Connie - TOS canon nomenclature

Discussion in 'Star Trek - The Original & Animated Series' started by Wingsley, Jul 9, 2014.

  1. sojourner

    sojourner Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    Just around the bend.
    2 and 3. especially when you use them to reinforce each other. What is seen on screen is ultimately the only canon, even if it contradicts itself. Everything else is just fanwank.
     
  2. Dukhat

    Dukhat Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland, USA
    Actually, he gets it wrong at #2. Here's the real definitions of canon (at least as it pertains to Star Trek):

    1. What is seen on screen, even if it's not internally consistent;

    2. in lieu of the above, whatever the current holders of the franchise says it is;

    3. See steps 1 and 2.

    "Publicly accessible materials from the original creators" is meaningless in this regard, unless that info made it onto the screen. If it didn't then no one has the right to use it to justify what's canon and what's not. They're free to use it to bolster their own pet theories about things, but that's it.

    *EDIT* Sojourner beat me to the punch.
     
  3. Serveaux

    Serveaux Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Location:
    Among the sellers.
    Half right. Onscreen information is canonical. Conclusions drawn by fans never are.


    Nope. Authorial intent does not impinge on the canon status of material appearing onscreen.

    [​IMG]

    That's not an opinion. That's the way it is.
     
  4. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk A Spock and a smile Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    AI Generated Madness
    I think if anyone should be called "TOS’ continuity guru" it would be DC Fontana who worked as story editor and script doctor for the first two seasons.
     
  5. BillJ

    BillJ The King of Kings Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    America, Fuck Yeah!!!
    The only way you can rationalize "1700" as a place holder is if you have any evidence that Starbase 11 is a starship construction facility.

    Then the question would become: why are they keeping track of starships under construction and starships being repaired and resupplied on the same chart?
     
  6. Forbin

    Forbin Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Location:
    I said out, dammit!
    Would you take your car to a mechanic who never looks at the manuals, and just relies on looking at the car to try to fix it? Can you assemble an Ikea cabinet without looking at the instructions? Would you want the mechanics working on the airliner you just climbed into to service it without knowing the specs - type of fuel, type of oil, proper hydraulic system pressure, tire pressure...?

    Why wouldn't the chief engineer be reading a manual?
     
  7. BillJ

    BillJ The King of Kings Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    America, Fuck Yeah!!!
    This is just crazy talk! :lol:
     
  8. Mytran

    Mytran Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    I think it's worth reinforcing the point that the technical manuals which Kahn and Scott read are not the same ones:

    [​IMG]

    Scott may well be reading up on the constitution class primary phaser module for mk IX/01 starships, but we have no way of knowing what specific page of the technical section that Kahn is browsing through, since stage directions are not canon (although see below).

    Since no-one's done it yet, I though I'd post a link to the article which first drew many of the connections between the registry numbers and classes - it's a good read.

    The article was written 40 years ago without benefit of the internet so a gap in the author's knowledge here and there is hardly surprising. But it's also clear that Greg Jein never expected his work to be taken as the "ultimate authority" - this disclaimer is pretty clear:

    It's also clear from the above posts page that there's no clear consensus about what "canon" actually is. For a community of Trek fans I must say that's a little surprising!

    I guess "personal canon" rules the day after all? :)

    However, coexisting inconstencies means each individual must eventually choose a preference - without anyone being actually wrong! Awesome. :techman:
     
  9. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk A Spock and a smile Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    AI Generated Madness
    Personal canon is an oxymoron.
     
  10. Mytran

    Mytran Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2009
    Location:
    North Wales
    Hey, who's the oxymoron? I resemble that remark! ;)
     
  11. sojourner

    sojourner Admiral In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    Just around the bend.
    Actually, if you remove one certain fan's interpretation of "canon" in this thread, there actually is a pretty good consensus.
     
  12. Serveaux

    Serveaux Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Location:
    Among the sellers.

    Exactly so. The more correct term is "opinion."
     
  13. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    I'll throw this out here as well and expand on it slightly:

    Back in the 1940s to 1960s, when a ship was rebuilt like USS Boston here, its class was also renamed. When built, USS Boston was a Baltimore-class heavy cruiser (of which there were 14 built). After her refit, she was given a new hull number, and was the first of the Boston-class guided missile cruisers (of which there were two, converted from the Baltimore-class cruiser Boston and Canberra).

    Thus one ship can be part of two or more classes based on a refit. However, when one talks generally about the ships in history, they are usually referred to by the first class they were built as, rather than one of the classes they were refitted into.

    So, if this is the case with USS Enterprise, she is called a Constitution-class starship by the 24th century. By general practice (from what I can tell), she would have been built as a Constitution-class starship in 2245. She may have later been converted to become an Enterprise-class starship and been properly called that to specify her from her older Constitution-class cousins, that had not been refit, or other Constitutions that were refit into yet another configuration and called by yet another class name.

