TV should be for exploring original characters to the point where we couldn’t care less about the scenery (tying into the actual topic here), and of course, a helpful side effect is that of sweeping continuity issues under the rug. Fewer legacy elements, fewer thoughts about their fit. If Michael works for you, great, but I’d have dropped Spock and his family, the Klingons, Mudd, the Mirror Universe, Section 31 and the Enterprise, then given an episode at least to every recurring character.
When did canon become such a hot-button issue?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
I think you've proven that the appeal of a TV show (in this case Star Trek) isn't the same for everyone. And that's ok.
In all fairness - that's what worked for Michael Piller and his style of writing. It's also reflective of the style of writing for Star Trek at the time.
While Discovery may lack episodes that focus entirely on one character, they have arcs that are periodically revisited throughout the season; Saru's evolving beyond having his threat ganglia, the relationship roller-coaster between Paul and Hugh, Pike's learning of his fate, Michael's mending her relationship with Spock as well as discovering her mother is still alive.
In the TOS/TNG world, all of these would have been self-contained episodes whose these threads would have never been revisited. And that's what, to me, dates those shows the most. It was always a big deal to me when I would see any of the older Trek series make reference to an event in a previous episode. In a lot of cases on TNG, and Voyager, they'd make reference to past off-screen events that none of us ever saw. Voyager's sixth season episode, Ashes to Ashes, focuses on a crewmember who died and returns years later. But, to me, it means absolutely NOTHING because it wasn't a character who was ever previously seen or mentioned and while a series of flashbacks shows her time on Voyager, this was something that happened entirely off-screen.
The fourth season episode of TNG, Family, was a huge deal, IMO, because it explored the aftermath of Picard's time with the Borg. Even Piller recognized then that it needed to be and that it wouldn't have made any sense to continue the show as if no lingering trauma from that event were present.
Last edited by a moderator:
That’s what A- and B-stories can be used for: give the A-story to one character, have the B-story continue the serialized show. It’s the way LOST functioned much of the time. The reverse is also an option, though then you have the more traditional character moments between the main events. Also, this has little to do with references to past events, since they can always appear if relevant to the present day.
I don't know how many times I need to post this. NO SPOILERS FOR SEASON 2 OF DISCOVERY WITHOUT SPOILER TAGS!!!!
I've said it 4 goddamn times in this thread alone!!
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/hey-you-spoiley-spoilerson-listen-up.299514/
Next person is getting a formal infraction.
Thanks for trying! I've seen all the episodes, but if I hadn't, this would be a lame way to have some of those surprises ruined.
I don't know how many times I need to post this. NO SPOILERS FOR SEASON 2 OF DISCOVERY WITHOUT SPOILER TAGS!!!!
I've said it 4 goddamn times in this thread alone!!
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/hey-you-spoiley-spoilerson-listen-up.299514/
Next person is getting a formal infraction.
Well I can't be blamed for being a Discovery spoiler this time.
I've talked about this in another thread, but with the way, not just Star Trek, but many franchises are going, you simply have to reserve in your own mind what you want canon to be.
There's no point in getting upset about it, no point in worrying about it, because the rights owners are going to do what they want anyway, so either they make a good series/movie that can be enjoyed for what it is, or they won't.
For me, I reserve TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY as a main canon and call it a day, a couple of the movies are pretty iffy, anything to do with time travel and mirror universe throws it off, but overall it works.
But I think that's all you can do.
There's no point in getting upset about it, no point in worrying about it, because the rights owners are going to do what they want anyway, so either they make a good series/movie that can be enjoyed for what it is, or they won't.
For me, I reserve TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY as a main canon and call it a day, a couple of the movies are pretty iffy, anything to do with time travel and mirror universe throws it off, but overall it works.
But I think that's all you can do.
Agreed. Enterprise is from a timeline created by First Contact and Discovery is just fan fiction.
Discovery is every bit as much canon as any other show, including the original. It is live-action made by the rights holder. I simply treat it as an alternate timeline within the Trek multiverse.
Though that isn't my issue with Discovery, my issue is that it isn't an entertaining show in its own right.
Though that isn't my issue with Discovery, my issue is that it isn't an entertaining show in its own right.
Hopefully that changes in season three when they take off the TOS training wheels.
