Star Trek Canon Problems

[fireproof78]

TOS was my first Trek. It holds a dear place in my heart. That said, I don't believe that anything is set in stone. It was full of things that other series have rightfully ignored or retconned. And I'm fine with that.

Same here. Nothing is taken away from TOS.

 

[cooleddie74]

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

I honestly don’t see these problems with canon that you are seeing. But I’ve realized some time ago that in general fandom basically seems to break up into two groups:

1. One that looks at Star Trek as a collection of distinct TV shows that just happen to be taking place in the same, loosely connected fictional universe, each one kinda telling its own stories, with its own flavor and unique take on the Trek sandbox.
2. And the other one that sees Star Trek as en epic, continuous tale, where each show adds to a larger narrative about, I don’t know, the “History of the Federation”, or something like that.

I think both viewpoints are valid, but I find myself in the first group. I appreciate if something ties together neatly from one show to the other, but it’s not what Star Trek “is about” for me.

And I guess it’s largely the second group that tends to obsess over continuity problems, “breaking canon” or filling in blanks.

There's a lot of Trekkies in both groups, and, honestly, these canon discussions aren't generally very productive, as I doubt they are going to make the recent shows non-canon. I don't believe they're in the same universe, but that's just personal head canon. They are objectively canon, whether we care to admit it or not.

 

[cooleddie74]

Then you'll have everyone complaining about the jelly beans and cheap looking set.

They'll do that anyways. Trekkies are rarely satisfied with any recreation of any old set, or even new ones never before shown.

 

[BillJ]

There are many things in this world that I have to be absolutely rational about, Star Trek isn't one of them.

 

[fireproof78]

They'll do that anyways. Trekkies are rarely satisfied with any recreation of any old set, or even new ones never before shown.

Yes, indeed. And it's confusing as heck.

 

[BillJ]

And it's confusing as heck.

Just human. If we all thought the same way, all the time, about everything, things would get pretty quiet in here.

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

Yes, indeed. And it's confusing as heck.

If it weren't this forum would be dead.

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

Just human. If we all thought the same way, all the time, about everything, things would get pretty quiet in here.

Jinx

 

[BillJ]

If it weren't this forum would be dead.

What is Picard's line from "Encounter at Farpoint"...

If we're going to be damned, let's be damned for what we really are.

The Next Generation Transcripts - Encounter at Farpoint (chakoteya.net)

 

[fireproof78]

Just human. If we all thought the same way, all the time, about everything, things would get pretty quiet in here.

That's...a fair point but hardly informative.

If it weren't this forum would be dead.

Well, sure, but I always thought that part of the human experience was about learning about and from the experiences of others. But just saying "It's irrational" isn't has helpful as I would hope.

Oh, well, that's my thing, I guess.

 

[BillJ]

That's...a fair point but hardly informative.

You're asking why people "people". Not sure what other answer there could be?

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

Well, sure, but I always thought that part of the human experience was about learning about and from the experiences of others. But just saying "It's irrational" isn't has helpful as I would hope.

There are so many ways to interpret Star Trek that I would call it entirely rational, just ... diverse.

 

[fireproof78]

You're asking why people "people". Not sure what other answer there could be?

Well, there absolutely could be but would require a lot more time and perhaps face to face interaction to fully unpack.

And, again, that's my thing. I'm a person who will trace my thoughts back to their origin, how a thought started, what prompted it, what feeling, and explore that. I'm crazy in my introspection of the "Why" of things.

It's not everyone's thing. Few people actually enjoy it.

 

[BillJ]

And, again, that's my thing. I'm a person who will trace my thoughts back to their origin, how a thought started, what prompted it, what feeling, and explore that. I'm crazy in my introspection of the "Why" of things.

I have spent a good portion of my life doing this. I know exactly why Star Trek captured my imagination. I know it wasn't because of "quality" or any other high minded things people associate with the show.

It was in the right place, at the right time in a frightened child's life. I've said it before, I saw Captain Kirk as far more of a father figure than I did my own father, for good reasons. If I had caught it five years later, it might not have caught me at the right point in my life.

Sometimes, we just don't know why? We just know that it strikes us as something interesting in our lives.

 

[fireproof78]

I have spent a good portion of my life doing this. I know exactly why Star Trek captured my imagination. I know it wasn't because of "quality" or any other high minded things people associate with the show.

It was in the right place, at the right time in a frightened child's life. I've said it before, I saw Captain Kirk as far more of a father figure than I did my own father, for good reasons. If I had caught it five years later, it might not have caught me at the right point in my life.

Sometimes, we just don't know why? We just know that it strikes us as something interesting in our lives.

That is the why. Thank you for sharing.

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

I have spent a good portion of my life doing this. I know exactly why Star Trek captured my imagination. I know it wasn't because of "quality" or any other high minded things people associate with the show.

It was in the right place, at the right time in a frightened child's life. I've said it before, I saw Captain Kirk as far more of a father figure than I did my own father, for good reasons. If I had caught it five years later, it might not have caught me at the right point in my life.

Sometimes, we just don't know why? We just know that it strikes us as something interesting in our lives.

For me, part of the thrall of Star Trek is the suggestion that it could be our future. The depth of the universe (like Tolkien) and the amount of detail is the foundation of my Trekkiedom. (Reading the Star Trek Technical Manual is what got me in to TOS, and thus Star Trek.)

I like the details.

 

[BillJ]

Reading the Star Trek Technical Manual is what got me in to TOS, and thus Star Trek.

A side note: if you haven't read it, you should hunt down the Star Trek: Spaceflight Chronology by Rick Sternbach. It was published in 1980, so its' view of the universe is far different than what we have now, but it is jammed packed with ships and bits of lore.

 

[fireproof78]

For me, part of the thrall of Star Trek is the suggestion that it could be our future. The depth of the universe (like Tolkien) and the amount of detail is the foundation of my Trekkiedom. (Reading the Star Trek Technical Manual is what got me in to TOS, and thus Star Trek.)

I like the details.

I enjoy it too, though not as much as others it seems. I've read the Concordance and Tech Manual. I've even developed a rough manual for Kelvin Trek. I thoroughly appreciate the thought behind the design.

I also don't tnink a single series produced now takes away from any of it.

 

[Disposable_Ensign]

A side note: if you haven't read it, you should hunt down the Star Trek: Spaceflight Chronology by Rick Sternbach. It was published in 1980, so its' view of the universe is far different than what we have now, but it is jammed packed with ships and bits of lore.

I've got that one. I like to think I have the largest collection of Star Trek books in the county .