News Discovery and Trek Continuity

[DSG2k]

They are not a separate continuity, because the screen continuity is already part of their continuity

And this is where you are fundamentally mistaken. Spin-offs don't control the canon. Your argument is that CBS licensing and Pocket Books actually controlled Star Trek continuity because they've made an expanded one (or "ones") that expanded on, referenced, and interpreted the live-action works.

That is wrong, and is part of why acknowledgement of rank is so critical to properly understanding things. Just as you shouldn't accept the words of the school janitor as the final word about what is or isn't school policy, so it is that you must properly recognize who's in charge of what with respect to Star Trek.

Back in the day the seat of Star Trek power was in Rick Berman's office. Now it is in Kurtzman's. Both are outranked by assorted corporate suits, to be sure, but this is generally true.

The ranking of continuities follows the same logic. Pocket Books and the gang at licensing may have their own little 'overall continuity' going but it doesn't control the primary production continuity any more than someone's headcanon which might include a fanfic can control the Pocket Books continuity it includes as part of a 'super-duper-continuity'.

That is too say, you are arguing for this:

But because you're ignoring rank you don't recognize that this is just as valid, by your argument:

Monday and Tuesday on screen, Wednesday was a book, Thursday was on screen again.

Don't you understand that by adding a new story about Wednesday you just changed the whole week?

(Of course, that pretends that the books are so narrow in focus, which is seldom if ever the case.)

What can happen here is...everything between Nemesis and the new Picard show happened in the books, then the new Picard show becomes the Thursday in my example. (Unless of course they do adapt Destiny. Then it becomes retelling of Wednesday.) It does not transmite into a third continuity, it is simply a continuation of continuity already in place for a number of years.

You are merely saying that the existing Destiny continuity can be overwritten, but missing the point that it exists as a thing that would be changed.

Similarly, Picard had a future in the live-action-only canon, whatever it was to be.

Now this new mixed continuity where Picard has a different past that includes books and comics events will write a different one.

That's Tuvix, in a nutshell.

I have already established how easy it is for STO to adjust itself to the new approach.

So? STO isn't referenced by Kurtzman.

 

[DigificWriter]

Kurtzman disagrees, and does so in his official capacity as Discovery Exec Producer and the proverbial Great Bird of CBS Trek.

No, he doesn't.

Numerous people have explained to you exactly how and why you are reading much more into what he said than is actually there.

His long-held opinion that the books and comics are or are to be treated as canon is now the apparent law of the CBS Trek land.

Again, you are incorrect in making that statement, and numerous people have exp!aimed to you exactly how and why such is the case.

 

[jaime]

And this is where you are fundamentally mistaken. Spin-offs don't control the canon. Your argument is that CBS licensing and Pocket Books actually controlled Star Trek continuity because they've made an expanded one (or "ones") that expanded on, referenced, and interpreted the live-action works.

That is wrong, and is part of why acknowledgement of rank is so critical to properly understanding things. Just as you shouldn't accept the words of the school janitor as the final word about what is or isn't school policy, so it is that you must properly recognize who's in charge of what with respect to Star Trek.

Back in the day the seat of Star Trek power was in Rick Berman's office. Now it is in Kurtzman's. Both are outranked by assorted corporate suits, to be sure, but this is generally true.

The ranking of continuities follows the same logic. Pocket Books and the gang at licensing may have their own little 'overall continuity' going but it doesn't control the primary production continuity any more than someone's headcanon which might include a fanfic can control the Pocket Books continuity it includes as part of a 'super-duper-continuity'.

That is too say, you are arguing for this:

But because you're ignoring rank you don't recognize that this is just as valid, by your argument:

Don't you understand that by adding a new story about Wednesday you just changed the whole week?

(Of course, that pretends that the books are so narrow in focus, which is seldom if ever the case.)



You are merely saying that the existing Destiny continuity can be overwritten, but missing the point that it exists as a thing that would be changed.

Similarly, Picard had a future in the live-action-only canon, whatever it was to be.

