I know that.
I'm talking about how things were viewed during TOS.
Khan and the Eugenics War
- Thread starter SiddFinch1
- Start date
I'm talking about how things were viewed during TOS.
Here's another thing to consider. Everyone's assuming the Romulans delayed Khan's birth by 40 years assuming he was at least 20 in the 1990s Eugenics Wars he'd have been born in the 70s and now he's born in 2012).
But Sera's own words and behavior indicate she assumed Khan and the Eugenics Wars would happen in the 1990s and was waiting for 30 years for a chance to even kill him. Which means that she and the Romulans couldn't have been the ones that delayed the Eugenics Wars because otherwise this would not be a surprise to her.
So who actually delayed the Eugenics Wars and Khan's birth? I might theorize that 23rd century Klingons, still trying to cure the Augment virus, might have gone back in time and eliminated Augments in the 1990s to prevent the Augment virus from ever happening.
But Sera's own words and behavior indicate she assumed Khan and the Eugenics Wars would happen in the 1990s and was waiting for 30 years for a chance to even kill him. Which means that she and the Romulans couldn't have been the ones that delayed the Eugenics Wars because otherwise this would not be a surprise to her.
So who actually delayed the Eugenics Wars and Khan's birth? I might theorize that 23rd century Klingons, still trying to cure the Augment virus, might have gone back in time and eliminated Augments in the 1990s to prevent the Augment virus from ever happening.
It might have been an unintended consequence from their interference and something they were not willing to own up to.
Or maybe more will be revealed on this later in the season.
Have fun.
Still the Romulans. Time changed around them and their AI gave them a new target. (Or the new version of the old target)
Just a thought, was that version of Earth Daniels and Archer were stranded on from "Shockwave" the same one as United Earth Fleet Kirk's Earth? It was in ruins, but Archer was able to find a book on the Romulans from before the destruction.
They don’t remove breasts though.
They remove the fatty tissue and stuff the boobies with hard drives.
Her yabbos do %90 of Seven of Nine's thinking.
Ummm the quest for perfection includes aesthetics too. Or something.
Haven't had a chance to see the episode, but the premise sounds great (needing to save a historical monster for the greater good and all that). However, the new show runners obsession with retconning the Eugenics Wars makes no sense to me; none of the arguments have "justified" why retconning the date to keep the franchise from having past events different from our's is needed, esp. since only destroys the pre-established timeline for literally no gain beyond them being able to say: "Hey, it happened in the 2030s now!" It does not make Star Trek any more aspirational than it was before, nor improve the storytelling, and only undermines the tales it's trying to build off of.
Also not sure that having be part of the story that the timeline was changed in-universe makes the retcon any better and might just make things even worse. Pre-SNW, the model seemed to be to just ignore the spoken dates r.e. Khan and the Eugenics Wars and pretend that the characters had said something else (or go for the "fragmentary records got stuff wrong" idea if you needed more than that). It makes hash of the old stories and means we can't understand the story the way it's told, but numbers and dates are easier to fudge than other stuff and it's simple enough. (Also, it was vague enough that fans who didn't want canon broken didn't have to follow it.)
However, now, with it being part of the story that history was changed, the only logical conclusion is that SNW (and the other post-DSC shows?) are now part of an alternate timeline separate from the original prime universe as we know it (TOS/TAS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT/movies 1 - 10). Granted, an alternate timeline might explain some of the broken canon stuff (like the Disc-prise vs. the TOS configuration, "Horbus" vs the Romulan sun, the reimagined SNW Gorn vs the original Gorn, etc.) -- although that does create its own issues, since PIC and LDS only make sense in context of the prime universe 1.0 that SNW is ignoring.
I have liked most of the modern Trek shows as sci-fi shows and am looking forward to catching up on SNW, but I do have to completely divorce them from from the classic stuff to not be bugged by how revisionist the shows are. I don't think the "have their cake and eat it to" take to canon (for all intents and purposes, the show runners want the programs to be both sequels/prequels and reboots, but without the drawbacks of either) is working; the franchise's internal world doesn't make sense anymore when you piece everything together.
Honestly, at this point, I think they should just come out and officially make modern Trek a parallel universe branch of the franchise ("prime universe 2.0"?) that branches off the main one somehow; that's the kind of series they're making, so just own it.
I don't think that's a great analogy; the Marvel universe is a floating timeline with no set end for any of the characters; the Star Trek universe has been fixed for years with characters' stories having endings.
