Spoilers Would you consider the things that Matalas wanted to happen as canon?

[Sci]

Dax mentioned to O'Brien how he expected to die surrounded by his family at 140. Either that was an average human life span for a 24th century human or she was exaggerating. McCoy was over 130 plus in TNG, so not implausible at all

Given the context, I definitely interpreted that as Jadzia telling Miles he would live to an unrealistically old age, the equivalent of telling someone today that they'll live to 100. So I would not take 140 as a plausible lifespan for the vast majority of Humans even in the 25th Century.

 

[Gepard]

On the other hand, DS9 had 26-hour-long days, one of those tropey ways of using crazy names and numbers to tell the audience it's The Future, so I took "140 years" in that sense.

 

[Scionz]

Nothing is going to make Star Trek look weak and exhausted than constant do-overs, especially those that involve death.

Counterpoint 1: the biggest Star Trek movie ever in involved a new spin on the TOS crew. That's the biggest of do-overs and the rail the franchise long ignored. Now it's done it twice (Kelvin and Prime)

Counterpoint 2: SNW is at the very heart of the franchise and treading the well worn 23rd century era, telling an enterprise ensamble story (albeit with some new players). Picard Season 3 is the TNG wrap up that retreaded an enormous amount of Trek canon and fixed it. And it's Streaming Trek's biggest hit yet.

There is no evidence that death has any upside in bringing in viewers, nor undoing it have any downside. Best move is to avoid playing that silly game entirely. Because death in fiction is utterly meaningless. It isn't real. It just ends storylines.

 

[Nyotarules]

Given the context, I definitely interpreted that as Jadzia telling Miles he would live to an unrealistically old age, the equivalent of telling someone today that they'll live to 100. So I would not take 140 as a plausible lifespan for the vast majority of Humans even in the 25th Century.

This is a universe where humans have babies with aliens, where beings don't stay dead. Anything is plausible

 

[Sci]

This is a universe where humans have babies with aliens

I mean, sure, but again that interpretation would seem to contradict Jadzia's intention, which was clearly to pick an age Miles was statistically unlikely to reach in order to give him some confidence in a dangerous situation.

 

[Sci]

Because death in fiction is utterly meaningless. It isn't real. It just ends storylines.

To say that an element of a work of art is meaningless because it is fictional is essentially an assertion that art can have no greater merit or significance than mere amusement.

 

[Scionz]

To say that an element of a work of art is meaningless because it is fictional is essentially an assertion that art can have no greater merit or significance than mere amusement.

If I want art, I go to the National Gallery, or go to Broadway or to a concert.

Star Trek has artistic elements, but its an entertainment fantasy franchise. That is what my 30 years as a fan has led me to. For all the higher-concepts and dollar store pop philosophy Trek fans has been peddling in for decades, on an artistic level, this is one step above a Saturday Morning cartoon (not that they make those anymore).

And I said this before, but what really drove home that point to me, was in the last season when Discovery tried to hard science a plot point. I appreciated the effort. Really. It was illustrative of how far our understanding of space has evolved since Voyager's bullshit science. But it was also completely out of place. Star Trek is predicated on bullshit science. Tachyons and Subspace. There is not an ounce of science fiction in this franchise that isnt window dressing. It's identical to Star Wars. It's fantasy.

And to that end, I hold it to the same creative standard as a work. I don't look for artistry here. I look for escapism.

It's not Star Trek, but there was an issue of this in Star Wars recently. Andor. Andor was a very good series. It was very deep. Very relatable. And it got high praise from a lot of media figures who never paid attention to the other 98% of Star Wars. And then those people turned into Mandalorian Season 3 and wondered what the hell were they watching, when they saw Lizzo and Jack Black embrace the cheese. Because Star Wars is fundamentally silly, and Andor was a mirage. There is no real art in Star Wars. It's escapism that sells merch.

