Enterprise : The First Adventure out of sync with canon

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Christopher said:

EliyahuQeoni said:
Not to mention a violation of Nichelle Nichols' preferences for the character. She was unhappy with the uniform trousers in TWOK and requested a return to the miniskirt for TSFS.

And ironically the DC Comics Star Trek annual that chronicled the end of the Five Year Mission had Uhura complaining about having had to wear a mini-skirt for 5 years!

But in Ex Machina, I had Uhura lament the loss of the miniskirts. (Or mini-culottes, which I think is what they actually were.)


[/QUOTE]

That is more fitting with Nichelle Nichols take on Uhura.

I also like that she didn't like the garment replicator on the refit-E, citing that people's proportions very throughout the day and are not constant as they are when the garment was applied.

 

[Timo]

There was no explanation offered for their absence; presumably duty assignments just shift sometimes.

We have to remember that the ship's personnel exist in triplicate - one for each shift. So if Uhura is absent during a certain adventure, we might say that Starfleet rules dictate that each crisis be handled with the personnel on duty at the beginning of the crisis (unless there is a pressing reason to summon the department chief). So Uhura didn't actually go away to a conference or transfer to botanics - she merely slept through that particular adventure!

As for whether Uhura actually was the department chief, well, it's not as if we have a better candidate. Palmer held the same rank, and was about the same age, so that's equally possible.

However, Chekov probably wasn't the Chief Navigator, considering the parade of Lieutenants we saw in his chair. Kirk merely preferred to pair his Chief Helmsman with a junior Navigator and vice versa... And most of the adventures we saw happened during the first setup.

Sure, jumping from shift to shift may wreak havoc with sleep cycles and so forth. But sometimes a person might quite plausibly request three or four off shifts instead of the regular two, for various reasons, and be granted that request.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Christopher]

middyseafort said:
I also like that she didn't like the garment replicator on the refit-E, citing that people's proportions very throughout the day and are not constant as they are when the garment was applied.

That was my attempt to explain why the "beam the clothes right on" technology from TMP was never used later on. I figured it was an impractical invention that proved to be more trouble than it was worth and got abandoned.

 

[Timo]

...Assuming that it ever even existed, that is.

We don't know what Kirk is really doing when he lunges for those nondescript controls next to Ilia's shower booth. Perhaps he's turning off the shower using outside manual override - a maneuver that may require more than one keypress, considering that it's something of a violation of both privacy and the general operating practices of a shower stall?

Or perhaps Kirk is struggling to overcome the strange temperature variations within the shower, not quite realizing that the shower machinery has nothing to do with it?

I mean, we never quite got confirmation that the "Very funny, Mr Scott, now beam down my pants" thing ever were technologically possible. The aim must be quite coarse in "The Cloud Minders" where the father cannot be beamed away from the daughter even though the two most definitely aren't physically intermingled.

Admittedly, a century later, transporters can play with the molecular structure of their victims. The transition to the newer tech could come between TOS and TMP. But Janeway in "Flashback" was somewhat insistent that the folks back then didn't have replicators or similar fancy stuff.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Christopher]

Timo said:
...Assuming that it ever even existed, that is.

We don't know what Kirk is really doing when he lunges for those nondescript controls next to Ilia's shower booth. Perhaps he's turning off the shower using outside manual override - a maneuver that may require more than one keypress, considering that it's something of a violation of both privacy and the general operating practices of a shower stall?

Okay, so how do you explain the robe materializing onto the Ilia-probe's body?

Besides, I prefer not to speculate too far beyond the intent of the text without good reason.

 

[Timo]

Okay, so how do you explain the robe materializing onto the Ilia-probe's body?

How do you explain the Ilia-probe materializing in Ilia's shower booth?

When I see advanced magic in action, I tend to suspect the advanced magician in evidence. The robe looks like V'Ger's doing in every respect... For example, the probe, suspicious of all the doings of the carbon units, doesn't question the robe in the slightest, let alone shun it like it shuns the later headgear.

In contrast, if Kirk really were worried about the chastity of the intruder, wouldn't he replicate something more covering, with Starfleet insignia on it?

Besides, I prefer not to speculate too far beyond the intent of the text without good reason.

Yeah, I know we have a slight difference of approach here.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Christopher]

Timo said:
When I see advanced magic in action, I tend to suspect the advanced magician in evidence. The robe looks like V'Ger's doing in every respect...

Except that it happens after Kirk works a control that closes the door. Why would V'Ger wait until the door was shut to materialize the robe? Why would it care? Why would it even be aware of the concept of clothing or modesty, when people were just interchangeable "carbon units" to it? The only being in the scene who has an incentive to put a robe on Ilia is Kirk or another human. The intent of the scene is clear enough even without the script or novelization to make it explicit that a clothing synthesizer was being used.

For example, the probe, suspicious of all the doings of the carbon units, doesn't question the robe in the slightest, let alone shun it like it shuns the later headgear.

