Spoilers (Somewhat minor spoilers) Guys, Lower Decks has NOT decanonized Discovery. Or SNW.

[fireproof78]

Because it's all the same universe, simply altered.

The prime universe has had so many examples of time travel throughout the years, it's the only option. Otherwise, what really is the prime timeline? Every single example of time travel would equal a new universe being formed and means that we haven't been following the prime timeline since a few episodes into season 1 of TOS.

Even early on, with "The Naked Time" you had time travel. You had time go backwards, and yet how do the characters treat it? Then they go back in time for historic research in "Assignment: Earth." Multiple people die randomly in other time travel events. Guess their lives didn't impact the timeline.

It becomes ridiculous to pull out the seams to this extent. Treating it as one, if modified at times, timeline, is pretty much my preferred way. Aside from TOS as a dramatic recreation, and completely separate from the rest of Trek.

 

[Phoenix219]

Because it's all the same universe, simply altered.

The prime universe has had so many examples of time travel throughout the years, it's the only option. Otherwise, what really is the prime timeline? Every single example of time travel would equal a new universe being formed and means that we haven't been following the prime timeline since a few episodes into season 1 of TOS.

same physical universe, but altered timeline with completely different results! It might be the prime "universe" but its not the prime/original/TOS-TNG timeline and they all don't take place in the same continuity unless you watch them in production order where the new stuff layers on top of and covers up the old stuff.

 

[Phoenix219]

Even early on, with "The Naked Time" you had time travel. You had time go backwards, and yet how do the characters treat it? Then they go back in time for historic research in "Assignment: Earth." Multiple people die randomly in other time travel events. Guess their lives didn't impact the timeline.

It becomes ridiculous to pull out the seams to this extent. Treating it as one, if modified at times, timeline, is pretty much my preferred way. Aside from TOS as a dramatic recreation, and completely separate from the rest of Trek.

small time-travel with no-changes doesn't change the timeline much. big time-travel with big-changes rewrites the timeline wholesale. its all been pretty consistent.

 

[HotRod]

Didn't the Romulan in Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow say that it was like the time was trying to correct itself? Pushing back and correcting itself so that things happen the way they're "supposed to happen." That doesn't sound like a new timeline being created. It sounds like a single timeline that is bending and flexing, but still maintaining itself.

 

[fireproof78]

small time-travel with no-changes doesn't change the timeline much. big time-travel with big-changes rewrites the timeline wholesale. its all been pretty consistent.

But we don't know. That's the whole point! What constitutes a big change? And why do some lives matter more over others?

As I said, it becomes absurd to pull at it becomes it comes apart. Spock is so important that Kirk must use the Guardian to get him back? But not the random homeless man in City on the Edge of Forever? Or the people on Cochrane's camp who get blown up by the Borg? The various people stolen out of time by the aliens in TNG when they visit Mark Twain? The various offspring of the Enterprise-C crew captured by the Romulans who didn't exist before but suddenly get to?

It's all quite random and not consistent at all, except towards our main characters who are the most important people in the universe so things that don't affect them don't matter.

It's not consistent because then you have the time war and Braxton coming in and then there are like 3 different versions of him who all get merged together so he can be put on trial, for things he may or may not do in the future, or the past.

Didn't the Romulan in Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow say that it was like the time was trying to correct itself? Pushing back and correcting itself so that things happen the way they're "supposed to happen." That doesn't sound like a new timeline being created. It sounds like a single timeline that is bending and flexing, but still maintaining itself.

I mean, that's one explanation, and one nearly used in ST 09 for why all these different people were coming together.

 

[Tuskin38]

Right, but that's only a recent thing, from Rebirth onwards. When it was made, and for whole decades, Watchmen was not canon, so the point stands: you don't need to be canon to be great, or even the GOAT.

Exactly, some of my favourite Star Trek stories are novels, which are not canon.

Because the people in charge keep saying it is. And then proceed to make creative decisions that are contrary to that idea.

