I don't see how that relates to my question at all. That DSC is an inferior show to TOS doesn't mean that every single piece of data within it is inferior or less correct than one from TOS.
USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?
- Thread starter EJD1984
- Start date
I don't see how that relates to my question at all. That DSC is an inferior show to TOS doesn't mean that every single piece of data within it is inferior or less correct than one from TOS.
Well, from what I understand Serveaux said that the writing/dialogue in Discovery is bad hence why he finds it easier to ignore it, as opposed to dialogue/writing from TOS.
I may of course have misunderstood Servaux so if I'm misrepresenting you I'm sorry about that.
Ah, the unanswerable question. I guess it comes back to Spock’s line about having faith.
Agreed. Those young minds and fresh ideas in TSFS were building on the successes of the previous generation, not trying to rewrite them. Breaking the Enterprise’s speed records doesn’t mean that those records were never set in the first place...
Unless...
Which it is. A different visual continuity. It doesn’t make sense unless you believe that it’s TOS.
And the theme for s2 is set up.
Well, that's the intent behind it, but I see no reason why we should definitely accept that over rationalizing the view contradictory visual elements.
Well, what I'm saying that since I don't think the show's very good I have no reason to try to accommodate any inconsistencies it introduces. I mean, I watched about 50% of it last year. Who gives a fuck what it contradicts.
Generally speaking, I don't think it's important to reconcile inconsistencies even in the Trek I do like - the things were made over more than half a century, they're fiction, they're not consistent, who cares?
From what I've seen, there's no big narrative inconsistency between Enterprise, STD and the 24th century shows. There are some visual inconsistencies. But the only thing that sticks out as not belonging, now, are TOS and the movies based on it - so it's simplest to recognize that they were never written to fit into a larger narrative that would span thousands of characters and hundreds of years of faux history.
Every Trek fron TNG onward more or less was conceived to do just that. It started the moment that Roddenberry (or the folks who preceded him on the new Trek, like Greg Strangis) said "These stories take place a century after Star Trek, and this is how things are then."
This is why it's a matter of straightforward observation that TOS and the rest of Trek are distinct from one another while acknowledging that the creators of the latter try to backfit it to TOS - but that in fact they are never committed to that when they consider that a present story demand requires an exception or the provision of an extraordinarily strained and implausible rationalization.
The TNGVerse is a kind of rolling reboot - it has to eventually* run over much of the TOS timeline and at some point there will be revised looks at Picard's era, etc.
(By "eventually" I mean, of course, "Real Soon.").
There are two creation stories in Genesis. Later, redactors stitched them together and now it’s hard to pull them apart.
And western civilization slouches forward in spite of the inconsistencies.
Well, according to myth, the earth was created in six days, so there’s your answer.Now ask Star Trek fans which is more important
At least until such time as DSC or another reboot contradicts that.
If I were going to try and rationalise it in-universe, I think I'd just say DSC is the post-ENT Temporal war timeline. Maybe something like TOS happened in the past of TNG, or ENT, but the details differ. The ENT in the past of Disco had no Augment Virus, for example.
But more and more I think of Trek as a collection of real-life series' and movies, no more linked than other franchise adaptations. The TOS Enterprise is Christopher Reeve, the Kelvin universe version is Henry Cavill and the Disco version is... whoever it is that plays Superman in Supergirl.
^Bingo.
I understand why fans want things to fit together, but I really don't get why anyone would worry about what CBS says is canon. Without a creator like Roddenberry in charge, it just becomes a series of business decisions made by an ever-changing cast of random people. What's canon today may not be tomorrow if there's money to be made from it, just like with Star Wars. Why invest any emotional energy into it?
I understand why fans want things to fit together, but I really don't get why anyone would worry about what CBS says is canon. Without a creator like Roddenberry in charge, it just becomes a series of business decisions made by an ever-changing cast of random people. What's canon today may not be tomorrow if there's money to be made from it, just like with Star Wars. Why invest any emotional energy into it?
By that argument, why bother at all? GR conducted business decisions as well, and almost abandoned TOS when ratings were down.
Roddenberry would do this very thing himself, let alone new showrunners. He was no more or less saintly than CBS.
As long as it looks something like this, I'm good.
I used to believe that was a good rule of thumb, then THIS happened.
Words cannot express my joy at just how reserved the Discoprise redesign is compared to what could have been.
Sure, both of those are valid point of views.
That's a good way to think about it.
It could be a lot worse. About 15 years ago there was a design floating around on the internet, possibly from Germany, that made the Enterprise look almost like a Thanksgiving turkey. It was green linear on a black background and revolved, almost like on a rotisserie. Anyone else remember that thing?
Isn't that the Enterprise-D?
I totally agree. I just find it interesting that the strongest argument for DSC being in the same universe as TOS is essentially the belief that it is so, versus the scientific approach of coming to conclusions based on visual evidence.
This should be reflected in DSC in s2 with the whole “science versus belief” theme they want to address
It's a TV show, a fiction based one at that, not a science experiment. Not sure the scientific method applies. Fiction is mutable that's why it's not a science.I totally agree. I just find it interesting that the strongest argument for DSC being in the same universe as TOS is essentially the belief that it is so, versus the scientific approach of coming to conclusions based on visual evidence.
This should be reflected in DSC in s2 with the whole “science versus belief” theme they want to address
Similar threads
