"Forbidden Planet" as TOS prequel?

[Christopher]

I've always looked at FP as an alternate reality; what the Star Trek universe would be like, if the South had won the civil war.

Isn't it much simpler to look at it as a separate creation that was made in the 1950s and reflects the assumptions of that era? Let FP be its own entity. It did come first, after all.

Besides, even if the South had won the Civil War, that doesn't mean there would never have been racial equality. First off, the Confederacy was trying to leave the USA, not conquer it. Even if they'd won the war, it would just mean that the US would be smaller today, not that it would've been taken over by slaveowners. After all, the reason there was slavery in the South and not in the North is because the economy of the Southern states was dependent on plantation agriculture while the North was industrial. So there's no reason a Confederate victory would've prevented the spread of civil rights in what remained of the USA or the rest of the planet.

After all, the British abolished slavery before America did. It's a mistake to treat American history in isolation from the rest of the world. Even if the CSA had won the Civil War, it would've been under political and social pressure from other nations (including its neighbor the USA) that had abolished slavery. The global trend toward the eradication of legal slavery would've eventually encompassed the CSA along with everyone else, though it would've taken longer. Certainly there would've been no need to preserve the institution once there was electric or gasoline-powered farm machinery that could do the work faster and more economically than slaves could.

The primary ideology that led to the formation and secession of the CSA was nationalism, not racism. They saw themselves as a separate culture from the Northern states and didn't like the North telling them what to do, with slavery being one of the main issues of contention but, in their minds, just one facet of the larger problem. So there's no reason why an independent CSA would have to remain racist forever. After all, the civil rights movement had its roots in the South. In a post-slavery 20th-century CSA, there would certainly have been a homegrown civil rights movement. It might've taken longer, but there's no reason it wouldn't have kicked in by the 23rd century.

So the idea that Confederate victory in the Civil War = all-white spaceship crews in the future just doesn't follow.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Somebody wanna get Shelby Foote in on this?

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I've always looked at FP as an alternate reality; what the Star Trek universe would be like, if the South had won the civil war.

Isn't it much simpler to look at it as a separate creation that was made in the 1950s and reflects the assumptions of that era? Let FP be its own entity. It did come first, after all.

Yep. The world is full of interesting and worthwhile things that don't fit into the Star Trek universe. Most of them, in fact.

 

[3D Master]

I've always looked at FP as an alternate reality; what the Star Trek universe would be like, if the South had won the civil war.

Isn't it much simpler to look at it as a separate creation that was made in the 1950s and reflects the assumptions of that era? Let FP be its own entity. It did come first, after all.

And thus it is not Star Trek AT ALL.

If I let it be somewhat Star Trek it has to be an alternate reality, it simply can't be Star Trek itself.

It also goes to what Star Trek is and who created it. The 60s weren't that different from the 50s when it comes to these sensibilities, it's only what was occurring in the 60s that changed it later. Even if you don't take race into account, would any other program in the 60s have a Russian on board, and positively depicted?

This is Gene's doing; FP doesn't even come anywhere in the neighborhood of close.

Besides, even if the South had won the Civil War, that doesn't mean there would never have been racial equality. First off, the Confederacy was trying to leave the USA, not conquer it. Even if they'd won the war, it would just mean that the US would be smaller today, not that it would've been taken over by slaveowners. After all, the reason there was slavery in the South and not in the North is because the economy of the Southern states was dependent on plantation agriculture while the North was industrial. So there's no reason a Confederate victory would've prevented the spread of civil rights in what remained of the USA or the rest of the planet.

After all, the British abolished slavery before America did. It's a mistake to treat American history in isolation from the rest of the world. Even if the CSA had won the Civil War, it would've been under political and social pressure from other nations (including its neighbor the USA) that had abolished slavery. The global trend toward the eradication of legal slavery would've eventually encompassed the CSA along with everyone else, though it would've taken longer. Certainly there would've been no need to preserve the institution once there was electric or gasoline-powered farm machinery that could do the work faster and more economically than slaves could.

