New uniforms in Season 2 Trailer

[John Cooley]

In your head canon? Ok.

It’s remarkable to me how many people are now ignorant to the ways in which Star Trek Fandom and indeed even those in charge of the franchise once “policed” such things to ensure a more cohesive franchise. I take for granted the facts that I grew up in this fandom (now part of my career) knowing are not readily understood by a much larger and often splinted fandom today. Allow me then to help.

“Star Trek” later referred to as “Star Trek: The Original Series” consists of 78 originally aired episodes starting with “The Man Trap” and ending with “The Turnabout Intruder”.
The footage from the 1st rejected pilot (remember this was in an era when it was unusual for a pilot episode to even be aired, much less included in a series original run or syndication package) was cut apart and repurposed via edited incorporation into the 1st season two part episode “The Menagerie”. At that point “The Cage” lost its own agency as an episode of Star Trek. If, indeed it ever really had any as again it’s not even the pilot episode of what we know as “Star Trek”. That pilot episode is called “Where No Man Has Gone Before” as the accepted pilot episode for the series (and it was incorporated into the first run of the series, where “The Cage” was not).

The footage incorporated into “The Managerie” is canon, and therefor IS relivent as “the past” or as background for those characters in an earlier era in the voyages of the U.S.S. ENTERPRISE. But, ONLY those scenes as presented in “The Managerie”. To dismiss this fact invites too many naritive problems especially the ending of “The Cage” made especially problematic by the end of the, actually aired, official, episode “The Managerie”.

Now, for years Gene Roddenberry would cart around a black and white print of “The Cage” to conventions and it was always presented as a curiosity; a road not taken by the network, and something that existed outside of the 78 episodes of the series proper. It’s relivence and agency within Star Trek IS its use in “The Managerie”, and that’s all.

Now, I like and enjoy “The Cage” for what it is, but that is not as some artificially, shoehorned-into-continuity, “Episode” of TOS. It’s more appropriately thought of in the same way Tolkien and his fans view some of the stories presented in both “Lost Stories” and in the appendixes of “The Lord of the Rings” - which is to say that they provide interesting information, but are not part of the naritive proper as presented in “Star Trek”.

John

 

[Firebird]

While I can't say I'm a fan of TMP these minor tweaks would have went a long way into making me like it a bit more.

Those splashes of color to the set and uniforms gives the production even more of an "Andromeda Strain" feel.

 

[fireproof78]

which is to say that they provide interesting information, but are not part of the naritive proper as presented in “Star Trek”.

Not sure why, though. What does adding them diminish in TOS?

 

[cultcross]

Tolkien and his fans view some of the stories presented in both “Lost Stories” and in the appendixes of “The Lord of the Rings” - which is to say that they provide interesting information, but are not part of the naritive proper as presented in “Star Trek”.

I'm not sure Tolkien would agree with your representation there. He was a storyteller who embraced the 'real history' of his secondary creation in the way that many Trek fans embrace the 'real history' of the fictional Trekverse. Tolkien's 'additional information' is very much part of that history, and that huge scale worldbuilding exercise.

But what sets Tolkien and his universe apart from our topic here is that he also embraced the concept of different authors, narrative voices, and versions of events. Stories told by different people for different purposes in different times presented different perspectives on history and truth. Take The Hobbit's most famous chapter, Riddles in the Dark. The originally published version and the version you will read today are quite different, because he rewrote it in the 50s to act better as a setup for the Lord of the Rings. But he always felt (and later wrote) that the two versions were both canonical, only told to different audiences for different purposes. The 'truth' of what happened by Gollum's lake is filtered through the narrative voice of the storyteller. Gene Roddenberry expressed a similar thought in his somewhat off piste novelization of TMP. Trek fans can't cope with that though - every version must look and feel identical and feature identical events or its an alternative universe.

 

[BillJ]

...every version must look and feel identical and feature identical events or its an alternative universe.

Well, we we told for forty-plus years the way TOS looked, across multiple series. It isn't hard to see Discovery as something separate.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Well, we we told for forty-plus years the way TOS looked, across multiple series. It isn't hard to see Discovery as something separate.

Now we're told something else. Such is the nature of long term fiction.

 

[Dukhat]

I don't see how. Nothing in Discovery has broken the Cage's lore.

I'm not talking about the 'lore.' The 'lore' means nothing. The '60's Batman series, the '90's Tim Burton Batman films and the noughts Christopher Nolan Batman films all share the same 'lore,' but take place in different continuities. No impartial observer is going to look at those three examples and think that they take place in the same universe. Ditto with "The Cage"/TOS, and DSC.

In your head canon? Ok.

It’s remarkable to me how many people are now ignorant to the ways in which Star Trek Fandom and indeed even those in charge of the franchise once “policed” such things to ensure a more cohesive franchise. I take for granted the facts that I grew up in this fandom (now part of my career) knowing are not readily understood by a much larger and often splinted fandom today. Allow me then to help.

