Nardpuncher
Rear Admiral
Are you and YARN friends or the same person?!!?
Is TOS really part of Trek Canon?
- Thread starter YARN
- Start date
YARN
Fleet Captain
Nard, I think your irony sensor array may be malfunctioning.
Our brother George seems to be in earnest about all this stuff.
I think the question of whether TOS is canon is the silliest canon question imaginable (out of all the silly canon debates I've encountered). My job here is one of satire.
I thought that the silliness of advocating removing TOS from canon could serve to illuminate the absurdity of other such crusades.
The method of reductio ad absurdum only works, however, if you arrive at ground that people agree is manifestly absurd. George is proof of the general limits of this method -- he does not see it as absurd, so the method does not work in cases like his.
For the satire-impaired I have been dropping winking hints and even offered literal explanations of my position (such as this). If George is arguing in earnest, then we are diametrically opposed on this issue.
When will people learn that sarcasm does NOT translate well in writing especially on the Internet?
Yeah, this is a board where people have tried to "prove" all sorts of batshit crazy stuff, from "Nimoy isn't playing the Spock we know in STXI but a different Spock", "Enterprise is an alternate timeline to TOS" (boy, are they passionate and long winded about that 
) and various other things that basically translate to "ignore what you've seen on TV because I've declared it wrong and my way's better and the tro0 can0n"
For every troll thread started there are 10 people who actually mean it.
) and various other things that basically translate to "ignore what you've seen on TV because I've declared it wrong and my way's better and the tro0 can0n"For every troll thread started there are 10 people who actually mean it.
YARN
Fleet Captain
What is so unique about the internet as opposed to other modes of writing? Is it easier to track sacrasm in a book or in a newspaper article? If so, how so.
If sarcasm and irony are not well-suited to writing in general, then whither Swift's Modest Proposal?
Finally, how many times do I have to explicitly and literally tell you what I am up to (not just providing winking hints in the text), before you figure it out?
I don't think you can really cry foul on this thread.
What baffles me is that there are people who are actually in agreement with my OP.
Oh well...
Are you for real without TOS as a building block THEY WOULD BE NO STAR TREK FRANCHISE. !!!!
You must stop smoking sixties drugs there not good for you and try to embrace the legendary series know as STAR TREK .
Yeah, those are both still true.
"TOS isn't really Trek." Uh... yeah. Right. What, were you born in the 1990's? TOS is the beginning of it all. If it never was, all that followed wouldn't exist. So, to say it isn't really Trek is just... well, completely without merit.
Flop? No. It was one of the most expensive television series of its time. The ratings system was in its infancy. And the Star Trek executive producers had to constantly convince NBC that it was what the public wanted. There were enough Westerns (but NBC wanted more). A good sci-fi series needed to be there. Gene had to call it "wagon train to the stars" in order to get it through the NBC executive board. But by the 3rd season NBC decided to move Star Trek to the "death slot", late evening on Friday. And that effectively killed it. If it really was due to the series being junk, there wouldn't have been such serious success in syndication.
Yes, you got that right. There was no hype needed for the movies. Star Trek was very popular in syndication, enough to spawn the first movie in 1979. That was 10 years after TOS had been canceled. TOS was ahead of its time and finally recognized after NBC pulled it. There would have been a "phase II" series, but... various complications ensued. It eventually became TMP movie.
So before you stand up and bash TOS, you might want to get your facts straight.
There are so many scientific liberties taken in Star Trek series and movies. TNG tried to sound too legitimate by choking the dialog with techno-babble. It was really too much. It was also too idealistic, making characters look too perfect and sterile. It also created a number of conflicting ideals, like there being no concept of "money" in the Federation. Hah. Anyway, TOS could have benefited with a little more techno-jargon, but overall it was fine. And yeah, the special effects look very dated today... but that has been taken care of with the remastering.
So I wouldn't completely disregard TOS. You have to watch it with respect of when it was made. The cultural influences of the 1960's. It's classic sci-fi. And it's filled with many treasures worth seeing.
threads like this remind me of people who refuse to watch black and white movies. why do they refuse? 'cause black and white is, like, so old!' right. when you'd rather watch Transformers Revenge of the Fallen instead of Frankenstein or Seven Samurai or any of a hundred other classic black and white movies then you may need medication.
The short bus/shuttlecraft always arrives late.I may not know what George IS a fan of, but I have not seen any which do not blast TOS or ST09. Can you spell troll?
Knock it off
No problem. He's an actor, not a continuity buff. He just reads the lines.
Did someone really just ask if TOS was cannon
Now I seen it all.
There's no medication that can raise your IQ.
Did someone really just ask if TOS was cannon
Now I seen it all.
There's no medication that can raise your IQ.
lol. true.
Listen to me....
Don't blow a gasket over it...
How can you have "canon" without the original series? but if you wish you can read the following..(I tried, it turns personal enjoyment of a genre of TV shows into WORK and I really don't get too worked up over "canon") http://www.canonwars.com/STCanon.html#I
And in conclusion..
And since it's live-action..Star Trek (2009) is canon using the above criteria...
so..It's ALL canon...
Big whoop
Don't blow a gasket over it...
How can you have "canon" without the original series? but if you wish you can read the following..(I tried, it turns personal enjoyment of a genre of TV shows into WORK and I really don't get too worked up over "canon") http://www.canonwars.com/STCanon.html#I
And in conclusion..
And since it's live-action..Star Trek (2009) is canon using the above criteria...
so..It's ALL canon...
Big whoop
This IS a joke, isn't it?
YARN
Fleet Captain
I thought it was, but then some people started agreeing with me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JQWVahlQx8
Last edited:
No problem. He's an actor, not a continuity buff. He just reads the lines.
Nimoy's done a lot more for Spock, and Star Trek, than just read lines. He defined one of the most iconic characters in television, and he directed two of the movies. When he comes back to play Spock one last time, he's playing the Spock.
L
Lord Garth
Guest
Then what do you do about "Relics" (TNG), "Trials and Tribble-ations" (DS9), and "In the Mirror Darkly" (ENT) which featured TOS designs? Should they be rendered non-canon?
What about the fact that Vulcan was destroyed in Star Trek (2009) yet Vulcan is visited in the movies and TNG but not referred to as "New Vulcan"?
Visually, I can't see TNG/DS9/VOY as an outgrowth of ST XI. If Star Trek makes its way back to the 24th Century, it'll look very different from how it did before.
Finally, this is 2010. A lot of other 20th Century series have been rebooted, especially in movie form. Audiences know the difference.
Similar threads
- Poll
