The early 20-year mission concept, better or worse?

[Phantom]

Way back at the beginnings of creating TNG, the concept for the E-D and her mission was an unsupported, long-duration deep space assignment. This thinking guided the specifications for the ship (size, etc), and some aspects of the story development (including families, etc).

From what I remember reading at the time, the Enterprise would have been something like an 19th century US Cavalry fort: military base, embassy, trading post, and community all in one mobile package.

The exigencies of producing a weekly TV show under a studio system whittled away most of that (such as dropping the idea of a Mall/Promenade, which wouldn't resurface until DS9).

What do you think the show would have been like if they hadn't had to pare all that down? Would we have gotten a better show, or would it have been worse?

 

[C.E. Evans]

The thing was that the concept of a Galaxy-class starship having deployments of a decade or so was never really mentioned onscreen ever. It was one of those offscreen ideas that stayed there. For all intents and purposes, the only real difference mission-wise between the original Enterprise and the Enterprise-D was that the latter carried civilian passengers on a regular basis. Otherwise, both were really written the same way--to do whatever was required of them in any given episode.

 

[JesterFace]

I'd imagine that by 24th century people might have realized that living in a submarine on a mission that may take years, can get boring... so there has to be something more than just walls around people.

I think that an idea where a ship travels 20 years forwards, is limiting. There is only one way to travel at one time... Expanding more slowly across the galaxy makes more sense.

 

[BillJ]

The thing was that the concept of a Galaxy-class starship having deployments of a decade or so was never really mentioned onscreen ever.

I think it was clearly alluded to in "Encounter at Farpoint". There was a mention of the "great unexplored mass of the galaxy", and Picard's "we have a long mission ahead of us".

I would've preferred a series that had been more exploration based, but still enjoyed what we got for the most part.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The thing was that the concept of a Galaxy-class starship having deployments of a decade or so was never really mentioned onscreen ever.

I think it was clearly alluded to in "Encounter at Farpoint". There was a mention of the "great unexplored mass of the galaxy", and Picard's "we have a long mission ahead of us".

That's a general blanket statement that could be applied to most starships, including the original Enterprise and NX-01 Enterprise.

 

[BillJ]

The thing was that the concept of a Galaxy-class starship having deployments of a decade or so was never really mentioned onscreen ever.

I think it was clearly alluded to in "Encounter at Farpoint". There was a mention of the "great unexplored mass of the galaxy", and Picard's "we have a long mission ahead of us".

That's a general blanket statement that could be applied to most starships, including the original Enterprise and NX-01 Enterprise.

But if that was the everyday standard Starfleet M.O., then there'd be no real reason to mention it.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I think it was clearly alluded to in "Encounter at Farpoint". There was a mention of the "great unexplored mass of the galaxy", and Picard's "we have a long mission ahead of us".

That's a general blanket statement that could be applied to most starships, including the original Enterprise and NX-01 Enterprise.

But if that was the everyday standard Starfleet M.O., then there'd be no real reason to mention it.

Most log entries are like that--they often contain exposition that is more for the sake of viewers than for Starfleet.

 

[Bob Morton]

Yeah, there would be a lot of thing they wouldn't have to mention if it wasn't a TV show.

 

[at Quark's]

Yeah, there would be a lot of thing they wouldn't have to mention if it wasn't a TV show.

Now, I'm imagining Picard having to report at Starfleet HQ because he is asked to explain why he puts so much unnecessary common knowledge in his logs, wasting the time of every fellow officer that has to listen to or read through them

I'm wondering now what happens with all those logs anyway. I mean, they obviously get stored into some kind of archive, for later referal (for example, we hear about Janeway browsing through some of Picards logs). But would anyone at starfleet HQ read through all of them, to keep information at HQ up to date? Is anything similar done in the navy of today?

 

[Shark]

I would imagine someone reads them otherwise why write them? Everyone has had to deal with tedium at sometime in their working lives, I would imagine Starfleet would be no different. And yes, Log books are still kept today.

 

[tharpdevenport]

I think it's good we didn't find the 24th century equivilent of McDonald's. We already have 10-Forward, plenty of lounges, the arboretum, Holodecks; recreeational areas like fencing, sports, phaser target practice, and anything else I forgot. What good is a mall, especially for a series in the first couple years that went on & on & on about how humanity had moved away from the need to material things (which was always a load of bullcrap, but still -- it's what was said repeatedly). Plus the whole ideea is just silly as hell if you really think about it. I was what is was for Deep Space Nine, but the Enterprise is not a galactic hang out and intersteller trading post. The more and more I read about Roddenberry's ideas and how he changed scripts, the more he's gone from the visionary creator to the problem that held the show back and gave it weak areas, and this was no different.

