Spoilers Discovery and the Novelverse - TV show discussion thread

[Damian]

Except the change in the Klingons' appearance is not diegetic except in "Trials and Tribble-ations" and "Affliction"/"Divergence." Every other time it's happened, it hasn't been mentioned or had any effect on the story. When Kor, Kang, and Koloth showed up in "Blood Oath" with ridged foreheads, nobody in the story remarked on it; it was treated as the way they'd always looked. That's a textbook example of a change that isn't part of the narrative

I always liked that they did that for the Klingons though. I mean, they did kind of back themselves into it with "Trials and Tribble-ations". I have to admit it was kind of comical when they were speculating why they looked different (and of course the line "THOSE are Klingons???"), I think partly because some fans have been speculating on that for years. And that was the one design that has been speculated on for years, including a number of novels. You're right that other aliens have changed...some relatively minor like forehead ridges on Romulans, some a bit more significant like Tellarites...but it seemed most fans, including myself frankly, were willing to just go with it either because the change was pretty minor and the overall product was similar enough to the original, or the aliens depicted weren't a significant part of the Star Trek universe, usually because they weren't seen that much.

But Klingons were probably the most significant change to a popular alien in Star Trek. In that case I thought it wasn't a bad idea to offer an in-universe explanation for the change in appearance. They were one of the few aliens where fans and novel writers had speculated on the change in appearance in Klingons for years, why not add something in story. "Trials...." gave them an opening in a sense, since they acknowledged the difference, and while it took a few years, they finally followed through.

Retroactively, when it comes to Kor, Kang and Koloth, I generally assumed they finally found a cure to the Augment virus and the Klingon dominant features manifested themselves again, perhaps decades earlier (hence the lack of any reaction to their 'new' appearance). If I recall correctly I believe the Excelsior novel "Forged in Fire" said as much.

It's one reason the Giger-Klingons in Discovery bug me. They went to all the trouble to tell the story of how the Klingon appearance changed and that seems to have been blown up again.

 

[Christopher]

Course, a lot of the others (not all, e.g. Trills) are close enough to be chalked up to racial variants and the like. ILR humans have a lot of variation within the template.

That's beside the point. This is not a conversation about whether we can explain it afterward (we always can), but about whether the creators intended it to be narratively relevant. The only times that an alien makeup redesign was an actual story point were "Trials and Tribble-ations" and "Affliction"/"Divergence" -- and in the former case it was just a throwaway joke that had no real effect on the narrative. The point is that almost every time an alien makeup in Star Trek has been redesigned, it has not been mentioned within the story. That makes it an external, non-diegetic change, in the same vein as Saavik or Ziyal being recast or a spaceship's size being inconsistent from shot to shot. As I said, we in the audience can pretend that it's an actual change in-universe, but that shouldn't be mistaken for the creators' intention -- not unless the creators tell a story that explicitly acknowledges a hitherto non-narrative change within the narrative, like "Affliction"/"Divergence" did.

Remember, when ST:TMP came out, Roddenberry explicitly asked fans to pretend that Klingons had always had ridges and TOS had just been unable to depict them accurately. It was meant to be a change in how the story was told, rather than a change that happened inside the story. That was the default position of Star Trek for years afterward, as seen in "Blood Oath" where the returning Klingons' makeup was changed without explanation. It wasn't until they reused TOS Klingon footage in "Trials" that they were forced to acknowledge the change as something that existed in-universe, and even then they just lampshaded it briefly because they knew it didn't matter to the narrative. But by the time "Affliction"/"Divergence" came along, the writing staff consisted largely of fans like us who had spent years obsessing over those non-narrative changes and trying to invent rationalizations for them, and so we ended up with the kind of fanfictionish story that was built around explaining an out-of-narrative change in narrative terms.

It's one reason the Giger-Klingons in Discovery bug me. They went to all the trouble to tell the story of how the Klingon appearance changed and that seems to have been blown up again.

Why in the world do so many people people assume the Klingon design only changed once??? There are at least eight distinct Klingon designs by now -- the Kor/Kang version with swarthy skin and bifurcated eyebrows; the Kras/Koloth version with just facial hair; the TMP version with a single spinelike ridge on a smooth cranium; the Burman Studios TSFS version with individualized bony plates and minimal female ridges; the Michael Westmore version that's like TSFS but adds ridged noses and has no gender difference; the Richard Snell version from TVH-TUC with smaller, subtler head plates and minimal female ridges; the Neville Page Kelvinverse version; and the Neville Page DSC version. And there are variations within some of those too: https://www.herocollector.com/en-gb/Article/star-trek-the-many-faces-of-the-klingon

 

[Damian]

Remember, when ST:TMP came out, Roddenberry explicitly asked fans to pretend that Klingons had always had ridges and TOS had just been unable to depict them accurately.

