should PARAMOUNT take over?
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
It also happened in Web of the Romulans. There are countless footnotes to various episodes, complete with absolutely unnecessary lines next to the *.
Interestingly enough, there's a line-and-footnote reference to "The Enterprise Incident," AND a line reference (with NO footnote, suprisingly) to "Wolf in the Fold", EVEN THOUGH the female-computer subplot (and another footnote) makes it absolutely clear that the book is set immediately after "Tomorrow is Yesterday."
I mean, it WAS a good story, don't get me wrong, but...did this guy neglect to check the episode order, or something?
^ Well, if that's not motivation to adopt the OP's idea, I don't know what is.
I dunno. Star Wars canon gives me a headache.
Planet of Judgement had footnotes too. it irritated me intensely.
Holy crap, I forgot all about that book. The past couple days I've actually had the image of the cover in my head, trying to figure out what the hell it was called. I remembered checking it out of the library about 20 years ago.
did this guy neglect to check the episode order, or something?
MS (Melinda) Murdock is female, and there's nothing canonical to say that TOS episodes run in a particular order. Roddenberry deliberately encouraged the episodes to be capable of being played in (almost) any order, hence stardates - and Ms Murdock originally caught random rerun episodes.
Look, who cares what's canon and what's not? The authors on here spend many sleepless nights to bring us many great stories so instead of complaing about canon(which is getting old) we should give credit where due and just say thank you.
*points and laughs hysterically*
yeah, right.
yeah, right.
Did I say guy? OUCH. My bad.
But uh...in my defence, this kinda goes to show why it's not a good thing nowadays to use initials rather than a first name. Next thing you know, people will be forced to guess your gender, and... as I have so EMBARRASINGLY demonstrated, that ain't pretty.
Ah. And back then, there was no ST Chronology. I see.
Speaking of which, I often hear tell of an old Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology, which a LOT of early ST Novels followed, and which REALLY contradicted future canon.
I wonder, what WAS this book all about, anyway? And was it authorized by The Bird? If so, why would Gene authorize a reference book like that when he didn't seem to want to refer to it anyway?
Ah...OP? You kinda lost me there, Dayton. What's an OP?
What the heck is "future canon?" You can't contradict something that doesn't exist.
I wonder, what WAS this book all about, anyway? And was it authorized by The Bird? If so, why would Gene authorize a reference book like that when he didn't seem to want to refer to it anyway?[/quote]
The Spaceflight Chronology was a book published as a tie-in to ST:TMP. It was a licensed product authorized by Paramount, but was not and never was (and GOD do I hate this word) "canon." Authors used it as a reference because there was precious little else besides the original TOS and TAS episodes, and because nobody really gave a damn about "canon" back then.
As new onscreen Trek was created in the years that followed, backstory was filled in which eventually rendered the book obsolete. That said, it's a very well-presented tome and deserves a place on any serious hardcore Trekkie's shelf.
Also: "OP" = "Original Poster," in this case, the person who started this thread. What happened to him, anyway?
No, it isn't "widely accepted as canon" except by people who don't know what the word "canon" means. By definition, canon is decided by those in official positions of power -- so "widely accepted as canon" is a contradiction in terms. Canon is what the current producers of new Star Trek material onscreen say it is.
The FJ Tech Manual was treated as authoritative back in a time when there was nothing competing with it, but back then the concept of "canon" didn't even exist in fandom to any significant degree. It didn't become a fan obsession until the TNG era when GR started trying to lay down the law about what was canon and what wasn't.
What Christopher said. The phrase I believe you're looking for is "widely popular." This popularity has led to the FJ Tech Manual getting referenced, hat-tipped, and homaged constantly in all manner of fan works and sometimes in the real canon. But referencing parts of a work in the canon do not make the whole work canon, and no canon lawyer will tell you that the JF TM is canon today. (Otherwise, by that principle, all of TAS would be canon simply by virtue of having been referenced in DS9 and Enterprise.)
Scorpio jumps in and out of controversial topics more or less all over the forum. Some ideas are alright, some are plain awful. (This would fall into the latter category.) I suspect he'll be back.
As I understand it, a number of female writers of Star Trek (and SF in general) chose to use initials or gender-neutral names or even male pseudonyms because of the apparently widespread assumption that SF was written by boys for boys, and SF written by girls would have cooties or people kissing or other gross stuff that didn't belong in SF. That doesn't seem to be the case these days, but it was still a problem in some circles in the 1980s.
The problem isn't that he jumps in and out of them, it's that he creates so many topics but doesn't stay to discuss them. It's not unusual to go into General Trek Discussion and see a dozen or more topics started by him, most of them frivolous at best. To me it seems a lot more like spamming than posting two or three replies in a row in the same topic, but the mods evidently disagree.
I have given up the hope to understand why he basically has free reign to spam this board a long time ago.
Could it be possible to have this:
Cannon for books and seperate for screen.
Considering the direction the books are taking wouldn't it make sense to have canon for books and books alone?
Cannon for books and seperate for screen.
Considering the direction the books are taking wouldn't it make sense to have canon for books and books alone?
