I just saw Yesteryear

[Alidar Jarok]

It's actually the first TAS episode I saw. It was a great episode. Even though it was short and a kids show, I'd put this episode even among the best of the original Star Trek.

Spock's internal conflict between being half-Vulcan and half-Human is probably one of the most underrated things in Trek. It was handled really well and makes Spock a much more interesting character than if he had been a full Vulcan. This episode did a great job dealing with that conflict. Sometimes, I think Sarek is an asshole, but he is Vulcan, so he can't help that.

 

[Forbin]

It's one of the very few TAS eps that should definitely be in the canon continuity.

 

[Mallory]

Congrats AJ, you picked a really good one. And I'm of the same opinion of Forbin in that this should be canon. I know it's part of my personal canon.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Well, I'm perfectly happy to include most of the animated series as canon (pretty much, as long as it doesn't contradict anything else, I'm fine with it). I know a lot of writers like sneaking in subtle references to animated trek, so they're at least familiar with it, but it's not quite the same thing.

 

[Christopher]

Forbin said:
It's one of the very few TAS eps that should definitely be in the canon continuity.

Except that it completely contradicts "City"'s depiction of the Guardian. There, it said it was only capable of replaying the past in fast-forward, but in "Yesteryear" it was serving up precise places and times on request.

 

[Mallory]

Perhaps in the time between when it was discovered and when Yesteryear the Federation discovered a more precise method of communicating with the Guardian.

 

[Classic Fan]

Mallory said:
Congrats AJ, you picked a really good one. And I'm of the same opinion of Forbin in that this should be canon. I know it's part of my personal canon.

I agree with you both. its a good decent story, D C Fontana take a bow. It was a shame it couldve been good as a live action episode.

Its in my personal canon anyway. :thumbsup:

 

[Captain Robert April]

Most of it is included in the official version of Trek history (jury is still out on the part where Spock goes back and saves his seven year old self).

 

[Christopher]

Mallory said:
Perhaps in the time between when it was discovered and when Yesteryear the Federation discovered a more precise method of communicating with the Guardian.

Kirk: "Guardian. Can you change the speed at which yesterday passes?"
Guardian: "I was made to offer the past in this manner. I cannot change."

Of course, both "Yesteryear" and the final draft of "City" were by D. C. Fontana, so we can't chalk it up to ignorance (although it could be forgetfulness). Sometimes storytellers deliberately contradict past assertions that get in the way of new ideas. Still, with only two broadcast works about the Guardian, it's hard to choose which version to treat as authoritative.

 

[Therin of Andor]

JingleBell Jarok said:
Well, I'm perfectly happy to include most of the animated series as canon.

Problem already solved.

The Okudas explain in the "ST Encyclopedia" and "ST Chronology" that Roddenberry approved them adding details of the depiction of Vulcan, ShiKahr (although they mispelt it "ShirKahr"), Spock's troubled childhood and the kahs-wan ritual from "Yesteryear", plus Captain Robert April from "The Counter-clock Incident", even though the rest of TAS had been shunted into non canonical status with the infamous memo of 1989.

And since Roddenberry's death, the novels and comics have happily incorporated TAS elements again.

The look of ShiKahr is now canonical, I guess, with the onscreen CGI depiction of the city in the remastered "Amok Time", looking very much like in did in "Yesteryear".

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Allowing novels including them isn't the same as making them canon (it just corrects a mistake that was banning them from being used in the first place). Also, I was referring to more than just certain background elements in Yesteryear, but it's a nice start.

I just watched Time Trap, which was a nice episode (nothing special, but certainly fun). I think this episode could have benefitted from more time, but it was otherwise good. I guess if I decide to continue watching them, I should watch them in order.

 

[Therin of Andor]

JingleBell Jarok said:
Allowing novels including them isn't the same as making them canon (it just corrects a mistake that was banning them from being used in the first place).

But banning TAS from tie-in novels and comics at the time was done for several weird reasons, but also legal ones. It wasn't "a mistake", it was seen as a legal necessity, or at least it was at the time. Filmation was being dissolved in 1989, and ownership of all Filmation output was in flux. For example, the likenesses of Arex and M'Ress did not necessarily belong to Paramount, since they were created by Filmation's animators, and the kzinti were/are the property of Larry Niven.