So just like any fiction. This is nothing new nor unique with Trek.

 

[Darth Thanos]

I just don't know how we are still having this "its all the same universe" argument after Tomorrow Tomorrow Tomorrow spelled it out for us.

Because the universe (and by "universe" we mean the setting where the characters live and stories take place, not the physical universe) and the Sacred Timeline are not the same thing. Even if time travel alters the meaning of "before" and "after", there's still a "before" and "after" in the perspective of the time traveler we the audience follow through the story. And by the end of the story, everything goes "back to normal", and that means that it is the same universe, even if technically it's a new timeline. Even when thing go south and we stay for a time in a "bad timeline", as in the Year of Hell, the Age of Apocalypse or Flashpoint, things eventually do go back to normal.

Let's use a simpler example: Back to the Future. The 3 films are one long story in three parts. And this story we go from 1985 to 1955, to 1985 again, to 2015, to hell 1985, to 1955 again, to 1885 and back to 1985. What would belong in the "Back to the Future universe"? The 1985 of the first minutes of the first film? The 1985 of the ending of the third film? All of it?

 

[fireproof78]

 

[Dukhat]

So just like any fiction. This is nothing new nor unique with Trek.

There's a difference between not being entirely accurate to 50+ years of Star Trek fiction, and making deliberate changes to it. So when the changes are deliberate, this is an example of straying away from the source material in such a way as to create something new. That's the definition of a reboot, not a shared universe that isn't entirely consistent in minor ways.

To be honest, I don't think CBSTrek is a reboot. I used to, but I don't anymore. Now I see it as a fictionalized dramatic representation of the 'real' events. And what are the real events? That's up to the viewer.

 

[Phoenix219]

There's a difference between not being entirely accurate to 50+ years of Star Trek fiction, and making deliberate changes to it. So when the changes are deliberate, this is an example of straying away from the source material in such a way as to create something new. That's the definition of a reboot, not a shared universe that isn't entirely consistent in minor ways.

To be honest, I don't think CBSTrek is a reboot. I used to, but I don't anymore. Now I see it as a fictionalized dramatic representation of the 'real' events. And what are the real events? That's up to the viewer.

thats funny - i've been calling SNW the "captain pike DLC for the rec room holoplayers" for months/years now. Spock, Chapel, Uhura and M'Benga play it during TOS in their off time. Kirk joins them occasionally.

 

[Phoenix219]

Didn't the Romulan in Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow say that it was like the time was trying to correct itself? Pushing back and correcting itself so that things happen the way they're "supposed to happen." That doesn't sound like a new timeline being created. It sounds like a single timeline that is bending and flexing, but still maintaining itself.

which is why things are kind of normal by the time the 24th century re-rolls around, but the 22nd and 23rd are completely different. It still changed entire events by decades and rippled throughout the timeline. It takes awhile for the auto-correct (which i still think is what the TCW and Section 31 is all about) to steer things back on course.

 

[Shawnster]

Because the people in charge keep saying it is. And then proceed to make creative decisions that are contrary to that idea.

This. TPTB want to eat their cake and have it too. They keep preaching and insisting and declaring loud and proud that it's all one and the same cohesive universe from beginning to end, then intentionally allow story elements to contradict previous continuity and clearly state continuity is irrelevant when it's in the way of a good story.

Let me specify intentionally. There are plenty of continuity gaffs due to oversights. Vulcan, Vulcanian, R or T, spikes on the nacelles or not. Those are unintentional contradictions. On the other hand, Chapel's personality change and the radical reinterpretation of the Gorn are deliberate and intentional alterations.

Dark Knight Returns. Gotham by Gaslight. Both are great Batman stories. Neither are part of the main Batman continuity, nor are there attempts to claim they are. Comics constantly get officially rebooted. Zero Hour. Crisis on Infinite Earths. The comic industry isn't afraid to reboot. In fact, they do it so much, especially in movies, that it's unnecessary. We understand that this movie may not be in the same continuity as that movie. We really don't need a retelling origin story of Batman or Spiderman every 3 or 5 years.