Now this new mixed continuity where Picard has a different past that includes books and comics events will write a different one.

That's Tuvix, in a nutshell.



So? STO isn't referenced by Kurtzman.

Nope.
The spin offs were the only continuity in town for a long time. That’s not a power/conqueror relationship.
It’s more a keeping the seat warm thing.
If the screen then keeps that continuity in place then...nothing will change.
If not, then meh I am not fussed.

 

[DSG2k]

The spin offs were the only continuity in town for a long time.

Even if there was never to be live-action Trek again, then provided the old canon policy was not countermanded by someone of adequate rank then the books still wouldn't have been part of the canon continuity.

 

[jaime]

Even if there was never to be live-action Trek again, then provided the old canon policy was not countermanded by someone of adequate rank then the books still wouldn't have been part of the canon continuity.

Absolutely.
This whole discussion is that someone may have done just though.
It’s happened in places before...Imzadi is the inspiration for the future seen in All Good Things for example.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Thus far, Star Trek novels have contributed Sulu and Uhura's first names to Trek and a space station design used in TOS-R. Thus, it's a fairly safe bet that Disco S2 will use the novelverse's name for Number One. Which is... Una Something?

 

[XCV330]

Thus far, Star Trek novels have contributed Sulu and Uhura's first names to Trek and a space station design used in TOS-R. Thus, it's a fairly safe bet that Disco S2 will use the novelverse's name for Number One. Which is... Una Something?

the novels gave us some other stuff in Discovery, though i think its more of a collaborative effort. Nothing major, just little things like only Connie crews get the color coded uniforms at this point. I'm betting that Una is the final name too.

 

[DSG2k]

Numerous people have explained to you exactly how and why you are reading much more into what he said than is actually there.

Again, you are incorrect in making that statement, and numerous people have exp!aimed to you exactly how and why such is the case.

Multiple people expressing disagreement or displeasure doesn't make a point wrong.

The counterargument you reference to my reading comprehension of what he said is the strongest counter, and it basically says I am reimagining what he said into some high-level legalistic jargon. However, that's also the weakest counterargument, because (a) it takes extremely basic reading comprehension and tries to recast it as some sort of Vulcan symbolic logic instead of the basic obviousness it is, and (b) it presents Kurtzman as some sort of idiot who has a stroke and starts spouting nonsense whenever someone asks him about the canonicity of the books.

It's trivially easy to say the books aren't canon, or to couch it in gentler terms that sugarcoat the point. He doesn't say that.

Beyond the words themselves is what it all means vis-à-vis a new CBS continuity. Again, I haven't seen any argument meaningfully address that point. Jamie's confusing approach took some time to parse down to its nuts and bolts but, in the end, is based on question-begging and fundamental disagreement on rank issues.

This thread has only reinforced my opinion, in other words. I have put the argument to other groups in the hopes of a hole in the logic being found but so far this has been the site of the greatest resistance.

I still feel bad for forgetting the plant, though.

Thanks for your help.

 

[jaime]

Thus far, Star Trek novels have contributed Sulu and Uhura's first names to Trek and a space station design used in TOS-R. Thus, it's a fairly safe bet that Disco S2 will use the novelverse's name for Number One. Which is... Una Something?

It’s funny how close the novels came to the Klingon explanation too...I have half a memory of a line about how a ‘genetic purge’ had led to bumpy head Klingons becoming dominant in Klingon society somewhere in the early TNG novels. Which is very very close to something that makes sense next to the augment storyline.

 

[Tuskin38]

Multiple people expressing disagreement or displeasure doesn't make a point wrong.

The counterargument you reference to my reading comprehension of what he said is the strongest counter, and it basically says I am reimagining what he said into some high-level legalistic jargon. However, that's also the weakest counterargument, because (a) it takes extremely basic reading comprehension and tries to recast it as some sort of Vulcan symbolic logic instead of the basic obviousness it is, and (b) it presents Kurtzman as some sort of idiot who has a stroke and starts spouting nonsense whenever someone asks him about the canonicity of the books.

