Trek is too inconsistent and contradictory to have a canon. Its meaningless ...
Canon is a word and a concept that trek could stand to lose.
Yes, this is where i sort of stood, i mean its a kind of unsubstantiated interpreted dogma sometimes and thats why i didn't really understand why some people were so catagorically sure about canon infringments when using phrases like 'this film is not star trek, it breaks canon; you have betrayed your trekkiedom' as if they had the authority to make that judgement.
Understand, it's all psychology.
Hardcore "trekkies" are people who obsess over the smallest detail concerning the version of the Trek universe they insist on perceiving as "canon". The more accurately and detailed this universe is defined, the more real it becomes (for them, and in product). The more stable, stagnant, and unchanging this universe remains....the more permanent the foundation of episodes, rules, and character traits become....the more consistent this reality becomes, and thus, more easily escaped into by said "trekkie". Within a constuct of their own acceptance and design, they have power over that universe. And, thus, power over their life.
Once you remove the stability of that universe....once you change any detail to any drastic degree, or threaten to rewrite their "permanent foundation"....that is when the conflict occurs for them. You are removing their power. Their control and percieved "ownership" of said universe.
That's why you have these few that lament and wail over the new movie. They are trapped. They cannot accept it into their controlled universe, because of its alien elements (sexuality, emotional flaws, pop culture, etc.), elements that remind them of the real world. For many who require a Trek universe to escape into, these elements could actually be the things they are escaping from. It is not an insult to say that sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll do not mix with Trekkies. The sex part, especially. This is not within their control, thus they shun it.
On the flipside, it is onscreen, stars Leonard Nimoy's Spock, and is from all possible angles,
Star Trek.
So, the immediate weapon of "Cannonical Debate" is drawn, and the tantrums begin. Beware these supposed "fans". They do not support Star Trek. They support their personal corporate fantasy world. They support "more of the same" because they require the comfort, the reassurance, the control that this little bubble of fandom has given them their entire life. They do not care for new fans. They care for converting new fans to their perceptions of these fantasy worlds. They long for like-minded company, because there is security within the pack. They long for the pack mentality, because within an emotional furvor, whoever screams the loudest gets the most accolades, and....this is the key here.....the
most validation.
If being a hardcore "trekkie" is their life, then maintaining a rigid stance on what they perceive to be Star Trek is the validation of their life.
). gammon? thats gonna be my next thread. star trek gammon.
(we need a "cowering pitiously in the corner" smilie)
