The answers above seem to say that different people have differing interpretations of the term "purist."
I asked the question partly because the term "purist" is often invoked in a dismissive or derogatory way as if to discredit someone who may not automatically accept change or something new. "You're a purist so what you think about (whatever) doesn't count." sort of thing.
For me, yes, TOS is Star Trek. How could it be otherwise? It established the universe and the ground rules, not just in terms of continuity but also in storytelling. But I will look at something new if I sense that it's generally respecting the ground rules.
I initially dismissed TNG and still dismiss a bulk of it. But I'm generally favourable towards the first three seasons because I see something there that echoes something of TOS. I don't really see it as the same continuity as TOS, but I can accept much of it on its own terms.
I dismiss a great deal of the rest not simply because I think they strayed too far from what had been established (and they did stray ever farther and farther), but mostly because I don't think it was good storytelling.
Succeeding Bonds and superhero franchises have been reinterpreted over the years with some better than others. I don't have a problem with something rebooted if they fulfill my preferences in storytelling, because continuity wise I can disconnect a new version from what came before and say, "This doesn't take away from the old because it really isn't connected and can stand on its own terms."
I think the word "purist" can be too narrowly defined to mean you cannot accept or tolerate anything but just one particular thing.
I asked the question partly because the term "purist" is often invoked in a dismissive or derogatory way as if to discredit someone who may not automatically accept change or something new. "You're a purist so what you think about (whatever) doesn't count." sort of thing.
For me, yes, TOS is Star Trek. How could it be otherwise? It established the universe and the ground rules, not just in terms of continuity but also in storytelling. But I will look at something new if I sense that it's generally respecting the ground rules.
I initially dismissed TNG and still dismiss a bulk of it. But I'm generally favourable towards the first three seasons because I see something there that echoes something of TOS. I don't really see it as the same continuity as TOS, but I can accept much of it on its own terms.
I dismiss a great deal of the rest not simply because I think they strayed too far from what had been established (and they did stray ever farther and farther), but mostly because I don't think it was good storytelling.
Succeeding Bonds and superhero franchises have been reinterpreted over the years with some better than others. I don't have a problem with something rebooted if they fulfill my preferences in storytelling, because continuity wise I can disconnect a new version from what came before and say, "This doesn't take away from the old because it really isn't connected and can stand on its own terms."
I think the word "purist" can be too narrowly defined to mean you cannot accept or tolerate anything but just one particular thing.
