Is there any Star Trek that is not "canon" for you?

[QuasarVM]

canon shmanon. there's stuff i omit from my personal continuity, like TATV, Threshold, Spock's Brain and Way to Eden...but i also add in books and my own fan-fic...

Nope. If it makes it onscreen, it should be canon -- although I certainly understand the temptation to create one's own personal "canon".

But, I don't even like it when producers, writers and actors say..."Well, that one didn't count because I didn't like this or that about it".

Bullshit! You wrote it, acted in it, produced it and broadcast it. It's yours!

You own it now buddy. Don't give me this "I take it back" crap!

If my eyeballs beheld it and it was recorded in my ganglia (or "gangula" as McCoy said in the wonderful and epic "Spock's Brain") and auditory nerves, then it's part of the canon.

 

[uniderth]

A lot of people will say that if it's on screen it's canon. But this certainly is not a true statement. The Animated Series was on screen but Gene Roddenberry specifically said it is not canon. But from my research one of the main reasons he didn't want TAS to be canon was beacuse of the "Slaver Weapon" It uses two of Larry Niven's species, the Slavers and the Kzinti. Mr. Roddenberry didn't want to open the dorr to have the rest of Niven's universe included in Star Trek. I would love to have TAS included as canon but the reason I reject it is because of a few lines and the looks and designs of the technology. One specific technology is Life Support belts. For me to consider TAS canon the LSBs would have to be replaced with space suits.

But either way the "if it's on screen it's canon" has been disproved. So the only Star Trek I don't consider canon is TAS.

Enterprise and "Star Trek 2009" are not Star Trek. If I said they were a Star Trek I don't count as canon, then I would be admitting that they are part of Star Trek.

 

[JustKate]

Paramount has said that TAS isn't canon - Paramount's criteria are everything on-screen that's live action.

 

[QuasarVM]

Paramount has said that TAS isn't canon - Paramount's criteria are everything on-screen that's live action.

Yeah, I addressed producers and studios trying to say "We take it back".

I'm against it. I guess I kinda-sorta see a good case for it with "Slaver Weapon" though...for the reasons stated.

 

[kissthestar]

If it's on screen, it's canon. I just ignore the cartoons, but they were Roddenberry approved.

 

[Misfit Toy]

I've been in fandom for a long time - and part of the fun (at least in the early years) was to take the stuff that many consider non-canon and come up with a reasonable (or not) explanation for it - thereby making it easier to accept as canon.

 

[The Super Brando]

For me, I consider the following not canon:

TAS
DS9 seasons 4-7
Voyager "Threshold"
ENT seasons 1-3
Star Trek TMP
Insurrection
Nemesis
TOS
DS9 seasons 1-3
Enterprise season 4
Voyager season 1
Voyager seasons 2-7
TOS
First Contact
TNG
Star Trek movies 2-6

 

[kent]

I keep reading people's responses that "in their version" of star trek, or "in my opnion" in so many words, this isn't canon, then they list almost everything Star Trek has created.

Uh, so is the opnion or your version canon? Did that version get produced, made a TV series, then spawn movies? I don't think so.

Everything POST TOS, movies included, and some authorized publications, are considered canon. Not one pinion, not someone's version of Star Trek. Everything you basically see on screen that aren't cartoons. There have been mistakes on the part of the writers here and there, no doubt, but they're only human after all. People should just try to rationalize it and work mistakes into the canon using common sense.

I should think the ONLY, the ONE, exception would be Enterprise considering they really kind of messed with the established timeline post TOS ("Photonic" torpedo's when they should've been using nukes, "Phase canons" when they should've been using highoutput lasers, and the "Akiraprise".). That show was, if you suspended disbelief a lot of the time, a good show. But I had to consider it a show of it's own to enjoy it, not a Star Trek series.

 

[kent]

I've been in fandom for a long time - and part of the fun (at least in the early years) was to take the stuff that many consider non-canon and come up with a reasonable (or not) explanation for it - thereby making it easier to accept as canon.

That is EXACTLY what people should do. Like in "Threshold"....yes i'm using one of the most challenged episodes ever....Perhaps they didn't ACTUALLY break the warp 10 barrier and travel at infinite speed...It seemed to me that Paris simply broke down some barrier between physical space. So it seems not a matter of speed, but physical property he barrelled through. To maintain that on a linear scale to me would be attaining REAL warp 10.

And perhaps along the way, Janeway and Paris' DNA mutated or merged with some other species, causing them to "evolve" into amphibians of some sort.

A strech, I know, but with mistakes like that littered along all the series, it's what you have to do.

 

[Rarewolf]

I've got all the Trek I want on my shelf - TOS, TAS, the 10 movies, TNG, DS9 and Voyager. That's my canon.

 

[kent]

There are things here and there that I didn't like, but I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and "pretend it never happened." That's pretty silly.

