Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe?

[Christopher]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

But it's funny to think about what was supposed to have happened to movies after 2040 as per Picard's statement in The Neutral Zone.

A, it was Data's statement, and B, it was about television, not movies. Presumably TV gave way to the Internet as a form of entertainment -- a trend we may already be seeing the start of in real life as Netflix and Hulu are beginning to produce original content and as productions like Dr. Horrible and Sanctuary are debuting online. And in DS9: "Past Tense," set in 2024, we did see that TV had been largely subsumed within the computer network already.

Jean Airey wrote a short novel called The Doctor and the Enterprise which crossed over the two. It featured the Enterprise crossing to the Doctor's universe, where they battle the Sontarans.

AFAIK, in the Who universe, Vulcan does not exist (it was "utterly destroyed in a massive civil war"); whereas in the Trekverse, it's Gallifrey (whose sun went supernova and wiped out every planet in the system, so apparently there are no Time Lords).

You mean, within the context of that fanfic? I've certainly never heard that claim anywhere else. And the differences between the two universes are far too huge to be reconcilable, not least because Star Trek is often mentioned as a fictional franchise in the modern Whoverse shows.

And there is a planet Vulcan in Doctor Who, by the way. It's the name of the Earth colony in "The Power of the Daleks." Vulcan was once a pretty common name for planets in science fiction, because in the 19th and early 20th centuries it was used as the name for a hypothetical planet between the Sun and Mercury, which was proposed as an explanation for anomalies in Mercury's orbit that were later explained by General Relativity.

 

[sevenstars]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Another title in the library is "Love's Lovely Love". Which sounds a lot like the mock romance title made up at the bookstore where I and a future member of the Star Trek production staff worked. Hmmmmmm.....

Actually that sounds like something I saw on the Hallmark Channel.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

They mentioned watching some sci-fi movies in "Enterprise" on movie night. As for "Captain Proton"...I was under the impression that was entirely created by Tom.

I kind of got that feeling as well. Though I wasn't as familar with Voyager as some, I thought that Captain Proton was the 24th century holodeck equivalent of a YouTube production.

And according to "These Are the Voyages", Star Trek Enterprise was a creation of Will Riker! Continuity issues solved!

(I'm kidding. But I can't see how else that pile of crap finale could be a "Valentine to fans", aside from giving ENT haters a Dallas-style out)

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

They mentioned watching some sci-fi movies in "Enterprise" on movie night. As for "Captain Proton"...I was under the impression that was entirely created by Tom.

I kind of got that feeling as well. Though I wasn't as familar with Voyager as some, I thought that Captain Proton was the 24th century holodeck equivalent of a YouTube production.

Hmm. I always assumed that it was actually (in the Star Trek universe, that is) a classic old 1940's movie serial like "Buck Rogers" or "Flash Gordon." This was just a holodeck version of a pre-existing story--like Data's "Sherlock Holmes" simulations.

(As I recall, I wrote a few references to the old Captain Proton serials into one of my Khan books.)

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Do they debate which version of Babylon Five, Battletech, Battlestar Galactica, Blake's 7 (hey four Bs) or Space: Above & Beyond was best?

Everyone in the Trek universe seem, somehow, to be living productive and interesting lives.

So I'm thinking "no."

 

[Knight Templar]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Do they debate which version of Babylon Five, Battletech, Battlestar Galactica, Blake's 7 (hey four Bs) or Space: Above & Beyond was best?

Everyone in the Trek universe seem, somehow, to be living productive and interesting lives.

So I'm thinking "no."

What about those guys sweeping the floors in the background at Ben Sisko's dad's restaurant?

Are they living the dream?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Ask them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Babylon 5 is an alternate reality to Trek. They meet and have an f'n great big space battle. Sort of.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Do they debate which version of Babylon Five, Battletech, Battlestar Galactica, Blake's 7 (hey four Bs) or Space: Above & Beyond was best?

Everyone in the Trek universe seem, somehow, to be living productive and interesting lives.

So I'm thinking "no."

On the other hand, they seem to spend a lot time living out westerns and spy thrillers and gothic romances and old movie serials in the holodeck, as well as indulging their Rat Pack fantasies in 1960s Las Vegas. Not to mention staging amateur theatricals aboard the Enterprise and writing their own novels (hello, Jake Sisko and the EMH). Heck, we've even heard about Klingon opera and romance novels.