That's a mischaracterization of the headband scene. The probe accepts the headband without objection at first, because its mission is to gather data. It only rejects the headband later, after it triggers Ilia's memories and distracts the probe from its mission. A simple bathrobe has no such distracting associations. The probe doesn't care what coverings it has, so long as its functioning isn't impeded.

In contrast, if Kirk really were worried about the chastity of the intruder, wouldn't he replicate something more covering, with Starfleet insignia on it?

Presumably the robe was preset into the synthesizer. Besides, why put the probe in a Starfleet uniform when it isn't Starfleet personnel? (And we are talking about Jim Kirk here... )

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

^Plus, wasn't the "Spray Wear" mentioned in the production material for TMP as well as being mentioned by Robert Fletcher in the Roddenberry/Sackett book on the movie's making?

 

[Christopher]

^^Yep.

 

[foravalon]

RE: The "Spray Wear".

Technology comes and goes all the time that seems rather novel but subsequently proves to be quite impractical and is phased out.

I went to a Grocery Store in L.A. about 20 years ago and all of the shopping carts had an LCD screen on the handle that had a layout of the the store, like a mini-GPS, a symbol of where your cart was at any given time within the store, and a bunch of other cool stuff on its touch screen display. My little kid mind thought this was absolutely the coolest and was so bummed that I never saw it again.

I went to a Taco Bell about 10 years ago, also back in L.A., where you ordered all of your food on touch screen monitors while waiting in line, when you got to the counter, you gave them your money and your food was ready, no middle-man. It was fast, it was efficient, it was novel, I thought it was the future of fast food but it didn't pan out and I never saw it again.

Starfleet is no different. The life support belts from TAS were a dangerous and impractical technology (IMNSHO), we never saw them again.

The Refit Enterprise of TMP was Full of useless novelties, like the Excelsior which came after it, every time something new and shiny comes out, and the resources are available, engineers always want to embellish on the details, (see: ENT: "Singularity" Re: Trip and the Captain's chair.)

The automatic wardrobe machine, is no different than the technology later used so casually in Holodecks, prototypes of which had already classically been seen on the Enterprise in "The Practical Joker", and on Diane Duane's post TMP Rec-Deck. It's simple replication, it doesn't even have to be high res. It's not a big deal and certainly no stretch of the imagination.

 

[foravalon]

KRAD said:That's really not the point. "The Menagerie" made it pretty clear that Spock was the only one who'd served with Pike. If somebody else on board had served with him it really would've come up -- during the court martial, if nothing else.

I hate to contradict you Keith but, when was this point made? I don't remember any of that.

 

[Timo]

It wouldn't stand out in the official inquest scenes of "The Menagerie" IMHO - there's no room for "character witnesses" in that procedure, unlike there was in Kirk's earlier "Court Martial" trial.

But if there were former colleagues of Pike aboard Kirk's ship, one would expect them to beam down to pay respects to the poor guy. Not in the teaser along with Kirk and Spock, of course, since one of them didn't know Pike was hurt and the other wasn't telling. But surely later during those events?

Then again, we have no proof Scotty didn't beam down at some point and find out whether Pike would beep once or twice for his suggestion of hooking a hooch bottle up the IV line.

In that sense, I wouldn't shut out any of Kirk's colleagues from the circle of former friends of Pike, at least not outright. Even Chekov could have met him at some point, what with Pike being involved with training cadets and all.

Except that it happens after Kirk works a control that closes the door. Why would V'Ger wait until the door was shut to materialize the robe?

I'd suspect Kirk would wish to lock the door for reasons of slowing down an invading enemy, rather than for reasons of modesty. And why wouldn't V'Ger wait? Its procedure of sending in the probe was almost agonizingly slow and gradual to begin with. For all we know, the process started with beaming in the artificial endoskeleton, then those micropumps and whatnot to flesh it out, then the skin, and then our heroes entered to see the final phase where the outer garment arrives.

Why would it care?

Why does it "care" enough to create the probe in Ilia's form? The robe would be an arbitrary choice on its part. OTOH, I don't really see Kirk caring. Decker might rush in to protect the modesty of something that looks like his beloved. Kirk should order phasers set to kill.

wasn't the "Spray Wear" mentioned in the production material for TMP as well as being mentioned by Robert Fletcher in the Roddenberry/Sackett book on the movie's making?

Who are these people, and in which episode did they appear? (Save of course for Admiral Roddenberry, a famous multicentenarian and holder of several canonically established Starfleet jobs and titles.)

If we're really going to go by canonically unvoiced 1979 intention here, Kirk shouldn't really have a nudity taboo.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Therin of Andor]

Timo said:
one would expect them to beam down to pay respects to the poor guy. Not in the teaser along with Kirk and Spock, of course, since one of them didn't know Pike was hurt and the other wasn't telling. But surely later during those events?

Pike was reclusive. When asked if he wanted visitors, he kept signalling "No".

Re Ilia Probe's robe: I don't really see Kirk caring. Decker might rush in to protect the modesty of something that looks like his beloved.

The robe was to cover the Ilia Probe's nakedness because Vejur had also replicated Ilia's Deltan pheromones, and it made the thought of a nude android on the ship even worse.