I think we'd be better off societally, if we were clearer in demarcating where to expect art and where to expect entertainment. I didn't go to Ant Man to see compelling family drama or or feel like its relatable or something ridiculous like that. I saw it to see Scott Lang punch Kang in the Microverse.

Star Trek is every bit as ridiculous and one of the high points of SNW is that it is very self aware about that. Picard was too. It was just better at hiding it. Let's keep in mind the main character runs around in a "synth" body, whatever that is, and is the same person because of mind transfer, which is impossible, and his worst day recently is because a Changeling in a ship that was designed in a lab to look fearsome, made the Titan eat its own photon torpedoes thanks to a portal gun.

Or heck, super serious season 1, examining life and death, hot dropped a Borg cube on a planet, and it didn't devastate the continent . And it did it after it got attacked by a giant flower defense system. Why? Because it was spectacle for the audience.

Star Trek is a silly, silly show. And looking or art in it is a silly, silly premise. And you know who gets this the most? The actors. They alway seize on the fleeting serious moments.But they know the draw, and what they do thirty times as much, is silly fantasy talk. Patrick Stewart was a real trooper saying some of the things he said in Season 3, but you could tell through his acting he was grimacing sometimes.

 

[Sci]

If I want art, I go to the National Gallery, or go to Broadway or to a concert.

Star Trek has artistic elements, but its an entertainment fantasy franchise. That is what my 30 years as a fan has led me to. For all the higher-concepts and dollar store pop philosophy Trek fans has been peddling in for decades, on an artistic level, this is one step above a Saturday Morning cartoon (not that they make those anymore).

1) The assertion you made applied to all art, not just popular art.

2) I don't know how you can assert that Star Trek does not have levels of greater artistic depth when you have episodes like "The City on the Edge of Forever," or "Family," or "The Visitor," or "Far Beyond the Stars," or "Past Tense," or "In the Pale Moonlight," or "Forget Me Not," or "Remembrance." Star Trek can certainly have its silly and shallow episodes too, but it also has episodes with a great deal of depth. And when resurrection is employed so casually, especially after work has been done to explore grief and existentialism in previous episodes, that's really disrespectful to the artistic work that was previously done.

And I said this before, but what really drove home that point to me, was in the last season when Discovery tried to hard science a plot point. I appreciated the effort. Really. It was illustrative of how far our understanding of space has evolved since Voyager's bullshit science. But it was also completely out of place. Star Trek is predicated on bullshit science. Tachyons and Subspace. There is not an ounce of science fiction in this franchise that isnt window dressing. It's identical to Star Wars. It's fantasy.

I don't really see how that's applicable to the question of artistic merit.

And to that end, I hold it to the same creative standard as a work. I don't look for artistry here. I look for escapism.

And much of Star Trek is escapism. But much of Star Trek is not. I don't begrudge the Star Trek episodes/films that are just escapism, but it bothers me when new episodes deliberately undermine the efforts at artistic merit previous episodes made.

Star Trek is every bit as ridiculous and one of the high points of SNW is that it is very self aware about that. Picard was too. It was just better at hiding it. Let's keep in mind the main character runs around in a "synth" body, whatever that is, and is the same person because of mind transfer, which is impossible,

And those are sci-fi versions of the idea of new life after descending into the underworld to see a loved one -- the Orpheus myth with a sci-fi skin. That's not escapism; that's one of humanity's oldest metaphors for the experience of finding one's self embracing life again after grieving a loved one.

 

[Lord Garth]

Dax mentioned to O'Brien how he expected to die surrounded by his family at 140. Either that was an average human life span for a 24th century human or she was exaggerating. McCoy was over 130 plus in TNG, so not implausible at all

Given the context, I definitely interpreted that as Jadzia telling Miles he would live to an unrealistically old age, the equivalent of telling someone today that they'll live to 100. So I would not take 140 as a plausible lifespan for the vast majority of Humans even in the 25th Century.

On the other hand, DS9 had 26-hour-long days, one of those tropey ways of using crazy names and numbers to tell the audience it's The Future, so I took "140 years" in that sense.

