Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed

[137th Gebirg]

Or not at all. Unoriginal self-plagiarism.

That whole episode seemed nothing more than a vehicle to give lip service to TOS, referencing the original Enterprise and Riker's expository "that's Kirk's ship" throw-away line, reminding us all that this IS Star Trek and it's in the same universe - Well, DUH! A waste of air time, as were a majority of the S1 episodes, IMO. Better left forgotten.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Uh, yes. Reimaginations that aren't official are no different than proposed retcons. The definition of official/unofficial, published/unpublished, aired/unaired has nothing to do with retcon/not retcon, reimagination/not reimagination, reboot/not reboot. Not sure why that's a hard thing to get. Put "proposed" in front of retcon, reboot or reimagination instead of "fan". That shouldn't make a difference, but maybe it will.

You can say that as many times as you like, but that won't make it true. A retcon happens only in official episodes, by definition. Fan works cannot alter official continuity. That's why there is a distinction between canon and fanon. There's no bona fide proposal to TPTB involved in fan works, either.

 

[Tarek71]

You can say that as many times as you like, but that won't make it true. A retcon happens only in official episodes, by definition. Fan works cannot alter official continuity. That's why there is a distinction between canon and fanon. There's no bona fide proposal to TPTB involved in fan works, either.

That isn't the definition. It remains true that you're confusing official/unofficial with retcon/not retcon. Retcons do not have to be any more official than a reboot or a reimagination. No proposal has to be formally made, and even formal proposals for a retcon that get shot down remain retcons. There are several categories of retcon, and none of them require that they be adopted. It a type or kind of change proposed, not whether it's accepted by anyone else.

 

[Guy Gardener]

TV + Movies = Canon.

Everything else = Fanwank.

 

[captainkirk]

The problem with “The Naked Now” is more that the crew's behavior hasn't really much to do with intoxication. They just behave completely wacky and out of the norm. No real insights about the characters are revealed.

That's true. There were no moments as classic as Sulu's fencing, or as revealing about the character's internal struggles as Spock's breakdown. There are several stock sci-fi plots that every series seems to have to do at some point, one of them being the characters all going nuts. I'm hoping Discovery avoids these unimaginative plots.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

That isn't the definition. It remains true that you're confusing official/unofficial with retcon/not retcon. Retcons do not have to be any more official than a reboot or a reimagination. No proposal has to be formally made, and even formal proposals for a retcon that get shot down remain retcons. There are several categories of retcon, and none of them require that they be adopted. It a type or kind of change proposed, not whether it's accepted by anyone else.

Original fan fiction occupies an altogether alternate continuity from the continuity of the canonical works. The continuity of canonical works is untouched by them. Only canonical works have the privilege of retroactively altering their own continuity, which is what a "retcon" does. That's why fan fiction doesn't retcon a thing.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Someone really wants their fanfic to count.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Uniform is the prerogative of the base commander.

Sisko changed into a TNG Uniform when he went to earth, and Kirk in beyond wore a York Town Uniform when he was on York Town.

So uniform mode switching from pjs in The Cage, to ultra modern utility wear in Discovery, and then back to PJs for season one of TOS is not outside the scope of possibility.

Laundry.

They fabricated a nazi era uniform for mcCoy in seconds, in patterns of force. Textile fabricators. No washing. Uniforms are destroyed and replaced every day. Why make complicated uniforms if any one uniform has the life expectancy of three says at most?

What's a greater drain on ship resources, dry cleaning/recycled-urine cleaning, or constantly fabricating new uniforms magically from nothing and recycled cloth from yesterday.

It's a geometric equation to figure out if a smaller ship with less surplus power and smaller crew can accommodate a laundry, while a larger ship would need a larger laundry, the larger the laundry was, requiring a yet larger ship, and more crew who would wear more clothes that need to be washed.

Federation ships are not all built on Mars.

The stylistic differences in bridge décor are probably because not a lot of ships were all built at the same ship yards by the same engineers with access to uniform resources.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Someone really wants their fanfic to count.

I guess so....

 

[Tarek71]

Someone really wants their fanfic to count.

I don't know any one who thinks their fanfic "counts". That's official/unofficial, canon/non-canon not reboot/not reboot or retcon/not retcon. Those are different types of changes, not what their official status is. That doesn't make any logical sense. TPTB can approve a retcon, but it doesn't become a retcon because they approve it. It becomes canon when they approve it.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I don't know any one who thinks their fanfic "counts". That's official/unofficial, canon/non-canon not reboot/not reboot or retcon/not retcon. Those are different types of changes, not what their official status is. That doesn't make any logical sense. TPTB can approve a retcon, but it doesn't become a retcon because they approve it. It becomes canon when they approve it.

You seem not to understand that "retcon" (noun) is a form of canon. It is canon that contradicts previously established canon and retroactively revises old canon to match the new canon. One can retcon (verb) only within canonical works, by definition.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I don't know any one who thinks their fanfic "counts". That's official/unofficial, canon/non-canon not reboot/not reboot or retcon/not retcon. Those are different types of changes, not what their official status is. That doesn't make any logical sense. TPTB can approve a retcon, but it doesn't become a retcon because they approve it. It becomes canon when they approve it.

Again retcon is retroactive continuity. To become part of the continuity it has to be approved by TPTB. Everything unapproved is not part of the continuity.