Who are these people, and in which episode did they appear?

Chef Roddenberry in "Charlie X" (TOS) and walk-on sciences blue skant-wearing Sackett in "The Neutral Zone" (TNG).

 

[Christopher]

Timo said:
I'd suspect Kirk would wish to lock the door for reasons of slowing down an invading enemy, rather than for reasons of modesty.

You're reaching. It's in the script, it's in all the production notes: Kirk was materializing a robe onto her body. What you're doing is tantamount to arguing that when Spock put his hand on Evil Kirk's shoulder in "The Enemy Within" and Evil Kirk fell down, it was because a security guard shot Evil Kirk with a tranquilizer dart off camera. After all, there was no dialogue in that scene that explicitly established the causal link between Spock's action and the resultant unconsciousness, so by your logic, we can make up whatever arbitrary, overcomplicated explanation we want in order to flee as far as possible from the obvious implication of the scene.

Occam's Razor. Kirk pushed buttons, the door closed, a robe appeared. Go with the obvious causality, don't inject ad hoc variables.

OTOH, I don't really see Kirk caring. Decker might rush in to protect the modesty of something that looks like his beloved. Kirk should order phasers set to kill.

James Kirk is as much an explorer as a soldier. He doesn't attempt to kill unless there's a clear and present danger, and even when there is, he's often chosen the riskier path of attempting communication or reconciliation (see "Devil in the Dark," "Arena").

Besides, his mission was to discover all he could about the Intruder. This was a probe sent by the Intruder. He would've had to be an incompetent coward to try to destroy it first without even ascertaining if he could learn anything from it. Kirk gets caricatured as a hothead who charges into a fight without thinking, but that's not who he actually is at all. He's a master chess player, good enough to outplay even Spock. Not some idiot who'd go in blasting before he'd even assessed the situation.

 

[seigezunt]

no reference in this discussion to the Brother's Keeper series? That seemed a fair attempt to deal with canon issues, for all its shortcomings.

I still like E:TFA, despite the circus plot. It was my first ST novel, or one of them, way back.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Therin of Andor said:
Chef Roddenberry in "Charlie X" (TOS) and walk-on sciences blue skant-wearing Sackett in "The Neutral Zone" (TNG).

What about Miss "What's the problem? I thought you people had that circuit patched in an hour ago!" from ST:TMP? Wasn't that somebody famous?

 

[Christopher]

Babaganoosh said:
What about Miss "What's the problem? I thought you people had that circuit patched in an hour ago!" from ST:TMP? Wasn't that somebody famous?

No, that was an actress named Momo Yashima, who's had various TV guest roles since 1970 but is just one more working actress out of thousands, as far as I know. Although I did give her character a much more sizeable role (and the name Reiko Onami) in Ex Machina.

http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0946579/

Oh, and according to Memory Alpha, she's the sister of the late Mako.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Christopher said:
No, that was an actress named Momo Yashima, who's had various TV guest roles since 1970 but is just one more working actress out of thousands, as far as I know.

Her Dad was an author/illustrator and, when Momo was a little girl, she became the "star" of a popular children's picture book, "Momo's Kitten". That would count as "famous".

 

[Timo]

You're reaching. It's in the script, it's in all the production notes: Kirk was materializing a robe onto her body.

I'd say the script is the one doing the reaching. It tries to show us something that is overtly complicated, overtly subtle, and out of line with things previously seen. It fails: the fact that Kirk creates the robe is not transmitted to the audience. One has to have it explained before it can be seen.

It's like saying that we should immediately know about Ilia's pheromones when she enters the bridge, when the far more reasonable explanation for everybody's behavior is that Ilia has an attractive female body. The pheromones are not in the movie (not in the original theatrical release anyway); nor is the robe-creating shower stall. Occam razes those things out of existence.

Unless one includes the books as part of the universe, that is. In which case Janice Rand really is in her late teens in TOS, despite appearances, as there's nothing to contradict this rather nonapparent fact...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[Therin of Andor]

Timo said:
I'd say the script is the one doing the reaching. It tries to show us something that is overtly complicated, overtly subtle, and out of line with things previously seen.

I disagree. Roddenberry is on record as saying that we shouldn't get explanations in scenes about Kirk's hand phaser, or how it operates. So the sonic shower of TMP, and clothing materializer (an extension on the transporter technology), are simply there, and we see them working.

I read the novelization of TMP before seeing the film, and was quite satisfied watching the movie that several things, which were not explained in the movie - but had certainly been part of the developed backstory that led to the scenes we saw - were simply "givens". Ilia's pheromones, the clothing materializer, Kirk's brain implant that summoned him to HQ, Kirk's ex wife, Decker and the New Human Movement, etc, aren't crucial to the film but were all part of the backstory. Ditto Jedda being a Deltan in ST II; it's cool to know it was what the script had intended.

I'm not interested in wacky speculation that ignores the authors' intent. Wacky speculation in the absence of any evidence of authorial intent is, however, fair game.