    What is interesting is that I can't find a real world example of a class that was majority refit and then had new ships built into that class. I could probably find ships that were built based on a refit design, but they would be a separate class of ship with more improvements over the old refit hull. There are examples of ships being changed while I the shipyard based on information from ships that were finished beforehand. They are sometimes classified as a different class, and sometimes they are considered the same class, just with differences (the Essex-class carriers had two different designs while under construction in World War II, a short hull and a long hull. The Long hulls were sometimes classed differently, as were some of the ships when half the class was given angled flight decks in the 1950s and the other half wasn't. Half were kept as attack carriers (CVA) while the others were made anti-submarine warfare carriers (CVS)) At some points they are called different things in places like Jane's Fighting Ships based on their hull configuration or their task. The name sometimes changes in Jane's to reflect the remaining existing ships if the "sub-class" ship leader is retired or sunk, they would sometimes reassign the "sub-class" leader title to the oldest remaining ship of the class.

    So the definitions "Constitution-class". "Enterprise-class" and perhaps "Starship-class" could all be correct, at one point or another in the ship's history. But the evidence suggests that the ship class was originally the Constitution-class, based on how naming conventions work in history.
     
  14. GSchnitzer

    GSchnitzer Co-Executive Producer In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Location:
    Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, Terra
    We've had this discussion before.

    I think Robert Comsol is arguing that the "Constitution-class" diagram Scotty is looking at can't be a diagram about "the class to which the Enterprise belongs" because if Scotty were interested in Enterprise components, he would have gone to look at those actual shipboard components (a la Lee Kelso looking at the engine's "points"); he would never have relaxed by reading the tech manual about those components; he can only relax by taking offline/removal/disassembly/tinkering with the actual physical shipboard components.

    This is sort of like thinking that I will always go out into my driveway even during the rain at night to remove and fondle the carburetor of my 1966 Ford Mustang; I would never choose to read about the component in a Mustang manual in bed at night when I've turned in for the night.

    It's not that Scotty can go to the Phaser deck; Robert Comsol seems to be arguing that Scotty It's not that Scotty can go to the Phaser deck; Robert Comsol seems to be arguing that Scotty must go to the Phaser deck and must study ship components only in situ.

    It seems a pretty flimsy way of excluding the "Trouble with Tribbles"/"Space Seed" "Constitution-class" diagram from possibly being about the Enterprise.

     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2014
  15. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    astral plane
    We can take it a step further, too. No doubt, inspecting certain areas of the ship requires taking systems offline. Can you imagine a chief engineer who would, say, take the phasers offline on his own authority, just because he wanted to tinker with them in his off time?

    Sulu: "Captain, the Klingon ship has left its parking orbit around K-7. They're locking disruptors on us!"
    Kirk: "Red alert. Arm phasers."
    Chekov: "But Mister Scott completely disassembled the phaser array as soon as he went off shift!"​
     
  16. Serveaux

    Serveaux Fleet Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Location:
    Among the sellers.
    :drool:You have a '66 Mustang?
     
  17. KirkusOveractus

    KirkusOveractus Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    Ambler, PA
    It's clear that Khan was looking at a diagram for a Mk I Pez Dispenser.
     
  18. Marsden

    Marsden Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2013
    Location:
    Marsden is very sad.
    I liked Krako better.
     
  19. GSchnitzer

    GSchnitzer Co-Executive Producer In Memoriam

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Location:
    Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA, Terra
    Doesn't everybody?

    Actually, I don't. It was meant to be an illustrative theoretical example. That, and I would never own a piece of crap Ford.

    I do own a 1951 Chevy Deluxe Fleetliner "woody" station wagon that my granddad bought new in 1951 and which I inherited.
     
  20. Ithekro

    Ithekro Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Location:
    Republic of California
    I've never owned a car that is younger than I am. Presently own a 1972 Dodge Dart and previous a 1976 Fleetwood Cadillac.

    However, for Star Trek, I would think the Constitutions would be the old workhorse by the time Kirk gets his hand on one. Unlike all the other ships we see crewed by the heroes in Star Trek series. Only the original one has the ship as old at the start. Every other Star Trek series has the ship as brand new at the start/first time they get it in series. USS Enterprise-D was brand new. USS Enterprise-E was a year old and just finishing its shakedown year. USS Defiant was basically new. USS Voyager was basically new. SS Enterprise was brand new in Enterprise. The Enterprise-A might as well have been brand new (we don't know for sure about her, or if she isn't new, her backstory/history in the fleet). The Enterprise-B was brand new. Only the Enterprise-C wasn't new, but that wasn't the hero's ship. So therefore, only the NCC-1701 was an old ship when we first see it as the hero ship. Even under Pike it was over five years old in "The Cage". Only in the 2009 film is that ship brand new, which again makes less of it.

    The charm of the old Enterprise was it had a personality...even if it was only given it by Kirk and Scott. It had a history. It had quirks that Scott knew about and worried about. She was the ship that got people home. In some versions, she was the survivor (until Star Trek III that is).