Chekov timeline

[erastus25]

As we all know, Chekov joined the crew in S2 thus creating an inconsistency when Khan recognizes him in the movie. The common explanation is that Chekov was below decks at the time and Khan saw him then. This explanation is supported by Chekov's apparent knowledge of Kirk's prior use of the corbomite bluff in The Deadly Year. BUT he does not know who Harry Mudd is in I, Mudd. Mudd's Women comes in between those two episodes so shouldn't he know of both corbomite and Mudd??? How can this be resolved?

Note: I'm assuming a production date chronology.

 

[A beaker full of death]

erastus25 said:

Note: I'm assuming a production date chronology.

And there's your problem. Trek mostly consisted of stand-alone episodes. Even where there is some reference to earlier episodes, as in the examples you give, there's no issue here. People rotate on and off ships all the time. I can come up with 1500 explanations for what you're viewing as a discrepency. It's so easy that it's not necessary to do so. TOS didn't need to spoon-feed its audience.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

More likely Chekov had heard of Mudd but not met him and therefore didn't recognize him or immediately place the name. He certainly seemed to be pretty familiar with Harry's reputation later in the episode when he was contemplating the advantages of Mudd having been the programmer of the "Alice" androids.

 

[Chevron Guy]

I don't know how much weight can be given to the (beginning) stardates of the various episodes, but here is the relevant info:

Mudd's Women: 1329.1
Corbomite Maneuver: 1512.2
Catspaw: 3018.2
Space Seed: 3141.9

You could argue that the episodes fell in the order above. If so, no problem believing that Chekov came aboard between MW and CM. Dates found here.

 

[sbk1234]

I suppose it could be possible that as a young officer below decks, he would not have been privy to the name Harry Mudd, at all. The TNG episode Lower Decks shows that the secondary officers are routinely unaware of what the main stars know. Perhaps he was in a position where he would have some knowledge of the corbomite maneuver.

 

[PowderedToastMan]

sbk1234 said:
I suppose it could be possible that as a young officer below decks, he would not have been privy to the name Harry Mudd, at all. The TNG episode Lower Decks shows that the secondary officers are routinely unaware of what the main stars know. Perhaps he was in a position where he would have some knowledge of the corbomite maneuver.

exactly. Every episode is essentially the tip of an iceberg of over 400 characters...the vast majority of which we never see or meet. Just as we cannot assume that if we dont see someone he doesnt exist, we cant assume that they all know what the main characters know. Neither the viewer nor all the characters can be assumed to be omniscient.

Chekov could have been there since they pulled out of drydock, but he may not be that clued in to what is going on...he is just an ensign

 

[Timo]

Also noteworthy is that Chekov is never quite considered the new kid on the block. His first appearance, production-wise, features no "introductory exposition", and gives Chekov scarcely more to do than the other "bridge extra" DeSalle - even though the producers wholly well know that Chekov is going to be a regular. That's pretty smooth for such a conventional TV show.

I believe in my TOS in stardate order. And I like to think Chekov came aboard in time for "Space Seed", but only heard of corbomite from Sulu whom he befriended after arrival. After all, it's Sulu he trades smiles with when hearing Kirk use the word, in an eager boyish manner to which Sulu responds with a more "knowing" smile.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Ronald Held]

I can believe he was below decks for almost a season.

 

[Sulu_Love_child]

It may be a stretch but it is certainly possible.

 

[Outpost4]

Not even a stretch.

Beyond the Big Three, the other charactors missed many episodes. Chekov just happened to bunch his mostly into the first year. Who knows? He even may have been on the Enterprise before Season One, left for training that year and came back at the beginning of Season Two.

 

[Ronald Held]

Maybe he did not catch Kirk's eye until right before Season 2 and got transfered to bridge duty.

 

[Ceridwen]

Personally, like Timo, I tend to ignore the Okudas' production-order timeline and see Star Trek as taking place more or less in stardate order. As with The Next Generation and beyond, 1000 stardates = one year, and Voyager's "Q2" placed the final year of the five-year mission in 2270. So all of the 1000's take place in 2265, all of the 2000's take place in 2266, all of the 3000's in 2267, and so on.

So, based on this idea, Chekov's first appearance, in the episode "Catspaw" takes place in early 2267. Khan Noonien Singh is found a few months later, so Chekov was definitely aboard when Khan was.

As likely as it is that Meyer just didn't pay attention to when Chekov first appeared on the show, it's also possible that when he was showed the series, he watched them in stardate order. Despite the Okuda's insistence on production order, when Star Trek was released on VHS by Columbia House, the episodes were arranged in stardate order (so it's not just a few strange fans who seem to prefer to show that way). It's such an elegant fix for this issue, (and indeed, many of the continuity issues presented by the series) that I'm surprised it hasn't been embraced by more fans.