The primary ideology that led to the formation and secession of the CSA was nationalism, not racism. They saw themselves as a separate culture from the Northern states and didn't like the North telling them what to do, with slavery being one of the main issues of contention but, in their minds, just one facet of the larger problem. So there's no reason why an independent CSA would have to remain racist forever. After all, the civil rights movement had its roots in the South. In a post-slavery 20th-century CSA, there would certainly have been a homegrown civil rights movement. It might've taken longer, but there's no reason it wouldn't have kicked in by the 23rd century.

So the idea that Confederate victory in the Civil War = all-white spaceship crews in the future just doesn't follow.

It is exactly that I do NOT isolate American history in isolation from the rest of the world, that I consider this an option, the timeline would go something like this:

South successfully secceeds.

Several decades later they abolish slavery.

There are now 2 Americas influencing politics across the world; most notably a anti-racial-mixing south.

Racial tensions as a result increase throughout the world; even in places where different races are treated equally, because one's opinion on the CSA and their politics has a polarizing effect. Asian bias towards Caucasians and blacks increase a lot as a result, especially in the already filled with superiority complex Japan.

In the 20th century we get large racial clashes as a result.

From this the races slowly separate more and more in places where they weren't, isolating themselves for support from their own.

Ultimately, especially once technological progression has gone far enough anywhere is an equal standard of living, the races separate themselves completely.

It would produce a society where nobody would consider their race superior to another (except extremists of course), but virtually all believe that they simply can't live together in the same places.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I'm getting ten percent of what's owed to Kurt Vonnagut.

You were his agent?

 

[Christopher]

And thus it is not Star Trek AT ALL.

If I let it be somewhat Star Trek it has to be an alternate reality, it simply can't be Star Trek itself.

But it can't be an alternate reality in the sense of the Mirror Universe, since the physics are different -- hyperdrive instead of warp drive. So it's another reality in the sense that it's just plain a different fictional creation. No point in tying it to ST at all.

It is exactly that I do NOT isolate American history in isolation from the rest of the world, that I consider this an option, the timeline would go something like this:

South successfully secceeds.

Several decades later they abolish slavery.

There are now 2 Americas influencing politics across the world; most notably a anti-racial-mixing south.

Racial tensions as a result increase throughout the world; even in places where different races are treated equally, because one's opinion on the CSA and their politics has a polarizing effect. Asian bias towards Caucasians and blacks increase a lot as a result, especially in the already filled with superiority complex Japan.

In the 20th century we get large racial clashes as a result.

From this the races slowly separate more and more in places where they weren't, isolating themselves for support from their own.

Ultimately, especially once technological progression has gone far enough anywhere is an equal standard of living, the races separate themselves completely.

It would produce a society where nobody would consider their race superior to another (except extremists of course), but virtually all believe that they simply can't live together in the same places.

I don't buy that the whole history of the world would've been changed that drastically by the South successfully seceding. Nothing is monocausal in history. Social change occurs as a result of multiple factors and processes. If one factor is changed, it may change the timetable or details of how a social change comes about, but it's unlikely to change the final outcome to that degree.

Besides, America wasn't that major a player in the world prior to WWII. The idea that the entire planet would've been so profoundly affected by a change in American politics in the 1860s just doesn't follow. At the time, it was Britain that was the dominant global power, the society whose changes sent ripples across the planet. And Britain had abolished slavery throughout the Empire by 1838. It was pressure from the British that led Brazil and the Ottoman Empire to give up slavery, in 1850 and 1877 respectively. Russia emancipated the serfs in 1861 after the Crimean War exposed the weakness of the serf-based Russian economy. America was a straggler in the global process of abolition, not a leading voice. If the CSA had successfully seceded and continued using institutionalized slavery, it wouldn't have reversed the process of emancipation that had already taken hold around the world. More than likely, the Confederacy would've succumbed to pressure from the British Empire and given up slavery sometime late in the 1800s. It might've needed to; separated from the rest of the country, the Confederacy would've needed to strengthen its ties with Britain in order to balance the power of the US.

