ships in the class were named for towns and counties.

Just adding fodder

[Ronald Held]

Since the original 1701 dedication in 2245 was the bridge module swapped out or just upgraded? If not was they uncertain what class of vessel it was to be called so starship class was just a placeholder?

[Robert Comsol]

GSchnitzer wrote:

---

"Well, the memo from Bob Justman of August 9, 1967 only indicated the names he liked from D.C. Fontana's proposed list. I don't think it was meant to be the exhaustive list. For example, it doesn't have the Defiant which was still a year from being created, but his list also didn't include the Exeter--which was among D.C. Fontana's suggestions. In the end, it looks like the list of Starships was settled upon by Roddenberry regardless of what Bob Justman's preferences might have been."

That is probably the case and I have little doubt that it had probably been the script for "Space Seed" that was the inspiration to add a starship Constitution to the final list, but nothing more and nothing less.

GSchnitzer wrote:

---

"Of course, the "Constitution class" script comment first appeared in the "Space Seed" script by Carey Wilbur and Gene L. Coon. It's there not only in the Second Revised Final Draft script dated December 13, 1966, but also in the Final Draft script dated a week before that, if not in earlier drafts."

But regardless what Carey Wilbur and Gene L. Coon may have tried to accomplish with that odd "Constitution Class" script line (the producers hadn't even settled for the names of the other 12 starships like the Enterprise) it does not reflect one bit in The Making of Star Trek (although that should have been of interest to the author Stephen E. Whitfield considering his job was to generate PR on behalf of AMT and future sales of the Enterprise model kit...).

But in this book from 1968 we have the Bob Justman memo refering to the "Enterprise Starship Class" and an even clearer description: "The Enterprise-class starships..." ("Mission and Men", chapter 3, page 203).

Whether Walter Matt Jefferies shouted "veto" when he heard about this idea of a "Constitution Class" is unknown, but it's obvious that by 1968 the creators / producers hadn't settled for a "Constitution Class", otherwise the book wouldn't refer (twice!) to an "Enterprise Class".

I think the one thing we can all agree upon is that the Enterprise is a member of the Starship Class - and even if it were simply for the fact that this is another quote straight from this book.

Happy Holidays

Bob

[GSchnitzer]

Robert Comsol wrote:

---

Whether Walter Matt Jefferies shouted "veto" when he heard about this idea of a "Constitution Class" is unknown, but it's obvious that by 1968 the creators / producers hadn't settled for a "Constitution Class", otherwise the book wouldn't refer (twice!) to an "Enterprise Class".

Well, my hunch is that it's not so much that the creators/producers hadn't settled for a "Constitution Class." I think it's more likely that they had simply forgotten that they had actually already done so back with the terse comment in "Space Seed." I guess all we really know was, at the point that TMOST was written, Whitfield was unaware. Certainly, Bjo Trimble knew by the time her first version of the Star Trek Concordance was published in 1968 that the Enterprise was a Constitution Class.

[Nerys Myk]

I'd think that as the show's producer, Gene Coon would have a pretty big say in what was what. Perhaps more so than Jefferies. After all, this is the guy who gave us the Klingons, the United Federation of Planets and Starfleet Command.

[BK613]

GSchnitzer wrote:

---

Well, my hunch is that it's not so much that the creators/producers hadn't settled for a "Constitution Class." I think it's more likely that they had simply forgotten that they had actually already done so back with the terse comment in "Space Seed." I guess all we really know was, at the point that TMOST was written, Whitfield was unaware. Certainly, Bjo Trimble knew by the time her first version of the Star Trek Concordance was published in 1968 that the Enterprise was a Constitution Class.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...utionClass.jpg

The interesting thing is that the Writer's Guide, 3rd edition, dated April 17, 1967, only has this to say about the class:

The U.S.S. Enterprise is a spaceship, official
designation "starship class"; somewhat larger
than a present-day naval cruiser, it ...

Now, I presume that WGIII is a reference to this document (Writer's Guide, 3rd edition) since the majority of the description is lifted verbatim but the word Constitution does not appear at all in this edition of the guide. Don't know the reason for the substitution but the influence by the Concordance over early fandom's perceptions of the show cannot be denied.

[throwback]

An American cruiser in the 1960's measured between 600 feet (Cleveland-class cruiser) and 721 feet (Long Beach-class cruiser). Not knowing which cruiser class the writer had in mind, the Enterprise could be slightly larger than either class, and this would be the smallest length I have seen mentioned for this class.