If they've got time to rehearse Gilbert & Sullivan numbers, I think they have time to debate Buffy versus Xena . . . or Dixon Hill versus Sherlock Holmes!

 

[YARN]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

If they've got time to rehearse Gilbert & Sullivan numbers, I think they have time to debate Buffy versus Xena . . . or Dixon Hill versus Sherlock Holmes!

Star Trek can't reference Buffy as a fictional show, because Buffy references Star Trek as a fictional show.

If you refer to BtVS as an actual show in the Trek universe, then you have the problem of BtVS referring to Trek as an actual (but fictional) show in its universe.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

But what about that classic Bajoran tv series, Nerys, the Wraith Slayer?

 

[Dantheman]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

I know that in Star Trek they can watch 20th century movies normally, but I wonder if there's on option where they can relieve them on the Holodeck as something like a background extra.

 

[YARN]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

I know that in Star Trek they can watch 20th century movies normally, but I wonder if there's on option where they can relieve them on the Holodeck as something like a background extra.

If the computer can simulate a novel, it should be able to simulate a film.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

If they've got time to rehearse Gilbert & Sullivan numbers, I think they have time to debate Buffy versus Xena . . . or Dixon Hill versus Sherlock Holmes!

Star Trek can't reference Buffy as a fictional show, because Buffy references Star Trek as a fictional show.

If you refer to BtVS as an actual show in the Trek universe, then you have the problem of BtVS referring to Trek as an actual (but fictional) show in its universe.

Too late. Kirk listens to the Beastie Boys. Beastie Boys reference Star Trek in "Intergalactic". Universe explodes.

 

[Skellington]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Star Trek can't reference Buffy as a fictional show, because Buffy references Star Trek as a fictional show.

Of course it can. Reciprocal meta-referencing between fiction frameworks is not unknown and should be no problem for shows where anything of a pre-watershed nature can happen (including, in both cases, alternate timelines and in-continuity continuity reboots).

Futurama has been referenced as fiction in The Simpsons and vice versa. (Matt Groening was shown in a Simpsons episode and Bart recognises him as the creator of Futurama. In a Futurama episode, Fry picks up a Bart Simpson doll. The Simpsons even meta-references itself all the time; if I recall, it once even had a character mention Chief Wiggum alongside Boss Cat as having been influenced by Sergeant Bilko. )

 

[YARN]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Of course it can.

Not without pain of contradiction it can't.

Reciprocal meta-referencing is not unknown and should be no problem for shows where anything of a pre-watershed nature can happen (including, in both cases, in-continuity continuity reboots).

Any chance you might say that again in English?

It's one think to offer a wink at another show (gesture at it without directly referencing it - think about the end of the holodeck episode where Picard speculates that their reality itself might merely be an entertainment in a box), but the universe explodes when one fictional show refers to another fictional show as a work of fiction (and vice versa).

Futurama has been referenced as fiction in The Simpsons and vice versa. (Matt Groening was shown in a Simpsons episode and Bart recognises him as the creator of Futurama. In a Futurama episode, Fry picks up a Bart Simpson doll.) (The Simpsons even had a character mention its own Chief Wiggum alongside Boss Cat as having been influenced by Sergeant Bilko, if I recall. .)

These are cartoons. There is no "canon" game to play with them. Bart is always a child. Homer is always working at the plant (or will be again at the end of the zany episode). They are unreal unrealities with no commitment even to internal consistency. Star Trek, on the other hand, has worked to stitch together a continuous fabric of narrative.

Too late. Kirk listens to the Beastie Boys. Beastie Boys reference Star Trek in "Intergalactic". Universe explodes.

Yet another reason to criticize the reboot.

I suppose we might suppose

1. The Beastie Boys of the Trek Universe are a slightly different group. They're just like our Beastie Boys, but they don't reference "Mr. Spock" in their version of Intergalactic.
Trek is now so deeply embedded in our cultural conscience, however, that this is hard to believe.

2. Supervenience - In the Trek universe there was a show called Star Trek with the very same characters on the same missions. It is all a remarkable circumstance that the future so strongly resembled this old show.

