How can these episodes (from TNG, DS9, and ENT) be canon any longer?

As someone who believes in the Bible, I think I have an easier time discussing biblical topics than this at times!

Not just a fundamentalist but a strict literalist point of view. As bad as a book I read that insisted that the Bible taught the Earth was flat.

That was deliberate.

 

It basically comes across as a petulant toddler grabbing his ball and going home because he doesn't like how the game is going. I recall people having fun trying to make this stuff work, but now the default reaction seems to be to shriek "heresy" and run off/ boycott / harass creators and fans. It's lazy.

This is true. The stuff about it being a reboot? Nah.

Ladies and gentlemen, here is the logical choice.

 

Again... because "the canon" is simply the body of official televised and cinematic Trek work, which those episodes still belong to by definition. It has nothing to do with perfect consistency throughout that body of works.

Kor

 

My own loose head canon includes the blooper reels (which help contextualize Scotty in V, a movie NOT in my head canon), Galaxy Quest, and, of course, this:



By referencing the Great Bird, the above video reveals Picard has a secret and jubilant deist streak that adds layers to his character and curious series-wide subtext.

I may have to add that Black Mirror episode I keep meaning to watch. And maybe Captain Belushi vs. NBC.

 

I'd watch the hell out of that show!

 

Wait a minute...

How is determining how is all fits together in one's mind some kind of equivalent of a "petulant toddler grabbing his ball and going home because he doesn't like how the game is going"? Not once have I shrieked "heresy", nor have I boycotted the show nor told anyone not to watch the show based on my feelings.

It is pretty simple: Discovery doesn't fit with TOS in my mind. It simply doesn't. Too much time has passed and we've changed too much as a society. So I treat Discovery as a thread of the Trek multiverse.

Probably best to not paint folks with a broad brush.

 

I actually think it's ok for everyone to interpret the differences in Star Trek in their own ways so that it maximizes their enjoyment of the franchise. I don't see why anyone would make an impassioned counter-argument to that point.

The problem comes up when people take it personally that someone interprets something differently than others.

 

No. Just means that Discovery isn't canon. There's no reason to throw out something that's been established for over fifty years just because some dingus decides he wants to have a "visual reboot."

Problem is "enjoy" doesn't follow either of those.

Make it consistent with what came before. Then we'll have a foundation for me to be able to enjoy. But you know, telling a good story in the first place might have been a good place to start.

 

Nuh uh.

And my dad can beat up your dad.

 

Seriously? Canon is not some deified, sanctified state of flawless continuity in regard to what has gone before. Star Trek being a professional (and copyrighted) TV and film franchise, canon for Trek is simply what is produced by those who have the authority to do so, and appears on the screen.

That being the case, Discovery is indisputably canon. And so are the episodes mentioned by the OP.

As has been mentioned repeatedly before in this thread -- if things don't match up, that's a problem with continuity. It has no effect on whether or not something is canon.

 

As an NBCist, I and my fellow adherents believe that Lucille Ball will return from the dead and restore Star Trek to its proper place of glory at 8:30pm Fridays on your local affiliate. Therefore all episodes past season 2 false and those who view them are apostates who will be eaten by the doomsday machine.

That ain't TOS. That's that whole nuther universe with wierd looking Klingons, red uniforms, an Enterprise that CANT be a refit because of scaling and where neer is seen a blinking jellybean. Whose worried about continuity again?

 

"Canon" is the body of work upon which derivative works are based as defined by the owners of the intellectual property.

CBS owns Star Trek. CBS says Star Trek: Discovery is part of the Star Trek canon. Ergo, Star Trek: Discovery is part of the Star Trek canon.

They haven't been thrown out. You can stream every single one of those older episodes and buy them all on DVD and Blu-Ray.

For goodness's sake, it's a set of TV shows. Are you trying to enjoy a work of art or trying to write an encyclopedia of things that aren't real?

 

The entire premise of this thread was proposing that they should be thrown out. I was responding to that proposition.

 

Oooh, oooh, another argument about canon and I didn't jump in until page 4

I don't really sweat 'canon' all that much. The Star Trek PTB tell us canon is anything on screen. I view canon as something for the show runners to worry about, and tie in authors. And show runners can do what they want as long as it's ok with the true PTB at CBS. When it comes down to it the tie in authors like our novelists are really the only ones that have to worry about canon because they can't contradict it.

Now continuity, that I pay much closer attention too. I'd prefer a Star Trek universe with greater continuity (though being an entertainment franchise I don't expect perfection in every detail).....and yes, I'd prefer a greater visual continuity.

I'd personally love to see Discovery more consistent with a pre-original series feel (I do make some allowances--for instance I didn't complain about Enterprise's set designs because I could see they tried to balance making it looking futuristic with making it less advanced than the original series). I'd prefer smooth headed Klingons is another....and so forth.

But I don't get to make those calls.

As I don't do streaming I only saw season 1 of Discovery on Blu-Ray so far. And I do agree with some who have said it's easier to view Discovery as a reboot. Frankly I find I enjoy the show much more if I don't try to do mental cartwheels to try to fit it in with everything else. But I don't begrudge authors who included Discovery references in their novels or anything like that (and the references are hardly plot changing references anyway).

Now that may change in time. Maybe after seeing season 2 I will be able to view it through a different lens. But for the time being I just find it easier to view as a type of reboot.

To each their own though.

 

Someone else said it great....DSC had done a production design equivalent of "recasting" a role with a different actor. Yes it all looks different, but we know what it's supposed to be and how it's supposed to fit. It's an elegantly simple and perfectly reasonable way to view things.

I quite like that, and I've gone with it since I read it out here, and it's all I need to enjoy things.

 

But do you also TOSsify the references to disco or Elon Musk? I’d argue you have to go beyond production design and see it as another universe on the shared Prime Timeline framework. Yes, all this happened in the original universe also — more or less.

 

No, I guess I just don't need to see it that way