I believe it has been established that JTK has only one nephew. If I'm wrong, I'll be sure to hear about it.
That's ambiguous. "What Are Little Girls Made Of?" stated that George Samuel "Sam" Kirk had three sons. "Operation -- Annihilate!" later claimed that Peter Kirk was Captain Kirk's only surviving relative. Some fans have resolved the contradiction by assuming the other two nephews died sometime in the few months between those episodes, or that they died in the parasite attack but somehow went unmentioned. But several previous tie-ins have ignored the line from OA and depicted Kirk's three nephews. Bottom line, it's a continuity error and there's no consensus on how to resolve it.
Trek works best if you look at it as examples from all the various universes. In Universe #1285 JTK has three nephews. In Universe #250 he only has one. In a similar fashion Universe #29042 we see a James Kirk with the middle initial of R. There are no continuity errors, just an infinite numer of universes, some quite similar, some remarkably different.
The run from TOS through ENT are fairly similar in their history. The 2009 movie is much more removed but still using the broad strokes.
It all fits.
Bashir: What I want to know is, out of all the stories you told me which ones were true and which ones weren't?
Garak: My dear doctor...they're all true.
Bashir: Even the continuity errors?
Garak: Especially the continuity errors.
I find that a very unsatisfying way to look at it, since it's basically saying episode X didn't happen to the same crew we saw in episode Y or novel Z. I prefer to see all the episodes, movies and books (excepting the ones deliberately out-of-continuity) as windows into some "real" (for lack of a much-needed better word) Trek universe. Some windows are clear, others are fogged up to varying degrees, jumbling the details a bit.
For what it's worth, I saw it on sale today at two stores in Newark, Delaware.
Glad to hear the electronic version is beaming in as well.
I find that a very unsatisfying way to look at it, since it's basically saying episode X didn't happen to the same crew we saw in episode Y or novel Z. I prefer to see all the episodes, movies and books (excepting the ones deliberately out-of-continuity) as windows into some "real" (for lack of a much-needed better word) Trek universe. Some windows are clear, others are fogged up to varying degrees, jumbling the details a bit.
Well, look at it this way: Maybe the same stories, the same events, happen in multiple parallel timelines, but with some of the details being different. So you are basically seeing an adventure that happened to the familiar crew, you're just seeing a slightly different version than the one they experienced. That's not so different from what you're proposing -- you are seeing a slightly off-kilter version of a story the Prime crew experienced, but because a slightly different timeline was selected rather than because the details were recorded wrong.
This is basically what the Voyager novel Echoes depicts outright -- many different parallel versions of Voyager arriving at the same planet at the same time and having essentially the same experiences for the most part (though with some major differences for some of them), but with subtle differences in the details, like one Voyager having a two-person helm console instead of one-person, one Chakotay having a different tattoo, and so on. The book portrays its cross-timeline events from the perspectives of three main crews, but it's indicated that there are thousands of other parallel crews experiencing much the same adventure in much the same way. Similarly with TNG: "Parallels" -- the first few timelines Worf jumps to are essentially the same as his own, meaning the same events must have happened, but some details happened differently.
I find that a very unsatisfying way to look at it, since it's basically saying episode X didn't happen to the same crew we saw in episode Y or novel Z. I prefer to see all the episodes, movies and books (excepting the ones deliberately out-of-continuity) as windows into some "real" (for lack of a much-needed better word) Trek universe. Some windows are clear, others are fogged up to varying degrees, jumbling the details a bit.
Well, look at it this way: Maybe the same stories, the same events, happen in multiple parallel timelines, but with some of the details being different. So you are basically seeing an adventure that happened to the familiar crew, you're just seeing a slightly different version than the one they experienced. That's not so different from what you're proposing -- you are seeing a slightly off-kilter version of a story the Prime crew experienced, but because a slightly different timeline was selected rather than because the details were recorded wrong.
This is basically what the Voyager novel Echoes depicts outright -- many different parallel versions of Voyager arriving at the same planet at the same time and having essentially the same experiences for the most part (though with some major differences for some of them), but with subtle differences in the details, like one Voyager having a two-person helm console instead of one-person, one Chakotay having a different tattoo, and so on. The book portrays its cross-timeline events from the perspectives of three main crews, but it's indicated that there are thousands of other parallel crews experiencing much the same adventure in much the same way. Similarly with TNG: "Parallels" -- the first few timelines Worf jumps to are essentially the same as his own, meaning the same events must have happened, but some details happened differently.
Exactly the argument I attempted to make in the Star Trek XI forum last summer when you, me, and Greg Cox were debating the differences in the universes between William Shatner's Kirk, and Chris Pine's Kirk, only then, you didn't see what I was saying.
Looking at the awesome cover makes me wish I did not get the ebook. Maybe if Greg does a book signing in NYC I can pick up a copy![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.