Discussion in 'Star Trek - The Original & Animated Series' started by ZapBrannigan, Mar 8, 2013.
^^ You're Galileo is the best shuttlecraft I've ever seen. Great work.
McMaster's D7 blueprints were sold by Roddenberry's Lincoln Enterprises.
^And along with FJ's Enterprise prints, were reproduced by FASA for their Star Trek role-playing game.
I don't think any of these observations settles the question either way.
Personally, I'd give my eyes to have a DST model of the Peregrine!
I have a nice model of it.
Great work too.
Lets be clear. To criticize FJ's work is not an indictment to devalue it. It's fair commentary without taking away any credit to FJ or any significance of what it meant to fans at the time. As has been said upthread it is an important and significant work in terms of Trek merchandising, indeed in genre material merchandising overall.[/QUOTE]
Criticizing is all that I see on this website.
The whole "a work is better if it is based on actual behind-the-scenes material" argument doesn't hold much water with me. I find set blueprints and the like to be fascinating artifacts, but a fictional spaceship like the Enterprise exists in the imagination, largely inspired by what we see and hear on our television or theater screens. If the end result captures that imagination and fuels it further, then it's successful, whether or not a given room on Deck 15 matches the shape and size of its stage plan for a given episode. (Sets evolve over time as well, as demanded by production needs or artistic whim. Which arrangement(s) are to be taken as "gospel" for blueprinting purposes?)
I'm not sure I interpret your statement correctly, but IMHO the behind-the-scenes material would refer to the deck functions laid out in The Making of Star Trek which FJ followed blindly and which is sometimes not compatible with the actual on-screen information (e.g. according to "Amok Time", "Elaan of Troyius" and possibly "The Day of the Dove" sickbay is on Deck 5, not Deck 7).
I'd say that most of the sickbay visualizations were compatible with the studio set blueprints so I fail to understand why FJ simply ignored these. IMHO, the main reason to have blueprints of any given vessel, is orientation and guidance, not confusion or fantasy.
If possible all arrangements, of course, if that's not possible the arrangement that answers more questions than it raises new ones, IMHO.
It is a time-consuming and difficult effort (a jigsaw puzzle is a walk in the park for comparison), and for deck 5 / astro-medicine ward 4 (sickbay probably extends down to deck 7...) I first had to compile all visual sickbay information from TOS during the past weeks (would you like a copy?) before I started to assemble the corridors in what I hope will be the most palatable presentation (I might be able to publish my draft in the "Fan Art" section this weekend).
The one thing that apparently is not possible is to "freeze" door signs, direction markers and the many (tiny) sickbay changes (including all the variations between Season Two and Three) permanently for certain sections.
Apologies if it's already been posted in this thread, but this interview with FJ's daughter Karen Dick is extremely enlightening, especially Q19 with regards to Gene Roddenberry's falling out with FJ, and why Mike Okuda's manuals deliberately contradicted the original Technical Manual and Enterprise blueprints.
Maybe this thread should be renamed "Let's Bash Franz Joseph."
I just came off of a "Let's Bash James Dixon" one.
Funny how first generation Treknical fans and fandom gets the finger around here.
Dare criticize someone like Michael "4747 Anime" Okuda and that's heresy.
I've studied the FJ blueprints and virtually everything that FJ did was done for a reason, whether to make the interior sets fit the exterior model or to make the starship realistically liveable as a "city in space." The things which are nitpicked were choices to be made, usually between two contrasts. For instance, Sickbay Is located on Deck 7 according to some episodes--but not according to others. Kirk's quarters is located on Deck 5--according to some episodes but not according to others (notably the earlier ones which give Deck 12, and no matter how you number the decks, up or down, there's no way you can fit Kirk's cabin onto Deck 12!). Other things like a photon torpedo bank in the upper primary hull--were put there by Matt Jeffries in his sketches. All in all the FJ blueprints are a combination of the different miniatures of the Enterprise fused together to make one set of blueprints. This was the best approach he could come up with for a single set of plans. For instance, he has 4 dual impulse engines as opposed to 2: those 4 are seen on aft shots of the model used in the pilot episodes only. If you want to geek-out you can do what 80s fans did and subdivide it up into Constitution, Bonhomme Richard, and Achernar classes/upgrades.
FJ's blueprints were fully authorized and approved of by Gene Roddenberry. They appeared in the Smithsonian, were runaway best-sellers, and appeared in various graphics in the first three Trek movies. They spawned many, many spinoff booklets of general plans. In a word, they Invented Treknical Fandom. A generation of Trek authors alone were also inspired by them and used them in their novels.