As for later on, if the US had split into two smaller nations, I doubt either one by itself would've been powerful enough to earn the kind of global influence that America gained in the 1940s. It's possible that the USA and CSA would've allied against the Axis; even a racist, segregated CSA would still believe strongly in its right to self-determination and would resist Nazi conquest with all its might. But two smaller nations might've been less dominant partners in the alliance than one large united nation, and therefore less influential on global society after the war. Not to mention that the Nazis' practices would still have shown the world how hideous racism can become, and that the Allies would still have set their internal racial strife aside in order to use all their resources in the war, giving oppressed minorities a taste of power they would've been reluctant to give up. So the factors that led to the modern civil rights movements around the world wouldn't have been that substantially affected by a Confederate victory.

 

[mb22]

Anyone see this movie?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0389828/

 

[WendellM]

Well, yes, FP says that humankind reached the moon by the last decade of the 21st century, but they didn't say that it was the FIRST moon landing. Just a significant one.

The novelization (though it's presumably not FP canon - yay, another canon to worry about... ) has a different, more detailed background in its foreword:

Excerpts from "THIS THIRD MILLENNIUM - A Condensed Textbook for Students" by A. G. Yakimara, H.B., Soc.D., etc.
(The following are taken from the revised microfilm edition, dated Quatuor 15, 2600 A.D.)

...So that in the year 1995 the first fully manned satellite Space Station had been established as a 'jumping off' place for exploration of the Solar system - and by the end of the year 2100 the exploration (and in certain cases colonization) of the planets in the Solar system had been more than half completed...

...It seemed then that space conquest must necessarily be limited to the Solar system - and it was not until 2200, a couple of centuries after the full occupation of the Moon and fifty years after the final banding together of Mankind in one single Federation, that the conquest of Outer Space became a possibility instead of a scientist's dream. The possibility was brought about by the revolutionary Parvati Theory, which proved as great a step from the Relativity Laws as they themselves had been from the age-old gravity superstition. The Parvati Theory completely negated the Einsteinian belief that "At or past the speed of light, mass must become infinite" - and the way was open for such men as Gundarsen, Holli, and Mussovski to develop and transmute the theory into fact. Their labors resulted, as regards the exploration of Outer Space, in what is now called the QG (or Quanto-Gravitum) drive...

...By the middle of the fourth century in our millennium the first exploratory trips beyond the confines of the Solar System had already been made, and all the time the design, construction and performance of spacecraft were being improved...

...The early days of Outer Space penetration were naturally productive of many events and deeds which have since attained almost legendary quality, perhaps chief of these being the extraordinary story surrounding the two expeditions to Altair, the great main sequence star of the constellation Alpha Aquilae. The first of these (aboard the Space Ship Bellerophon) was launched, from Earth via the Moon, on the seventh of Sextor, 2351. The second (on the United Planets Cruiser C-57-D) was launched twenty years later almost to the minute...
​

There's also this bit from Major Ostrow in the first chapter:

Take what they call the 'time-squeeze' for instance. The kids knew - they automatically accepted - that while time is fixed at each end of one of these preposterous journeys, it is concertina'ed on the journey itself. I didn't know it; my mind kept rebelling against it. Not being a mathematician, I couldn't help regarding it as some sort of infuriating conjuring trick. John Adams had told me (and I'd checked with Quinn) that the 'squeeze' on this journey, which would be about a year for us, was in ten to one ratio. I'd smiled at them politely, and thanked them for the information - but my mind still boggled at the thought that even if we just reached our destination and went straight back to Earth, I'd only have spent twenty-four months on the round trip but all my friends would be twenty years older.
​

If later, more advanced ships eliminated this time squeeze, a navigator might excitedly announce to someone only familiar with the old drive (perhaps a crash-landed scientific expedition on a distant world), "You won't believe how fast you can get back. Well, the time barrier's been broken! Our new ships can..."

