How would you retcon Strange New Worlds?

[Mudd]

SNW is just a much more interesting version of Spock than we've gotten since early in TOS's second year, and Peck plays him in a wonderful way that's only occasionally reminiscent of Nimoy.

He's one of the reasons that SNW is exactly what's been needed to reinvigorate the original Star Trek, much more successfully in creative terms than the Abrams films (which i also have liked).

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Based on The Cage, it’s more logical (pun intended) to think something happens between the first time to Talos IV and WNMHGB that makes Spock a more stoic character—we just haven’t seen it yet (perhaps we never will).

Perhaps it's Pike's accident itself.

 

[Mudd]

It's his tragic love affair with...well, p;robably everybody aboard, but I'm going with Chapel.

Who knows, maybe he was sentenced to three years forced reeducation on Tantalus V by Starfleet HR.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Perhaps it's Pike's accident itself.

Pike's accident likely didn't happen between "The Cage" and WNMHGB. Commodore Mendez says there's been subspace chatter about it "for months" when he's telling Kirk about it in "The Menagerie." If it happened before WNMHGB, it'd be years in the past.

 

[FederationHistorian]

Pike's accident likely didn't happen between "The Cage" and WNMHGB. Commodore Mendez says there's been subspace chatter about it "for months" when he's telling Kirk about it in "The Menagerie." If it happened before WNMHGB, it'd be years in the past.

Yep. That’s why it makes no sense for the series finale to be Pike handing the keys over to Kirk. Pike’s accident takes place during Kirk’s captaincy.

 

[Mudd]

Yep. That’s why it makes no sense for the series finale to be Pike handing the keys over to Kirk. Pike’s accident takes place during Kirk’s captaincy.

...after Pike has handed over the keys.

None of this will go the way people think.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Yeah. From what we know, the chronology goes something like this:

1) Pike becomes Fleet Captain. Kirk takes over the Enterprise from him. (According to Kirk in "The Menagerie," this is when Kirk first met Pike, but that's obviously about to be retconned.)

2) TOS begins.

3) Pike is exposed to Delta Rays while saving the lives of several cadets.

4) Months later, "The Menagerie" happens and Spock hijacks the Enterprise to take Pike to Talos IV.

 

[UssGlenn]

Pike becomes Fleet Captain. Kirk takes over the Enterprise from him. (According to Kirk in "The Menagerie," this is when Kirk first met Pike, but that's obviously about to be retconned.)

That's not what the Menagerie says. The meeting and the taking over are two separate statement from Kirk. All they have to do is have Pike promoted to Fleet Captain and remain in command of the Enterprise (perhaps Kirk even delvers the news). Then he hands over command years later. This could make for good drama as the promotion is one step closer to the accident for Pike.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I'd say the clear implication of the dialogue is that Kirk took over the Enterprise directly after Pike's promotion, but you could certainly interpret it to have them be two separate incidents and not do any real damage to previously-established continuity.

MENDEZ: You ever met Chris Pike?
KIRK: When he was promoted to Fleet Captain.
MENDEZ: About your age. Big, handsome man, vital, active.
KIRK: I took over the Enterprise from him. Spock served with him for several years.
SPOCK: Eleven years, four months, five days.

The phrasing implies that Kirk just met Pike the one time, but of course that's about to be blown out of the water on SNW.

 

[Mudd]

We have no idea what a "fleet captain" is in Trek context. It could simply be a temporary status for some kind of campaign.

Because, except in certain historical contexts, there's not really such a thing as a "fleet captain."

GR may have had some vague notion that having Pike promoted to admiral might make something about the way his injury was handled and reported out by the fleet problematic. God knows "The Menagerie" envelope story is a collection of narrative and logical holes barely knit together by fan enthusiasm for the episodes.

 

[fireproof78]

The phrasing implies that Kirk just met Pike the one time, but of course that's about to be blown out of the water on SNW.

Well, it's ambiguous enough that I don't mind the fleshing out too much, even with including Kirk in SNW at all. Also, Kirk knows Pike well enough to call him "Chris" rather than "Captain" or "Christopher." So there is wiggle room as well as the old fall back that the Menagerie is a dramatization of in universe events which were confused enough to begin with since the Talosians were manipulating the events.

 

[FederationHistorian]

...after Pike has handed over the keys.

…Meaning that’s not going to be his last episode. Regardless if his fate is changed or not. Since Pike is the show.

