And we need his wife showing McCoy around Sickbay to show off all the gadgets.
Evidence of SNW being a possible alternate timeline from TOS
Exactly.
This thread got me thinking. In the TTRPG RuneQuest, set in the fantasy world of Glorantha, the creator Greg Stafford famously said "Your Glorantha Will Vary", meaning essentially "take what you like from the source books, discard what you don't, make whatever shit you want up, your version is as good as the 'official' one". His belief was that the setting should fuel stories people wanted to tell, rather than stories being limited and restricted by the weight of the setting.
I feel like all new Star Trek writers should be given an equivalent "Your Star Trek Will Vary" directive, encouraging them to tell whatever story they want, up to and including directly contradicting and/or fucking around with existing """canon""". Write a story with Kirk alive in the 2380s that just doesn't mention him taking a bridge to the face in Generations, who gives a shit.
If this attitude was adopted then none of the perceived violations of SNW would matter to begin with since future writers could/would just ignore SNW anyway.
I feel like all new Star Trek writers should be given an equivalent "Your Star Trek Will Vary" directive, encouraging them to tell whatever story they want, up to and including directly contradicting and/or fucking around with existing """canon""". Write a story with Kirk alive in the 2380s that just doesn't mention him taking a bridge to the face in Generations, who gives a shit.
If this attitude was adopted then none of the perceived violations of SNW would matter to begin with since future writers could/would just ignore SNW anyway.
Fun fact: This is already how the powers that be do it, how they have always done it, they just don't say it out loud.
I feel like that is also how Conan Doyle and Frank Baum handled their famous stories, and yet fans (myself included sadly) made an entire game out of trying to explain why, for example, Watson was named James once, or why the Wizard had never heard of Ozma before despite it being said that he sold her to a witch previously. I think there's just something about the human brain that causes *some* of us to try and fix/mend/paperover contradictions. Like that false memory thing from Bioshock Infinite. I think it might just be a random quirk, like being left handed. I can't help it!
Very good idea.
There were never any "Eugenics Wars", it was a bunch of human countries ruining Earth (people in the real world argue we're in a soft WW3 now as it is) in WW3 and then afterwards a bunch of augments who happened to exist around that time had the blame placed on them, with history rewritten accordingly to in the chaos after WW3.
These augments were raised in a lab (as seen in SNW) then sent into space (probably by SpaceX and Blue Origin) when their ideas for world peace were ignored by the corporate/government moguls of the day (Thus Khan's "We offered the world order!")
Khan and his followers went insane after centuries in space and a decade and a half on Ceti Alpha 5 and started believing the post-WW3 propaganda that they ruled anything on Earth when they actually never did.
There, the above retcon will buy Trek time until 2063 at least.
These augments were raised in a lab (as seen in SNW) then sent into space (probably by SpaceX and Blue Origin) when their ideas for world peace were ignored by the corporate/government moguls of the day (Thus Khan's "We offered the world order!")
Khan and his followers went insane after centuries in space and a decade and a half on Ceti Alpha 5 and started believing the post-WW3 propaganda that they ruled anything on Earth when they actually never did.
There, the above retcon will buy Trek time until 2063 at least.
They've already sufficiently retconned things to get us to 2063.
Wibbly wobbly time wimey.
Well - it's the same for many a Trek fan.
Many of us from the 'old days' know that Trek continuity is ANYTHING BUT internally consistent; BUT we liked to try and rationize everything and explain it away in a sometimes convoluted fashion; but for me back then it was all in fun and hell, we had a shorthand term we used all the time:
YATI = "Yet Another Trek Inconsistency"
But yeah, there were always those in fandom (then and now) who take all this stuff WAY to seriously - and some of them have made money from Youtube and Tik-Tok doing it.
We also didn't have the studio trying to brow beat us into accepting things the way CBS is constantly doing. They put out product and we watched it and figured out how to put it all together.
They essentially took away our imagination.
Fans gave up the imagination with the constant questions about canon.
^ I'm not even sure what that means.
Canon has become more important than the stories.
Canon became the first question asked about a story. It isn't, "is the story good?" It's not, "here's why I like the story." It's all about how it fits in to the preordained order of the canon.
No one is brow beating anyone. Hell, it was GR in 1987 who said:
"What's on screen in live action is canon...the rest isn't..."
But that was on response to fans bringing up stuff from novels; and Filmation wanted royalties from anything taken/referenced from TAS in the then new in production TNG series, and neither Paramount nor GR wanted the hassle of a court lawsuit - thus the above public policy so they had something out in public IF Filmation ever sued.
And yes, when Filmation went bankrupt and all TAS rights reverted to Paramount, suddenly TAS was re-canonized.
That isn't the problem. GR isn't telling you how you have to interpret the universe. Heck, he contradicted himself often in his stories, he didn't tell you how you had to interpret those inconsistencies. I imagine as long as you were adding money to his pocket in one form or another, he didn't much care about how it was interpreted.
On the imagination side, there is just very little to engage with where CBS Trek is concerned. At least, for me. I never walk away from a live-action episode with that itch at the back of my mind about where things could go. It's already been pre-ordained by CBS.
So, my engagement level with CBS live-action Trek is about on par with most other things from the current streaming era. Its "nice" but I have zero attachment to it. I never imagined that I would feel that way about Star Trek.
Similar threads