The best answer, of course, is not to think about it too hard and pretend these problems don't exist. Good writing, however, doesn't force you to think about these problems (unless that is the point of that work of art), but rather skillfully sustains suspension of disbelief by avoiding situations that would raise these questions. The more obvious the contradiction is, the worse the writing is. You can have the crew of Bakula's Enterprise watch any film made before 1966 without pain of contradiction. You can have them watch some works after '66 too, but this is where it gets tricky. If we see them watchin DS9 or an SNL episode that spoofs Star Trek the contradiction is too obvious to avoid.

 

[Christopher]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Actually Wiggum is based on Edward G. Robinson. Phil Silvers/Bilko was the basis for Hanna-Barbera's Hokey Wolf.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

I can't remember, did the characters in "Little Green Men" make any reference to science fiction? Or Roberta Lincoln in "Assignment: Earth"?

We know that John Christopher joked about UFOs and little green men . . . .

 

[FredH]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Since I believe Starfleet Academy's been established to be on the grounds of the Presidio, I like to imagine that the Yoda statue outside the Lucasflm/ILM offices there survives through the next four centuries, serving as an unofficial patron saint for all Starfleet cadets.

 

[Skellington]

Re: Do Other Science Fiction Franchises Exist Within the Trek Universe

Reciprocal meta-referencing is not unknown and should be no problem for shows where anything of a pre-watershed nature can happen (including, in both cases, in-continuity continuity reboots).

Any chance you might say that again in English?

Okey-doke.
Star Trek and Buffy both allow for the effective rewriting of the past. First Contact shows the world changing around the Enterprise, which is obliged to follow the Borg back through their time tunnel to preserve the present. Buffy episodes The Wish and Superstar involve spells that can "write over" the world to essentially change the past, as does the entire fifth season. Hence these are essentially reboots within continuity, especially given that in both cases some characters are unaffected.

(Edit: For clarity, "pre-watershed" means material that kids can watch.)

Futurama has been referenced as fiction in The Simpsons and vice versa. (Matt Groening was shown in a Simpsons episode and Bart recognises him as the creator of Futurama. In a Futurama episode, Fry picks up a Bart Simpson doll.) (The Simpsons even had a character mention its own Chief Wiggum alongside Boss Cat as having been influenced by Sergeant Bilko, if I recall. .)

These are cartoons. There is no "canon" game to play with them. Bart is always a child. Homer is always working at the plant (or will be again at the end of the zany episode). They are unreal unrealities with no commitment even to internal consistency. Star Trek, on the other hand, has worked to stitch together a continuous fabric of narrative.

The Simpsons has also done that to some extent, with the Bart / Sideshow Bob storyline for instance. Star Trek has also allowed some slack with the narrative as regards, for instance, inconsistent warp speed / star date systems and the nature and effects of time travel. (In some stories the past is like putty. In others it's suggested to be immutable or hard to change. In the movie, time travel seemingly creates alternate timelines separate from the originals.) So I think that in principle the comparison is valid and it's a question of magnitude. Take any fictional framework (not gonna say "universe" 'cause that means consistency) and scrutinise it enough; eventually you'll find the chink in the fourth wall.

The best answer, of course, is not to think about it too hard and pretend these problems don't exist. Good writing, however, doesn't force you to think about these problems (unless that is the point of that work of art), but rather skillfully sustains suspension of disbelief by avoiding situations that would raise these questions. The more obvious the contradiction is, the worse the writing is. You can have the crew of Bakula's Enterprise watch any film made before 1966 without pain of contradiction. You can have them watch some works after '66 too, but this is where it gets tricky. If we see them watchin DS9 or an SNL episode that spoofs Star Trek the contradiction is too obvious to avoid.

I agree completely, even if it can be fun and instructive to think through these things a little.

Actually Wiggum is based on Edward G. Robinson. Phil Silvers/Bilko was the basis for Hanna-Barbera's Hokey Wolf.

This is true, at least where the voice is concerned. I've identified the episode (The Day The Violence Died) and the quote is as follows:

Okay, maybe my dad did steal Itchy. So what? Animation is built on plagiarism. If it weren't for someone plagiarizing the Honeymooners we wouldn't have the Flintstones. If someone hadn't ripped off Sergeant Bilko, there'd be no Top Cat. Huckleberry Hound, Chief Wiggum, Yogi Bear? Hah! Andy Griffith, Edward G. Robinson, Art Carney. Your honor, you take away our right to steal ideas, where are they gonna come from?