Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed

[F. King Daniel]

TOS: Romulans are limited to impulse drive.

ENT: Romulan ships are warping around the galaxy a century before.

This is a retcon. The line from TOS is ignored, and it didn't make any sense anyway.

 

[Tuskin38]

If the work isn't canon it is just a contradiction to canon, not a retcon.

Only canon works can retcon something.

Could this retcon conversation be moved to another topic? We're not even talking about the show anymore.

 

[DigificWriter]

Guys, it's pointless to keep belabouring this point. @Tarek71 just doesn't care about the actual definitions of things.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Sure they can. Even non-canon stories can have an internal consistency and continuity and be retroactively changed, scraped or rebooted.

But no one said fan ideas, reboots, retcons or reimaginations are "canon" or official continuity. No non-canon story, even one that is entirely consistent with the existing canon, is part of that canon unless approved. We all agree completely. It's not that fans cant retcon or reboot. They cant even create an official canon consistent story that doesn't reboot or retcon anything. Official being the key word.

But you can write a story cant you? And if it is written to be consistent with the Prime universe continuity you can say the word "continuity" in that sense. Why? Because the story is set there and is consistent with it. You can also write a story that fundamentally reimagines and reboots the entire Trek universe. Reboot is the correct term for that type of story. Or you can keep the basic continuity but make retroactive changes to it. You can retcon. If you want to withhold use of the word "retcon" for that type of story until it is greenlighted, flimed and aired and thus becomes "canon", that's up to you, but that isn't what a retcon is. Nothing to do with "official".

It was a retcon before it ever was approved. It differs from stories that do not retroactively change anything, nor is it a reboot. Stories that reboot are definitely reboots. A non-canon reboot is still a reboot. As I said earlier, call it proposed retcon, if for some unknown reason it makes you feel better. But retcon and reboot do not = "canon".

If I write a TOS fanfic where I gender-swap the entire cast, all I've done is write a TOS fanfic where I gender-swapped the entire main cast. To argue I've done anything more than that--or retconned TOS or whatever--would be utterly ridiculous.

 

[Prax]

I declare this conversation noncannnon!

 

[CorporalCaptain]

But is it a loose canon?

 

[137th Gebirg]

So loose it knocked the balls off the brass monkey.

 

[Prax]

Don't make me add another canon

 

[Tarek71]

Guys, it's pointless to keep belabouring this point. @Tarek71 just doesn't care about the actual definitions of things.

No, those just aren't the definitions. If I introduce a story by saying "it's set in the Prime Universe timeline/continuity", that is just a statement as to its setting, not its canonicity. The same goes for "in this story, I present an entirely different take on Star Trek, a hard reboot that fundamentally reimagines it" . That tells the reader the setting, and nothing more. Nothing to do with TPTB have approved this reimagination.

Nothing about the words timeline, reboot, retcon or reimagination refer in this context to official/canon and absolutely no one takes it that way in any fanfic conversation. Obviously when you say "It's set in the Kelvinverse timeline, but with a few retcons", you mean it's setting is basically consistent with the new movies except that, internally to this story, some things have been altered. No one will mistake you for saying Paramount/CBS approved any change at all.

For it to be canon, even stories that don't retcon, alter, reimagined or reboot anything require their approval. That's nothing specific to retcons.

 

[Tarek71]

If I write a TOS fanfic where I gender-swap the entire cast, all I've done is write a TOS fanfic where I gender-swapped the entire main cast. To argue I've done anything more than that--or retconned TOS or whatever--would be utterly ridiculous.

No, it's a retcon. Just not a canon one. If you write a story where they are the same gender as in TOS, the same applies. It's not like 100% canon consistent fan stories are any more "official" than ones that reboot or retcon.

But you can still say "it is set in the Prime timeline or continuity". That's the setting. And what makes it set there is how the universe of persons, places and things and the sequence of events are portrayed not whether anyone approved it.

 

[137th Gebirg]

Did someone say CANNON?

 

[Tarek71]

If the work isn't canon it is just a contradiction to canon, not a retcon.

Only canon works can retcon something.

Could this retcon conversation be moved to another topic? We're not even talking about the show anymore.

Not really. You can write a story fully consistent with the canon, and it is still non canon though. It has to be approved to be "canon". That's what canon means. But a "reboot" is a change in the setting of the story, not a statement about whether anyone approved the changes. It's about content of the work, the kind of story it is, not it's legal status. No one outside of 4 or 5 people on this thread is confused by any of this.

 

[Tuskin38]

Not really. You can write a story fully consistent with the canon, and it is still non canon though. It has to be approved to be "canon". That's what canon means. But a "reboot" is a change in the setting of the story, not a statement about whether anyone approved the changes. It's about content of the work, the kind of story it is, not it's legal status. No one outside of 4 or 5 people on this thread is confused by any of this.

You completely misunderstood my post.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Fans and fan-fiction cannot retcon anything in canon. End of story. Moving on...

 

[Tarek71]

Fans and fan-fiction cannot retcon anything in canon. End of story. Moving on...

No one said they can. We can't even create official canon stories that don't retcon anything. We all agree!

 

[Prax]

I will now retcon this conversation




Gosh, that trailer sure looks like Kelvin to me! You people are in denial or sumfin...

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Khan in SS was a genetic "superman". Khan in ID was a comic-book superman, complete with superhuman powers.

Khan in both is a genetic superman with superhuman powers; give me a break. You just don't like the new movies, is all, and you want to rubbish them because they aren't exactly like the previous TV shows or movies. But they are (in a way) and this Khan's the same as the one from Space Seed, but with the full extent of his abilities being shown rather than just slightly depicted or told.

 

[Trekkin]

I will now retcon this conversation




Gosh, that trailer sure looks like Kelvin to me! You people are in denial or sumfin...

Belay that! I retcon this man's retcon.

 

[Captain of the USS Averof]

Khan in both is a genetic superman with superhuman powers; give me a break. You just don't like the new movies, is all, and you want to rubbish them because they aren't exactly like the previous TV shows or movies. But they are (in a way) and this Khan's the same as the one from Space Seed, but with the full extent of his abilities being shown rather than just slightly depicted or told.

Strange. I didn't know Khan appeared in all "the new movies". I thought he only appeared in Into Darkness. You probably just don't like The Original Series, is all, and you want to rubbish it because it isn't exactly like the following TV shows or movies.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Editing your old posts to make others look foolish now, is how you fight a Time War.

I like to think that Kirk prime and Kelvin Kirk met in 1930s new York and sorta argued over who's timeline should be allowed to live more so than the others.

If neither one got their own way, leading to some kind of compromise, that's how we wind up with Discovery.