Even back then Roddenberry should have realized fans would obsess over that for years. He should know Trekkies better then that

Why in the world do so many people people assume the Klingon design only changed once??? There are at least eight distinct Klingon designs by now

Well, like I've said before I don't sweat the small details. From TMP through Enterprise (before "Affliction/Divergence") the Klingon design was similar enough that you could probably chalk any changes to each individual looking a bit different. Kind of like how all humans don't look alike. Different Klingons have different forehead ridges and facial hair, etc. TMP was a bit more 'primitive' design of the forehead ridges, but later designs were based on that early model and just touched up with better make up and detail.

In essence you could tell Klingons were Klingons based on their appearance from TSFS through Enterprise, even if the details were a bit different. The original series Klingons and Discovery Klingons were a much more drastic difference to that design. Honestly if someone showed me a Discovery Klingon with me never seeing them before and someone not telling me they were Klingons I probably would have thought they were some new, never before seen alien on Star Trek. Whereas if you showed me a Klingon in the first season of Enterprise without telling me anything I would instantly know it was a Klingon.

 

[Christopher]

Honestly if someone showed me a Discovery Klingon with me never seeing them before and someone not telling me they were Klingons I probably would have thought they were some new, never before seen alien on Star Trek.

Uhh, the fact that they spoke Klingon and talked about Kahless and honor and stuff was kind of a big clue, wasn't it? This is a disingenuous complaint.

Fans 40 years ago were just as upset about the TMP Klingon redesign, and the TMP everything redesign. But they got used to it and life went on. So don't expect me to have the tiniest shred of sympathy for fans whining about the DSC redesigns as if they were some horrible assault on fandom.

 

[Damian]

Uhh, the fact that they spoke Klingon and talked about Kahless and honor and stuff was kind of a big clue, wasn't it? This is a disingenuous complaint.

I'm just talking about their appearance. Obviously when the subtitles say "In Klingon:.." I knew they were Klingons.

So don't expect me to have the tiniest shred of sympathy for fans whining about the DSC redesigns as if they were some horrible assault on fandom.

Well, I did say they just 'bugged me'. It's not the end of the world. And part of the reason for that as I noted was that Enterprise went to all the trouble to explain why Klingons appeared differently in the original series from later series and they just sort of blew that all out of the water. The Klingons were sort of unique in the Star Trek universe in that sense. I don't recall any other aliens in Star Trek being given such an explanation for a change. So for me it's not just the change in appearance, but the fact that an in universe explanation was given for it that seems to have been ignored. BUT, I don't consider it some sort of assault. I like to complain about it of course but it's not something that keeps me up at night

And I think in a way it may have been a missed opportunity. We only got a very brief glimpse of smooth headed Klingons in Enterprise. It would have been interesting to see more of them in a modern Star Trek show and show their interactions with ridged Klingons and how they are treated by ridged Klingons. Novels have indicated the smooth headed Klingons weren't well regarded, which makes sense. And there are some hints even in "Affliction/Divergence" that smooth headed Klingons because of the virus experience some human emotions, like fear. It may have opened some opportunities to show some of that on screen.

 

[Christopher]

And part of the reason for that as I noted was that Enterprise went to all the trouble to explain why Klingons appeared differently in the original series from later series and they just sort of blew that all out of the water.

No, they did not. As you yourself acknowledge, only a portion of the Klingon population was de-ridged, just a few million; the majority of Klingons were still ridged. So there's no conflict in showing only ridged Klingons in DSC, and the change in makeup is just artistic license like all the previous changes.

 

[Tuskin38]

Plus the most recent DSC comic has shown a flat headed Kor.

Though he isn’t identical to humans, he has DSC style pointed ears, and there’s some very subtle ridges on his neck and chest. A hybrid of the two.

 

[Damian]

Ok, ok, you win.

Still, it'd be nice to see maybe some smooth headed Klingons in Discovery. And maybe an in-universe explanation of why by the time of the original series they only encounter smooth headed Klingons. There might be some story ideas they could work with there.

 

[Damian]

Ok, ok, you win.

Still, it'd be nice to see maybe some smooth headed Klingons in Discovery. And maybe an in-universe explanation of why by the time of the original series they only encounter smooth headed Klingons. There might be some story ideas they could work with there.

 

[WebLurker]

Retroactively, when it comes to Kor, Kang and Koloth, I generally assumed they finally found a cure to the Augment virus and the Klingon dominant features manifested themselves again, perhaps decades earlier (hence the lack of any reaction to their 'new' appearance). If I recall correctly I believe the Excelsior novel "Forged in Fire" said as much.