McCoy at 137 on the subject of age, "What's so troublesome about not having died?"

Today, that would sound like an 87-year-old. So I'm guessing 130 for them is like 85 for us. Which means the average lifespan is probably more like 110 or 120. Making 96-year-old Picard still old, but not "How the Hell are you still alive?!" old.

 

[DEWLine]

The 26-hour day was their way of saying "it's not Earth".

 

[Timofnine]

Unless Matalas’ musings appears ‘on screen’, they are not canon. Anything Terry *wanted* to happen is his own personal fan-fic , because he did not… “make it so” when he had the chance to do so, hehe.

Boungelikki buckets *are* canon though.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Given the context, I definitely interpreted that as Jadzia telling Miles he would live to an unrealistically old age, the equivalent of telling someone today that they'll live to 100. So I would not take 140 as a plausible lifespan for the vast majority of Humans even in the 25th Century.

McCoy probably lived to age 137 because, as a doctor, he'd have access to the very latest medical advances to keep himself alive. Who knows if the average Joe would also be that lucky.

 

[Yistaan]

McCoy probably lived to age 137 because, as a doctor, he'd have access to the very latest medical advances to keep himself alive. Who knows if the average Joe would also be that lucky.

Everything we're told about the Federation says that this kind of inequality, and presumably the very important issue of health care inequality (which is very much an issue in our real world right now) has been abolished by the time of Trek.

Yes, Raffi lives in a trailer but it still counts as a home and presumably her trailer's replicator provides all the clothing and food she needs. Even with the "downbeat" atmosphere of Picard there's still the impression that top care medical aid is available to any citizen who wants it (unless of course your healthcare requires a synth, sorry Riker and Troi).

 

[Racefuel]

Nothing, in any way, has Earth been shown in Picard to have fallen out of the idealized nature we saw it in TNG and DS9. Now the galaxy outside of Federation space...

Supremely different story

 

[The Wormhole]

Remember, the Star Trek Countdown comic was supposed to be Kurtzman's headcanon on what happened in the Prime universe leading up to Spock meeting Nero. Until it wasn't when Kurtzman himself contradicted it with Picard.

Kurtzman had nothing to do with Countdown. That was Orci's project.

 

[dswynne1]

I would basically agree with you but the complete disregard of canon would eventually lead to a declaration of invalidity towards the franchise’s fundamental structure. If nothing about past events is important for future iterations of the franchise, you could turn the 5 year mission of the TOS Enterprise into a fever dream of a 13th century merchant. From one second to the other, Star Trek wouldn’t be a science fiction franchise anymore but a GoT rip off without dragons…

SNIP!

The interesting side-note about the "canonicity" of TOS? The novelization of TMP implied that the Enterprise's "5-Year Mission" was exaggerated for public consumption, direct from James T. Kirk's thoughts on the matter.

 

[Racefuel]

Gene was pretty clear he considered TOS to be an approximation of events, where TMP and TNG were literal

 

[Yistaan]

Gene was pretty clear he considered TOS to be an approximation of events, where TMP and TNG were literal

He also decanonized TAS supposedly and said that Sybok's existence was apocryphal (both of these can be found in the Star Trek Omnipedia/Encyclopedia editions in the 1990s). Those obviously do not reflect the current stance on canon by the rights holders Paramount/CBS, seen most dramatically in Sybok's appearance in Strange New Worlds.

 

[Racefuel]

No I know, I'm meaning that even 35 years ago now the status of TOS being not literal was in place

 

[Nerys Myk]

He also decanonized TAS supposedly and said that Sybok's existence was apocryphal (both of these can be found in the Star Trek Omnipedia/Encyclopedia editions in the 1990s). Those obviously do not reflect the current stance on canon by the rights holders Paramount/CBS, seen most dramatically in Sybok's appearance in Strange New Worlds.

Probably didn’t reflect the rights holders in the 90s, either.