There were models of that used as desk props on DS9, so it is "real," although how so is unclear.
Just use a "Connie"!
- Thread starter dswynne1
- Start date
There were models of that used as desk props on DS9, so it is "real," although how so is unclear.
There were models of a globular ship used as desk props.
The model originally was used as a "Daedalus" in a Paramount-licensed Trek reference book.
That does not make the ship model on the desk in DS9 a "Daedalus" within studio continuity (what fans like to call "canon").
With CBS being one of those "folks".
http://www.startrek.com/database_article/daedalus-class-starship
"...A model of the [Daedalus] design was displayed in Benjamin Sisko's office on Deep Space Nine".
Last edited:
I think that's a fair assessment, although there's no real reason to not assume that's the case, is there?
This fan article had some interesting and logical points on the discussion.
The Daedalus-class was clearly shown on screen and it was mentioned in an episode, like startrek.com's entry says. So it is canon. And it will remain canon until a new movie or a new TV series comes along and specifically contradicts what was said and shown and effectively replaces it with new canon. Like in the case of the Ambassador-class/Enterprise-C.
Mind-blowing stuff, I know, because it's entirely logical.
Mind-blowing stuff, I know, because it's entirely logical.
In a complete absence of evidence there's no reason to assume a thing to be so.
A model was shown in one series, the name of a class of starship was mentioned in another. That doesn't mean they are connected.
And yet CBS' startrek.com makes that connection:
"Daedalus-class starship
Star Trek: The Next Generation
Episode: TNG 215 - Power Play"
"One of the United Federation of Planets' first starship designs commissioned and operated under its auspices, inaugurated soon after UFP formation in 2161 and retired in 2196. It was among the first starships to demonstrate the primary/secondary hull and warp nacelle designs which later became a characteristic of Starfleet vessels. Destroyed in 2167 at Mab-Bu VI, the U.S.S. Essex was a Daedalus-class starship. It is possible that the U.S.S. Horizon as well as the U.S.S. Archon also belonged to this class. A model of the design was displayed in Benjamin Sisko's office on Deep Space Nine".
So it remains canon until new evidence (as in "new canon") replaces it.
It was shown onscreen. It was stated onscreen. Until it is contradicted onscreen it does carry weight.
For someone who admits doesn't understand the concept of "head canon" you sure try to impose yours. Even over CBS and Michael Okuda.
Canon is what is on-screen. Is the model ever referenced as "Daedalus Class"? If not, then it simply isn't canon. What CBS considers "official" isn't really canon. 2233 was considered as Kirk's birthday and I'm sure it was shown on CBS website. But, it didn't become canon until it was actually mentioned in Star Trek (2009).
Exactly so.
CBS licenses and authorizes a tremendous amount of stuff - some of it even created by people who work on the shows, in which case it's pretty good and may even eventually be used in a show. The people creating the shows, though, are under no compunction to even look at any of it unless that suits them.
That's something people don't get. The folks in charge get to pick and choose what gets used. Being mention on line or in a book, even an official one, doesn't make it Canon. When it shows up on screen, then it's canon/continuity. At least till the next PTB comes along. 
That's something people don't get. The folks in charge get to pick and choose what gets used. Being mention on line or in a book, even an official one, doesn't make it Canon. When it shows up on screen, then it's canon/continuity. At least till the next PTB comes along.
Exactly so. Another thing lots of people don't seem to understand is that canon does not mean "consistent with" - canonical statements and events contradict one another, and one is not more "canonical" than another.
I think people are getting to fixated on the letter of canon and are ignoring the spirit. CBS considers the ship shown and the ship mentioned to be the same. They want us to consider it the same. If they ever show the ship onscreen it will most likely be called the Daedalus. Sure they have slightly more leeway to change it than normal if they wanted to but there isn't even a reason to want to change it.
You mean people like Doug Drexler, Greg Jein, and Michael Okuda who actually worked on Trek shows, whose opinions actually matter and who insist on the canon state of the Daedalus?
Speaking of some things people don't get…
Just how many times something has to be shown onscreen to be considered canon?
Once?
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/daedalus/daedalus-themaquisi.jpg
Twice?
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/daedalus/daedalus-afterimage.jpg
Thrice?
http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/articles/daedalus/daedalus-inquisition.jpg
Please stop me when you've had enough.
Exactly so.
The production team of DSC (or ST4) may choose to show us a new/different Daedalus class but until they do what we've got is canon.
No, it simply isn't "canon".
There is nothing in the shows that connects the model with the name.
OK. You've convinced me. I'll take your word over DS9, CBS, StarTrek.Com, Michael Okuda, the Star Trek Encyclopedia, Greg Jein, Doug Drexler, Star Trek Official Starship Collection, Memory Alpha, Memory Beta, Pocket Books, etc, etc, etc… After all, what do they know?
Similar threads