Or the plastic surgery that was floated out as an option at the end of the ENT episodes (granted, a lot of Klingons seem to prefer keeping old wounds and scars over cybernetics and the like, but it seems likely that some would).

It's one reason the Giger-Klingons in Discovery bug me. They went to all the trouble to tell the story of how the Klingon appearance changed and that seems to have been blown up again.

Yeah, shame that we didn't get to see both, but if we assumed that all the DSC Klingons were standard ridged ones and we just never saw smooth ones for whatever reason, it checks out no worse then TOS having no ridged ones.

That's beside the point. This is not a conversation about whether we can explain it afterward (we always can), but about whether the creators intended it to be narratively relevant. The only times that an alien makeup redesign was an actual story point were "Trials and Tribble-ations" and "Affliction"/"Divergence" -- and in the former case it was just a throwaway joke that had no real effect on the narrative. The point is that almost every time an alien makeup in Star Trek has been redesigned, it has not been mentioned within the story. That makes it an external, non-diegetic change, in the same vein as Saavik or Ziyal being recast or a spaceship's size being inconsistent from shot to shot. As I said, we in the audience can pretend that it's an actual change in-universe, but that shouldn't be mistaken for the creators' intention -- not unless the creators tell a story that explicitly acknowledges a hitherto non-narrative change within the narrative, like "Affliction"/"Divergence" did.

Remember, when ST:TMP came out, Roddenberry explicitly asked fans to pretend that Klingons had always had ridges and TOS had just been unable to depict them accurately. It was meant to be a change in how the story was told, rather than a change that happened inside the story. That was the default position of Star Trek for years afterward, as seen in "Blood Oath" where the returning Klingons' makeup was changed without explanation. It wasn't until they reused TOS Klingon footage in "Trials" that they were forced to acknowledge the change as something that existed in-universe, and even then they just lampshaded it briefly because they knew it didn't matter to the narrative. But by the time "Affliction"/"Divergence" came along, the writing staff consisted largely of fans like us who had spent years obsessing over those non-narrative changes and trying to invent rationalizations for them, and so we ended up with the kind of fanfictionish story that was built around explaining an out-of-narrative change in narrative terms.

Taken to the logical conclusion, there's no point to internal continuity then. I mean, DSC can change whatever the heck it wants, but doing that undermines the intent of the show, namely that it's a prequel to TOS and the rest and slots into the same world.

Why in the world do so many people people assume the Klingon design only changed once??? There are at least eight distinct Klingon designs by now -- the Kor/Kang version with swarthy skin and bifurcated eyebrows; the Kras/Koloth version with just facial hair; the TMP version with a single spinelike ridge on a smooth cranium; the Burman Studios TSFS version with individualized bony plates and minimal female ridges; the Michael Westmore version that's like TSFS but adds ridged noses and has no gender difference; the Richard Snell version from TVH-TUC with smaller, subtler head plates and minimal female ridges; the Neville Page Kelvinverse version; and the Neville Page DSC version. And there are variations within some of those too: https://www.herocollector.com/en-gb/Article/star-trek-the-many-faces-of-the-klingon

Maybe because there's a difference between variation within a standard design and starting over from scratch?

 

[Christopher]

Taken to the logical conclusion, there's no point to internal continuity then.

That's not a logical conclusion at all. Taking things to extremes is usually a very dishonest way to discredit a perfectly sensible practice, like, say, "If you put any speed limits on cars at all, you might as well limit them to standing still!" Obviously that makes no sense, because nobody has any interest in taking things to such an extreme.

In real life, most things are not taken to extremes. Most things are about finding the optimal balance between extremes or opposing goals. So a logical conclusion and a reductio ad absurdum extreme are two entirely different things.

Maybe because there's a difference between variation within a standard design and starting over from scratch?

The change from TOS to TMP was more extreme. Fandom dealt with it.

 

[Damian]

Or the plastic surgery that was floated out as an option at the end of the ENT episodes (granted, a lot of Klingons seem to prefer keeping old wounds and scars over cybernetics and the like, but it seems likely that some would).

That reminds me of KRAD's novel "Diplomatic Implausibility" where he noted Klingons frown on plastic surgery to correct deformities. Klag reluctantly agreed to have his father's arm transplanted but refused anything like a synthetic or robotic arm. I would imagine Klingons would dismiss plastic surgery as well.

Maybe because there's a difference between variation within a standard design and starting over from scratch?

