V
Vale
Guest
Well... the laws of physics are slightly different in the Star Trek universe. So it's an alternate reality even if historical events match those in our own.
Spoilers Should Star Trek be "our future" or an alternate timeline?
- Thread starter eschaton
- Start date
The laws of physics are very different in the Star Trek universe and inconsistent with themselves to boot.
Presenting a possible future for humanity doesn't mean the Star Trek universe has to be a 1:1 recreation of actual human history. Star Trek is close enough to the real world that its message of hope can still resonate with us.
*Shrugs* I got nothing. If treating it as an alternate universe makes it more palatable and enjoyable and the message of hope resonates better then more power to you, I mean that sincerely. To me, Star Trek has always been treated as "our" future in it's presentation, and the dates are not as important as the events and the people.And I don't see the need NOT to. Funny old world, ain't it?
It's not all or nothing to me. It can work either way but the original intent was our future. So I take it as such.
As I have written before, I believe that most works of fictiona must me in alternate universes to our universe, sicne they involve people. palces, things, and events which can be shown to be unreal in our iverse.
As I have written before, any long lasting tv series.like Star Trek, especially the more episodic and less serialized ones, should not have all the episodes happen one after the other in one universe. Instead each episode - except for the ones which are clearly sequels to earlier episodes - should be thought of as happening in alternate universes of their own. We should imagine that the creators of the series search countless thousands and millions of alternate universes to find examples of theprotagonists having exciting adventures (and surviving those exciting adventures).
And as I have written before, It is my belief that the inability of Star Trek writers and production staff to ensure that all historical references are accurate proves that Star Trek must happen in an alternate universe (or a big bunch of many alternate universes) which branched off from ours long before the first Star Trek productions were made in 1966,1965, and 1964.
If the creators of tv show don't want the more informed viewers to think that the show happens in an alternate universe which diverged sometime before the show was made, they should make certain that all hsotrical referces made during the show are accurate. The creators of TOS and other Star Trek productions didn't make certain that all historical references were accurate, and thus they have no grounds to complain when people state that Star Trek that happens in a bunch of alternate universes which split off from ours before Star Trek was made.
As I have written before, any long lasting tv series.like Star Trek, especially the more episodic and less serialized ones, should not have all the episodes happen one after the other in one universe. Instead each episode - except for the ones which are clearly sequels to earlier episodes - should be thought of as happening in alternate universes of their own. We should imagine that the creators of the series search countless thousands and millions of alternate universes to find examples of theprotagonists having exciting adventures (and surviving those exciting adventures).
And as I have written before, It is my belief that the inability of Star Trek writers and production staff to ensure that all historical references are accurate proves that Star Trek must happen in an alternate universe (or a big bunch of many alternate universes) which branched off from ours long before the first Star Trek productions were made in 1966,1965, and 1964.
If the creators of tv show don't want the more informed viewers to think that the show happens in an alternate universe which diverged sometime before the show was made, they should make certain that all hsotrical referces made during the show are accurate. The creators of TOS and other Star Trek productions didn't make certain that all historical references were accurate, and thus they have no grounds to complain when people state that Star Trek that happens in a bunch of alternate universes which split off from ours before Star Trek was made.
Oh, don't mistake my meaning. I don't want to treat all of this as a series of alternate universes. I would like nothing better than to have all of Trek be a single, consistent, unified timeline.
It's just that I don't think it can be OUR timeline.
Last edited:
To me the main benefit of it being set in our future is that they get to go back in time to our present day. But certain time travel episodes have shown that you can have a Star Trek present that is basically our present (except for when it's not), and if I can have my cake and eat it too I'm happy to do that.
I am cool with Star Trek being our present/future, but I don't believe that anything really needs to be retconned. As an example, I can recognize that in the real world, the Eugenics Wars never happened, and still suspend my disbelief when I watch those TOS episodes. Similarly, I can watch enjoy TOS in spite of the fact that computers with tapes are antiquated technology and Alexa can speak far more clearly than the 1701 computers. The computer screen in Picard's 1701-D office is also far thicker than the television on which I presently watch TNG. Modern Star Trek is bound to make social and technological predictions that either don't come true or become dated in the years to come as well. I don't need nor want an alternate universe or multiverse to explain it all away.
They should had embraced the alternate timeline stuff in TNG and ran with it, set down in TOS. Dy-100s! Eugenics Wars and WW3, that split was fine. But stuff like Ares IV and so on in TNG and VOY as they pushed into the 90s and knew that there was no Khan, no Genetic Manipulation writ large (Dolly and Stem Cells and the Human Genome Project and the sort of iffy computer power and tools then put the breaks to all that)...but that's our problem.
Our society turned its back on space and fought against science; we flinched. Trek's didn't. Trek kept going. There was good and bad, but eventually they made it. Even if it was just the US at times it seems, they kept going.
Our society turned its back on space and fought against science; we flinched. Trek's didn't. Trek kept going. There was good and bad, but eventually they made it. Even if it was just the US at times it seems, they kept going.
I don't really get why it's necessary for Star Trek to be connected to the real world. Actually I don't really get why it's important. Every fictional world exists in it's own universe (so to speak) surely?
I don't think it's necessary so much as it is a part of Trek's basic conceit.
I'd say it's a common conceit within the genre of science-fiction rather than something that's particular to Star Trek. Many science fiction/fantasy worlds are at least grounded in our reality in inception, even if it's not a conscious choice of the creators.
Probably. Certainly more so in the fiction I read as a youth. I just feel Trek embraced it as part of its central conceit rather than crafting differences.
It did in TOS, certainly. But then no-one making TOS could have seriously believed people would still be watching the show in the 90s in order to notice the Eugenics Wars didn't happen.
I think as soon as any work of fiction shows any signs of longevity, it necessarily has to disconnect itself from the idea. Basically as soon as the future predicted actually rolls around then it loses that. Back to the Future 2 was a work in extrapolation in 1989, but we watch it now (post 2015) and accept it as what it is. An idea of what the future would look like at a certain point in time, now dated.
I would tend to agree but Trek hasn't done that yet.
I like what Picard did to combine the Sanctuary districts with modern issues.
If Prime universe Trek is still going in 50 years? Yeah it’d be super cool to have World War 3 going on with drugged soldiers regardless of what the world looks like at the time.
If Prime universe Trek is still going in 50 years? Yeah it’d be super cool to have World War 3 going on with drugged soldiers regardless of what the world looks like at the time.
How so? I feel that particular ship sailed decades ago.
STAR TREK is both future fictional history and alternative history at the same time, at this point.
Similar threads
