Spoilers Discovery and the Novelverse - TV show discussion thread

[Christopher]

Nah, that's too easy. What if they visit the Breen homeworld and depict only one race of Breen, with throwaway lines invalidating any hope of compatibility with the novelverse? Something leaving the Typhon Pact-era Breen novels in Starfleet: Year One territory.

One wonders at what point these little and not-so-little changes add up to a point where the prime novelverse becomes unrecognizable.

Why worry about imaginary worst-case situations? There's enough real crap in the world to worry about right now without making up new stuff that may never happen. If those things happen, we'll deal with them then. Otherwise it's a waste of imagination.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Why worry about imaginary worst-case situations? There's enough real crap in the world to worry about right now without making up new stuff that may never happen. If those things happen, we'll deal with them then. Otherwise it's a waste of imagination.

I think it's a fun mental exercise. The way tie-ins are always playing catch up has always fascinated me, and now that the show they're playing catch up to is changing all the rules and partly rebooting itself has made it all the more interesting.

 

[Jinn]

One wonders at what point these little and not-so-little changes add up to a point where the prime novelverse becomes unrecognizable.

I think that's scheduled to happen just a week after the in-universe explanation for Klingon design changes. Unless they time travel to the 24th century I doubt there'll be lots and lots of major disruptions.

 

[Dayton Ward]

Trust us. We've got plans.

 

[Damian]

Why worry about imaginary worst-case situations? There's enough real crap in the world to worry about right now without making up new stuff that may never happen. If those things happen, we'll deal with them then. Otherwise it's a waste of imagination.

Why, what's going on in the real world?

Just kidding.

I think it's a fun mental exercise. The way tie-ins are always playing catch up has always fascinated me, and now that the show they're playing catch up to is changing all the rules and partly rebooting itself has made it all the more interesting.

I agree. Star Trek is probably my favorite hobby and I love discussing it and all the various changes. In the past it seemed changes made were a bit more subtle (now I know some people will throw out some major changes--like Klingon design changes in TMP and things of that sort--however they were more spaced apart). It seems with Abramsverse Trek and now Discovery changing the production design has become much more dramatic and frequent. While past Star Trek tried to update things but respect some of the basis of what came before, all that seems to be thrown out the window these days.

I've gone on and on about how I like a certain amount of inconsistency. I'm not opposed to change in the sense that I want everything to always be the same. I get it. Updates are necessary to keep up with the times. But sometimes it feels like they are abandoning any attempt to maintain any sort of consistency and I find it a bit jarring.

 

[Christopher]

In the past it seemed changes made were a bit more subtle (now I know some people will throw out some major changes--like Klingon design changes in TMP and things of that sort--however they were more spaced apart). It seems with Abramsverse Trek and now Discovery changing the production design has become much more dramatic and frequent. While past Star Trek tried to update things but respect some of the basis of what came before, all that seems to be thrown out the window these days.

As I remarked yesterday in another thread, the difference is largely in whether things get reused. TNG and its successors saved money by reusing sets, costumes, miniatures, etc. from the movies, so that helped give things a consistent look. Similarly, the episodes that revisited the TOS era -- "Relics," "Trials," "Darkly" -- either reused actual film footage from TOS or borrowed set/prop replicas to save money, or they reused and expanded on the TOS-era set pieces they'd already built. And thus, also, the look was consistent because they were recycling existing assets -- it was for budgetary and practical reasons rather than aesthetic reasons alone.

By contrast, in the instances where nothing was reused -- TMP, and now the Kelvin movies and DSC -- things get redesigned, which is what you'd expect when you hire people whose job is to be creative. It's been a long time since the earlier productions, and they can't just reuse the old stuff anymore.

Also, of course, part of it is who is involved, who the designers and producers are. The TNG-era shows had a lot of the same behind-the-scenes people over the years, and a few were veterans of the movies. So that provided some aesthetic continuity. Between the TNG-era stuff and the post-2009 stuff, the only art staffer in common is John Eaves.

 

[Damian]

As I remarked yesterday in another thread, the difference is largely in whether things get reused. TNG and its successors saved money by reusing sets, costumes, miniatures, etc. from the movies, so that helped give things a consistent look. Similarly, the episodes that revisited the TOS era -- "Relics," "Trials," "Darkly" -- either reused actual film footage from TOS or borrowed set/prop replicas to save money, or they reused and expanded on the TOS-era set pieces they'd already built. And thus, also, the look was consistent because they were recycling existing assets -- it was for budgetary and practical reasons rather than aesthetic reasons alone.