 

[Phantom]

The thing was that the concept of a Galaxy-class starship having deployments of a decade or so was never really mentioned onscreen ever. It was one of those offscreen ideas that stayed there. For all intents and purposes, the only real difference mission-wise between the original Enterprise and the Enterprise-D was that the latter carried civilian passengers on a regular basis. Otherwise, both were really written the same way--to do whatever was required of them in any given episode.

I know that already. I'm asking if the original, dropped concept would have been a better show or a worse show.

What good is a mall, especially for a series in the first couple years that went on & on & on about how humanity had moved away from the need to material things (which was always a load of bullcrap, but still -- it's what was said repeatedly).

It wouldn't have been just for the crew, but for all the alien life-forms they ran into out in deep space.

The Enterprise would have been a self-mobile version of DS9, or the Babylon 5 station: a center for diplomacy, commerce between the Federation and other species, and other species with each other, diplomacy, etc.

Plus the whole ideea is just silly as hell if you really think about it. I was what is was for Deep Space Nine, but the Enterprise is not a galactic hang out and interstellar trading post.

Again, in the original idea, it would have been.

The more and more I read about Roddenberry's ideas and how he changed scripts, the more he's gone from the visionary creator to the problem that held the show back and gave it weak areas, and this was no different.

This was one of those things he took out, so it couldn't have "held the show back", because they never actually carried through with it in the first place.

 

[BigJake]

Picard's assignment on the Stargazer was over twenty years long, wasn't it?

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

A Trek show lasting 20 years? 1987-2007. It would have been interesting to see the evolution in effects technology, from Encounter at Farpoint to the quality of season 4 Enterprise, all in one show.

The Enterprise would have had to be like an actual ship in one regard though in terms of crew rotation. I doubt any cast member would have stuck with a show for 20 years, and certainly contract negotiations would have been a pain. We could have had up to four captains over the series run, with the supporting cast changing just as regularly if not more so. I suppose Trek would have been more like CSI.

 

[C.E. Evans]

The thing was that the concept of a Galaxy-class starship having deployments of a decade or so was never really mentioned onscreen ever. It was one of those offscreen ideas that stayed there. For all intents and purposes, the only real difference mission-wise between the original Enterprise and the Enterprise-D was that the latter carried civilian passengers on a regular basis. Otherwise, both were really written the same way--to do whatever was required of them in any given episode.

I know that already. I'm asking if the original, dropped concept would have been a better show or a worse show.

You must know already that it would have been the same show because it wasn't really a part of the show's premise. Regardless if its mission was 5 years, 7 years, or 20 years, the Enterprise would be doing the same kind of things. The whole idea of "to explore strange new worlds" for TOS and TNG was just an excuse to rationalize why the ships were out there ready for that week's adventure, with the mission length really unimportant or at best, of minimal importance. When necessary, both those Enterprises were always able to return to a starbase (for supplies, repairs, or crew rotation) whenever a story required it.

 

[JesterFace]

'All Good Things...' ended like Picard tells us during opening credits: "continuing mission"

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

'All Good Things...' ended like Picard tells us during opening credits: "continuing mission"

Yeah, but then they let Troi drive...

 

[JesterFace]

'All Good Things...' ended like Picard tells us during opening credits: "continuing mission"

Yeah, but then they let Troi drive...

Which I don't remember happening in the series, not once... first time for everything.

 

[BillJ]

'All Good Things...' ended like Picard tells us during opening credits: "continuing mission"

Yeah, but then they let Troi drive...

Which I don't remember happening in the series, not once... first time for everything.

We didn't have too many times where Conn was killed in battle.

 

[Phantom]

You must know already that it would have been the same show because it wasn't really a part of the show's premise.

It was a part of the original premise, but it was dropped.

Regardless if its mission was 5 years, 7 years, or 20 years, the Enterprise would be doing the same kind of things. The whole idea of "to explore strange new worlds" for TOS and TNG was just an excuse to rationalize why the ships were out there ready for that week's adventure, with the mission length really unimportant or at best, of minimal importance. When necessary, both those Enterprises were always able to return to a starbase (for supplies, repairs, or crew rotation) whenever a story required it.

In the original premise, the Enterprise in fact would not be able to just head for a nearby starbase for repairs or whatever. That was part of the point. It would have been the ship, alone, out in the "wilderness" and reliant only on it's own resources and those of the crew. (They tried again to pay some lip service to the idea in Voyager, but once again the exigencies of weekly TV studio thinking messed that up.)

The question I am asking is: would that original concept, uninterfered with by the studio, have been a better or worse show.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Was it is the studio or just a natural evolution in storytelling that moved the Enterprise closer to "home"?

 

[JesterFace]

The question I am asking is: would that original concept, uninterfered with by the studio, have been a better or worse show.

Not necessarily worse, maybe, but definitely it would not have been as good as TNG was. It's more comfortable to be in a "familiar" surrounding.

Voyager is a good example... They just plowed the same course for years, I don't think it worked well. Some think differently of course but...