It's trivially easy to say the books aren't canon, or to couch it in gentler terms that sugarcoat the point. He doesn't say that.

Beyond the words themselves is what it all means vis-à-vis a new CBS continuity. Again, I haven't seen any argument meaningfully address that point. Jamie's confusing approach took some time to parse down to its nuts and bolts but, in the end, is based on question-begging and fundamental disagreement on rank issues.

This thread has only reinforced my opinion, in other words. I have put the argument to other groups in the hopes of a hole in the logic being found but so far this has been the site of the greatest resistance.

I still feel bad for forgetting the plant, though.

Thanks for your help.

The fact no-one or almost no-one here agrees with you, probably means you did misunderstand Kurtzman.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Thus far, Star Trek novels have contributed Sulu and Uhura's first names to Trek and a space station design used in TOS-R. Thus, it's a fairly safe bet that Disco S2 will use the novelverse's name for Number One. Which is... Una Something?

Number One has had like three or four different names over the years.

Not as many as, say, the Romulan Commander from "The Enterprise Incident", but close.

 

[Agony_Boothb]

I always viewed the novels as the stuff the crew did on the weekend or between the adventures we saw on tv.

 

[DigificWriter]

Multiple people expressing disagreement or displeasure doesn't make a point wrong.

The counterargument you reference to my reading comprehension of what he said is the strongest counter, and it basically says I am reimagining what he said into some high-level legalistic jargon. However, that's also the weakest counterargument, because (a) it takes extremely basic reading comprehension and tries to recast it as some sort of Vulcan symbolic logic instead of the basic obviousness it is, and (b) it presents Kurtzman as some sort of idiot who has a stroke and starts spouting nonsense whenever someone asks him about the canonicity of the books.

It's trivially easy to say the books aren't canon, or to couch it in gentler terms that sugarcoat the point. He doesn't say that.

Beyond the words themselves is what it all means vis-à-vis a new CBS continuity. Again, I haven't seen any argument meaningfully address that point. Jamie's confusing approach took some time to parse down to its nuts and bolts but, in the end, is based on question-begging and fundamental disagreement on rank issues.

This thread has only reinforced my opinion, in other words. I have put the argument to other groups in the hopes of a hole in the logic being found but so far this has been the site of the greatest resistance.

I still feel bad for forgetting the plant, though.

Thanks for your help.

I'd like to hear Trek tie-in authors @Christopher and @Greg Cox weigh in on this topic, because I have a very strong suspicion that their comments would be in line with what has been the general fact-based consensus that Kurtzman's comments do not mean what you think they mean.

 

[DSG2k]

I'd like to hear Trek tie-in authors @Christopher and @Greg Cox weigh in on this topic, because I have a very strong suspicion that their comments would be in line with what has been the general fact-based consensus that Kurtzman's comments do not mean what you think they mean.

The facts are as I have laid them out. Anyone is welcome to agree or disagree as they're moved to do so. As for your continued insistence that there is an opposing consensus (which one would expect in the Discovery forum this was moved to anyway), I had an uphill climb before to have my CanonWars.com opinions recognized as common knowledge (e.g. as the basis of the Trek canon article on Wikipedia, the facts about the Star Wars canon, et cetera), so even if your opposing consensus existed it wouldn't bug me a bit.

Any new statements they'd like to make can be added into the mix, but they don't outrank the new Great Bird of CBS.

 

[DigificWriter]

The facts are as I have laid them out.

They're not, though; all you have to support your assertion is two comments from Kurtzman that you have interpreted in a certain way; myself and others have interpreted those comments differently in keeping with what we know has been the case regarding Star Trek Canon and Star Trek tie-in media and is largely still the case, and it is my belief that both Christopher and Greg Cox, two people who are going to be intimately familiar with what is official Star Trek canon policy because of the nature of what they do as tie-in fiction writers, would make statements consistent with the "general consensus" that Kurtzman has not suddenly radically changed Canon policy in the manner you keep claiming that he has.