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Nice excerpt, thanks. I'm going to have to take up the search for this book again.

Of course, the S.S. Columbia had disappeared in the region of Talos "approximately eighteen years ago" and Vina had supposedly been born "almost as [they] crashed." So whatever Jose Tyler was talking about with the "time barrier" remark it wasn't the "time squeeze" that Ostrow describes.

Unlike the many TV shows and movies that actually are part of the Trek continuity, Forbidden Planet can't reasonably be made to fit into it.

 

[Timo]

Huh? I don't see any major showstoppers.

The timeframe is not problematic. In the early 23rd century, ships like that were no doubt operating solo in the depths of space, the smaller and older examples still suffering from the 22nd century lack of subspace communications across any significant distance.

Terminology is no problem, either. The United Federation of Planets existed, and different ways of spelling out that mouthful are quite plausible. Warp drive vs. hyperdrive is a non-starter: our Starfleet heroes sometimes spoke of "time warp" and other such oddities, too.

Technology presents no obvious problems. The ship has a FTL drive, shields, and particle guns, all staples of generic scifi and of Star Trek as well. Phasers are absent, but then again, so were they from "The Cage". The fancy "personal IDF chambers" may be the poor man's solution when the ship's own IDF is somewhat rickety...

Indeed, we're apparently not seeing a top-of-the-line Starfleet vessel here. The Federation is referenced, Starfleet is not. So this survey party could come from some other UFP organization besides Starfleet, solving the remaining terminology problems.

Location is slightly problematic in that Altair IV explodes at the end but is mentioned in later Trek. Perhaps Altair V was simply logically renamed?

Technicalities don't stop us from doing the continuity shoehorning, not really. The movie is probably an easier fit than many TOS episodes! The only question is why one should bother...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[WendellM]

Of course, the S.S. Columbia had disappeared in the region of Talos "approximately eighteen years ago" and Vina had supposedly been born "almost as [they] crashed." So whatever Jose Tyler was talking about with the "time barrier" remark it wasn't the "time squeeze" that Ostrow describes.

Unlike the many TV shows and movies that actually are part of the Trek continuity, Forbidden Planet can't reasonably be made to fit into it.

I'm happy with the accepted Trek history, though I don't mind others having fun creating their own and find such "could have beens" interesting (I do that with Star Fleet Battles). I just found it interesting/amusing how the two "time" phenomena might mesh, so I threw it out there as a possible, not-serious explanation for Tyler's rather cryptic remark.

That said, upon reflection I think it could actually work, since Enterprise wouldn't be affected by "time squeeze," only Columbia would. Here's how the novel's timeline went:

Forbidden Planet:
Earth Year (EY) 0 - Bellerophon leaves Earth on one-year (ship time) journey to Altair
EY 10 - Bellerophon arrives at Altair in Altair Year (AY) 0.
...Ten years pass...
EY 20/AY 10 - On 20th anniv. of Bellerophon's launch, C-57D leaves Earth on one-year (ship time) journey to Altair
EY 30/AY 20 - C-57D arrives at Altair.
​

And here's how the two Trek timelines could go:

canonical "The Cage":
Earth Year (EY) 0 - Columbia leaves base (Earth?) for one-year? journey to Talos. RealVina is, say, 21 years old.
EY 1 - Columbia arrives at Talos and disappears. RealVina is 22. IllusionVina is "born."
...Eighteen years pass...
EY 19 - Enterprise leaves base (Earth?) on one-month? journey to near Talos
EY 19 - Eighteen light-years from Talos, Enterprise gets Columbia's light-speed SOS. IllusionVina is 18. RealVina is 40.

