Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 1x05 - "Spock Amok"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
Correct. From the transcript:
Begs the question now... Did Sarek have another son with his new wife, post-Amanda, or was he indeed referring to Spock? If the latter, who was Spock eventually married to? And why the hell didn't he just say "Spock" and keep it all wishy-washy secret?
Last edited:
It should. But for some reason Trek fandom doesn't consider the official site canon. Note for example that it says Will Decker is Matt's son--Memory Alpha just treats this as speculation.
Also the official site has some wrong info. Onscreen in Voyager says Kirk's 5 year mission ended in 2270. The official site has it at 2269 per older outdated chronologies. It also says Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet (Admiral Terral says hi). Maybe this can be retconned into Spock being the first to attend Starfleet Academy, as Michael Burnham at Discovery showed that Starfleet accepted Vulcan Science Academy education as equivalent to Starfleet Academy.
Memory Alpha does wave it away as non-canonical but, to their credit, they do mention the following:
This is one of those "Soft Canon" moments that seems a little stronger than the usual "Head Canon" references, but not fully "Hard Canon". I think it's pretty much generally accepted apocrypha throughout the vast majority of the fandom that Will is the son of Matt.
Because only what actually makes it into the TV shows/movies is canon.
Official website also has several things wrong, for example it repeats the urban legend that Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet despite the fact no one who has worked on any of the shows has ever stated that is the case.
There's no rules about what constitutes "canon." It's a thing that doesn't exist.
The studio and producers will declare anything in or out of canon that suits them at a given point with respect to a given project. If one version of "canon" in one instance conflicts with an earlier one in a way that's confusing or troubling, there is no court of resort - because, again, there are no rules, and none of it is real.
A representative from CBS's trek department stated in the mid 2000s that canon is whatever appears on screen. They have one rule, and it's that only the movies/shows are considered canon.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Canon#The_history_of_defining_canon
That's about right. And the issue there is that things onscreen contradict other things onscreen, and fans want some kind of ruling on which supercedes which or is more important than what, or some way of explaining explicit contradictions away. And those things are not available, at least not in any durable way.
Ah I see what you mean now.
I personally just go with either 'whatever is the newest version of the lore', or what the novels have tried to do to explain the contradictions.
Memory-Alpha editors try to record everything, and make notes about any contradictions in BTS boxes/sections. They also consider whatever the latest remastered/directors cut versions of movies/shows to be the current canon of those stories.
The whole ceremony used old language and traditional lines, so the property thing was probably something they meant way back when, but is only still said because it's tradition, like "so help me god".
Part of Vulcan mystery was that they never seemed to kiss or cuddle in bed. That's how they're different from us. Showing them behave just like humans now makes them less interesting
They changed the character. It's a retcon. Let's move on.
Fanwank and anciliary publications are NOT "canon".
It's not even canon that she was pregnant with Spock's child at the start of Star Trek IV since that scene was never filmed. She wasn't his wife nor the mother of his child.
And who's to say a statement from someone nearly 20 years ago still counts? Is the canonizer valid until contradicted? Since you are using an authority given by the IP owner as the ultimate spokesperson, isn't that what I just said? Is the official website not implicitly considered the word of the IP owner? Isn't the dismissal of the website kind of apocryphal? (I don't care about the website. I am just wondering about where these absurd "rules" come from.)
I very much agree with Serveaux. People look for authorities where there are none as if someone saying what is canon is immutable and fixed and not just as arbitrary as a fan's view on anything else.
Totally agree. That statement from 20 years ago is overriden by an official website that's still up and running. This is like Star Wars fans trying to prioritize Leland Chee's canon statements from 20 years ago over Disney's current official stance on canon on their Star Wars Databank.
Well, it's obviously not Sybok, so therefore it must be Spock. Sarek had no other sons.
As for who he married: Probably Saavik.
About Chapel, I think she has already met, fallen for, and lost Roger Korby by this point in her life. Would be kind of a nice explanation as to why she's so...noncommittal. She's afraid she'll lose the next one just like she lost Korby.
In any case, it's unlikely that SNW will ever mention Korby anyway. Wouldn't they have to pay royalties to whoever wrote "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" if they did?
That we know of, anyway.
Sarek is famous enough that if he'd had any other sons, we would have seen them.
They would have at least been mentioned when he died, anyway.
And if Sarek had had multiple sons (not counting Sybok), Picard would have adjusted the line accordingly.
So, because it's outside of personal experience it must not happen at all?
Or, more likely, this is another effort to cry continuity violation because it's the thing to do with SNW.
He also had a new wife. So, there's no need to adjust dialog if Picard is thinking of Perrin vs. Amanda.
