I realize this isn't every fan's preference but it's pretty close to mine.I realize this isn't every fan's preference, but I'll take a good story over canon consistency every time.
I realize this isn't every fan's preference but it's pretty close to mine.I realize this isn't every fan's preference, but I'll take a good story over canon consistency every time.
Consistency simply isn't a priority, or even possible given the spread of authors and time when stories are produced.
I'll take a good story over canon consistency every time
Nope.Seems like it was a priority and possible up until Discovery.
I don't think it was priority since TMP.Seems like it was a priority and possible up until Discovery.
It wasn't even a priority in TOS.I don't think it was priority since TMP.
It's not a novel
Seems like it was a priority and possible up until Discovery.
Actually, I think this is a great comparison. A great novel series or a great TV series create a rich universe the the reader/viewer takes part in discovering and enjoying.
Now taker my favorite novel series, the Foundation series by Asimov. The first books were written in the 1940's. In subsequent decades he wrote books that took place well before and well after, but they were always consistent with one another and built upon the the universe and 'history' that he created that spans hundreds of years. Now admittedly, he did have to retcon dates of some events in other series when he merged them with Foundation, but if someone wrote a new Foundation novel that ignored or changed that established history, I don't think that would be very well received.
The difference is between one author (Asimov) vs. a TV series with multiple writers (Roddenberry, Fontana, Coon) and production considerations.Actually, I think this is a great comparison. A great novel series or a great TV series create a rich universe the the reader/viewer takes part in discovering and enjoying.
Now taker my favorite novel series, the Foundation series by Asimov. The first books were written in the 1940's. In subsequent decades he wrote books that took place well before and well after, but they were always consistent with one another and built upon the the universe and 'history' that he created that spans hundreds of years. Now admittedly, he did have to retcon dates of some events in other series when he merged them with Foundation, but if someone wrote a new Foundation novel that ignored or changed that established history, I don't think that would be very well received.
Seems like it was a priority and possible up until Discovery.
The level of consistency you're looking for is an illusion and never existed in Star Trek. The closest we got was TNG through VOY when the same production team, show runners, designers, etc were all writing and creating Star Trek shows consecutively and with overlap.
Star Trek was never intended to be one giant interconnected saga (like Star Wars).
Seems like it was a priority and possible up until Discovery.[/QUOT
I never felt a sense of discontinuity or "wait, that doesn't make sense based on what I have previously seen." Just my personal experience.
Plus, for most of TNGs run TOS was treated like the embarrassing uncle who gets drunk at family get togethers. Probably because it didn’t jibe well with Roddenberry’s later new age views. It wasn’t until he passed and fans of the original show started to run things that they made any effort to tie things up more closely.There was actually lots of discontinuity, even during the 90s. The Ferengi got retconned. The Trill got retconned. A Klingon woman's ability to serve on the High Council went from "yes" to "no" the same TNG season in episodes written by the same writer.
Plus, for most of TNGs run TOS was treated like the embarrassing uncle who gets drunk at family get togethers.
The Borg went from growing their own children to assimilating other species.I think you're just talking about the aspects of Trek that you find important, like the tech design or uniforms.
There was actually lots of discontinuity, even during the 90s. The Ferengi got retconned. The Trill got retconned. A Klingon woman's ability to serve on the High Council went from "yes" to "no" the same TNG season in episodes written by the same writer.
It also didn't jibe well with Roddenberry himself as he really wanted to portray an extremely positive view of humanity. That distancing from TOS and the more militaristic aspects is evidenced from Encounter at Farpoint on.Plus, for most of TNGs run TOS was treated like the embarrassing uncle who gets drunk at family get togethers. Probably because it didn’t jibe well with Roddenberry’s later new age views. It wasn’t until he passed and fans of the original show started to run things that they made any effort to tie things up more closely.
Probably why he had Picard surrender twice in the first five episodes, people went apeshit over that in the fanzines.It also didn't jibe well with Roddenberry himself as he really wanted to portray an extremely positive view of humanity. That distancing from TOS and the more militaristic aspects is evidenced from Encounter at Farpoint on.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.