We can call it whatever we want. I use Discovery, but someone could use "Dog Turd" if they wanted.
Spock mentions his human mother in "The Corbomite Maneuver".
Spock News
- Thread starter Vger23
- Start date
We can call it whatever we want. I use Discovery, but someone could use "Dog Turd" if they wanted.
Spock mentions his human mother in "The Corbomite Maneuver".
The problems with stories like these (beyond the 50 year difference in the creation of the character and his now secret backstory, which one of the creators is on record as saying Spock has no siblings), is that they almost never live up to the hype such stories generally generate.
Nothing about this feels organic. Nothing about what I've seen makes me think Spock's inclusion is organic to a great story. Spock looks to be the story.
Maybe I'll be wrong.
Nothing about this feels organic. Nothing about what I've seen makes me think Spock's inclusion is organic to a great story. Spock looks to be the story.
Maybe I'll be wrong.
In the past tense to boot. (Or was the bit where she considered herself fortunate the one that was now in the past?)
Spock voluntarily brings up his father here, in the derogative sense. He is then challenged on the issue of his mother. But the point seems to be that his crewmates know nothing about either of these "ancestors", which jibes well with them later being ignorant of Sarek being the actual dad.
Timo Saloniemi
As much as I adore some youtubers who point out Star Trek Discovery (aka DIS, DSC, DISCO, STD, Septic Tank Dirty, etc)'s flaws, they're wrong on this issue.
Look at "The Cage". Unlike "Where No Man Has Gone Before" where Spock is hollering, in the former he's traipsing around the alien environment and grinning over big green plants making sounds similar to the transporter. And hollering later on, jumping over things, screaming "THE WOMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", etc. Enough of a case can be made that Spock did grow over time, which TOS affirms in "Plato's Stepchildren", "Journey to Babel", and others. Enough of a case can be made that Spock wasn't shown much in "The Cage" so there is a lot of creative leeway available.
My guess is they'll probably manage to screw it up royally and win an award for "best dramatic presentation".
Look at "The Cage". Unlike "Where No Man Has Gone Before" where Spock is hollering, in the former he's traipsing around the alien environment and grinning over big green plants making sounds similar to the transporter. And hollering later on, jumping over things, screaming "THE WOMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", etc. Enough of a case can be made that Spock did grow over time, which TOS affirms in "Plato's Stepchildren", "Journey to Babel", and others. Enough of a case can be made that Spock wasn't shown much in "The Cage" so there is a lot of creative leeway available.
My guess is they'll probably manage to screw it up royally and win an award for "best dramatic presentation".
It's going to be STNF then.
I'm not going to use abbreviations shorter than three letters. They become inconclusive. It's therefore STID, or ST:FC, wheras "TWOK" is also perfectly unambigious.
Also: We totally derailed this thread topic. And we're not even 300 pages in!
Yeah. The problem with "The Cages" Spock is that his portrayal there falls under "early installment weirdness":
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EarlyInstallmentWeirdness
Like, his character wasn't that defined at that point. The cold, logical first officer was "Nr. 1" back then, and Spock another character. It should be obvious this isn't his "true" character at that point, like Batman using guns and killing Batman in his very first comic. If they try to put this merry laughing Spock into DIS, all sorts of hell are going to break loose in fanbase.
As I remember it, the Cage was the Pilot right? The pilot being the episode they filmed to show TPTB this is kinda what we want to do. Not much thought had been put into Spock at that point, in fact I remember reading in Nimoy's autobiography that they wanted to scrap him entirely because he looked too much like the devil or some such nonsense but Roddenberry refused and he ended up being the only character to make it over to the actual series.
Nimoy had a LOT to do with Spock's creation once TOS became an actual show. I'm not sure why fans act all confused that he was so different in the cage when the facts are out there that this was just a concept idea.
It's like any form of writing you do, you write the first draft and then revise, revise, revise and what comes out is usually vastly different from the first draft. I watch and enjoy the Cage keeping this in mind and I sure hope the STD writers don't think this needs explaining.
That's 25%. For legal purposes.
If Spock doesn't grin over vibrating plants, I'm officially declaring the show not Prime and posting a long manifesto on the matter. Watch for it.
Which writer is Burnham supposed to be an insert for? How is she virtually flawless? Because that's what "Mary Sue" actually means.