 

[Tuskin38]

Memory-Alpha has examples of retconned material in Star Trek

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Retconned_material

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Retroactive_continuity

Changes made to TNG and TOS when they were remastered are examples of retcons.

 

[Tarek71]

Again retcon is retroactive continuity. To become part of the continuity it has to be approved by TPTB. Everything unapproved is not part of the continuity.

Same goes for reboots and reimaginations. To become part of canon, it has to be approved. But it doesn't have to be approved by anyone to be a reboot, reimagination or retcon. That is, once again, the difference between canon/non canon. Not the difference between a retcon/not a retcon. A retcon is a kind of change. Nothing to do with whether it was canon or not canon.

 

[Tarek71]

You seem not to understand that "retcon" (noun) is a form of canon. It is canon that contradicts previously established canon and retroactively revises old canon to match the new canon. One can retcon (verb) only within canonical works, by definition.

Again, not the definition. It didn't become a retcon when it became canon. It was retcon when the change was conceived of. Should they approve this proposed retcon or not? That is, make it canon or not. Retcon is the correct term for such a proposed change, even if it's never approved. There is no difference at all with a reimagination or reboot. None. They are every bit as non-canon when not approved by TPTB as the fan retcon. But a proposed fan retcon is no less a retcon than a proposed fan reboot.

 

[Tarek71]

Memory-Alpha has examples of retconned material in Star Trek

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Retconned_material

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Retroactive_continuity

Changes made to TNG and TOS when they were remastered are examples of retcons.

There are several kinds of retcons, but this idea that it has to be canon to be a retcon doesn't make any sense. It is a kind of change. We aren't putting aside the existing continuity, we are retroactively changing the existing one. The idea that a fan cant do that, but can reboot the entire franchise is a nonsense distinction. You can keep the onscreen continuity but make some retroactive (unpublished, unaired) changes. Or you can scrap the whole canon and start from scratch with a complete, ground-up reboot. Neither is official or approved but they differ from each other in important ways. In one, it's a retcon of the existing continuity. In the other, it is scraped. We have words for each type. One is called a retcon, the other a reboot.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Again, not the definition. It didn't become a retcon when it became canon. It was retcon when the change was conceived of. Should they approve this proposed retcon or not? That is, make it canon or not. Retcon is the correct term for such a proposed change, even if it's never approved. There is no difference at all with a reimagination or reboot. None. They are every bit as non-canon when not approved by TPTB as the fan retcon. But a proposed fan retcon is no less a retcon than a proposed fan reboot.

Nope. But this is tedious and unproductive. I won't reply to you anymore on this subject.

 

[Tarek71]

Nope. But this is tedious and unproductive. I won't reply to you anymore on this subject.

Yep. But as long as you cant distinguish reboot/not reboot, retcon/not retcon from canon/not canon there isn't much more to add. In the meantime, fans will continue retconning things.

 

[Rahul]

Yep. But as long as you cant distinguish reboot/not reboot, retcon/not retcon from canon/not canon there isn't much more to add. In the meantime, fans will continue retconning things.

"retcon" is short for "retroactive continuity". You cannot seperate those two. Canon is official continuity, aka what the rightsholders, the producers, say. When they say it's prime universe, then in canon it is prime, per definition.

Everything else, like your personal headcanon, even (especially) fan fiction, books, comic books, Youtube videos, or if you personally don't "count" an episode or two, is in Trek all officially defined under the umbrella of "non-canon". You cannot use the official terms for that. "Non-canon" can, per definition, not have a "ret-con" or reboot.

 

[Tarek71]

"retcon" is short for "retroactive continuity". You cannot seperate those two. Canon is official continuity, aka what the rightsholders, the producers, say. When they say it's prime universe, then in canon it is prime, per definition.

Everything else, like your personal headcanon, even (especially) fan fiction, books, comic books, Youtube videos, or if you personally don't "count" an episode or two, is in Trek all officially defined under the umbrella of "non-canon". You cannot use the official terms for that. "Non-canon" can, per definition, not have a "ret-con" or reboot.

Sure they can. Even non-canon stories can have an internal consistency and continuity and be retroactively changed, scraped or rebooted.

But no one said fan ideas, reboots, retcons or reimaginations are "canon" or official continuity. No non-canon story, even one that is entirely consistent with the existing canon, is part of that canon unless approved. We all agree completely. It's not that fans cant retcon or reboot. They cant even create an official canon consistent story that doesn't reboot or retcon anything. Official being the key word.

But you can write a story cant you? And if it is written to be consistent with the Prime universe continuity you can say the word "continuity" in that sense. Why? Because the story is set there and is consistent with it. You can also write a story that fundamentally reimagines and reboots the entire Trek universe. Reboot is the correct term for that type of story. Or you can keep the basic continuity but make retroactive changes to it. You can retcon. If you want to withhold use of the word "retcon" for that type of story until it is greenlighted, flimed and aired and thus becomes "canon", that's up to you, but that isn't what a retcon is. Nothing to do with "official".

It was a retcon before it ever was approved. It differs from stories that do not retroactively change anything, nor is it a reboot. Stories that reboot are definitely reboots. A non-canon reboot is still a reboot. As I said earlier, call it proposed retcon, if for some unknown reason it makes you feel better. But retcon and reboot do not = "canon".