Is Enterprise Canon?

[Luther Sloan]

I've been a Star Trek fan long enough to hold TOS in high regard, it's my childhood, it's my favorite Trek, and to me it's the best Trek...

But, TOS is Star Trek's rough draft, not it's bible.

We can't limit all of Trek to TOS, it was written by guys and gals unaware that 40 years later it was going to be held to such standards and scrutiny. It will never hold up, so let it be, as long as it serves as the template what more can we ask of it? It was written and produced in a time that has since moved forward and Enterprise reflects that change without destroying what Trek was and still is. TOS exists in a very real alternate timeline from ours: the 1960's.

KottenFutz

Yeah, I would agree with that to some extent. The Original Series is a very different animal compared to Enterprise, Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, and Voyager. Otherwise we would have to assume that the 1960s sets are how things really looked within the 23rd Century.

Good thing JJ Abram's came along and showed us how it really should have appeared.

Not that I still don't love those old style 1960's sets mind you.

 

[FlapJoy]

Story telling is an art form and skill. I extremely dislike having to story guess (not like a mystery) when they're are plot holes and consistency is always desirable in art. Rushed art is commercialism and that's what Trek has been for some time instead of an art.

Star Trek is commercialism and never asked to be considered anything more. While storytelling is an artform, it has many different levels, varieties, and standards.

Art, as a concept, is not consistant... that's what makes it art.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Star Trek Enterprise's canon was either put into serious question or broken. This caused strong debate between Trekkies like no other series. This is the very heart of the real debate we are talking about. The fact that Enterprise's canon issues raises concerns by fans is proof in the pudding that the show was not what it could have been.

In fact, here is a quote taken from Memory Alpha's Enterprise page...

Numerous factors contributed to the demise of Enterprise. Due to its setting, the show was perhaps doomed from the start to step on the toes of previous canon and fanon, provoking the ire of the core Star Trek fan base.

In other words. The show on some small level suffered because of a lack of regard for canon, among many other things mishandled within the series, too (of course).

Now, to wipe away any misunderstanding: Is the show canon?
Yes. But it also broke or put that very canon into question, though. So alternate theories to explain Enterprise within the rest of the Star Trek series is the next logical step (whether one believes Enterprise to be a fixed predestined time line, fixed altered time line, or a separate alternate time line within an infinite number of multiple time lines).

For an explanation of these time lines. Please click here...

http://trekbbs.com/showpost.php?p=4000915&postcount=83



Source:
http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Star_Trek:_Enterprise

 

[Dukhat]

ENTERPRISE IS CANON UNTIL SOMETHING ELSE COMES ALONG THAT SAYS IT'S NOT ANYMORE.



Seriously though, here's the crux of the matter: Yes, UPN and to a lesser extent Braga (who was told not to watch TOS before visualizing the universe of ENT), and the writers (who were basically writing the episodes to cater to Voyager's previous audience) were ultimately responsible for the show's demise. But there's also a factor that most people involved never considered, which is why we have threads like this one.

The thing is, any prequel is going to be risky business, especially with something like Star Trek. If it's not believable as a true prequel to whatever came before it, the concept is just not going to work. As has been already stated ad nauseum, there were just too many aspects that were established in TOS that didn't jibe with what we saw in ENT (and before someone says something to the effect of "well, why should they have to kowtow to a show made in the '60s?", don't forget that TNG DID respect the canon established in TOS. If TNG could do it just fine, why couldn't ENT?)

Anyway, the thing about Enterprise's premise (the 22nd century, formation of Starfleet, possible Romulan War), is that most fans already had their own personal ideas of what this period in Trek history was already like, and most of those assumptions were based around TOS. I know I did. (For example, before Enterprise, the earliest era of Trek we saw was "The Cage." To me, anything pre-TOS should have looked similar to that episode. ENT obviously doesn't). To me, almost every episode of ENT would have worked the same if it were Voyager's crew. This just wasn't believable to me as a prequel to TOS.

