What Has Discovery Added To Star Trek Lore?
- Thread starter Kane_Steel
- Start date
No, much like Highlander, it was a documentary filmed in real time.
I gave you some proof that the technology that exists on star trek discovery shouldn't exist yet but, as I said, people will call it circumstantial and come up with hypothetical to fit the facts then declare that no proof exists. Within the plot of "The Day Of The Dove" intra-ship beaming was considered a very experimental and dangerous procedure but it's not a big deal on discovery. Hypotheticals can be conjured up to explain it away but it still counts as proof that they shouldn't be able to do that on Discovery. It's also hypothetically possible that Star Trek Discovery takes place in an alternate reality. Alternate realities are common on every star trek series and would explain how there we see so many deviations from the norm kinda like what happened in "Yesterday's Enterprise" or "Parallels"
But the showrunners said it's not set in an alternate reality, and their decision is the one that matters. So you can either accept that and suspend your disbelief or find workarounds for those issues, you can stop watching if it's really that big a deal for you, or you can continue harping on it ad nauseam until people get fed up with hearing about it.
Or perhaps continuity isn't absolute in Star Trek?
We can find many more examples than just that "Day of the Dove" bit you keep bringing up. Not just for DISCOVERY but all shows.
We can find many more examples than just that "Day of the Dove" bit you keep bringing up. Not just for DISCOVERY but all shows.
Why are you so dead set against enjoying something you supposedly like and have absolutely no control over how it gets created?
Most folks who state they like something, don't usually trash it every chance they get.
Comments that writers make off-screen don't count as canon as far as I know. Writers could have differing opinions on that anyway. I'm going off of this "As a rule of thumb, the events that take place within the live-action episodes and movies are canon, or official Star Trek facts.". The whole show is one big multi-reality, they change the timeline so much.
If you're going to split hairs between cannon and a showrunner's stated opinion regarding a show they wrote the show bible based on, why worry at all? Is there anyone who actually experiences joy based on total understanding and acceptance of fictional canon? It's just a show.
Its a fictional futuristic universe. Its entirely possible that by the 2250s, NONE of the technology would exist. I think this is the Prime timeline. TOS-VOY have just been overwritten because of so many damned incursions into the timeline. The events still happen. They just look a little different.
Or ya know, its just a TV series that was made 50 years after the original works. Whatever works for you.
Again I will point out that an ambiguous line that was probably meant to be sexist against women at the time is very different from, say, seeing holograms as the norm on a starship ten years before TOS. Why did it take over 100 years for someone to come up with the idea to have an emergency medical hologram when the technology for having one already existed a century before?
Man, you are killing it today!
Last edited:
I bet the Red Angels will have as much to do with the on-screen tech issues as season one had to do with transdimensional Sareks.
I'll drop it, but isn't this kind of discussion inevitable in a thread about Trek's lore?
On the subject of the technology of DSC adding trek lore, other than the Spore Drive -- which will probably be given an explanatiopn as to why Kirk, Picard, et al don't have it -- I don't think DSC has added anything in particular.
Trek technology to me is very general, and basically two things in the TOS era -- transporters and warp drive. Those are the tech items that drove the story. TNG added the holodeck, which arguably can be added to that short list of story-drivers, or things that "make Trek, Trek."
Beyond those things, the specific detailed tech items that DSC includes aren't anything that important in the grand scheme of things. Whether or not they had holographic communication in 2255 is not driving the story, and neither is the look of the phaser, the features of a tricorder, 3D displays, the veiwscreen, gumdrop lights, or whether their badges are embroidered or metal. Those are minor set dressings.
As I mentioned, the spore drive would fall into the category as a piece of technology that is entwined into the overall Trek story, but -- also as mentioned -- I think they will give it a "proper" retirement.
Trek technology to me is very general, and basically two things in the TOS era -- transporters and warp drive. Those are the tech items that drove the story. TNG added the holodeck, which arguably can be added to that short list of story-drivers, or things that "make Trek, Trek."
Beyond those things, the specific detailed tech items that DSC includes aren't anything that important in the grand scheme of things. Whether or not they had holographic communication in 2255 is not driving the story, and neither is the look of the phaser, the features of a tricorder, 3D displays, the veiwscreen, gumdrop lights, or whether their badges are embroidered or metal. Those are minor set dressings.
As I mentioned, the spore drive would fall into the category as a piece of technology that is entwined into the overall Trek story, but -- also as mentioned -- I think they will give it a "proper" retirement.
Sorry, my bad. That wasn't telling you that you had to drop it in the thread or forum, just saying in general that it's better to just move on because what else can you possibly say that you haven't already said a thousand times? You have your stance, and the showrunners have their's, and the showrunners get the final say on whether it's a reboot or not.
Then why worry about it?
The TNG View Screen
The First Contact EV suit
You can say the same thing all the TV series and movies.
Actually, the TAS episode: "The Practical Joker" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Practical_Joker
added the Holodeck. (And TAS is canon again BTW)
^^^
As has Gene Roddenberry and Rick Berman, Ronald D. Moore and Brannon Braga at various points in the past, (They're all stated 'Story' will trump 'Canon' at times) so what's your point again?
Similar threads