See, I don't understand why you'd consider it silly. It's an imagined universe in the first place. So why can't I imagine it to be the way I think it should be?

For me, for example, excluding certain episodes and certain events makes the universe far more enjoyable. And what's wrong with that?

I mean, I don't deny that those things were filmed, and I don't deny or mind that other people count all of it in. But what's the problem with seeing a fictional universe meant to be entertainment in a way that makes it more entertaining for oneself?

One, because your imagined universe is a fan-spawn of what's already happened in the Trek verse. You can't just go back and say an entire chunk of time or character development didn't happen. Your version is just that, YOUR version. It's not canon, and never made it to screen. It's simply just fan-entertainment.

Secondly, you are right. There is nothing wrong with making the universe more enjoyable and re-working it to be more realistic. I've had my own idea's as well. But it's NOT canon, I have to accept it and so do other's who like writing or being involved with fan-fic, or at least the idea of it. It might be entertaining, but until "Star Trek, Reimagined" makes it to screen it's not considered canon. Though I would like to see a few of the series re-imagined. Imagine Voyager living to its FULL potential? OR reimagine DS9 battles?

It would be pretty sweet.

 

[SFRabid]

If I cared about canon I would discard anything after TOS season 1 episode 3 (or somewhere close to that episode) when Spock changed from having an "ancestor" that is partially human to having a human mother.

I'm glad Trek has never been bound to the strict canon that some fans believe should exist.

 

[captcalhoun]

For me, I consider the following not canon:

TAS
DS9 seasons 4-7
Voyager "Threshold"
ENT seasons 1-3
Star Trek TMP
Insurrection
Nemesis
TOS
DS9 seasons 1-3
Enterprise season 4
Voyager season 1
Voyager seasons 2-7
TOS
First Contact
TNG
Star Trek movies 2-6

um, that's all of it?

 

[I am not Spock]

^Ha ha! He's decanonised all of Trek! LOL

For me, it all happened. If its on screen, its canon. I don't much care for cartoons, though, so I ignore the existence of TAS. Apparently, that ain't canon anyway.

 

[Kinggodzillak]

Enterprise. Just Enterprise. It doesn't fit the established timeline at all...

Actually...Voyager too. In my personal canon Voyager left DS9, got lost and was never heard from again.

It's also in my personal canon that when Starfleet called up DS9 to have them go look for Voyager, Sisko did that 'your signal's breaking up, I can't understand a word you're saying' thing before hanging up and going off to do something more important. Like cutting his toenails.

 

[MyCylon]

One, because your imagined universe is a fan-spawn of what's already happened in the Trek verse. You can't just go back and say an entire chunk of time or character development didn't happen. Your version is just that, YOUR version. It's not canon, and never made it to screen. It's simply just fan-entertainment.

I agree, it's not canon. But I don't see a problem with that. It's simply one's personal version of the universe and as such is only meaningful to oneself or others who have a similar take on the universe.

When I'm in a discussion with others, I'll naturally acknowledge everything that has been filmed since, obviously, not everybody is going to agree with my take.

But as far as one's personal 'use' is concerned, I think one can easily ignore stuff that just doesn't seem to make sense or doesn't seem to work or stuff one just doesn't like. Again, it's an imagined universe that you can imagine to be whatever you like, really.

Now as far as the producers or writers are concerned, I think that's different. They can't just say, 'it never happened'. It's their work, their responsibility, they put it on screen.

Maybe the problem is simply deciding on what you might call your own continuity. It's not canon, and maybe 'personal canon' runs the risk of being too confusing.

 

[Myasishchev]

Enterprise. Just Enterprise. It doesn't fit the established timeline at all...

Actually...Voyager too. In my personal canon Voyager left DS9, got lost and was never heard from again.

It's also in my personal canon that when Starfleet called up DS9 to have them go look for Voyager, Sisko did that 'your signal's breaking up, I can't understand a word you're saying' thing before hanging up and going off to do something more important. Like cutting his toenails.

Enterprise had its downs, but at the end of the day at least it was all "in the past," so to speak. It was locked away in the 22nd century, and couldn't hurt anything else. If it did something silly, like the Xindi, I could just pat it on the head and say, "Better luck next time." And sometimes they'd do some entertaining stuff, especially in season 4, and I'd feel okay about the show. Not cordial. But I admitted its right to exist, where it did not contradict, directly or by unavoidable inference, the Good Three.

But the perfidious dead hand of Voyager reached into Trek's future, and it has not let go.

 

[Brolan]

Canon has no meaning because any writer (who just happens to working on a Trek show or movie) can change even well-established canon on a whim.

Anything you think is canon just hasn't been messed with yet.

 

[Lowdarzz]

It's all cannon to me and its all high quality entertainment compared to the crap hollywood spews out these days. Some just rise a little above the rest. *cough* TOS, TNG *cough*

 

[M'Sharak]

Contemno proinde non canonus.