You really thing the episode is going to go ‘Pike’s hand over keys to Kirk. The End.’? And not address the accident or remake his relocation to Talos IV if his fate is unchanged?

None of this will go the way people think.

We can agree on that much.

 

[fireproof78]

You really thing the episode is going to go ‘Pike’s hand over keys to Kirk. The End.’? And not address the accident or remake his relocation to Talos IV if his fate is unchanged?

Yes.

But, it probably won't go how I think. Which is good.

 

[Shamrock Holmes]

We have no idea what a "fleet captain" is in Trek context. It could simply be a temporary status for some kind of campaign.

Because, except in certain historical contexts, there's not really such a thing as a "fleet captain."

And why does it only existing a "historical context" invalidate the known information?

Incidentally, the classical role of the "fleet captain" still exists to this day in the US Navy at least (principal aide and nominal fleet 2-i-C to an admiral), it's just been renamed "chief of staff" to avoid confusion.

 

[Mudd]

And why does it only existing a "historical context" invalidate the known information?

Why shouldn't it? Since the position of chief of staff exists within Starfleet, there's no reason that an archaic title should have been resurrected alongside it to refer to the same thing.

I can do this all day, same as anyone else here. If they want to, the producers can provide an explanation for this "inconsistency" that makes as much sense as three-quarters of the rest of the pseudo-military bushwah in Star Trek, and there are no real grounds on which to argue the point.

 

[drt]

The so-called decanonizing of TAS died with Gene

It's always funny to me that people 100% buy into Roddenberry's supposed decanonization of TAS, but forget that he also decanonized all of the movies after TMP and some of TOS.

It should also be pointed out the all of this "decanonizing" came from interviews with Richard Arnold, there was never a formal announcement from Roddenberry or anything. TAS's case was probably exacerbated because Paramount didn't originally own the rights so couldn't formally acknowledge it. But honestly, it's the purest Star Trek sequel, made by most of the same people who did the original series, including Gene Roddenberry.

 

[Mudd]

Also, GR never could decanonize anything. He could only object to it.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Well, it's ambiguous enough that I don't mind the fleshing out too much, even with including Kirk in SNW at all. Also, Kirk knows Pike well enough to call him "Chris" rather than "Captain" or "Christopher."

True. They certainly have wiggle room. And honestly, they were probably never going to let one line of dialogue cut them off from a potential story. I figured that SNW wouldn't hew to Spock's line in "Dagger of the Mind" about how he'd never mind melded with a human, and I was right.

Hell, ENT retconned the (admittedly estimated from TOS) year of Zephram Cochrane's disappearance from 2117 to 2119 just so he could be present at the dedication of the Warp Five Facility. No idea why they moved the date of his disappearance forward instead of just saying the Warp Five Complex was founded in 2117, though.

TAS's case was probably exacerbated because Paramount didn't originally own the rights so couldn't formally acknowledge it. But honestly, it's the purest Star Trek sequel, made by most of the same people who did the original series, including Gene Roddenberry.

From what I've heard, Roddenberry wasn't terribly involved in TAS and largely just left it in the hands of D.C Fontana and David Gerrold. He doesn't even have any writing credits on TAS, as opposed to the 12 he had on TOS.

 

[Nyotarules]

Pike's hair. They have GOT to tone that pompadour down. It looks ridiculous.

It deserves to be recognised in the credits!

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Pike's accident likely didn't happen between "The Cage" and WNMHGB. Commodore Mendez says there's been subspace chatter about it "for months" when he's telling Kirk about it in "The Menagerie." If it happened before WNMHGB, it'd be years in the past.

Perhaps, but I disagree that WNMHGB necessarily occurred "years" before "The Menagerie."

1. Memory Alpha has WNMHGB happening in 2265 and "The Menagerie" happening in 2267. If it's accurate, between them there could be as little as just over one year but less than three.

2. Assuming that WNMHGB and "The Menagerie" happened during the same five-year mission, there aren't that many years that can separate them. (VOY "Q2" canonized Kirk's "historic" five-year mission as ending in 2270.)

3. There being subspace chatter for months doesn't mean that the start of the chatter coincided with the accident. We know now that Pike's accident is classified, because of the time-travel elements. The accident could have happened months before word of it got out.

4. Spock is in the know now even though the accident has not yet happened. So, he's already processing it emotionally.

Do I think Pike's accident is the only reason Spock's personality/behavior could change? Not at all. I also like the possibility, mentioned upthread, that an emotional incident with Chapel could be involved, possibly even one involving both Chapel and T'Pring.