By contrast, in the instances where nothing was reused -- TMP, and now the Kelvin movies and DSC -- things get redesigned, which is what you'd expect when you hire people whose job is to be creative. It's been a long time since the earlier productions, and they can't just reuse the old stuff anymore.

Also, of course, part of it is who is involved, who the designers and producers are. The TNG-era shows had a lot of the same behind-the-scenes people over the years, and a few were veterans of the movies. So that provided some aesthetic continuity. Between the TNG-era stuff and the post-2009 stuff, the only art staffer in common is John Eaves.

Yeah, I know a lot of it was budgetary based. But I like to see some basic consistency between the various shows. I don't say it has to all look the same. But there should be some fundamental similarities that follow the various series IMHO.

Now I know that's just me. There are some fans that love when a new designer blows everything up and starts basically from scratch. And there are others that want purity in Star Trek in the sense that Discovery should look much like "The Cage". I fall somewhere in the middle. I don't mind some updating and modernization. But I'd like a certain basic continuity that helps it fit more naturally. New designers could put their own spins on things, but I'd just wish they'd look at what came before, see what makes sense to reuse, what may need some adaptations and what needs to be redone from scratch.

Just as an example I thought Star Trek's (2009) design of Starfleet Headquarters was nothing like what we've seen since TMP through Enterprise. However, in STID it's depictions were a bit more recognizable. In particular I thought some of the scenes at Starfleet reminded me a bit of Voyager's Pathfinder episodes. Not exactly of course, but it seemed to me at least that it was part of the same universe at least.

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, I know a lot of it was budgetary based. But I like to see some basic consistency between the various shows. I don't say it has to all look the same. But there should be some fundamental similarities that follow the various series IMHO.

There are plenty of fundamental similarities. Starfleet still uses an arrowhead. It still uses three-color uniform schemes. The Federation still has the same flag. Doors still slide open. Communicators still flip open. Phasers still fire beams. Starships still have saucers and nacelles. Shuttlecraft are still boxy and also have nacelles. Bridges are still circular and have captain's chairs in the middle. Transporters still have circular stages and make things sparkly. Klingons still have ridged foreheads and speak Marc Okrand's Klingonese. Vulcans and Romulans still have pointy ears, Andorians are still blue with antennae, Tellarites are still porcine. The fundamentals, by any legitimate use of that word, are the same. Only the overtones have changed.

 

[Damian]

There are plenty of fundamental similarities. Starfleet still uses an arrowhead. It still uses three-color uniform schemes. The Federation still has the same flag. Doors still slide open. Communicators still flip open. Phasers still fire beams. Starships still have saucers and nacelles. Shuttlecraft are still boxy and also have nacelles. Bridges are still circular and have captain's chairs in the middle. Transporters still have circular stages and make things sparkly. Klingons still have ridged foreheads and speak Marc Okrand's Klingonese. Vulcans and Romulans still have pointy ears, Andorians are still blue with antennae, Tellarites are still porcine. The fundamentals, by any legitimate use of that word, are the same. Only the overtones have changed.

I guess I'd like to see a bit more. It's all about preferences. Some are happy with the most basic of continuity (in fact, there may be some out there that wouldn't care if Discovery turned Andorians green or gave Klingons 4 arms instead of 2).

When I look at Discovery I don't need to see the Cage (since it falls roughly around the same time period). But it'd be nice for me to see something that seems to fit between Enterprise and the original series. What I've seen doesn't really fit in.

It's one of the reasons I wished they had advanced the story to 100+ years after Nemesis. It'd free them up to do pretty much what they wanted--not only in production design but storywise as well. Then the basics that you mentioned would be all they'd have to worry about. It wouldn't satisfy everyone of course--nothing ever does that--but it'd give them a lot more leeway I believe.

I'm more forgiving of Abramsverse Trek because they created an alternate universe to explain inconsistencies (though as I've noted I thought they went a bit too far in the Star Trek [2009] and corrected it a bit in STID and Beyond--or at least to my personal satisfaction for whatever that's worth).

 

[Christopher]

When I look at Discovery I don't need to see the Cage (since it falls roughly around the same time period). But it'd be nice for me to see something that seems to fit between Enterprise and the original series. What I've seen doesn't really fit in.

