I would simply call everything that was intentionally omitted from "The Menagerie" a deleted scene, for "canon" purposes, no more or less valid than any other.
-MMoM
-MMoM
Poll Do you consider Discovery to truly be in the Prime Timeline at this point?
- Thread starter Annorax849
- Start date
I would simply call everything that was intentionally omitted from "The Menagerie" a deleted scene, for "canon" purposes, no more or less valid than any other.
-MMoM
That scene where Vina's beauty was restored and she went off with the illusion of Pike from The Cage could have still happened in canon. It just wasn't shown by The Keeper in his projection during "The Menagerie."
OK, fine...now let's do:
Is V'Ger's cloud over 82 AUs in diameter or only two?
(HINT: it depends whether you're watching on DVD or Blu-ray.)
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, DAMMIT!
-MMoM
Is V'Ger's cloud over 82 AUs in diameter or only two?
(HINT: it depends whether you're watching on DVD or Blu-ray.)
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, DAMMIT!
-MMoM
Last edited:
They reduz the ending. Both versions can’t be canon as such, and only one was transmitted as part of the series run.
Though we did get the Cage in the UK in the nineties rerun of TOS.
I also prefer to treat the theatrical cut of TUC as the canon one, because the home video scenes are effing terrible. Romulan in a secret briefing, plans on a flip chart in the room, colonels....gah.
From a canon perspective, it is both. Canon is just the body of work. Not to be confused with Continuity.
Voyager can travel a thousand light years in a year, the TOS Enterprise can do it in twelve or so hours. Both are canon.
The ambiguity of the term itself is an element of the point I've been (obliquely) getting at, here. To some, it does indeed mean only that which is currently considered to be in continuity, and nothing else. To others it means something broader. Some consider it a category into which things can be brought, and out of which they can be subsequently removed, and vice versa. Some consider it an immutable thing that can never be revoked. Various copyright holders and creative personnel have used it in differing (and sometimes contradictory) ways through Trek's history. I'm not sure any of us here today can say definitively what the current ones' stance on the matter is. And good luck getting a truly straight answer. We're all just giving our interpretations of what it means.
-MMoM
[P.S. -- much the same might be said of "Prime"]
Last edited:
The ambiguity of the term itself is an element of the point I've been (obliquely) getting at, here. To some, it does indeed mean only that which is currently considered to be in continuity, and nothing else. To others it means something broader. Some consider it a category into which things can be brought, and out of which they can be subsequently removed, and vice versa. Some consider it an immutable thing that can never be revoked. Various copyright holders and creative personnel have used it in various (and sometimes contradictory) ways through Trek's history. I'm not sure any of us here today can say definitively what the current ones' stance on the matter is. And good luck getting a truly straight answer.
-MMoM
[P.S. -- much the same might be said of "Prime"]
When in doubt, I just go with the definition...
a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works
Plus, there's a quote from one of the Pocket editors about canon that I can't find at the moment. Pretty much all the live action movies and TV episodes are considered canon by CBS. There's been nothing contradictory from them on this in the intervening years, so I'll work under the assumption that is still the case.
There is also a quote from 2007 from one of the CBS people saying canon is exactly that.
And that's the one I was talking about
^Setting aside the fact that it dates to more than a decade ago, I would point out that by that statement "canon" does indeed mean "continuity." And it doesn't directly address the issue of whether alternate presentations that directly contradict previous ones supersede them where either are concerned at all. Guys, I'm not just talking about "The Cage" here. What about the remastered TOS and TNG? What about the various cuts of TMP and TUC? They can't all be in continuity at the same time. So how can they all be canon at the same time (again, going by that statement)? I don't see how anybody can find such an answer clear and unambiguous with respect to questions like that. It isn't. But personally, I'm OK with that.
I must leave this discussion be for a while, or I shall surely go insane. Apologies if I've rubbed anyone the wrong way. Be well, all!
-MMoM
I must leave this discussion be for a while, or I shall surely go insane. Apologies if I've rubbed anyone the wrong way. Be well, all!
-MMoM
^Setting aside the fact that it dates to more than a decade ago, I would point out that by that statement "canon" does indeed mean "continuity." And it doesn't directly address the issue of whether alternate presentations that directly contradict previous ones supersede them where either are concerned at all. Guys, I'm not just talking about "The Cage" here. What about the remastered TOS and TNG? What about the various cuts of TMP and TUC? They can't all be in continuity at the same time. So how can they all be canon at the same time (again, going by that statement)? I don't see how anybody can find such an answer clear and unambiguous with respect to questions like that. It isn't. But personally, I'm OK with that.
I must leave this discussion be for a while, or I shall surely go insane. Apologies if I've rubbed anyone the wrong way. Be well, all!
-MMoM
The same way that religious writings that give differing descriptions of the same story are still considered part of the same canon.^Setting aside the fact that it dates to more than a decade ago, I would point out that by that statement "canon" does indeed mean "continuity." And it doesn't directly address the issue of whether alternate presentations that directly contradict previous ones supersede them where either are concerned at all. Guys, I'm not just talking about "The Cage" here. What about the remastered TOS and TNG? What about the various cuts of TMP and TUC? They can't all be in continuity at the same time. So how can they all be canon at the same time (again, going by that statement)? I don't see how anybody can find such an answer clear and unambiguous with respect to questions like that. It isn't. But personally, I'm OK with that.
I must leave this discussion be for a while, or I shall surely go insane. Apologies if I've rubbed anyone the wrong way. Be well, all!
-MMoM
Kor
"Canon is Star Trek continuity as presented on TV and Movie screens."
That's unambiguous.
Yes, both the original TOS and the remastered are part of canon.
They are also part of continuity.
Because Trek canon and Trek continuity include contradictions.
They can do that because they're official, but not at all real.
It's not complicated.
It just annoys people.
So what precisely defines continuity then? And of what use is it to speak of TOS being in a different continuity to TNG/DS9/VGR/ENT, or DSC being in a separate one to either? If we can accept both "The Cage" and "The Menagerie" as equally valid despite the contradictions introduced through intentionally manipulating the content of the former to suit the latter, and we can do the same for both the theatrical and director's cuts of TMP, both TOS and TOS-R, and all the other instances of this throughout Trek's history...then why not DSC? That's what annoys and still doesn't make sense to me, despite this whole seemingly-futile rhetorical exercise that I now regret even embarking on...
-MMoM
Last edited:
Uh, no? By that logic you could argue that if an episode mentions the events of a novel that novel becomes canon. The only thing that becomes canon is the thing mentioned or shown, not any additional material like the parts of "The Cage" that weren't shown or the exact events of the novel referenced. Hell, you could even make the argument that stuff like some The Lost Era novels are canon because they are based on events that the show references like the Betraka Nebula Incident or the Tomed Incident. (Though that wouldn't be a very good argument)
Now, the reason "The Cage" is canon is that it was broadcasted in the 80s.
Retroactively that would make the Menagerie a two part clip show. Shudder.
The fact that something appears in a Trek TV series or movie makes it part of continuity.
Trek continuity contradicts itself.
That's a fact, not an opinion.
Similar threads