[Robert Comsol]

If I'm not mistaken this is a reproduction from the original writer's guide: http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicl...se/eplan01.JPG

Compare it to the quoted / illustrated text from the original Star Trek Concordance and you'll notice that the "Constitution Class" part has deliberately been added to make it appear official (I consider this to be fraudulent behaviour).

One of the issues Gene Roddenberry felt very strong about was that "U.S.S." was an acronym for "United Space Ship" (or "United Star Ship") to make the show and the future palatable to international audiences. Of course, a "Constitution Class" carries strong allusions to American history and tradition (because of the US frigate of the same name and the United States Constitution), but I was always under the impression that Gene Roddenberry tried to keep such allusions to a minimum and "Starship Class" is an obvious proof for that, IMHO.

Bob

[GSchnitzer]

Robert Comsol wrote:

---

If I'm not mistaken this is a reproduction from the original writer's guide: http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicl...se/eplan01.JPG

Compare it to the quoted / illustrated text from the original Star Trek Concordance and you'll notice that the "Constitution Class" part has deliberately been added to make it appear official (I consider this to be fraudulent behaviour).

One of the issues Gene Roddenberry felt very strong about was that "U.S.S." was an acronym for "United Space Ship" (or "United Star Ship") to make the show and the future palatable to international audiences. Of course, a "Constitution Class" carries strong allusions to American history and tradition (because of the US frigate of the same name and the United States Constitution), but I was always under the impression that Gene Roddenberry tried to keep such allusions to a minimum and "Starship Class" is an obvious proof for that, IMHO.

Bob

And was "Constitution class" inserted into the "Space Seed" script back in 1966 in order to make it appear official?

[Albertese]

My understanding is that most countries have a constitution.

OTOH, "Charlie X" tells us, "On Earth today, it's Thanksgiving" (a uniquely American observance) and Roddenberry's story for "The Omega Glory" make me think that American patriotism wasn't really being downplayed for international appeal. Indeed, there are numerous examples of Americanism throughout the series.

And, the Concordance while it was a fan production, was produced by Bjo Trimble, who evidently had quite a lot of backstage access. And given the near-religious fervor a lot of fans have for this show, I suspect that her use of the word "Constitution" in this context was not without foundation.

--Alex

[alchemist]

Robert Comsol wrote:

---

If I'm not mistaken this is a reproduction from the original writer's guide: http://www.cloudster.com/Sets&Vehicl...se/eplan01.JPG

Actually, what that webpage shows is a scan from a page of the Enterprise's "Biography" that Lincoln Enterprises sold. The biography was based on the original writer's guide, publicity material produced by the studio, and artwork provided by Matt Jefferies. It was written/assembled in late 1967/early 1968.

Robert Comsol wrote:

---

Compare it to the quoted / illustrated text from the original Star Trek Concordance and you'll notice that the "Constitution Class" part has deliberately been added to make it appear official (I consider this to be fraudulent behaviour).

FYI, and apologies if you've heard this before, Greg Jein was a contributor to the original Concordance.

Regards,

Dave

[BK613]

^^ "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." --The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

[GSchnitzer]

I think Bjo was pretty good about citing her source for every data point in the Concordance. (She had WGIII for "Writer's Guide, 3rd Edition," TY for "Tomorrow Is Yesterday," BT for "Balance of Terror," and so on.) I think Bjo's failing in this case was that she forgot to cite SS ("Space Seed") as the source for the "Constitution Class" comment. It's understandable: it's not found in dialogue like the vast majority of her Concordance entries. It would have been really easy for her to have lost track of the original source of this data point--as so many people have done. It's sort of like one of "Mudd's Women"--Ruth Bonaventure. Bonaventure? Says who? Ah, says the "Mudd's Women" script--but in script direction that wasn't dialogue. I don't think Carey Wilbur, Gene L. Coon, Bjo Trimble, Matt Jefferies. Greg Jein. and Franz Joseph Schnaubelt all conspired to fraudulently or decptively thwart Gene Roddenberry's "Starship Class" master plan.

[alchemist]

GSchnitzer wrote:

---

I think Bjo's failing in this case was that she forgot to cite SS ("Space Seed") as the source for the "Constitution Class" comment.

Indeed. However, this omiSSion was corrected in subsequent revisions of the Concordance.

[GSchnitzer]

alchemist wrote:

---

Indeed. However, this omiSSion was corrected in subsequent revisions of the Concordance.

omiSSion