Fiction is mutable. Dates are less important than plot, motivation and character. Setting or resetting the events has little or no impact on those,
For you. For me, it helps give character and depth to the universe.
It's surface level stuff. I'm more about the themes and characterization. What Space Seed has to say and who Khan is do not hang on a set of numbers.
Some folks like the forest. Others the trees. It's all good.You do you.
I prefer the forest myself.
I'm a tree hugger, one forest at a time!
I think that's fair. There's still a rise of genetic "supermen", there's still a nuclear war, there's still first contact from the ashes of that war
Whether that's in 1996 or 2053 or 2161 is less important than the meat of the events.
I don't agree with that question
Was it ever actually enforced? I brought back the "God" creature from TFF in my Q Continuum trilogy as far back as 1998, and referenced Sybok in Child of Two Worlds. Nobody at CBS/Paramount or Pocket Books ever objected.
(I suppose it's possible that TFF was off-limits back when Richard Arnold was approving the novels on Roddenberry's behalf, but that was before my time. I can testify that it wasn't enforced policy after Roddenberry passed away and Arnold was let go back around 1991, about thirty-five years ago.)
It was, but then the Krenim Timeship decanonized the enforcement.
I think it might be mentioned in the one of the last Star Trek Compendium by Alan Asherman that Roddenberry thought parts of V were apocryphal.
Oh, that Roddenberry personally considered parts of V apocryphal is well-established. There's a notation to that effect in the Okuda's Star Trek Cronology as well, but I'm not aware of any official policy "de-canonizing" it as far as the tie-ins were confirmed. Indeed, the events and characters of that movie are listed in both the Chronology and The Star Trek Encyclopedia, and probably various other licensed reference works.
Certainly, in all the decades I've been writing Trek novels, nobody has ever told me that Sybok and Co. should not be treated as "canon."
Shot out of a cannon, perhaps...
And I'd rather voyager or Enterprise never get mentioned again.
Neither are any worse than the live-action material CBS has peddled for the last decade.
Similar threads