But Star Trek? Oh no. We must close our eyes, plug our ears, and accept one continuous continuity while, at the same time, willingly accept the blatant and intentional changes, alterations, reinterpretations, and wholesale contradictions.

 

[fireproof78]

But Star Trek? Oh no. We must close our eyes, plug our ears, and accept one continuous continuity while, at the same time, willingly accept the blatant and intentional changes, alterations, reinterpretations, and wholesale contradictions.

Yes.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Yes.

This is the way,

 

[Nerys Myk]

This. TPTB want to eat their cake and have it too. They keep preaching and insisting and declaring loud and proud that it's all one and the same cohesive universe from beginning to end, then intentionally allow story elements to contradict previous continuity and clearly state continuity is irrelevant when it's in the way of a good story.

Has anyone ever said "cohesive"? Trek "cohesion" involves a fair amount of sticking our fingers in our ears and shouting "la la la la".

Let me specify intentionally. There are plenty of continuity gaffs due to oversights. Vulcan, Vulcanian, R or T, spikes on the nacelles or not. Those are unintentional contradictions. On the other hand, Chapel's personality change and the radical reinterpretation of the Gorn are deliberate and intentional alterations.

There are also plenty of intentional contradictions. Like the Federation overwriting United Earth. Starfleet overwriting a litany of other organizations. Dilithium replacing lithium. A radical reinterpretation of the Klingons. (And the Romulans too) Kirk and Spock's personality shifts.
Chapel's "personality change" was an improvement. She's an actual character now. Should that be jettisoned because of some misguided adherence to "The Canon". If you can make something better that's a good thing, right?

But Star Trek? Oh no. We must close our eyes, plug our ears, and accept one continuous continuity while, at the same time, willingly accept the blatant and intentional changes, alterations, reinterpretations, and wholesale contradictions.

Well yeah. Haven't we always done that?

 

[Firebird]

Worf in DS9 was way more badass than he was in most of TNG.

It's unfortunate that TNG Worf was continually used as a way to make enemies look stronger and gave rise to the following tropes:

The Worf Effect - TV Tropes

Want a quick way to show how dangerous one of your unknown characters is? Simple, make them do well or win in a fight with a character that the audience already knows is tough. This establishes them as willing to fight and marks them as …

tvtropes.org

Worf Had the Flu - TV Tropes

This is the specific rationalization that an otherwise powerful character suffering from The Worf Effect or a Curb-Stomp Battle did so only because something (artificially) undermined their performance. The insinuation, of course, is that it …

tvtropes.org

 

[Tuskin38]

and clearly state continuity is irrelevant when it's in the way of a good story.

Good, that’s how it should be

 

[The Wormhole]

I just don't know how we are still having this "its all the same universe" argument after Tomorrow Tomorrow Tomorrow spelled it out for us.

I don't know. Why do you keep peddling a rewritten timeline theory to people clearly not interested in hearing it?

 

[Darth Thanos]

Another example: back in TOS women were not allowed to be captains. And not just that we didn't saw any, it was spelled out in Turnabout Intruder. Janeway and Freeman are both in later times, both in and out of universe. But Discovery started before the TOS era, already with Philipa Georgiou as Captain. And that doesn't mean it's not canon or an alt universe, just that canon was silently fixed.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I wasn't around in 1969, but I can imagine that line being a bit of a head-scratcher at the time, especially considering that the series had already shown Number One commanding the Enterprise in Pike's absence. It doesn't fit the rest of TOS, which shows plenty of women in positions of responsibility, and it comes in the context of Janice Lester wanting to roam the stars with Captain Kirk, not commanding her own ship. So I expect there wasn't a huge outcry when that particular statement was contradicted by Star Trek 2, with Saavik training for command.