Differences between 23rd and 24th Centuries

[Arpy]

I've often thought about the differences in TNG's era (the one I grew up with) and TOS'...the tones of the different shows, the sociopolitical differences in-universe (for both aliens and humans alike), the kinds of aliens each met, and even how they were each able to realize them from an special effects perspective.

What are for you some of the biggest differences between the two eras?

 

[Qonundrum]

TNG took some elements of the animated show, the one that not everyone saw or remembered, such as what became the holodeck.

As generalizations as exceptions exist for both: TOS is more whole-societal for its issues involving the human condition, TNG is more about the personal therein, which isn't bad at all, but without a solid outer society anything on the inside isn't going to matter as much. These could also be exemplified/personified by the double acts of Spock/McCoy (TOS) versus Guinan/Ro (TNG) and both are just as valid IMHO.

TOS had more character personality differences amongst the crew. TNG liked to believe that humans will be so perfect that (a) everyone acts largely the same, to the point critics mewled "Data is the most human of the crew", (b) Lower Decks would have a character discuss having to be artificially polite as a possible nod to TNG's crew, and (c) kids will be polite at age 7 while throwing what would be deemed "severe tantrums" in their 24th century era about having to take calculus, in what's actually a charming scene. And yet TNG characters do have some personality differences despite all working together above and beyond, just like in TOS but without the McCoy/Spock banter, for which the only TNG attempt could be made with Pulaski/Data, which had a life of its own but everybody didn't look beyond the most superficial aspect. At least until VOY, when everyone kept drooling over the EMH spouting McCoy's catchphrases because catchphrases are cool.

 

[Qonundrum]

On a different level,

TOS had bold use of color. Color TV was new, but whoever took the time to do set lighting had some mastery of the color wheel. What could easily become a mess is actually very refined, while extremely lively. Almost never monochromatic as that's stale and anything but lively unless saturation and brightness are maxed out, TOS frequently used schemes such as Analogous, Split-Complementary, Triadic, and even Tetradic. Or more. Even the season 2 cast shot from "I, Mudd" manages to balance a lot of "busy" while looking iconic. To compare, TNG's palette is too often... beige and lead. Complementary is used, but generally with vibrant colors - note if the scene is of someone in a red shirt (e.g. Khan from Spacer Seed), the background is a suitable shade of green or teal that plays off that red and his skin hue and the result is sheer vibrance. Kirk wore yellow so expect a toned-down purple. In short, TOS is alive and exciting. TNG is... refined... or at least classy beige and lead... and for anything that's not a crew costume is eschewing the primary pigment colors (red, yellow, blue) for adornments but the secondaries (purple, orange, green - and generally as pastels but still unintentionally say "Happy Halloween" in the process). It still looks great, yet is just as bland in its own way. So much pastel you expect to see a marshmallow peep pop out.

TOS's uniforms were cheap and also made to exploit the shiny new color TV. The movies tried to do a more formal militaristic style with the maroon outfits, but then came TNG and eschewed that for more primary color hijinx - but with 80s angles, which work surprisingly well and hold up better than more generic fare that supplanted it by the time of their movies and spinoffs.


More on marshmallow pastel peeps:

If you like classical music:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

For something more Monty Hill or Benny Python:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[at Quark's]

I'd say the most important difference is that on average, the 24th century seems to occur approximately 100 years later than the 23rd century.

TOS feels more 'wild west era' to me. Even if TNG dives into unknown territories to push the frontier of known space as well, there's a far stronger feeling (imho) of how things are supposed to be done - a more settled, perhaps a more bureaucratic Federation, a proper standard way to initiate first contact, to attempt to resolve diplomatic conflicts, etc. Even if such rules also existed in TOS, it felt as if captains (or at least Kirk) played more fast & lose with those rules than Picard did. Then again, that could just have been the personality difference between Picard and Kirk.

 

[Lord Garth]

This is really more 2260s versus 2360s, because the entire 23rd Century wasn't like TOS. The era of DSC Seasons 1-2 wasn't much like TOS and for those who think "New Trek Bad!!!!", TUC also wasn't much like TOS. And that's only looking at the second half the 23rd Century.

Then look at the 24th Century. It was one way in 2364 (TNG Season 1) and then completely different just 10 years later in 2374 (DS9 Season 6). The peaceful Starfleet that Picard represented in early-TNG definitely wasn't the war-torn Starfleet that Sisko represented in late-DS9. After that, Starfleet is somewhere else and a lot more jaded and pragmatic by the time of PIC at the end of the century.

 

[Arpy]

This is really more 2260s versus 2360s, because the entire 23rd Century wasn't like TOS. The era of DSC Seasons 1-2 wasn't much like TOS and for those who think "New Trek Bad!!!!", TUC also wasn't much like TOS. And that's only looking at the second half the 23rd Century.

Then look at the 24th Century. It was one way in 2364 (TNG Season 1) and then completely different just 10 years later in 2374 (DS9 Season 6). The peaceful Starfleet that Picard represented in early-TNG definitely wasn't the war-torn Starfleet that Sisko represented in late-DS9. After that, Starfleet is somewhere else and a lot more jaded and pragmatic by the time of PIC at the end of the century.

Oh, yeah, I'm aware. There are layers of complexity here, especially as later series (with later vibes) took on earlier settings. I'd say ENT was the first of them. And if you discount the Kelvin-verse, both DSC and SNW also present different interpretations of the early/mid-23rd Century from what you might extrapolate from TOS.