“Star Trek” later referred to as “Star Trek: The Original Series” consists of 78 originally aired episodes starting with “The Man Trap” and ending with “The Turnabout Intruder”.
The footage from the 1st rejected pilot (remember this was in an era when it was unusual for a pilot episode to even be aired, much less included in a series original run or syndication package) was cut apart and repurposed via edited incorporation into the 1st season two part episode “The Menagerie”. At that point “The Cage” lost its own agency as an episode of Star Trek. If, indeed it ever really had any as again it’s not even the pilot episode of what we know as “Star Trek”. That pilot episode is called “Where No Man Has Gone Before” as the accepted pilot episode for the series (and it was incorporated into the first run of the series, where “The Cage” was not).

The footage incorporated into “The Managerie” is canon, and therefor IS relivent as “the past” or as background for those characters in an earlier era in the voyages of the U.S.S. ENTERPRISE. But, ONLY those scenes as presented in “The Managerie”. To dismiss this fact invites too many naritive problems especially the ending of “The Cage” made especially problematic by the end of the, actually aired, official, episode “The Managerie”.

Now, for years Gene Roddenberry would cart around a black and white print of “The Cage” to conventions and it was always presented as a curiosity; a road not taken by the network, and something that existed outside of the 78 episodes of the series proper. It’s relivence and agency within Star Trek IS its use in “The Managerie”, and that’s all.

Now, I like and enjoy “The Cage” for what it is, but that is not as some artificially, shoehorned-into-continuity, “Episode” of TOS. It’s more appropriately thought of in the same way Tolkien and his fans view some of the stories presented in both “Lost Stories” and in the appendixes of “The Lord of the Rings” - which is to say that they provide interesting information, but are not part of the naritive proper as presented in “Star Trek”.

John

Here's some education on what CBS (the owner of the intellectual property that is Star Trek) considers canon:

1. Star Trek (The Original Series, including "The Cage" pilot)
2. Star Trek: The Animated Series
3. Star Trek: The Next Generation
4. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
5. Star Trek: Voyager
6. Star Trek: Enterprise
7. Star Trek: Discovery
8. Star Trek: The Motion Picture
9. Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan
10. Star Trek: The Search for Spock
11. Star Trek: The Voyage Home
12. Star Trek: The Final Frontier
13. Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country
14. Star Trek: Generations
15. Star Trek: First Contact
16. Star Trek: Insurrection
17. Star Trek: Nemesis

As for 'narrative problems,' there's nothing different about that in "The Cage" than there is with any other continuity problem between the different iterations of Star Trek. How did Kirk's Enterprise in ST:TFF get to the center of the galaxy in a half hour when it would take Picard's Enterprise thousands of years to get there? That's a continuity problem, not a canon problem.

Hope that clears things up for you.

 

[Vger23]

I'm not talking about the 'lore.' The 'lore' means nothing. The '60's Batman series, the '90's Tim Burton Batman films and the noughts Christopher Nolan Batman films all share the same 'lore,' but take place in different continuities. No impartial observer is going to look at those three examples and think that they take place in the same universe. Ditto with "The Cage"/TOS, and DSC.



Here's some education on what CBS (the owner of the intellectual property that is Star Trek) considers canon:

1. Star Trek (The Original Series, including "The Cage" pilot)
2. Star Trek: The Animated Series
3. Star Trek: The Next Generation
4. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
5. Star Trek: Voyager
6. Star Trek: Enterprise
7. Star Trek: Discovery
8. Star Trek: The Motion Picture
9. Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan
10. Star Trek: The Search for Spock
11. Star Trek: The Voyage Home
12. Star Trek: The Final Frontier
13. Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country
14. Star Trek: Generations
15. Star Trek: First Contact
16. Star Trek: Insurrection
17. Star Trek: Nemesis

As for 'narrative problems,' there's nothing different about that in "The Cage" than there is with any other continuity problem between the different iterations of Star Trek. How did Kirk's Enterprise in ST:TFF get to the center of the galaxy in a half hour when it would take Picard's Enterprise thousands of years to get there? That's a continuity problem, not a canon problem.

Hope that clears things up for you.

In fairness to TFF, it was like 7 hours. Credit where credit is due, bruh.

 

[Dukhat]

In fairness to TFF, it was like 7 hours. Credit where credit is due, bruh.

I stand corrected.

 

[jaime]

Whose ever said "The Cage" isn't canon?

Me.

Because the ending doesn’t work as it was turned into a different ending for its inclusion in the menagerie, so it’s place in well...let’s call it continuity...only exists in relation to those scenes in the Menagerie. That means any other things that get changed for the series proper, and didn’t appear in the scenes in The Menagerie, can safely be ignored, as from the narrative standpoint, The Cage didn’t happen as shown in the ‘episode’ called the Cage.