Remember, TAS was not produced by Paramount Pictures (PP was only the distributors) or Viacom. TAS was a joint production by NBC and Gene Roddenberry's company, Norway Corp. DC Fontana and David Gerrold, important TAS luminaries, were also in the midst of legal action against Roddenberry over the creation of TNG. As sad as it may be, when legal action is pending, lawyers start laying out the sandbags and barbed wire to strengthen their own case, and put distance between opposing views. TAS was an innocent victim of turbulent times.

I was referring to more than just certain background elements in Yesteryear.

Yes, I know. I was just clarifying that the start had already happened.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I didn't realize there were legal reasons, I just thought people were being stubborn. That's good to know

 

[Kryton]

Ellison wants more money!

 

[Therin of Andor]

JingleBell Jarok said:
I didn't realize there were legal reasons, I just thought people were being stubborn. That's good to know

I have a feeling it was mainly people being stubborn. But someone would have had to be prepared to have the lawyers devoting time (= money) sorting out a lot of red tape and, as TAS wasn't a big deal in 1989, it became more efficient to just say that the tie-ins should drop all references to it. That, and Richard Arnold never really liked it, and he was the person drafting the memo for the Star Trek office.

 

[Alpha_Geek]

That glimpse we got of the wild sehlat that chased Archer and T'Pal certainly looked a lot like I-Chaya from "Yesteryear"... guess that's canon as well now.

 

[Duncan MacLeod]

Christopher said:

Mallory said:
Perhaps in the time between when it was discovered and when Yesteryear the Federation discovered a more precise method of communicating with the Guardian.

Kirk: "Guardian. Can you change the speed at which yesterday passes?"
Guardian: "I was made to offer the past in this manner. I cannot change."

Of course, both "Yesteryear" and the final draft of "City" were by D. C. Fontana, so we can't chalk it up to ignorance (although it could be forgetfulness). Sometimes storytellers deliberately contradict past assertions that get in the way of new ideas. Still, with only two broadcast works about the Guardian, it's hard to choose which version to treat as authoritative.

Maybe, maybe not. In City the Guardian was showing them Earth's past, and answered that it couldn't do so at any other speed. In Yesteryear it is told where and when the travellers wish to go and sends them there.

It sounds to me like the scientists and historians that were studying the Guardian in the years between the two eps learned a thing or two that our heroes didn't know the first time around. Which is completely reasonable, wouldn't you say?

 

[Christopher]

^^Well... I guess maybe the Guardian isn't the most reliable narrator. After all, what the hell kind of "Guardian" actively invites people to come in and rummage around in the domain it's supposed to be guarding? "Sure, hop on through, screw with history all you want! I don't mind, I'm just the Guardian." Frankly, I have to wonder if maybe the ol' donut had gotten a little senile. So I guess contradicting itself is within the realm of possibility.

 

[euphorik]

Christopher said:

Except that it completely contradicts "City"'s depiction of the Guardian. There, it said it was only capable of replaying the past in fast-forward, but in "Yesteryear" it was serving up precise places and times on request.

this is true. personally, it never bugged me much, though. i always liked alan dean foster's "log one" solution to this problem, that the guardian was a stickler for semantics and would only accept certain queries phrased in a very specific way. that seemed logical to me, and in character for the guardian.

actualy, now that i think of it, i think i actually prefer foster's adaptation to the produced episode (which is, by the way, one of my favorites). great adaptation, great episode. you can't lose with either.

 

[Nebusj]

Christopher said:
^^Well... I guess maybe the Guardian isn't the most reliable narrator. After all, what the hell kind of "Guardian" actively invites people to come in and rummage around in the domain it's supposed to be guarding? "Sure, hop on through, screw with history all you want! I don't mind, I'm just the Guardian." Frankly, I have to wonder if maybe the ol' donut had gotten a little senile. So I guess contradicting itself is within the realm of possibility.

Or it may just like messing with people's heads. ``You have to go back in time and fix whatever it is you change when you were there, only in fixing it you're going to have to make sure you kill someone you love. Ha-ha!''