Star Wars I-III, Gotham, and DSC: a study in prequels (and how DSC isn’t a TOS prequel?)

[Groppler Zorn]

Ah, shit, I hoped I could keep up answering with smilies I don't think Spock actually planned that, but you never know.

That was some on point smiley game

Mirror O’Brien approves...

Well, she did at the end of Discovery. She was against blowing up Qo'noS while Sarek was in favor of it, and it turned out to end the war anyway, without commiting genocide. Although helping to destryo Qo'noS would have probably make her more famous than the alternative.

Dang that’s true I forgot about that. I mean, I still have issues with holding the whole population hostage (seems a bit terrorist-y still) but I’m more worried that Sarek was all for genocide. His logic escaped me there. But then he was the tactical genius who told Michael to do a Han Solo and blast the Klingons in the face first. So I suppose there is a common theme with Sarek and his kids - he tells them to do things, they do the opposite, and they (mostly) go on to great things.

Well, it's probably to early to already compare the two, after all Spock had 133 years to do cool shit and Burnham had like one and a half (9 months of which were skipped by time travel). For what little time she had she also played a major part in changing the mirror universe by kidnapping their Empress and she ended a Klingon War. That is not bad for a year and a half. I for example only ended a Cardassian War in that time, so she already outdid me

That’s also true. Although Spock managed to end the Terran Empire without even visiting it... hehe

In all seriousness I hope Michael goes on to bigger and better things in s2 and beyond. Or they come up with a great reason why we never heard of them again. A bit like the Denobulans - DSC can deal with them too while they’re at it!

Or just don't say that it was a dream at all

That means accepting Star Trek V as being part of the continuity. I can get on board with TAS and the holodeck rec room and personal forcefields and pink tribbles, the Melbourne morphing into an excelsior class ship, senator Cretak looking totally different in all of her appearances (as well as Neral, and Daimon Bok too). But “the final frontier”? No, sorry. That’s “planet forbidden!”

I’m just kidding I actually don’t mind STV in small doses. Row row row row row your boat and all. It’s a good TOS story

 

[BillJ]

But then he was the tactical genius who told Michael to do a Han Solo and blast the Klingons in the face first.

I really think, looking back, where I knew the show was in trouble for me. "I'm going to tell you how the Vulcans beat the Klingons, but don't you use it!", to a person with PTSD over the Klingons.

It made no sense.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

I really think, looking back, where I knew the show was in trouble for me. "I'm going to tell you how the Vulcans beat the Klingons, but don't you use it!", to a person with PTSD over the Klingons.

It made no sense.

It did seem rather... illogical for a Vulcan.

The way that Michael described it as “peace with the Klingons” was odd to me as well. I didn’t realise the Vulcans made peace with the Klingons. And from Sarek’s description they simply found a way to “speak the Klingons’ language” as it were. Yet Archer tried similar things a century previously and the Klingons told him to shove it.

I guess that’s why Sarek is a diplomat (diplomats were derided by Spock in TUC member... ) and not a tactician - and an XO shouldn’t really be heading off the bridge in an emergency to call her dad. But it is what it is I suppose.

 

[BillJ]

...and an XO shouldn’t really be heading off the bridge in an emergency to call her dad. But it is what it is I suppose.

God, I remember the anguished cries when Uhura followed Spock off the bridge in Star Trek (2009).

 

[Robert April]

You're technically correct, he has an adopted sister.

That needs to be said in Nimoy's voice and picturing Spock circa ST V...

 

[Jinn]

That was some on point smiley game

Mirror O’Brien approves...

Aaaand, we're back to talking about the MU

Dang that’s true I forgot about that. I mean, I still have issues with holding the whole population hostage (seems a bit terrorist-y still)

Yup, I agree, I hope they find a way to... not do that anymore next season.

but I’m more worried that Sarek was all for genocide. His logic escaped me there.

