Colm Meany is busy.
So how important is canon, then?
- Thread starter Trekkie27
- Start date
Sarek was a player. Leaving his seed all over the galaxy.
The true "Space Seed"
Then perhaps the disconnect is simply what the definition of canon is.
For me I always thought of it as continuity, that what happened, happened within that universe and even if it doesn’t make sense, it all connects somehow.
And that’s fine.
But as far as I’m aware, it’s the IP holders that get to decide what is Canon and what isn’t which is why Star Wars fans were pretty divided when the Expanded Universe was completely dropped from canon.
So any studio exec or Creative Producer or whatever can arbitrarily decide What is canon and what isn’t...
So all I’m saying is with that in mind, perhaps it’s just a misunderstanding on the definition of canon but with something as vast as Star Trek... That’s just how I saw it and how I think people can decide for themselves.
And this is a very common use of the word when it comes to modern franchises. One definition has it be a collection of works but another has it it be the answer to an in-or-out question: Is it canon or is it apocrypha? IOW, is it a recognized part of the world's lore?
Last edited:
Last year and this summer I have watched TNG from Netflix for the first time and I think the picture quality might be better than on DVDs? But.. might I need to go back to the DVDs next year? Somehow a little bit of not so perfect picture quality might be a part of the original charm, first on VHS and then moving to DVDs. I don't know, maybe I'll stay with online services because it's just an easier way to watch the series, no need to do the massive task of searching for the discs and putting them into a DVD player.
Now that I've seen the Netflix quality, is there a way I would go back? Time will tell.
It is so incredibly important to some people that they spend every waking moment thinking about it and that is terrifying.
Today's canon can become tomorrow's apocrypha.
Agreed, and a good example is the Coke commercial in the 1960's, when they liked to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.
Provisionally important. The worldbuilding and having a cohesive universe is a huge part of Star Trek’s appeal.
But compromising on canon to tell a better story is always okay.
But compromising on canon to tell a better story is always okay.
I'm not a writer, just a viewer. But I would consider canon to be the ring binder that binds stories together and orders them in a cohesive way. A very useful tool for telling a large number of (interrelated) stories, keeping them somewhat consistent and make them more compelling together, but never a goal in itself.
Is it wrong that when the "canon" debate is brought up for the umpteenth time my eyes glaze over and my brain plays this
?
Wasn't speaking to that point, only to the idea that the word 'canon' means a collection of works and nothing else. But hell, even when you are using that definition (a collection of works) it is always a subset of a larger set, typical with modifiers like 'authentic', 'authorized', 'essential' or even 'divinely-inspired'.
Always an aspect of, "is it in or is it out?"
Heh. You just reminded me of this fun thread from years ago.
IIRC, Netflix has the HD versions of the episodes.
Maybe it does and maybe it doesn't. Wouldn't it be far more creative to tell stories that try to fit into canon and continuity rather than just saying fuck that, I'm going to tell the story I want to tell and damned be what came before?
As an exercise in creativity, trying to fit into continuity would be a far greater challenge.
I don't think so. But it is a mileage may vary situation.
Outside of the pilot episode, I didn't watch Discovery. How did Burnham get along with Sybok?
I've had several posts here already without addressing the main topic, except tangentially. So here's my shot at it.
There are people who like Star Trek as nothing but an entertainment. For them, it's a lark, a foolie if you will. Put it on, make some MST3K remarks every now and then; it's all fun. There are other people who like Star Trek as a way to help them define how they themselves fit into the universe. When I first started going to cons, they were the ones wearing Spock ears.
There are a few people who view Star Trek as a work of art, a work of literature, part of the great conversation that has been going on in human civilization since Gilgamesh, possibly even before. In this context, canon matters, and it matters a great deal. It is part of defining who these people are that we follow every week, how their pasts have influenced their presents and will influence their futures, not as people wearing goofy outfits but as people to whom we relate.
Example (and if this looks familiar it's because I've used it before): I enjoy Requiem for Methuselah. I enjoy it as entertainment, and as literature. That said, I've always thought that the episode was rushed, and that the supposed romance between Kirk and Rayna is rushed. In my head canon, this is at least partially due to Kirk has lost Edith Keeler, and much more recently, Miramanee, and the strain has showed on him. (Speaking of the great conversation, you could compare and contrast this with what Number 6 goes through in The Prisoner, and with how that character ends up.)
But that interpretation relies on canon as a basis. What if Kirk and company never traveled back to meet Edith Keeler? What if he never met Miramanee? Change those things and you change the emotional impact of the story.
Again, for the people who couldn't care less about the emotional impact (these are just characters on a TV show, right?) then those things won't matter, and they'll poo-poo anny attempt to say that canon has any value (it's jsut a TV show right?). All too often, the people who argue for canon argue about things that, while I find them annoying and irksome, are in the grand scheme inconsequential. Is that the "real" Enterprise in Discovery? It bothers me, but it's still a pretty ship and I'll accept it. As someone said upstream, is Pike's yellow tunic the correct shade of yellow. I don't know. That bothers me a slight amount, but most it goes in one eye and out of the other.
But if you change the story, when you pull that thread, the entire universe ultimately unravels.
There are people who like Star Trek as nothing but an entertainment. For them, it's a lark, a foolie if you will. Put it on, make some MST3K remarks every now and then; it's all fun. There are other people who like Star Trek as a way to help them define how they themselves fit into the universe. When I first started going to cons, they were the ones wearing Spock ears.
There are a few people who view Star Trek as a work of art, a work of literature, part of the great conversation that has been going on in human civilization since Gilgamesh, possibly even before. In this context, canon matters, and it matters a great deal. It is part of defining who these people are that we follow every week, how their pasts have influenced their presents and will influence their futures, not as people wearing goofy outfits but as people to whom we relate.
Example (and if this looks familiar it's because I've used it before): I enjoy Requiem for Methuselah. I enjoy it as entertainment, and as literature. That said, I've always thought that the episode was rushed, and that the supposed romance between Kirk and Rayna is rushed. In my head canon, this is at least partially due to Kirk has lost Edith Keeler, and much more recently, Miramanee, and the strain has showed on him. (Speaking of the great conversation, you could compare and contrast this with what Number 6 goes through in The Prisoner, and with how that character ends up.)
But that interpretation relies on canon as a basis. What if Kirk and company never traveled back to meet Edith Keeler? What if he never met Miramanee? Change those things and you change the emotional impact of the story.
Again, for the people who couldn't care less about the emotional impact (these are just characters on a TV show, right?) then those things won't matter, and they'll poo-poo anny attempt to say that canon has any value (it's jsut a TV show right?). All too often, the people who argue for canon argue about things that, while I find them annoying and irksome, are in the grand scheme inconsequential. Is that the "real" Enterprise in Discovery? It bothers me, but it's still a pretty ship and I'll accept it. As someone said upstream, is Pike's yellow tunic the correct shade of yellow. I don't know. That bothers me a slight amount, but most it goes in one eye and out of the other.
But if you change the story, when you pull that thread, the entire universe ultimately unravels.
Similar threads