Yeah, I'm not getting that vibe either. Mary Sues are supposed to be perfect, and loved by everyone, both of which Burnham clearly is not.
^Yeah, Mary Sues generally aren't portrayed as royal fuckups from page one, are they?
That reminds me, did anyone ever bring up after that DSC episode with the name I can never spell right ("Something about a Bell Pepper"?) that those blue vibrating plants on Talos that made Spock lose his cool and those blue vibrating plants on Pahvo that made Saru lose his cool might in fact be...one and the same type of blue vibrating plant? I always meant to raise that point at the time, but forgot. Coincidence? Intentional?
I disagree. And if the intent is to show backstory and expand lore, that has nothing to do with "standing on your own". It's kind of a nonsense argument from that perspective.
It's a refreshing change from the standard "new ship new crew new setting" approach that was worn thin.
The "Spock had no siblings" thing went out the window in 1989. And I think that Michael is a better, more believable character that works better as Spock's sibling then Sybok did.
Reading this thread, I don't know that I agree with the definition of revision that has cropped up over the course of this discussion, particularly concerning Burnham and her relationship to Spock. Revisionism would be to revise, to change extant detail.
What the writers so far have done is infill, or provide new detail that fills in blanks without contradicting existing detail. The two are very separate, and Burnham as a character is firmly invention, not revision.
ETA: The creator's intent also shouldn't generally matter here. It's not germane to what's on screen. If it were, we'd have to accept that Spock is related to, say, a flamingo, if a writer had ever said that or some other nonsense. A principle of criticism tends to be that authorial intent is immaterial to content presented.
What the writers so far have done is infill, or provide new detail that fills in blanks without contradicting existing detail. The two are very separate, and Burnham as a character is firmly invention, not revision.
ETA: The creator's intent also shouldn't generally matter here. It's not germane to what's on screen. If it were, we'd have to accept that Spock is related to, say, a flamingo, if a writer had ever said that or some other nonsense. A principle of criticism tends to be that authorial intent is immaterial to content presented.
I can actually imagine Amanda (Spock's mom) wanting a lot of kids. (she just seems like the type)
Knowing that she and Sarek would probably have a hard time creating any on their own, she probably pushed him to adopt as many as they could.
I can even imagine her treating Sybok as her own and perhaps was the one that accidentally started him on his crazy crusade.
That could also be a reason why Spock took on Saavik & Valaris, to honor his mom.
I bet she and Sarek sponsored a shit-ton of kids through the years.
Knowing that she and Sarek would probably have a hard time creating any on their own, she probably pushed him to adopt as many as they could.
I can even imagine her treating Sybok as her own and perhaps was the one that accidentally started him on his crazy crusade.
That could also be a reason why Spock took on Saavik & Valaris, to honor his mom.
I bet she and Sarek sponsored a shit-ton of kids through the years.
Last edited:
In terms of abbreviations, three letters max: TOS, TAS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT.
I do not care if you like STD, DSC, or DIS, but keep it to three. Personally, I like DSC best.
As for Spock, we will have to see. The story is the anomalies in my view. Looks like adult Spock won't make an appearance for a while into the season, so I doubt he becomes the story.
I do not care if you like STD, DSC, or DIS, but keep it to three. Personally, I like DSC best.
As for Spock, we will have to see. The story is the anomalies in my view. Looks like adult Spock won't make an appearance for a while into the season, so I doubt he becomes the story.
You mean in the same way that Spock told Uhura "Vulcan has no moon..." in TOS S1 - "The Man Trap" yet in ST:TMP (overseen by the great bird GR himself) in 1979, we get this shot of Vulcan:
^^^
Tell, me what are those TWO things in the upper right corner?
Whenever I see Vulcan's moons in TMP, I see pineapple and a cherry.
As far as I'm concerned TMP overrules "The Man Trap". I believe what I see not what I hear. And sometimes Pluto is a planet, sometimes it's a moon. So maybe in 2266 Vulcan's moon was a planet -- and what the Hell am I talking about?
Now I got dragged into a canon debate about Vulcan's moons!
As far as I'm concerned TMP overrules "The Man Trap". I believe what I see not what I hear. And sometimes Pluto is a planet, sometimes it's a moon. So maybe in 2266 Vulcan's moon was a planet -- and what the Hell am I talking about?
Now I got dragged into a canon debate about Vulcan's moons!
Similar threads
- Poll
- Sticky