Well, I assume that Sarek himself never really had contact with the Klingons, just read about them in databases etc. From that he got a (maybe skewed) impresion of the whole death over dishonor thing which is supported by the Vulcan-Klingon first contact and later engagement stuff. You can't defeat a Klingon, they'll want revenge. You must kill them, otherwise you'll pay for it. There's an interesting similarity to a plot point in the Errand of Vengeance trilogy (TOS novels, set before "Errand of Mercy"). In that trilogy we learn that the Klingons have considered the inconclusive nature of the Battle of Donatu V as meaning that this conflict didn't end and all their actions after are basically them continuing that battle that the Federation thought of as a one and done. That's the sort of mentality that the Federation in Discovery seems to know about. So from their point of view destroying Qo'noS was, to some extent, the logical option. Plus, if you'd ask the average Klingon citizen on the street if they'd rather be held hostage by Federation petaQs or go down in a big explosion, what would they do? This could be a rationaliziation for Sarek to approve of genocide. "The Klingons would have wanted it that way", or at least what he thinks of the Klingons after reading some database. Combine that with the existantial threat to the Federation, his three children, his wife and also himself and I don't find his actions that unlikely anymore. Of course he then learns his lesson and goes on to be more TOS Sarek-y.

But then he was the tactical genius who told Michael to do a Han Solo and blast the Klingons in the face first.

You forgot the latest retcon, he told Michael to do a Greedo, but not fail

So I suppose there is a common theme with Sarek and his kids - he tells them to do things, they do the opposite, and they (mostly) go on to great things.

Quality parenting I guess

That’s also true. Although Spock managed to end the Terran Empire without even visiting it... hehe

That is pretty badass!

In all seriousness I hope Michael goes on to bigger and better things in s2 and beyond.

I just remembered that she saved the multiverse I guess she's more important than Spock after all, although this seems like the type of thing you don't want your general public to know about. Then again Spock stopped a thread to this universe or a galaxy to, so for the Federation the outcome would have been the same... I think they're about even. And next season they can totally figure out what the red dots are!

Or they come up with a great reason why we never heard of them again.

I feel the need for a "Discovery crew: Where are they now?" thread... But maybe after another season or three.

A bit like the Denobulans - DSC can deal with them too while they’re at it!

The Denobulans are in synch with the spore network and all had a collective heart attack whenever Discovery jumped. Whoops.

That means accepting Star Trek V as being part of the continuity. I can get on board with TAS and the holodeck rec room and personal forcefields and pink tribbles, the Melbourne morphing into an excelsior class ship, senator Cretak looking totally different in all of her appearances (as well as Neral, and Daimon Bok too). But “the final frontier”? No, sorry. That’s “planet forbidden!”

I’m just kidding I actually don’t mind STV in small doses. Row row row row row your boat and all. It’s a good TOS story

I remember watching it as a kid and finding it very campy fun.

 

[dahj]

I remember watching it as a kid and finding it very campy fun.

 

[Jinn]

That's the way I wanna go. Not with bang, not with applause, but with a "bonk".

 

[dahj]

That's the way I wanna go. Not with bang, not with applause, but with a "bonk".

You'd be right at home on Miri's World

 

[jaime]

That's the way I wanna go. Not with bang, not with applause, but with a "bonk".

That’s what Kirk wanted I hear. I had no idea he was a closet Anglophile though.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Everything I know about Polk I learned from “how I met your mother”

But I’m guessing he wasn’t recently created as part of a revisionist history of US presidents?

History isn't being revised by DISCO, we're just reading a different chapter.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

History isn't being revised by DISCO, we're just reading a different chapter.

No it’s not

But to continue with the presidential analogy, if you picked up a history book and it named a previously unheard of US president that appeared in no other history books anywhere (even though nothing precluded the existence of such a president), you’d want more evidence of that “new” president than just that one book.

So, we might yet get more evidence of Michael Burnham in the upcoming Star Trek series.

Then again we might not and we’d just have this odd book that referenced a president not mentioned anywhere else in the history of presidents.

