Indeed, a lot of online fans act as though ST episodes are supposed to be dramatizations of a Wikipedia entry rather than, y'know, works of art in their own right.
Do you like the Discovery Klingon look?
- Thread starter jackoverfull
- Start date
Indeed, a lot of online fans act as though ST episodes are supposed to be dramatizations of a Wikipedia entry rather than, y'know, works of art in their own right.
No it doesn’t. It only establishes that the few Klingons we see didn’t.
exactly. And not even that actually: only that the few Klingons we actually see were flatheads, but they’re not necessarily the majority anywhere.
perhaps.
that’s clear.
I still say there never needed to be any explanation for the Klingons looking different in TOS and 90s Trek. The make-up was updated. End of story.
The whole virus nonsense from ENT was terrible, as are (imo) the various explanations the novels put forward.
If anything needed an explanation it'd be the huge shift in culture from TOS to TNG. How did the Klingons shown in TOS become the space bikers from 90s Trek?
The whole virus nonsense from ENT was terrible, as are (imo) the various explanations the novels put forward.
If anything needed an explanation it'd be the huge shift in culture from TOS to TNG. How did the Klingons shown in TOS become the space bikers from 90s Trek?
And yet they chose to not move forward and set it in the past. They didn't dump the established look in TNG, DS9, VOY, or ENT, when they went back to a previously shown ship or time.
Just look at our real world: Many cultures have drastically changed, even several times, just in the last 100 years
Brief appearances are different than a full show being sold to non-fans. It's still art.
What were they in TOS?
I seem to remember them being quieter and more scheming but my TOS knowledge isn't great.
You are dead right about the stupid virus
there wasn’t much shown about their culture in TOS, mostly that they were an expansionistic empire, an all-controlling dictatorship and that their ships were Spartan.
Also consider that on earth we’ve got a huge number of different cultures, each with a different approach to life, even without taking in consideration how much a culture can change in 100 years.
I'm not saying they *can't* change. I'd just like to know *how* it happened.
Plus the "there might be many cultures" approach, in my opinion doesn't work very well in Star Trek, where most species, including the Klingons are very homogenous.
Just like with humans in Star Trek where everyone is American
This is probably Star Trek's greatest weakness and one that fans tend to perpetuate is the idea of homogenous cultures. I think the assumption that all Klingons, Romulans or even humans are all the same because of what is presented on screen is needlessly limited. "There might be many cultures" is the more reasonable idea, and allows for greater fan exploration outside the limits of a TV show which of course will be limited.
We do get
We do get to see the old group who deviate from the norm but they are always purposely aligned against the standard culture like Romulan ninjas who always tell the truth cause all Romulans lie, ultra emotional Vulcans, hardcore non violent Klingons, very non slave/pirate Orion's so even then it's all about the dominant culture in it's set up
Which is always appreciated and even Enterprise alluded to this with Antak's comments around the "warrior caste increasing in power" over the assumption that all Klingons are warriors. Again, Star Trek has limits in terms of what it can portray regarding cultures so expanding upon other ideas of cultures within the alien races presented is something that I find very natural. Humanity isn't monolithic at all so why should any of these aliens?
I was just stating what the evidence from Canon suggests.
And it's particularly bad with the Klingons, because in 90s Trek we see so many Klingons and so much of their culture... and all is the same growly, "honour and glory" worm eating Space Viking stuff without any variation to it. And Enterprise just stereotyped them even more into that direction.
Yes it would be more realistic if the Klingons had many cultures, but suggesting that they exist, but just happen to be just off-screen each time we see the Klingons is like claiming that there's members of Klingon subject species in the a Klingon fleet, but they are just hiding of screen all the time.
Yes it can potentially lead to linteresting fanon, but there's not a shred of evidence for it on the shows, and the amount of Klingon stuff we have seen even contradicts such ideas to some extend.
Plus as TimeIsAPredator pointed out, Star Trek isn't even good at portraying human cultures other than American, so what chance do aliens have?
To some, perhaps, but it also is something to explore and speculate upon. Limited evidence, but only based on the assumption that all encounters with the hero ships are the only possible interactions, which I find unlikely. Klingons have a caste system, and are an interstellar empire. It's unlikely we have seen all facets.
I don't remember anyone shitting bricks when ENT decided to redesign the Tellarites, Gorn, or Tholians.
Exactly, no explanation was needed there either, so none was/is needed for the Klingons.
Though, did they really redesign the Tholians? All we had prior to Enterprise was a blurry head shot and the 3d-model from Enterprise looks similar enough imho.
Always found this extremely unrealistic and not favorable to the show.
Indeed, perhaps too little too late but at least a token step towards a more interesting direction.
well, they didn’t really redesign the tellarites that much, only updated on what was obviously a mask in tos. The gorn got A LOT of flack for how agile and CGI-looking it was, but it was in a otherwise great episode and mostly got a pass for that. They didn’t redesign the Tholians at all, as TOS didn’t show enough to be redesigned anyway.
Forward doesn’t have to mean turning the page of a calendar. Forward in technology, ideas, design and format. No matter when in the fictional timeline a story takes places.
Trek fans are remarkably hidebound for a franchise that prides its self on being dedicated to progress and forward thinking.
So do I, but the universe presented in the shows is what it is.
Too little, too late AND too early in the timeline, in my opinion. That is still before the TOS Klingons which, to me at least, seemed more intellectual and balanced (and sneaky) than the warrrrrgh! Growl! 90s Trek Klingons.
A statement like that seems like it should come from the era of the TOS movies.
My personal pet theory was always that after the Khitomer Accords the Klingons got really uncomfortable about living in peace with the Federation, so they compensated by playing up the warrior aspect of their culture, slipping into something of a cultural regression as they revived rituals and practises from more primitive periods in their history.
Like for example a TOS era Klingon might have looked at Gagh the way many modern, city dwelling people in the west look at tripe. But in that cultural regression it gained new popularity and a high status as the "food of our awesome, war-like ancestors" and things like that.
Though that is, of course, just my fanon.
I think fan interpretation is fine because it shows engagement. We're to imagine these are cultures not monoliths.
Similar threads