I agree that Enterprise branches off First Contact so the linear timeline is a little complicated vis a vis the 'earlier' series the intention was always to link-up with the 'broad strokes' of TOS-VOY canon (and as noted 'broadstrokes' was about as good as continuity got within TOS, so that seems fair to me. Similarily, while Discovery on occassion stretches even the 'broad strokes' of (visual) continuity vis-a-vis the other shows (though no worse than the Ambramsverse for the most part)*, they are officially CBS product so unless they are 'disavowed' by CBS (as TAS was at least for a time) they must be part of the official canon.
*While Midnight's Edge's insistence that the "Prime Timeline" is legally distinct from the TOS-VOY timeline (Not least because Enterprise is common to both) the idea that the Post-FC!TOS is only broadly similar to Original!TOS narratively plausible but remains the same timeline legally.
Roddenberry decanonized it through his personal stooge Richard Arnold (or it may have been Arnold), at a time when his power was waning. He also "decanonized" Star Trek V and I think he wanted to do the same to TOS.
They all made it to film, Paramount/CBS has sold me all of them multiple times, so it's all good to me. The stories are what matters to me, not their official status.
You purchased Star Trek V multiple times?!
There was no "branching off." Enterprise was always meant to lead into the TOS timeline, not away from it. That's the way we approach it in the novels, as a single continuous timeline, and if that weren't the intent, then CBS wouldn't allow us to do it that way. So clearly CBS's intention is that ENT is the actual history that creates the world we see in DSC, TOS, TNG, etc. The fact that it's changed from Daniels's future merely proves that Daniels's home timeline is not the Prime timeline, but one only approximately like it. Officially, per CBS, there are only two distinct, ongoing Trek timelines (aside from episodic ones like the Mirror Universe) -- the Prime timeline encompassing every Star Trek TV series, and the Kelvin timeline of the Bad Robot movies.
VHS, DVD, Blu-ray.
Good for CBS? I don't work for them, so I can treat Discovery as a separate timelime.
There is no reason for the Timeline to differ, but I suppose it will take a few iterations for a consensus to evolve regarding details. Say a Discovery novel needed to flash back to Pike’s adventures on Talos IV: does it postulate an earlier version of what are supposed to be new uniforms, or does it simply describe the DSC design because that’s what it ties into in the end? And if another novel ties into TOS, then it’s back to TOS design and colors? The same would apply to descriptions of the Enterprise interior.
You just write "he put on his uniform" and leave it to the reader's imagination.
Seriously, it's kinda like writing Saavik. Do you specifically describe her as looking like Kirstie Alley or as Robin Curtis, or do you just write "Saavik beamed down to the planet" and let the reader visualize her as they choose?
I confess: the last time I wrote Saavik, both Alley and Curtis flitted before my mind's eye from moment to moment. I didn't feel a need to consistently visualize one over the other when writing that book. Saavik is Saavik, regardless of what she looked like in one particular movie instead another.
See also Pike, Spock, and Number One these days.
I'm sure the grand plan is for the current look to eventually overwrite the original. Eventually we will get a Kirk on the Enterprise show, with a completely different look from TOS.
I imagine that eventually TOS will not be part of the current "Prime" timeline.
And this demonstrates the subjective nature of the work. The fact that it works for many, and doesn't work for others, is precisely why objective criticism, in the end, is mute.
And, in this fandom, I don't we'll ever be free of continuity issues, so the idea of sweeping them under the rug will only create more angst. Now, I personally would have dropped the Mirror Universe in DSC but I generally pleased with how things have progressed thus far.
Time will tell on the rest.
Absolutely correct.
Plot twist-it never was in Prime. *dramatic music plays*
Or we just accept that they're all part of the same "timeline" and chalk up any visual discrepancies to, well, the fact that they were made by different people half a century apart. As I always say, not everything requires an "in-universe" explanation involving altered timelines or whatever. Sometimes the real-world explanation is good enough when watching, you know, a fictional TV program.
Like I've said before, it's no different than recasting a character. You don't need to explain that they had plastic surgery or genetic modifications or whatever. You just accept the new actor as the same character because that's how movies and TV work. Same with updated sets, props, special effects, etc.
Darrin Stevens is Darrin Stevens, even if he looks a little different in the later episodes.
Similar threads