 

[CorporalClegg]

No it’s not

But to continue with the presidential analogy, if you picked up a history book and it named a previously unheard of US president that appeared in no other history books anywhere (even though nothing precluded the existence of such a president), you’d want more evidence of that “new” president than just that one book.

So, we might yet get more evidence of Michael Burnham in the upcoming Star Trek series.

Then again we might not and we’d just have this odd book that referenced a president not mentioned anywhere else in the history of presidents.

But that's not how it works. It's not a president who has never appeared in history books. It's a president who's never appeared in history books you've read.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

But that's not how it works. It's not a president who has never appeared in history books. It's a president who's never appeared in history books you've read.

Agreed. And in such a scenario I’d want to read more books that contained details about said president to see where they fit into history outside of the confines of one single text

 

[Nerys Myk]

No it’s not

But to continue with the presidential analogy, if you picked up a history book and it named a previously unheard of US president that appeared in no other history books anywhere (even though nothing precluded the existence of such a president), you’d want more evidence of that “new” president than just that one book.

So, we might yet get more evidence of Michael Burnham in the upcoming Star Trek series.

Then again we might not and we’d just have this odd book that referenced a president not mentioned anywhere else in the history of presidents.

Fiction doesn't work that way. Information is added and that information becomes part of the past, present and future. Trek is full of one off "greats". The number of mentions is irrelevant to their place in Trek's fictional history.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Fiction doesn't work that way. Information is added and that information becomes part of the past, present and future. Trek is full of one off "greats". The number of mentions is irrelevant to their place in Trek's fictional history.

Agreed. It is what it is I suppose

And as you say nothing has been overwritten by adding Michael to the canon, so let’s see where she takes us.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Agreed. And in such a scenario I’d want to read more books that contained details about said president to see where they fit into history outside of the confines of one single text

Put it this way: I'd bet a good fair number of all the books ever written on John Adams never mention Quincy. Similarly, I would say most kids in the US learn about John by first or second grade, but never learn about Quincy until middle or even high school.

And it's entirely possible to further study JQA and learn of his importance - not just as president but also a diplomat - and come to understand that he too was a pretty big deal. But doing so in no way diminishes his JA's role as one of the most significant figureheads in US history.

 

[Groppler Zorn]

Put it this way: I'd bet a good fair number of all the books ever written on John Adams never mention Quincy. Similarly, I would say most kids in the US learn about John by first or second grade, but never learn about Quincy until middle or even high school.

And it's entirely possible to further study JQA and learn of his importance - not just as president but also a diplomat - and come to understand that he too was a pretty big deal. But doing so in no way diminishes his JA's role as one of the most significant figureheads in US history.

That’s an interesting take on this analogy.

I suppose it comes back to the overarching impact of Spock (at least in-universe). I’d wager that Spock is the John Adams of this analogy for students in the 24th century.

 

[jaime]

Fiction doesn't work that way. Information is added and that information becomes part of the past, present and future. Trek is full of one off "greats". The number of mentions is irrelevant to their place in Trek's fictional history.

There’s fiddly ways of making such things fit though. Find a name or event mentioned elsewhere, and then attach them with a bit of tinkering. Stand them next to existing characters we have only seen or heard of a small amount. It’s basically the lighter touch version of what they have done...but they went in heavy, making her Spocks sister etc. If, for instance, they had made her part of an exchange program headed up by T’Pau, it could have worked just as well, but been a lighter touch. Give her a flashback to giving T’Pring a bloody nose or something.

 

[jaime]

Put it this way: I'd bet a good fair number of all the books ever written on John Adams never mention Quincy. Similarly, I would say most kids in the US learn about John by first or second grade, but never learn about Quincy until middle or even high school.

And it's entirely possible to further study JQA and learn of his importance - not just as president but also a diplomat - and come to understand that he too was a pretty big deal. But doing so in no way diminishes his JA's role as one of the most significant figureheads in US history.

As a non American, you could now start discussing President Ronald McDonald, and he would seem as real. Which is apt considering the discussion.
You honestly may as well make some of these guys up, because some of us have no idea who you are talking about. I though Quincy was a medical examiner dude.