Bottom line: I have no problem with them as depicting the Enterprise's final configuration before ST-TMP. I have not seen better deck plans anywhere beyond some rather glittery and overly colorful "fanboy" works which tend to rely too much on high resolution graphics, fonts, and colors than logically form a working and plausible interior layout that's not only consistent with TOS episodes but with functionality. There's no reason to reject them unless you're a revisionist who insists on "reverse engineering" say 1701-D into 1701 or NX-01 into 1701. Considering the changes in technology between eras, that route is best not taken. IMHO, FJ's prints are definitive, so that's a moot point.
It must be a generational thing in many cases. I was an avid fan from the early 1970s on, and for a while there, all my technical dreams and visions rested on The Making of Star Trek, the FJ material, and my own personal sketches.
You could see at the time that FJ's drawings were not a perfect match for the show, but they were vivid and engrossing. Now they have huge sentimental value. You can still look at his Blueprints and walk the ship in your mind.
As I said earlier in this thread, I don't believe in any "definitive" layout of any Trek ship, because a fictitious ship like the beloved TOS-era Enterprise only "really" exists in the viewer's imagination, and no two imaginations are alike.
I'm continually impressed by how many alternative layouts are conjured up for the Big E, most of which are based on reasonable assumptions and with reasonable design goals.
Even in the TNG era, the Enterprise-D has had at least three "official" (or in Whitefire's case, almost "official") layouts: Whitefire's, Sternbach's as published in the 1990s and Sternbach's more recent effort as part of a project for Japan that was never fully released.
Franz Joseph's drawings predate all the hullabaloo about "canon." They were based on a set of assumptions that would almost certainly not be used today, but that makes them no less valid on their own merits.
I love 'em. Others love 'em. Some don't. No biggie.
I'm of the right age that I had the Technical Manual in around 1977 when I was about 13-14 and it was just about the only thing available for any Trek fan. So needless to say, it's pretty foundational to my view and understanding of Trek. I know it's not canon by any means, but it's the source of many of the ideas that I'd held for a decade before TNG came out, and so I always give it the respect it deserves for the influence it had on my appreciation of Trek.
It also doesn't hurt that I played a lot of SFB in the 90's, which drew heavily on the Technical Manual.
Even with its inaccuracies, I'll always have a soft spot for it because of how important it was to my development. It helped fuel my love of Trek.
I use the uniform patterns in the manual.
I wonder if Franz Joseph made them up himself or asked the costume designers
This is where I really think "canon" in not really worth it. I understand attmepts to say this is mainline and this is fringe information, after all, all of the books, comic books and other stories can't really fit into one life time. Captain Kirk's 5 year mission would take about 50 years to have it all. But, how many "authorized" books at the time said one thing and were then de authorized afterward, after they sold quite bit, simply on the whim or needs of the current project? So as far as FJs Blueprints, I consider them absolutely fine as they are. In my opinion of course.
Much has already been written about it, but let me just say straight out that Franz Joseph's influence on the first few Star Trek films cannot be underestimated, despite the fact that he had nothing directly to do with those films!
Various deck plans and graphics of FJ's appear on bridge monitors... I think that alone in some way gives some validity to them...but it doesn't end there of course... There's much, much more... Background dialogue of "matrix restoration coils"and such heard in the first two films is straight from the Technical Manual... Admiral Kirk's travel pod shuttle in ST II has numerous plaques mounted on its interior bulkhead walls which are reproductions of the Flags and Seals of Federation worlds from the Technical Manual... The now very visible phaser bank emplacements on the movie Enterprise's hull are clearly derived from his blueprints' ball-and-socket styled phaser banks in the Booklet of General Plans... When we see turbolifts moving through the vertical shafts their outlines with their curiously curved upper and lower sections are straight out of the FJ cutaway of the Enterprise in his blueprints...
When we are first introduced to Epsilon 9 in ST-TMP we hear subspace radio chatter about the starships Columbia, Revere, and Entente--their names And their stated NCC registries and types come straight out of the Technical Manual! The UFP Seal in San Francisco in the first film is clearly derived from FJ's UFP Seal...
In ST IV there's another shot of San Francisco and on a building is not only a UFP seal but the Same UFP seal that FJ designed for the Technical Manual (and it is in fact right on the center of the cover of the original issue of the manual!).
I guess you have to be a real fan of the nuts and bolts components of the Trek mythos to truly appreciate it all though...
The Ball and socket phasers are in Matt Jefferies drawings in The Making of Star Trek which far predate the FJ plans.
The turbolift map in the refit is based on Jefferies outlines for the Phase 2 model. Or are you referring to something else?
Trekkie fan: "Leave Franz Joseph ALONE !!!!"
Separate names with a comma.