 

[RookieBatman]

Ceridwen Troy said:
Personally, like Timo, I tend to ignore the Okudas' production-order timeline and see Star Trek as taking place more or less in stardate order.

I don't know, I hate to open this can of worms, but it seems to me that the people who made the show had no intention of portraying the stardates as being the actual order of events. In Engel's Roddenberry bio, they're even quoted as saying as much.

 

[A beaker full of death]

RookieBatman said:

I don't know, I hate to open this can of worms, but it seems to me that the people who made the show had no intention of portraying the stardates as being the actual order of events. In Engel's Roddenberry bio, they're even quoted as saying as much.

In fact, that was the point, to keep people from focusing on the unimportant shit. Unfortunately, that's all a lot of Trekies are interested in. A few of us admire the artistry, literacy and professionalism that went into Star Trek. Others need to know why the combination to Kirk's safe changed between episode 14 and episode 63.

 

[skylark]

Ceridwen Troy said:
when Star Trek was released on VHS by Columbia House, the episodes were arranged in stardate order (so it's not just a few strange fans who seem to prefer to show that way). It's such an elegant fix for this issue, (and indeed, many of the continuity issues presented by the series) that I'm surprised it hasn't been embraced by more fans.

Each method of arranging the episodes introduces its own set of logical and continuity absurdities. It's just a matter of which absurdities you're willing to accept. I happen to agree that arranging the episodes in production order has the fewest problems and makes the most sense.

 

[blakbyrd]

A beaker full of death said:
In fact, that was the point, to keep people from focusing on the unimportant shit. Unfortunately, that's all a lot of Trekkies are interested in. A few of us admire the artistry, literacy and professionalism that went into Star Trek. Others need to know why the combination to Kirk's safe changed between episode 14 and episode 63.

skylark said:
Each method of arranging the episodes introduces its own set of logical and continuity absurdities. It's just a matter of which absurdities you're willing to accept. I happen to agree that arranging the episodes in production order has the fewest problems and makes the most sense.

Agreed.

 

[Timo]

I in turn am quite surprised that the stardate order, despite never having been the "intended" order of the episodes, presents the least problems...

I guess that with a pool of less than a hundred episodes, "happy coincidences" may still outweigh the general "who cares" attitude of the makers. In any case, stardate order (and the 1000 SD/yr theory) has these major pros and cons:

+ Chekov aboard by "Space Seed".
+ All of 5yr mission covered.
+ 3 years between "Errand of Mercy" and "Day of the Dove" as specified by Kang in the latter.
+ "Amok Time" comes before "This Side of Paradise", so the two shocking things common to the episodes - Spock falling in love and fighting his captain - are indeed novelties in "Amok Time".
+ Grand finale is the supernova fireworks of "All Our Yesterdays", not "Turnabout Intruder".
+ All non-stardated episodes can be inserted wherever they make the best sense.

- Some set modifications jiggle back and forth.

Anything to add?

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Neopeius]

Timo said:
I in turn am quite surprised that the stardate order, despite never having been the "intended" order of the episodes, presents the least problems...

I guess that with a pool of less than a hundred episodes, "happy coincidences" may still outweigh the general "who cares" attitude of the makers. In any case, stardate order (and the 1000 SD/yr theory) has these major pros and cons:

+ Chekov aboard by "Space Seed".
+ All of 5yr mission covered.
+ 3 years between "Errand of Mercy" and "Day of the Dove" as specified by Kang in the latter.
+ "Amok Time" comes before "This Side of Paradise", so the two shocking things common to the episodes - Spock falling in love and fighting his captain - are indeed novelties in "Amok Time".
+ Grand finale is the supernova fireworks of "All Our Yesterdays", not "Turnabout Intruder".
+ All non-stardated episodes can be inserted wherever they make the best sense.

- Some set modifications jiggle back and forth.

Anything to add?

Timo Saloniemi

Courtmartial and Menagerie, the two Starbase 11 eps, are put back to back.

I really like stardate order. Or at least the slightly amended stardate order I found on Amazon which accounts for some production enhancements (bridge equipment which only exists after a certain point, for instance)

 

[A beaker full of death]

I have to say, I'm utterly mystified as to why anyone cares.

 

[Hambone]

A beaker full of death said:
...the combination to Kirk's safe changed between episode 14 and episode 63.

WHAT?!! When did this happen? Goddammit, now I'll never get to sleep tonight.

Hambone, obsessive (with apologies to Joe)