Sure, I wish they hadn't gone quite so far afield. I don't much care for the show's production design. But they had every right in the world to take it in a new direction, whether I like it or not. The nature of freedom is that we won't always agree with other people's choices. Heck, that's why I became a writer and created my own SF universes -- that was the only way I could see stories that did everything the way I wanted. And even there, I have to make compromises.

 

[Damian]

Sure, I wish they hadn't gone quite so far afield. I don't much care for the show's production design. But they had every right in the world to take it in a new direction, whether I like it or not. The nature of freedom is that we won't always agree with other people's choices. Heck, that's why I became a writer and created my own SF universes -- that was the only way I could see stories that did everything the way I wanted. And even there, I have to make compromises.

True. And we have every right to complain about it too

 

[James Swallow]

Trust us. We've got plans.

Is it hot in here, or is it just me?

 

[ATimson]

When I look at Discovery I don't need to see the Cage (since it falls roughly around the same time period). But it'd be nice for me to see something that seems to fit between Enterprise and the original series. What I've seen doesn't really fit in.

Between those two, no. But it does fit in between Enterprise and The Motion Picture well enough.

 

[F. King Daniel]

A bunch of new Trek projects have been announced, and one of them is rumoured to be A Next Generation continuation starring Patrick Stewart.

The entire post-Nemesis novelverse may be about to go the way of Starfleet: Year One or the old Star Wars EU. I wonder if these nascent plans to expand the Trek brand played some role in the delays to Pocket's license renewal?

 

[Jinn]

The entire post-Nemesis novelverse may be about to go the way of Starfleet: Year One or the old Star Wars EU.

if this actually happens.

I wonder if these nascent plans to expand the Trek brand played some role in the delays to Pocket's license renewal?

From what I've heard the negotiations for the Patrick Stewart thing (if existing) are in a very early stage and could still very well go wrong. I don't think that they're responsible for the delays.

 

[Christopher]

The entire post-Nemesis novelverse may be about to go the way of Starfleet: Year One or the old Star Wars EU. I wonder if these nascent plans to expand the Trek brand played some role in the delays to Pocket's license renewal?

It's unlikely the two issues have anything to do with each other. Remember, Pocket has been publishing original Trek fiction since 1981 and it's only had the modern novel continuity since roughly 2000, with a brief flirtation with an earlier continuity in the late '80s. Inter-novel continuity has always been optional and has nothing whatsoever to do with license approvals. Licenses are about money and contracts, about the business end of things, not the creative end. True, there was that time that DC's Trek license renewal was delayed because Richard Arnold insisted on restrictive terms for what kind of stories they could tell, but the strict way Arnold treated the tie-ins was hardly typical.

Besides, even if continuity were a factor, it wouldn't delay renewal, because there's nothing to negotiate. It's a given that the tie-ins would follow whatever the screen continuity was. That's their job, plain and simple. It always has been. Pocket's been able to build its large continuity because there hasn't been much new screen material to contradict it, but when new screen material has come along (like Enterprise and its new information about Andorians, Tholians, etc.), the books have adjusted their continuity to fit it -- or completely abandoned it in the case of the '80s continuity and TNG. (Arnold's demands to DC weren't even about consistency with screen canon, since that was always a given; they were about how much freedom DC had to explore new ideas beyond it.)

The only way it could've had a delay on the license renewal is simply if the paperwork for the new stuff took up so much of the CBS people's time and attention that it took them a while to get around to the lower-priority stuff like tie-in license paperwork. But I don't think the timing adds up there. The license delays have been going on for more than a year and a half now, since before Discovery even premiered, whereas this new deal with Kurtzman is presumably recent and a vote of confidence following the success of Discovery.

 

[F. King Daniel]

So, Patrick Stewart is returning to play Jean Luc Picard in a series set 20 years after Nemesis.

This will severely impact the post-Nemesis novels,perhaps on par with how The Force Awakens affected the Star Wars novels of the time.

 

[OCD Geek]

So, Patrick Stewart is returning to play Jean Luc Picard in a series set 20 years after Nemesis.

This will severely impact the post-Nemesis novels,perhaps on par with how The Force Awakens affected the Star Wars novels of the time.

I found this post by Dayton in the 2019 thread very reassuring in that regard.

All I can probably say at this point without getting into trouble is that this wasn't a surprise.

 

[Jinn]

This is really happening? Yikes.

 

[OCD Geek]

Yep, and Kirsten motherfucking Beyer is a member of the creative team!