News Discovery and Trek Continuity
- Thread starter DSG2k
- Start date
- Status
Hearsay didn't imply misquotation. Hearsay refers to the reporting of what someone else has said, rather than what is known first hand to the reporter. It is direct evidence that the person said it, rather than direct evidence of the facts included. Part of the reason it is considered weaker than first hand evidence is that it is, as this thread aptly demonstrates, open to wide interpretation.
The 2018 quote places the novels and comics in the continuity they seek to maintain, albeit with the acknowledgement that the internal contradictions and/or multiple book continuities make this difficult. The difficulty is referenced specific to the history of Kirk and Spock in the 2008 quote. That "to a large degree" serves as lead-in to that exposition is fairly obvious, and certainly much more obvious than using the term canon (and later placing the same item in the canon continuity) while not actually meaning to do so.
After all, it isn't like one can append "to a large degree" and mean the opposite. Fortunately you don't seem to take it that far, instead appearing to argue for books and comics at a somewhat lower canon level. However, even an EU-as-lesser-canon is still the same massive shift, as I noted pages ago:
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/discovery-and-trek-continuity.296545/page-4#post-12662389
^ You continue to make absolutist statements that Kurtzman's comments are tantamount to a declaration that the entire body of Star Trek tie-in media is now franchise Canon carrying as much 'weight' as onscreen Star Trek, but have offered zero empirical evidence supporting that claim.
The quote comes from the reporter first-hand. The reporter isn't saying how CBS canon works minus a quote.
Hearsay would be if I asserted something based on something you said, not the first-hand knowledge that you said it.
Reporters can potentially misquote like anyone else, sure, but at a big media event in 2018 with multiple outlets present I rather doubt the DigitalSpy person was stuck scribbling on a notepad like a Luddite, unabke to keep up and filling in the gaps with their own imagination.
Decrying the quote as hearsay, esoecially inaccurately, suggests we cannot trust it, and, as you note, that it is open to interpretation. Having seen, in my day, that even video quotes get subjected to reimagining efforts when certain folks don't want to hear what's said, however, I don't think it appropriate to try to throw shade in that fashion.
Aside from more than a small degree but less than all, "to a large degree" doesn't mean anything specific. Something can apply to a large degree and also not apply to a large degree. An example would be:
People tell the truth to a large degree. However, to a large degree, people are also liars.
That is a perfectly valid pair of sentences that fit together consistently and moreover say something true and meaningful as a pair, albeit something non-specific.
It's already been pointed out that the purpose of these interviews is to make the fans happy. Saying "to a large degree" accentuates the positive without committing to anything specific. It's meant to take fans to their happy place. There's nothing wrong with happy, but there it is.
Everything you just said is wrong. I literally just said in the post above yours and to which you pointed, referencing a post from pages ago, that (1) books & comics (not the "entire body") as (2) lesser canon (not as weighted) could be an interpretation of the quotes (3) *I provided* (empirical evidence).
When your every claim is inaccurate and counterfactual I guess I could look like an absolutist, to you, but that's on you and not me.
Take for example elements within the Reeves-Stevens' novel Federation, arguably one of the greatest Trek books ever written. Conceived and written before First Contact hit theaters it presents an alternate history of the life of Zefram Cochrane both before and after the Third World War and his invention of warp drive. While the vast bulk of the details presented in the novel were ignored by the producers of FC and the Cochrane depicted by James Cromwell is radically different from the Cochrane written by Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens I wouldn't mind if someday elements of 21st century Earth history seen in the book were incorporated into canon Trek.
The Optimum Movement always attracted me as a believable political force and fascist philosophy in the leadup to World War III and the book explains that both Colonel Green and the drug-addicted soldiers seen in "Encounter at Farpoint, Part I(TNG)" were members of the Optimum, the triangular logo on the soldiers' uniforms being that of the Optimum Movement led by Green. I myself have used those elements in my own fanfic touching on 21st century Earth history and they'd fit into the established canon pretty smoothly.
All that said, many if not most Trek novels are mediocre at best and if the television and film producers go out of their way to ignore a lot of what's written in them I won't feel like I'm missing out on anything. Some little bits here and there would be cool to see onscreen, but other than those I'm cool with most of what's in print never being canonized. Really. Have you guys read some of that stuff?
The Optimum Movement always attracted me as a believable political force and fascist philosophy in the leadup to World War III and the book explains that both Colonel Green and the drug-addicted soldiers seen in "Encounter at Farpoint, Part I(TNG)" were members of the Optimum, the triangular logo on the soldiers' uniforms being that of the Optimum Movement led by Green. I myself have used those elements in my own fanfic touching on 21st century Earth history and they'd fit into the established canon pretty smoothly.
All that said, many if not most Trek novels are mediocre at best and if the television and film producers go out of their way to ignore a lot of what's written in them I won't feel like I'm missing out on anything. Some little bits here and there would be cool to see onscreen, but other than those I'm cool with most of what's in print never being canonized. Really. Have you guys read some of that stuff?
Agreed. Though there are some real gems in there, like the Vanguard series.
@DSG2k, I want you to click on the following link - http://www.trek.fm/literary-treks/206 - and pay attention to the conversation that begins at 1:29:28 because it directly addresses the claims you are making and the absolutist nature of said claims.
Dude, your last post in which you claimed insidious absolutism was wrong in all three attack parameters you were using, and so instead of addressing that in any way you simply repeat the absolutism attack like nothing happened?!?
Good grief.
Last edited:
Lots more than don't. I assure you.
Y'know, as long as I am being accused of absolutism, I will go ahead live up to the claim for this one moment and say that anyone who actually argues against your point above is wrong, absolutely. :-)
Lol.....how did I miss that one? I bet it was a gem....You forgot about Optmus Prime and the Transformers.
Not just difficult, he said impossible.
Funny, 25 minutes before that he's talking about a clean break with the way things used to operate thanks to the new team that came in after the 12 year break. I believe I called that the interregnum earlier, and made the exact same point simply by deduction.
At 1:06 he's talking about having a unified transmedia push. Kurtzman worked with JJ so that makes sense.
He goes on to talk about marching orders to reconcile the universes in his novel.
And in your section of choice, he suggests fans don't have any use for canon. However, that's not true. The fan use of canon is to have a single point of reference for discussion, as obviated by how every conversation of Trek tech (for a familiar example) devolves into canon talk.
No.
Literalism.
Based on observation and experience, there's no reason to take Kurtzman's PR blather seriously. None.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