That was sort of my argument. That Klingon designs from TSFS through Enterprise were based on what we saw in TMP (though TMP was admittedly a more bare bones version of the head ridges I think they were recognizably based on that). Discovery was a pretty radical change from that. If you were to look at a picture of saw Gowron from TNG and Kruge from TSFS I think you could pretty clearly see they were the same alien. But if you looked at a picture of T'Kuvma from Discovery and then Duras from TNG I think that'd be harder to say without any other information. That's basically what I was saying.

 

[The Wormhole]

I don't think it did?

http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/3x01/thesearch1_214.jpg
http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/3x01/thesearch1_261.jpg
Smaller, different Captain's Chair, no situation table at the back, dedication plaque located in a different location, side consoles don't look quit the same.

 

[F. King Daniel]

http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/3x01/thesearch1_214.jpg
http://ds9.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/3x01/thesearch1_261.jpg
Smaller, different Captain's Chair, no situation table at the back, dedication plaque located in a different location, side consoles don't look quit the same.

Huh, I never noticed. Still, it's a few minor redresses/changes and not "totally different". Kinda like the classic Enterprise bridge between "Where No Man..." and "The Man Trap"

 

[Christopher]

That Klingon designs from TSFS through Enterprise were based on what we saw in TMP (though TMP was admittedly a more bare bones version of the head ridges I think they were recognizably based on that). Discovery was a pretty radical change from that.

And TMP was an even more radical change from TOS.

 

[Damian]

And TMP was an even more radical change from TOS.

Duh. That's because of the augment virus. Gee, don't you know anything

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

That reminds me of KRAD's novel "Diplomatic Implausibility" where he noted Klingons frown on plastic surgery to correct deformities. Klag reluctantly agreed to have his father's arm transplanted but refused anything like a synthetic or robotic arm. I would imagine Klingons would dismiss plastic surgery as well.

Not if Kor, Koloth and Kang are any indication.

Indeed, at the end of ENT's Augment arc, the Klingon doctor Antaak considered going into cranial reconstruction....

I can see the QuchHa' seeking out such procedures to get rid of the shame of looking so human (especially since, in a very real sense, humans were responsible for that whole mess in the first place), but robotic or synthetic limbs would definitely be out. In that case they'd be expected to just deal with it.

As for Klag - didn't he have it done so his father's dishonor could be erased? Meaning, his father's death (rotting away in a prison) would be mitigated by the fact that the arm could give Klag new life. So that would be seen as an honorable act in Klingon society.

 

[WebLurker]

That's not a logical conclusion at all. Taking things to extremes is usually a very dishonest way to discredit a perfectly sensible practice, like, say, "If you put any speed limits on cars at all, you might as well limit them to standing still!" Obviously that makes no sense, because nobody has any interest in taking things to such an extreme.

In real life, most things are not taken to extremes. Most things are about finding the optimal balance between extremes or opposing goals. So a logical conclusion and a reductio ad absurdum extreme are two entirely different things.

Whatever you say.

The change from TOS to TMP was more extreme. Fandom dealt with it.

And it was later addressed and later still accounted for in ways that made sense (beyond "northern" and "southern" jokes).

That was sort of my argument. That Klingon designs from TSFS through Enterprise were based on what we saw in TMP (though TMP was admittedly a more bare bones version of the head ridges I think they were recognizably based on that). Discovery was a pretty radical change from that. If you were to look at a picture of saw Gowron from TNG and Kruge from TSFS I think you could pretty clearly see they were the same alien. But if you looked at a picture of T'Kuvma from Discovery and then Duras from TNG I think that'd be harder to say without any other information. That's basically what I was saying.

I think that once they started using hair with the DSC Klingons, they looked more recognizable. Some stuff, like the claws, may never make that much sense and may just have to be overlooked. But, overall, IMHO, the "mistake" was "fixed" enough I'm willing to let it slide.

 

[Christopher]

And it was later addressed and later still accounted for in ways that made sense (beyond "northern" and "southern" jokes).

It was addressed over 25 years later. Fandom got by just fine for a quarter-century without needing a canon explanation for a makeup change.

 

[Daddy Todd]

Fans 40 years ago were just as upset about the TMP Klingon redesign, and the TMP everything redesign.

Some fans, perhaps. But fans were no more a monolithic bloc in 1979 than they are in 2019.

Personally, I didn't have a problem with the Klingon redesign, and the TMP Enterprise is still, to my eyes, the most beautiful Starfleet vessel ever put on film. The explanation that it was a "refit" was a bit of a stretch, unless you assume "refit" means "Stripped down to the girders, then given an extensively redesigned spaceframe before being completely reskinned."

I didn't buy that explanation, but I was hardly "upset." I LOVED and still love that ship, so I was OK with the changes.