BUT...Enterprise is what we got. We're stuck with it, like it or not, whether it makes sense or not, whether it follows the TOS timeline flawlessly or not, and it's canon...at least until something else comes along that says it's not anymore.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The thing with Scotty and the computer, or acting like little kids?

It would be safe to assume both.

I agree.

 

[Luther Sloan]

ENTERPRISE IS CANON UNTIL SOMETHING ELSE COMES ALONG THAT SAYS IT'S NOT ANYMORE.

Seriously though, here's the crux of the matter: Yes, UPN and to a lesser extent Braga (who was told not to watch TOS before visualizing the universe of ENT), and the writers (who were basically writing the episodes to cater to Voyager's previous audience) were ultimately responsible for the show's demise. But there's also a factor that most people involved never considered, which is why we have threads like this one.

The thing is, any prequel is going to be risky business, especially with something like Star Trek. If it's not believable as a true prequel to whatever came before it, the concept is just not going to work. As has been already stated ad nauseum, there were just too many aspects that were established in TOS that didn't jibe with what we saw in ENT (and before someone says something to the effect of "well, why should they have to kowtow to a show made in the '60s?", don't forget that TNG DID respect the canon established in TOS. If TNG could do it just fine, why couldn't ENT?)

Anyway, the thing about Enterprise's premise (the 22nd century, formation of Starfleet, possible Romulan War), is that most fans already had their own personal ideas of what this period in Trek history was already like, and most of those assumptions were based around TOS. I know I did. (For example, before Enterprise, the earliest era of Trek we saw was "The Cage." To me, anything pre-TOS should have looked similar to that episode. ENT obviously doesn't). To me, almost every episode of ENT would have worked the same if it were Voyager's crew. This just wasn't believable to me as a prequel to TOS.

BUT...Enterprise is what we got. We're stuck with it, like it or not, whether it makes sense or not, whether it follows the TOS timeline flawlessly or not, and it's canon...at least until something else comes along that says it's not anymore.

Dukhat:

Extremely well said. In fact, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Thank you bunches for telling it like it is.

 

[KottenFutz]

ENTERPRISE IS CANON UNTIL SOMETHING ELSE COMES ALONG THAT SAYS IT'S NOT ANYMORE.

So then what needs to happen? A movie or mini series that shows how all of Enterpise fits TOS canon or proves that Enterprise is an alternate reality?

While I'm not all together certain of the quote but, but didn't Rick Berman pretty much say that Enterprise was an altered timeline started from when Picard and crew go back in time in FC? Is that not good enough? Who cares?

Did they take a chance with Enterprise as a prequel? Sure, and I applaud them for the effort. I took the ride, and by the 4 season I was glad I did... I took similar rides with TNG and DS9 and VOY. But canon made the show suck at first? Not to me.

Enterprise is a show with it's own identity, and I wouldn't have cared if Archer had gone back in time (again) and saved that Edith Keeler from that truck, made a baby with her and named the boy Kahn Noonan Singh Keeler-Archer (after her Indian grandfather on her mothers side...) because ultimately, to me, that's a far more interesting story than anything dictated and defined by the "gods of canon" !!

 

[Saquist]

Story telling is an art form and skill. I extremely dislike having to story guess (not like a mystery) when they're are plot holes and consistency is always desirable in art. Rushed art is commercialism and that's what Trek has been for some time instead of an art.

Star Trek is commercialism and never asked to be considered anything more. While storytelling is an artform, it has many different levels, varieties, and standards.

Art, as a concept, is not consistant... that's what makes it art.

I concur.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Did they take a chance with Enterprise as a prequel?

KottenFutz:

I would have to say... no.
The creators behind Enterprise (B & B) didn't take any chances or risks initially with the show. It was the same old "ray gun / planet of the week" TV show. They played it safe and only decided to do things when the numbers were slipping. But by then it was too late.