You are clearly determined to see things how you want to see them, though, facts be damned.

 

[DSG2k]

They're not, though; all you have to support your assertion is two comments from Kurtzman that you have interpreted in a certain way

They are not reasonably interpreted any other way. "He doesn't really mean what he's said with seeming consistency over ten years" is not an argument. It is wishful thinking.

myself and others have interpreted those comments differently in keeping with what we know has been the case

Oh yes, I am well aware of that. It's the same reasoning that kept some people arguing for years that Lucas believed the EU was canon despite repeated statements on his part that it was a parallel universe. They refused to accept that the cat with the highest rank made the actual rules, so engaged in increasingly absurd reimaginings of Lucas's words into something that would kinda-sorta fit their preconceived notions based on the statements of those with lesser rank.

You're arguing based on an old idea of canon from the Berman era. There is, pardon the use of the term, no continuity between Berman's team and Kurtzman's team.

In effect, if the proverbial Star Trek office is a ship, then it was mothballed for awhile but now has a totally new crew aboard. You're judging the content of its new captain's hails by what you've heard the old captain and crew say.

Indeed, that brings up your other best option. The first is to stop your current line of argument (which is basically to repeat that I am wrong over and over) and actually bring the goods by going to find a Kurtzman quote where he says the books are non-canon.

Your other best bet is to hope that my references to a "Star Trek office" led by Kurtzman are wrong, and that while Kurtzman leads the audiovisual production side of things he couldn't tell Licensing what to do if he tried. If the Licensing Trek overseer and Kurtzman both report to the same shadowy figure, then *that* is the person you want to hear from. That is how rank works.

Of course, the flaw in that plan is that even if CBS officially still considers the books and comics non-canon, that still doesn't change the situation for the 'renegade' Discovery production.

it is my belief that both Christopher and Greg Cox, two people who are going to be intimately familiar with what is official Star Trek canon policy because of the nature of what they do as tie-in fiction writers

They would be expert witnesses familiar with the operating rules they work under. That means they will know precisely what their editors say and what the Licensing liaison says (formerly Paula Block, but I am not up to date on the who's who or even if it is still under CBS Consumer Products (if I even remember that name correctly)).

However, as per Block's past comments, the Licensing and licensee rules didn't always necessarily follow the last-known-good policies of the Star Trek office, when it even existed. Sometimes they went their own way. Certainly the 'new' novel continuity push reflects that, to some extent.

In short, it wouldn't surprise me if the idea that books are canon to the CBS productions hasn't exactly been the subject of an excited conference call. I'd imagine they're aware of Ted Sullivan's Twitter comment about a particular Discovery book being regarded as canon amongst the writers, but I rather doubt there has been a memo from Kurtzman's office congratulating Pocket Books people on the elevation of their works.

You are clearly determined to see things how you want to see them, though, facts be damned.

Well, at least we share an opinion, albeit about one another.

 

[DigificWriter]

^ I'm done talking to you, because your insistence in this regard is starting to blur the lines between opinion and believing in "alternative facts".

 

[DSG2k]

^ I'm done talking to you, because your insistence in this regard is starting to blur the lines between opinion and believing in "alternative facts".

Sorry, I was trying to encourage you with my suggestions of how to achieve your goal (a contrary quote or info on the inner workings), but I guess that backfired.

Be of good cheer . . . no one at any other location I have posted this to has helped more than you and the folks here, no matter which direction their local consensus took.

Thanks again.

 

[Dar70]

So Kirk and Crews meeting with the X-Men and planet of the Apes are part of Canon now...??? Cool....

 

[Tuskin38]

Sorry, I was trying to encourage you with my suggestions of how to achieve your goal (a contrary quote or info on the inner workings), but I guess that backfired.

Be of good cheer . . . no one at any other location I have posted this to has helped more than you and the folks here, no matter which direction their local consensus took.

Thanks again.

Why are you finding it so hard believe that you might be wrong?