hypothetical "Forbidden Cage":
Earth Year (EY) 0 - Columbia leaves base (Earth?) for one-year? (ship time) journey to Talos. RealVina is, say, 21 years old.
EY 10 - Columbia arrives at Talos in Talos Year (TY) 0 and disappears. RealVina is 22. IllusionVina is "born."
...Eighteen years pass...
EY 28/TY 18 - Enterprise leaves base (Earth?) on one-month? journey (no time squeeze) to near Talos
EY 28/TY 18 - Eighteen light-years from Talos, Enterprise gets Columbia's light-speed SOS. IllusionVina is 18. RealVina is 40.
​

The only way for Earth/Enterprise to know (as they did) that Columbia disappeared 18 years ago in the Talos star group would be if Columbia had FTL/subspace radio in both timelines.

 

[Warped9]

I'll take Forbidden Planet any freakin' time over Enterfake, which I don't recognize in any capacity anyway.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I'll take Forbidden Planet any freakin' time over Enterfake, which I don't recognize in any capacity anyway.

Well, you don't get a choice in terms of actual continuity: Forbidden Planet stands forever apart from Star Trek and at least equal to it in depth of imagination, while TOS and Enterprise are both actually chapters in Trek.

Remarkably, the number of rewatchable episodes in both TOS and any one of the sequel shows are pretty similar - the later shows just each took four to seven years of fitful improvement to produce fifteen or twenty good ones, while TOS did it in about a season and a half.

 

[WendellM]

I just wanted to include this little "Easter egg" from 1980's The Star Trek Maps manual, written by John Upton, in the thread:

I'd forgotten about it until this thread but thought that it was a cute, not necessarily serious, touch. Just shows that fans have enjoyed unofficially "kitbashing" FP into Trek for a while, and I thought TOS Purist and others might get a kick out of it.

---

I'll take Forbidden Planet any freakin' time over Enterfake, which I don't recognize in any capacity anyway.

Well, you don't get a choice in terms of actual continuity: Forbidden Planet stands forever apart from Star Trek and at least equal to it in depth of imagination, while TOS and Enterprise are both actually chapters in Trek.

I agree with this. While I also don't put ENT in my "personal fanon," I do recognize it as canon. In a discussion with another fan, I'd yield to any events that he brought up from ENT since they're official. But if he started bringing up a non-canon background (say, from the Spaceflight Chronology), I'd happily jettison "official" ENT and have a fanon discussion about alternate pasts.

Remarkably, the number of rewatchable episodes in both TOS and any one of the sequel shows are pretty similar - the later shows just each took four to seven years of fitful improvement to produce fifteen or twenty good ones, while TOS did it in about a season and a half.

True... For Trek series, TOS is firmly in my personal fanon, TNG pretty much, and the rest to lesser extents - ranging down to ENT which simply isn't. So, other fans who omit ENT from their personal view of "What Trek is" and I can have interesting, "unofficial" discussions about pre-TOS stuff (such as this thread is about). While there's no question that FP didn't "really" happen in Trek and that ENT "really" did, nothing seems wrong with discussing an unofficial "what if."

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Huh? I don't see any major showstoppers.

The fact that human beings don't reach the Moon for most of the rest of this century is a flat-out major showstopper. End of story, really.

Pretending that the writer of that line meant anything other than what it first appears to mean - that humanity first reaches the Moon near the end of the 21st century - is something we can do, but it's not even rationalization, just masturbation...which is boring after a certain age.

 

[number6]

Masturbation is never boring.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Masturbation is never boring.

Girls, dude. Girls.

Or guys if that's your preference. Same point.

 

[3D Master]

Doesn't make masturbation boring though; especially not if the girls/guys join the masturbation.

 

[number6]

Masturbation is never boring.

Girls, dude. Girls.

Or guys if that's your preference. Same point.

I love girls.. They're just not always around, but Porn is ubiquitous!

 

[xortex]

It could be an alternate reality Trek since we've seen so much altering of the time lines.