However, please feel free to disagree with the unimportance of canon all you like. The fact that it has been debated with a strong passion by fans shows you it is a big deal (whether you believe canon to be important or not personally).

 

[Nerys Myk]

I would agree they played it too safe. Possibly because they tried to please too many masters (themselves, the fans,the franchise, the network and the studio).

 

[SFRabid]

They took a few chances and got nailed for it by fans when it was not something that fit into their perfect little trek universe. How many times have we heard "How could that happen when there was no mention of it in TOS/TNG/ect... And yet the same people cry "They didn't give us anything new."

IMHO some of the chances they took are...
Xindi attack on earth.
Vulcan on a human ship 100 years before Spock.
Showing that some Vulcans are not so honorable.
Anger at Vulcans for "holding humans back".
TCW
Soong/Eugenics/Klingon trilogy

 

[Luther Sloan]

IMHO some of the chances they took are...

SF Rabid:

Although, I commend B & B for bringing us some great previous Trek; personally, I don't think they took any risks with Enterprise, though. The only time they tried to do something different was when the numbers started to slide. And even then it wasn't enough. But that's just my opinion.

Xindi attack on earth.

Dominion War

Vulcan on a human ship 100 years before Spock.

Which essentially is still a Vulcan in 2nd Command again.

Showing that some Vulcans are not so honorable.

Take Me Out to the Holosuite

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Take_Me_Out_to_the_Holosuite_(episode)

Field of Fire

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Field_of_Fire_(episode)

Anger at Vulcans for "holding humans back".

Not sure if it was all that great of a plot device within the series to begin with. It didn't really go anywhere.

TCW

On the Enterprise DVD special features: We learn that the studio essentially forced them into coming up with this plot device in order to give the show a more futuristic feel or element to it.

Plus, they never really did anything with the TCW, anyways. We still don't know why the Temporal Cold War came about, who the Future Guy was or what he wanted, or why it was all that important.

Soong/Eugenics/Klingon trilogy

I will give marks for them in Season 4. They finally started to go into a direction the show should have been from day one.

However, I still would have preferred a more believable setting or universe (ie. better canon) for the show to take place in. But there is not much the creators behind Enterprise can do about that now.

 

[Anwar]

Well, I seriously doubt that UPN and Paramount itself would have allowed them to do stuff like use those shaky cam techniques or total non-Trek stuff like SGU or NuBSG did. They were too afraid to get away from what Iconic Trek was like. NuTrek got away with it because it was a total reboot of the entire universe.

I think a prequel was just a bad idea.

 

[Noname Given]

...Braga (who was told not to watch TOS before visualizing the universe of ENT)...

Um, just FYI - Brannon Braga (and ANY writer who had just come on to the TNG writing staff, and who hadn't seen TOS) - was told by Gene Roddenberry himself, NOT to watch TOS as he DIDN'T want TNG influenced by TOS.

Also, just FYI - sine that time (and before he or Berman had conceived of ENT); after GR's death, most of the wriiting staff (new and old) HAD taken the time to watch TOS.

I swear, all the myths and misinformation spread by fandom is amazing. Personally, I never cared much for any of the work by Berman, Braga, or GR during TNG. Micheal Piller (imo) was the one most responsible for the start of TNG's turnaround during the 3rd and 4th seasons. That said, I don't think it's fair to spread misinformation regarding someone; no matter how I feel about them.

 

[JarodRussell]

Well canon or not, it's not that hard to ignore it.

 

[Dukhat]

Um, just FYI - Brannon Braga (and ANY writer who had just come on to the TNG writing staff, and who hadn't seen TOS) - was told by Gene Roddenberry himself, NOT to watch TOS as he DIDN'T want TNG influenced by TOS.

Yeah, I already knew that. And so what? That didn't mean Braga had to do what Gene said, or what anyone else said, for that matter (since Gene was dead by ENT). Braga was the co-executive producer of the damn show! If ENT was a TOS prequel, then he should have watched TOS. Period. And, BTW, when TNG started, there were so many TOS influences it wasn't funny, so I don't know what you're talking about.

