There is anger though, maybe not from you personally, but it's there throughout the fandom. Browse through the DSC forums and youtube comments, facebook groups and videos. People genuinely are feeling upset and betrayed about this. Why? What could possibly warrant that anger?
This. The longer that I participate in discussion forums and various fan venues the more baffled I become. ... If DSC is that offensive I have to ask-is it worth the emotional energy to be angry at it?
I don't know where exactly either of you is seeing all this anger, but it's not on display in this thread. People in this discussion are expressing dissatisfaction, frustration, puzzlement... but nobody's throwing an angry fit. You're just knocking down a straw man if you insist on discrediting hypothetical people who are being less rational than your actual interlocutors. Why not engage with the more reasonable reactions actually being expressed here?
The last change made no more sense either, not really. People retrospectively justify why it was different then but the fact is it was just as big a deal at the time and no one felt the need to explain it. Why do so now?
Actually, as I've pointed out in other discussions of this same point, after '79
lots of people felt the need to explain it. People offered and debated explanations in fanzines, in reference books, in novels, in RPGs, in comics, and (once it existed) on the internet... for the entire 26 years until someone official took the trouble to explain it
in canon. They did this
because it made no sense on its face, and things that make no sense are irritating and compel efforts at explanation. I don't understand where the idea comes from that everyone in Trek fandom back then was completely copacetic with a big unexplained anomaly sitting in the middle of Trek continuity.
Much the same could be said for the Romulans, the Borg, the Trill, the Tellarites. All of these species have changed appearance at least once without this level of backlash, why do the Klingons generate such a personal and heartfelt response, even though we know it's happened before?
Not really comparable. Changes to the Borg and Trill were fairly subtle, and were also implemented after their very first appearances. Changes to Tellarites have been somewhat more conspicuous (especially the number of fingers), but not enough to make them look like a completely different species, and moreover Tellarites have never been more than background players in Trek. The change to the Romulans (adding forehead ridges) is probably the closest analogy — change for the sake of change, to a major species in Trek lore, which frustratingly makes
no sense in-universe given the backstory that Romulans are derived from Vulcan stock — but is still much less visually egregious, and can be at least partially handwaved away by saying some Romulans have them and some don't. The changes to the Klingons are simply far more drastic than any other instances.
Lots of things are canonical and make no sense, why start now? .... If we want it all to make sense I'm afraid that boat has long passed.
We do want it all to make sense, at least to the same extent as any other fictional construct can and does. Some of us disagree that that ship has sailed, and are unwilling to give up on it — largely because giving up on that ship is equivalent to throwing in the towel on Trek in general.
This. And so much this. I'd rather compl---, er debate the merits of the storytelling rather than what the visual aesthetic is. ... Star Trek had to move the goal posts, to still be futuristic. That's why I can live with the visual changes.
First of all, the two discussions are not mutually exclusive. It's not as if those of us who take issue with the Klingon redesign are unwilling or unable to discuss other aspects of the show (or other concerns in real life). Second, there's really no credible argument that the revamped Klingon designs look more "futuristic" than the previous ones. They look conspicuously
different, that's all. (And IMHO far uglier.)
...My attitude is far more the Klingon Empire is big and likely there are several variations of Klingons, not just TOS smooth foreheads, or all the variations seen in the TOS films, or the TNG era style.
That's my attitude as well, and I think the attitude of most of us who would prefer the Trek universe to make some degree of sense. Of course, it would be nice if the people making the show put something on screen to support or even
acknowledge this perspective. They've had perfect opportunities — a gathering of all 24 houses! a visit to the Klingon homeworld! — but have so far declined to do so.
It's a logical evolution of the design originating in TMP and progressing through the rest of the franchise.
Oh, c'mon, you can't be serious. How are bald egg-shaped heads and an extra set of nostrils in any sense a logical extrapolation of previous Klingon designs?
From that argument, there was no reason to redesign anything. Fundamentally, as an artistic endeavor they are allowed to it, whether the reasoning is "good" or not.
Bing bing bing! You're right — there
was no reason to redesign anything. That's what a lot of us have been saying all along.
Besides, as artistic endeavors go, when you're playing in a pre-existing sandbox, the degree of artistic license you can and should take is unavoidably more constrained than when you're working with original creations. And when the show's creators take that license anyway and attempt to make their own "mark" on the property... well, if they're technically "allowed" to do it by dint of the ownership of that property, we as viewers are at least equally allowed to point out
whether their reasoning is good or not, and whether the results are actually any improvement over what went before.
