Yeah, that's possible as well. I was just noting that maybe it was a term that Dr. Soong created for his new band of merry supermen and the term stuck. But sure, it could have been a term used previous to that as well.
News Introducing Fact Trek
- Thread starter Harvey
- Start date
Yeah, that's possible as well. I was just noting that maybe it was a term that Dr. Soong created for his new band of merry supermen and the term stuck. But sure, it could have been a term used previous to that as well.
I don't know. I'm guilty myself of floating words like 'retcon' and 'reboot.' But to be honest I'd probably apply the term 'retcon' to something more significant. A single term, like Augment, applied later that doesn't really change anything substance wide I probably wouldn't go so far as to say it was a 'retcon.'
Or the word "Federation" being applied later in the original series isn't what I would call a 'retcon.' Or Kirk's middle initial being changed from 'R' to 'T.'
I figure, if there's a way to explain some minor like that in-universe, then it's probably not a retcon. I figure a more substantive change, one that can't be explained away, or more than a simple changing in wording, would probably be more like a retcon.
No. We're literally discussing a retcon here. The premise that the supermen were the product of genetic engineering, introduced in TWOK* and made far more specific in ENT with the retroactively-applied conception of them as Augments, is obviously intended to revise the dated premise stated explicitly in "Space Seed," which was that they were the result of selective breeding, i.e. eugenics.
* - Kirk's use in "Space Seed" of "controlled genetics" doesn't mean "genetic engineering" as we understand the term today, given that "selective breeding" had already been used to describe the method used to create the supermen. In other words, selective breeding was the manner of controlled genetics posited in the original episode.
Anyway, moving on....
As retcons go its a good one, since I'm not sure I want Star Trek endorsing the idea that normal Selective Breeding can achieve that level of enhancement. They would have had to start a couple hundred years ago at a minimum anyway to pull it off in universe. So injecting a little advanced sci-fi genetic engineering into the story greatly reduces the timescales required and gives us a little distance from the real world.
As I said, though, that's exactly what the word "retcon" is supposed to mean -- a change that is perfectly consistent with what came before. It's short for retroactive continuity, not contradiction. A successful retcon is one that does maintain continuity, that fits in as if it had been the case all along. So yes, it is a retcon, in the original sense of the word.
I think that was exactly the idea in "Space Seed." In real life, the eugenics movement got started in the 1880s and there were a lot of genuine efforts to improve humanity through the kind of selective breeding applied to plants and animals. It was a prominent movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, though it was usually driven by white supremacism rather than good genetics. It was a major driver behind the Nazis' beliefs, which is why it fell out of favor after WWII. But I take "Space Seed" as positing that at least one eugenics program -- one that more intelligently embraced genetic diversity rather than whiteness -- continued in secret and eventually succeeded. If it had started in the mid-1880s and produced a new generation every 18-20 years, say, and if Khan was born in the 1960s, say, then he could've been a fifth-generation product of the program. Cutting it a little close, less than a century, but certainly more plausible than assuming it was all done in a single generation.
I agree with that, but I would have been more than fine if they'd stopped at "genetically-engineered" before careening off the cliff with "Augment." That's just my personally take, irrelevant to the other issues. YMMV.
Allright, I stand corrected. I sometimes mix up 'retcon' and 'reboot'. I guess part of it is the word 'retcon' has been applied to such a wide variety of topics I was mixing up what the word actually means, as opposed to what fans somethings think it means.
I'm guilty of that myself. I've also mixed up 'canon' with 'continuity' in the past, though I like to think I have gotten better with that. I usually think twice now before using the word 'canon' to make sure I don't really mean continuity (that's a little easier since I follow Star Trek's novel continuity with the relaunches for instance--which is explicitly not canon).
Well, they're not wrong, just overly narrow. A retcon is a change to the continuity, yes, but some of them are more successful than others at fitting smoothly into past continuity. And it's the ones that create inconsistencies that get more attention and generate more debate, so I guess that's why people's minds tend to go there first when they hear the word. But that's not the only kind of retcon, just the less successful kind at living up to the "con" part of the term.
Within the ENT story arc, the term "Augment" is used for all such individuals, not just the small group that had Dr. Soong's additional genetic modifications. And others besides Soong use the term.
Tucker refers to "Augments from the Eugenics Wars." He also describes them historically: "Well, if I remember my history, these Augments you love so much had plenty of slaves."
When Dr. Soong is giving a history lesson about the Eugenics Wars, he says, "Some claim humanity rose up against the Augments. Others say the Augments began fighting among themselves." And later, he speaks about "everything they've said about Augments for the last hundred and fifty years."
And there was Archer's reference to the original 20th century project: "Superior ability breeds superior ambition. One of their creators wrote that. He was murdered by an Augment."
(from the transcripts of Borderland, Cold Station 12, and The Augments at chakoteya.net)
Kor
Last edited:
I was just saying maybe Soong first used the term to describe them, even going back to when he first starting working with them and then the term stuck and was used to described all 'supermen' (and women).
What you say is probably more likely though. It's true the intent was probably that they were always called Augments, though occasionally some may call them by other terms as well (i.e. "Space Seed").
This illustrates in a nutshell a key reason why "Augment" is better -- it's not gendered.
"Superhuman" would have fixed that just fine.
Also, in a show made at a time when "man" was still commonly accepted as a gender-neutral synonym of "mankind" (cf, "where no man has gone before"), in context "supermen" was also gender-neutral.
Anyway, barring any correction or clarification that seems essential, I'm going to bow out of further discussion on this sidebar; I've said all I have to say. Back to Fact Trekking!
To get back to Fact Trekkin'... the latest Trek coffee table book, Designing the Final Frontier, credits Star Trek with changing "the trajectory of 1960s fashion" with the miniskirt (actually skorts) female uniforms.
What say you Fact Trekkers? Myth or fact?
What say you Fact Trekkers? Myth or fact?
Without diving into research, I gotta give that to the UK. Carnaby Street fashions and all that. London could really swing, baby, the British Invasion was more than just the Beatles. Dig?
And Space Patrol had miniskirts in 1950 (on ABC).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Patrol_(1950_TV_series)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Patrol_(1950_TV_series)
"Augment" sucks. It's crappy jargon.