Also, just FYI - since that time (and before he or Berman had conceived of ENT); after GR's death, most of the wriiting staff (new and old) HAD taken the time to watch TOS.

I'm not talking about the other shows; I'm talking about ENT. And ENT did not follow the commonly known observations made of the 22nd century by TOS.

I don't think it's fair to spread misinformation regarding someone; no matter how I feel about them.

I have spread no misinformation.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Court Martial: Kirk serves as an Ensign aboard the Republic.
Obsession: He also is said to be serving with Capt Garrovick on the Farragut since the day he left the academy.

depends on what he meant by "left the Academy". Did he mean graduate? Or conclude his career as an Academy instructor?

If the former: Either Garrovick commanded both vessels, or Kirk's rank of Ensign was given to him while he was on his cadet cruise.

WNMHGB: Kirks middle intial is "R"
Court Martial ( and others): His middle intial is "T"

Most likely: Gary screwed up. (Read Q-Squared for another explanation, though.)

Who is Carol Marcus? Why is she never mentioned in TOS?

Gary once mentioned "a little blonde lab technician"...

Spock and McCoy are both called Lt. Commanders in "Court Martial yet wear different rank devices.

That happened a few times in TOS. Officers would be referred to as a Lieutenant Commander yet wear the insignia of a full Commander. Besides Spock, I think this also happened with Finney (Court-Martial) and Giotto.

The Cage Enterprsie has a crew of 200 plus, The TOS Enterprise has a crew 0f 400 plus.

Crew sizes can change. No big deal. Perhaps the ship was refit to such a degree that it could accommodate a larger crew?

Spock says Vulcan reproduction is a private matter in "Amok Time" yet talks about it to a stranger in "Cloud Minders".

...okay, I'll give you that one.

Isnt 23 a bit young for a Lt Commander?

Watch the closing scene of ST XI and then ask that again.

 

[Warped9]

There's been quite a bit of debate here about whether Enterprise is Canon or not. Some people dismiss it entirely. Some people consider it as an atlernate timeline. others (like myself) feel that while it does contradict what some other episodes say, it does fit reasonably well into the timeline of the other series.

So what do you think? If you think it violates continuity, what specific examples are there?

I firmly believe that Enterprise and the other shows can be viewed as one timeline. I mean sure, there are some bits of Enterprise that contradict other stuff (the whole laser pistol thing, as established by The Cage), but I mean, we are dealing with little things. it's not like they were saying that picard was never assimilated by the Borg or anything. That's an example of a serious violation of continuity, and Enterprise, as far as I know, never did it.

Is ENT canon? Yes, in regards to itself. Is it in continuity with what came before, most particularly TOS? Hell, no. It gets so many things wrong it's cringe inducing.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

didn't Rick Berman pretty much say that Enterprise was an altered timeline started from when Picard and crew go back in time in FC?

No.

 

[Anwar]

There's been quite a bit of debate here about whether Enterprise is Canon or not. Some people dismiss it entirely. Some people consider it as an atlernate timeline. others (like myself) feel that while it does contradict what some other episodes say, it does fit reasonably well into the timeline of the other series.

So what do you think? If you think it violates continuity, what specific examples are there?

I firmly believe that Enterprise and the other shows can be viewed as one timeline. I mean sure, there are some bits of Enterprise that contradict other stuff (the whole laser pistol thing, as established by The Cage), but I mean, we are dealing with little things. it's not like they were saying that picard was never assimilated by the Borg or anything. That's an example of a serious violation of continuity, and Enterprise, as far as I know, never did it.

Is ENT canon? Yes, in regards to itself. Is it in continuity with what came before, most particularly TOS? Hell, no. It gets so many things wrong it's cringe inducing.

No more than TOS did with itself. And no, I don't mean in any stupid "It's not the SPIRIT of TOS" garbage.