I mean, you don't have to watch it. So why does it really matter?
Welcome to Star Trek for the last 50 years.
Alex Kurtzman on the Fine Line Between Adding to, and Staying True to, Star Trek's Canon
- Thread starter Danja
- Start date
It wouldn't surprise me. Everything anyone has ever done now and in the past that isn't "Starfleet" is Section 31.
Its mere existence bothers me.
What an odd thing to get upset over.
It is what it is. I'm just passionate about this show. I grew up with it.
Well, we’ll see what Kurtzman does to ‘maintain canon.’ By the time the Section 31 show comes out, it’ll only be 5 years before TOS.
Everyone keeps mentioning "The Enterprise Incident", which is a good example. One I've used myself. But how about "A Private Little War"? The Klingons arm one side of a planet with more advanced weaponry. The Federation arms another side with equally advanced weaponry to maintain the balance of power. McCoy tells Kirk he's condemning said planet to a war that may never end. Direct parallel to Vietnam. At the end, the formerly peace-loving Tyree tells Kirk he wants to make more weapons to fight the enemy after they killed his wife. McCoy tells Kirk he got what he wanted. Kirk says, "Not what I wanted, Bones. What had to be." Star Trek was for the Vietnam War, at least in that episode. Then Walter Cronkite publicly turned against it shortly thereafter.
The universe of the 23rd Century was exactly the same as the world of the 20th.
The universe of the 23rd Century was exactly the same as the world of the 20th.
Last edited:
Just a small addition, less we think that Section 31 introduced in TOS is somehow the work of the "evil" CBS and Kurtzman-there is a novel all about their involvement after Enterprise Incident-https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Cloak_(novel)
It's not a matter of canon. It's a matter of how it can work together
Er, no. I could write a fanfic specifically describing every instance of discontinuity in Star Trek and how I can come up with ways to fit it all together, but it’s still not going to be canon, and therefore, invalid. Now if you’re just talking about your own personal ‘head-canon,’ that’s different.
That's not the point. It's the point you can make it work together.
Use your imagination. Why does everything need to be explained to you?
If that's the case then DSC is canon with TOS no matter what.
I don't think that's what the episode was trying to convey. Kirk was reluctantly pulled into the situation. It was about the moral conundrum of finding oneself in such circumstances.
Why are you taking things so personally?
Head canon is a hell of a thing.
Canon is what CBS says. Continuity is another story.
Very true. And as has been shown, CBS plays quite fast and loose with continuity. But I won’t argue at all that DSC is canon.
Similar threads