Also not sure that having be part of the story that the timeline was changed in-universe makes the retcon any better and might just make things even worse. Pre-SNW, the model seemed to be to just ignore the spoken dates r.e. Khan and the Eugenics Wars and pretend that the characters had said something else (or go for the "fragmentary records got stuff wrong" idea if you needed more than that). It makes hash of the old stories and means we can't understand the story the way it's told, but numbers and dates are easier to fudge than other stuff and it's simple enough. (Also, it was vague enough that fans who didn't want canon broken didn't have to follow it.)
However, now, with it being part of the story that history was changed, the only logical conclusion is that SNW (and the other post-DSC shows?) are now part of an alternate timeline separate from the original prime universe as we know it (TOS/TAS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT/movies 1 - 10). Granted, an alternate timeline might explain some of the broken canon stuff (like the Disc-prise vs. the TOS configuration, "Horbus" vs the Romulan sun, the reimagined SNW Gorn vs the original Gorn, etc.) -- although that does create its own issues, since PIC and LDS only make sense in context of the prime universe 1.0 that SNW is ignoring.
I have liked most of the modern Trek shows as sci-fi shows and am looking forward to catching up on SNW, but I do have to completely divorce them from from the classic stuff to not be bugged by how revisionist the shows are. I don't think the "have their cake and eat it to" take to canon (for all intents and purposes, the show runners want the programs to be both sequels/prequels and reboots, but without the drawbacks of either) is working; the franchise's internal world doesn't make sense anymore when you piece everything together.
Honestly, at this point, I think they should just come out and officially make modern Trek a parallel universe branch of the franchise ("prime universe 2.0"?) that branches off the main one somehow; that's the kind of series they're making, so just own it.
Let's just say I'm old enough to remember when Iron Man's origin involved Tony Stark being captured in Nam by the Viet Cong. And when Captain America was traumatized by Watergate, after being unthawed from the ice in . . . the early 1960s. And the Hulk was created by . . . an outdoor nuclear-bomb test in the New Mexico? You know, the kind we have all the time these days.
Marvel Comics have always operated on a sliding timescale in terms of current events, so that exactly which conflict Tony Stark was injured in keeps being moved forward. Ditto for what wars Nick Fury fought in.
And, of course, to explain why Spider-Man isn't collecting Social Security Payments after being a high school kid in the 1960s.
I don't think that's a great analogy; the Marvel universe is a floating timeline with no set end for any of the characters; the Star Trek universe has been fixed for years with characters' stories having endings.
Why not treat it that way? Parallels sets the precedent. TNG shifted the Eugenics Wars to 21st century and now its associated with WW3 again.
If the disparities are too much then why not be proactive?
Ironically, despite feeling the need to justify why they're breaking canon, I don't think the Powers That Be see themselves as creating a new universe, just "fixing" an old mistake, so the franchise will continue to present itself as if everything goes together. However, that doesn't really work, either; all the new shows are tied to the old ones in some way and don't make sense divorced from them (Picard is literally a revival of Next Generation, following up on old episodes and all that). Without the original prime universe intact, the new shows fall apart internally.
There's also the issue that there's a point where you need to take the show on its own terms, which, so far, are clearly "everything is canon even when we break it." I get that realistically, there's a point where something's going to give and that perfect cohesion was never going to happen. I just don't get why the Powers That Be are so anal over this one detail that they're will to make a mess of continuity over something doesn't even "fix" what they claim is broken? (Seriously, how does moving the Eugenics Wars into our future make Star Trek any better?). The pointlessness of it all is kinda depressing. I've often on suggested the perspective that Star Trek canon is broken and doesn't really exist anymore and it's best to watch the shows through that lens (if the people making it don't care about canon, why should we?). Still, it's stuff like this that reminds me just fun the puzzle pieces actually fitting together was.
Yes, that's how canon works.
Hope for humanity.
I mean, that's my approach. I don't understand the fatalistic or nihilistic approach that if "They don't care about canon so why should we?" I stated elsewhere but my whole enjoyment of Trek was creativity in the face of contradictions. I mean, I've studied enough history and various accounts of different stories to know that stories are not strictly literal, details get missed and new information is not discontinuous. It just means more creativity at times, or appreciating another perspective of telling a tale. If we take it literally, then it's frustrating. If we take it more metaphorically and work within the sandbox then I think more fun can be had.
That's me. I never felt like I lost much if shows didn't connect together. I take shows as standalone objects in the telling of the world.
You can't break canon. You can break continuity, but everything is canon, even the contradictions.
Both James R. Kirk and James T. Kirk are canon, but one has just taken priority over the other.
Especially the contradictions
Now don't go throwing around words like contradictions for no reason.
With all due apologies to Red vs. Blue.
They just announced the final season...
Similar threads