In my mind, I could see TOS being different universes between the series, TMP, TWoK-TFF, and even TUC – if you look at how stylistically different the bridge and Klingons are, and how bigoted say Kirk is vs. the previous film. It's not simply a matter of they got new uniforms but how drastically different they are and why, and the stories told with them.

But I digress. I'm mostly interested between TOS and TNG. That's a fascinating gap of time, and I loved how they really tried to extrapolate where things might be ~78 years later.

And yeah, it's further complicated because TNG s1-2 could be their own universe from s3-7, and another one for the movies. But what would you imagine would be most difficult for Scotty to deal with awakened in the TNG era?

 

[Finn]

Technobabble. And were "inverted" ever used in the 23rd?

 

[Paul755]

But I digress. I'm mostly interested between TOS and TNG. That's a fascinating gap of time, and I loved how they really tried to extrapolate where things might be ~78 years later.

that “lost era” is very fascinating to me too. I would have much rather seen a new series set in that era than two more TOS prequels (even though I love SNW). There is so much to explore there with the de-escalation with the Klingons, the Romulans going into hiding. First Contact and then War with the Cardassians, two new Enterprises, etc…

 

[Farscape One]

The Lost Era is a way to have our cake and eat it too... we would get a 'prequel' series because it's set before TNG, a 'sequel' series because it's set after TOS, and it would still be considered 'new' because there is SO MUCH not known about that era.

Whenever the next series is set, I hope it's there.

 

[Arpy]

that “lost era” is very fascinating to me too. I would have much rather seen a new series set in that era than two more TOS prequels (even though I love SNW). There is so much to explore there with the de-escalation with the Klingons, the Romulans going into hiding. First Contact and then War with the Cardassians, two new Enterprises, etc…

Oh yeah, so much there. Klingon refugees and Narendra III, the Battle of Cheron and Treaty of Algeron and whatever secret matter turned the Romulans inward (from which they emerged foreheaded and big-shipped), Cardassian border skirmishes, Tzenkethi War, Tholian attacks, whatever disappeared the Gorn, emergence of the Breen and Jarada and Ferengi as the Federation spread outward, the Talarian War, the annexation of Bajor, the plague and exterminations that wiped out the Tarellian civilization, many new species in the Federation, the Betreka Nebula incident between the Klingons and Cardassians that lasted 18 years, Enterprises B and C, the fate of the Excelsior and all the TOS characters…so much!

 

[M.A.C.O.]

Technobabble. And were "inverted" ever used in the 23rd?

Don’t forget the “1000 and 1 different uses for the main deflector”. You can thank VOY for exploiting that.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The 23rd century had no holodecks. They called it a recreation room.

The 23rd century had no replicators. They called it a synthesiser.

Ever wonder if it was the group of people we followed that were different, not the universe at large?

 

[Arpy]

Ever wonder if it was the group of people we followed that were different, not the universe at large?

That’s less interesting an angle to me. The idea that the more things change the more they stay the same is comforting but paradoxical and unrealistic. If something changes, it changes. That some things take longer to is beside the point. Usually I find it’s the storyteller that makes things similar, not the situation as it would be.

 

[WarpTenLizard]

To me the combadges are the biggest difference. The more prequels we get developing the 32nd Century and its technology, the more awkward it feels to see characters using those big clunky communicators. The invention of iPhones in real life hasn't helped with that matter, since combadges now feel like something we might see in our lifetime.

 

[Oddish]

23rd century: The year starts with 22.
24th century: The year starts with 23.

 

[Qonundrum]

I'd say the most important difference is that on average, the 24th century seems to occur approximately 100 years later than the 23rd century.

TOS feels more 'wild west era' to me. Even if TNG dives into unknown territories to push the frontier of known space as well, there's a far stronger feeling (imho) of how things are supposed to be done - a more settled, perhaps a more bureaucratic Federation, a proper standard way to initiate first contact, to attempt to resolve diplomatic conflicts, etc. Even if such rules also existed in TOS, it felt as if captains (or at least Kirk) played more fast & lose with those rules than Picard did. Then again, that could just have been the personality difference between Picard and Kirk.

As much as I adore Patrick Stewart's performance, the reason I prefer Kirk and Sisko is because they are not afraid to bend the rules if it legitimately helps. Even Captain Sulu bent the rules to help save Kirk and the Khitomer conference. That's almost a thread in of itself... But to compare, no matter how he's written, Picard's almost too often a walking popsicle stick. But Picard was standing on the shoulders of giants.

Also, as far as Starfleet captains go, Sisko is the closest to Dirty Harry. Just without the sardonic quips or those pointless scenes in the movies involving nekkid people to ensure that "R" rating if nothing else had, though I liked the one from "Magnum Force" - that one really subverted expectations... But that's another story...

 

[Arpy]

Thing is, while Kirk and Sulu were bending the rules so were the Klingons and Romulans. When Sisko poisoned a Maquis planet, maybe the Tzenkethi took leave to start poisoning some themselves—for Tzenkethi reasons. It was when say Garrett and even Harriman were beginning to more earnestly follow rules and establish new ones that perhaps others did as well. Interstellar law was established, agreements and expectations set, and witness the result: a Federation that expanded (per Romulan Commander Tabok/Marc Alaimo) “everywhere.” Admiral Quinn noted in TNG S1 that the Federation was having difficulty accommodating all new additions to it by the 24th C, and Admiral Clancy in PIC S1 suggested that “thousands” of races looked to the Federation for support. That sounds like success me. Kirk’s Wild West had been tamed.