Canon in terms of the more usual usage? It’s a work by Gene Rodenberry and has Star Trek written on it, so it’s part of the canon in that sense...but what it actually is, is a first draft for Star Trek, that is later totally replaced by the series we got. It’s a deleted scene to all intents and purposes, and anything contradicting it, is really not a problem.
Thing is, if we strip ‘continuity’ from part of the meaning for what we as Trek fans refer to as canon, then everything, Gold Key to Simon and Shuster is canon. Which is even more of a spanner in the works for the cohesiveness we tend to look for...because even books I like, like Ghost Ship or Children of Hamlin, or ones others like such as the John Ford Klingon stuff, are directly contradicted by on screen stuff. We end up with a Star Wars a and b canon approach, which might work well tbh...but it renders much of the discussion moot.

The Cage is a first draft. Like that first Holmes story where Holmes was a Frenchman, and Watson was his maid who escaped from the circus. Oh. No ones read that one? I may have made it up.

 

[Mudd]

Well, we we told for forty-plus years the way TOS looked, across multiple series. It isn't hard to see Discovery as something separate.

Well, there is that.

STD is not of a piece with the oldTrek that ended when Enterprise was cancelled in 2005. It's a new product with different values and points of view, a different aesthetic and a different commercial angle of attack, just as the Abrams films are. Apparently fans are going to parse words like "reimagining," "reboot" and "visual reboot" and so on, and argue over it forever, but it's self-evident and undeniable.

 

[Tuskin38]

Ditto with "The Cage"/TOS, and DSC

Well we’re not impartial, we’re start trek fans. This isn’t the first time we’ve experienced a visual reboot.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

I'm not talking about the 'lore.' The 'lore' means nothing. The '60's Batman series, the '90's Tim Burton Batman films and the noughts Christopher Nolan Batman films all share the same 'lore,' but take place in different continuities. No impartial observer is going to look at those three examples and think that they take place in the same universe. Ditto with "The Cage"/TOS, and DSC.

The Batman movies are pretty much forced to "reset" their universe every so often. They're trying to tell the story of the same character, in roughly the same time period.

Same with the comics, though their resets don't happen as often (how many Crisis Of Infinite Earths™ have there been?).

Discovery looking different than TOS doesn't bother me. I know they're making it 50 years later and I would never expect them to use the same look, no matter if it's an iconic look.

 

[BillJ]

Because the ending doesn’t work as it was turned into a different ending for its inclusion in the menagerie, so it’s place in well...let’s call it continuity...only exists in relation to those scenes in the Menagerie. That means any other things that get changed for the series proper, and didn’t appear in the scenes in The Menagerie, can safely be ignored, as from the narrative standpoint, The Cage didn’t happen as shown in the ‘episode’ called the Cage.

I don't see the conflict in the endings? But I'll do a rewatch of the two in the next couple of days to see if I do.

 

[jaime]

I don't see the conflict in the endings? But I'll do a rewatch of the two in the next couple of days to see if I do.

In one they give Vina an illusion of pike. In menagerie the exact same sequence is played, but now it represents the real pike being given an illusion also. The exact same bit of film represents two sets of events.
It's not an outright contradiction as such, but it's clunky as heck.
I thi k they redub some of the Talosian dialogue also?

 

[BillJ]

In one they give Vina an illusion of pike. In menagerie the exact same sequence is played, but now it represents the real pike being given an illusion also. The exact same bit of film represents two sets of events.
It's not an outright contradiction as such, but it's clunky as heck.

That is what I remember. Clunky? Yeah, I'll give you that. It was being reused to save money. Contradictory? I don't see it.

 

[jaime]

That is what I remember. Clunky? Yeah, I'll give you that. It was being reused to save money. Contradictory? I don't see it.

Vina would be having some serious deja vu, or at least be pissed off having spent the last x years living with a lie and now getti g the real one. As it stands, the 'original' version has some bits that don't gel well with trek in general later... Its a first draft.

 

[BillJ]

As it stands, the 'original' version has some bits that don't gel well with trek in general later... Its a first draft.

TOS has bit that don't gel with later Trek, as does early TNG. If they are part of the Prime continuity, I don't really see an argument for excluding "The Cage". Of course, everyone's mileage will vary.

 

[jaime]

TOS has bit that don't gel with later Trek, as does early TNG. If they are part of the Prime continuity, I don't really see an argument for excluding "The Cage". Of course, everyone's mileage will vary.

We lived with it as a curio for twenty years, rather than part of Canon as such, easiest way to fix its cracks is to keep it as it was then. Other things will require more creativity. I won't miss some of the more b movie elements in the cage, personally.

 

[Dukhat]

In one they give Vina an illusion of pike. In menagerie the exact same sequence is played, but now it represents the real pike being given an illusion also. The exact same bit of film represents two sets of events.
It's not an outright contradiction as such, but it's clunky as heck.
I thi k they redub some of the Talosian dialogue also?

You’re absolutely right; the ending does not fit what we see in “The Menagerie.” But that doesn’t make “The Cage” not canon. It just makes it a continuity error.