Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 2x10 - "Hegemony"

[Dukhat]

Yep. TMP is basically like, "We're gonna make Spock look and act nothing like what he looked and acted like before, and have lots and lots of continuity problems which we are very much aware of but we're making them anyway, while at the same time saying that it's all exactly the same. But don't you dare call it a reboot! It takes place in the same universe! Really, it does!"

Because that's how Star Trek has always handled inconsistencies.

You're a very funny guy.

There is a two-and-a-half year period between the end of Turnabout Intruder and TMP where we know nothing about Spock's life and what he was going through. For all we know, he took that time to ponder his life among humans and decided that he had some serious problems with the way he should be acting as a Vulcan. A mid-life crisis, if you will. Now by that logic, T'Pring could go from being the sweet, caring, level-headed person we see in SNW to the conniving bitch we see in Amok Time, for no other reason than to separate herself from the man that she clearly loves in SNW to the man she clearly doesn't care about and could care less whether he and/or his best friend dies so that she can be with some other schmuck. But do I really think that this character that we're clearly meant to like is going to devolve so easily? I prefer to think that these two women are not in fact the same person because of the fundamental differences I see, but I have no problem accepting that Spock has gone through a maturity phase of his life and has determined that he needs to set a better example for himself as a Vulcan to his people. And T'Pring is only one example.

 

[fireproof78]

There is a two-and-a-half year period between the end of Turnabout Intruder and TMP where we know nothing about Spock's life and what he was going through. For all we know, he took that time to ponder his life among humans and decided that he had some serious problems with the way he should be acting as a Vulcan. A mid-life crisis, if you will. Now by that logic, T'Pring could go from being the sweet, caring, level-headed person we see in SNW to the conniving bitch we see in Amok Time, for no other reason than to separate herself from the man that she clearly loves in SNW to the man she clearly doesn't care about and could care less whether he and/or his best friend dies so that she can be with some other schmuck. I prefer to think that these two women are not in fact the same person because of the fundamental differences I see, but I have no problem accepting that Spock has gone through a maturity phase of his life and has determined that he needs to set a better example for himself as a Vulcan to his people. And T'Pring is only one example.

If TMP is acceptable, then I'm of the opinion that SNW to TOS is acceptable.

 

[Sci]

@Dukhat , I don't disagree that there's a two and a half year period where we the audience can make stuff up to reconcile the two depictions of Spock. But the fact that TMP's depiction contradicts TOS S3's depiction remains, and the fact that TMP makes no effort to explain the contradiction remains.

And the fact that Star Trek has always set its productions (save the Bad Robot films) in the same continuity as one-another even when there are unexplained contradictions, remains. Nothing about the decision to set DIS and SNW in the Prime Timeline is unique -- it is consistent with past precedent on how ST has handled unexplained contradictions.

Now by that logic, T'Pring could go from being the sweet, caring, level-headed person we see in SNW to the conniving bitch we see in Amok Time, for no other reason than to separate herself from the man that she clearly loves in SNW to the man she clearly doesn't care about and could care less whether he and/or his best friend dies so that she can be with some other schmuck.

1) Yes.

2) T'Pring isn't as caring as you make her out to be in SNW.

3) T'Pring isn't as malicious as you make her out to be in "Amok Time."

 

[cooleddie74]

T'Pring in SNW is a lot like she is in TOS, just seven or eight years' less conniving, at least openly so. She worked alongside Stonn even in 2259 so there's no way you're gonna tell me she wasn't already having an affair with him or about to start one.

 

[fireproof78]

T'Pring in SNW is a lot like she is in TOS, just seven or eight years' less conniving, at least openly so. She worked alongside Stonn even in 2259 so there's no way you're gonna tell me she wasn't already having an affair with him or about to start one.

I would say about to start one. In SNW she is making all the effort for Spock, while Spock seems to be more focused on his career. She has done all that is "logical" in the relationship, including overtures towards Spock in being accommodating of his human side. Which is something that Spock has a difficult relationship with, and is not always open with T'Pring about his struggles.

I don't disagree that there's a two and a half year period where we the audience can make stuff up to reconcile the two depictions of Spock. But the fact that TMP's depiction contradicts TOS S3's depiction remains, and the fact that TMP makes no effort to explain the contradiction remains.

Exactly. It's just we have decades of explaining away differences now. No such grace exists for newer production, for whatever reason.

 

[Sci]

I would say about to start one. In SNW she is making all the effort for Spock, while Spock seems to be more focused on his career. She has done all that is "logical" in the relationship, including overtures towards Spock in being accommodating of his human side. Which is something that Spock has a difficult relationship with, and is not always open with T'Pring about his struggles.

I mean, yes, but also T'Pring has still absorbed some of her mother's anti-Human bigotry. She means well, but she does still very much essentialize Humans and stereotypes them to some extent. Her entire notion that she should review Human literature on sexuality when Spock has spent his entire life almost completely immersed in Vulcan culture speaks to that. What would Spock know about Human literature on sexuality? It's not really his culture. But she treats him like he must already know all this stuff, just because he's half-Human.

Exactly. It's just we have decades of explaining away differences now. No such grace exists for newer production, for whatever reason.

100%. I've been a Trekkie long enough to see this pattern emerge before. ENT depicts a 22nd Century that contradicts some tidbits from TNG, and people go apeshit; 20 years later, ENT is considered fine and dandy and people go apeshit over DIS's contradictions. In 20 years, people will say that DIS is a classic show and that awful new show is just terrible the way it violates canon or whatever.

 

[fireproof78]

I mean, yes, but also T'Pring has still absorbed some of her mother's anti-Human bigotry. She means well, but she does still very much essentialize Humans and stereotypes them to some extent. Her entire notion that she should review Human literature on sexuality when Spock has spent his entire life almost completely immersed in Vulcan culture speaks to that. What would Spock know about Human literature on sexuality? It's not really his culture. But she treats him like he must already know all this stuff, just because he's half-Human.

Oh, I agree. But the idea that T'Pring is out of character, or some how inconsistent. She has her flaws, but in her mind she is perfectly justified, because of the apparent efforts she made. Before, she appeared cold and calculating. Except, now, she is more in line with Vulcans as presented in further stories, those emotions run deep and require logical control. And she did, to the point of killing Spock, or her champion in the process.

It's a deeply fascinating drama now unfolding.

 

[cooleddie74]

And totally in line with how scheming we know Vulcans can be from the ENT Era.

 

[Dukhat]

I don't disagree that there's a two and a half year period where we the audience can make stuff up to reconcile the two depictions of Spock. But the fact that TMP's depiction contradicts TOS S3's depiction remains, and the fact that TMP makes no effort to explain the contradiction remains.

I guess I don't need to be spoon-fed details that I can assess on my own. I just gave a perfectly valid reason for Spock's attitude change, which you have decided you don't want to agree with. That's fine; that's your choice.

And the fact that Star Trek has always set its productions (save the Bad Robot films) in the same continuity as one-another even when there are unexplained contradictions, remains. Nothing about the decision to set DIS and SNW in the Prime Timeline is unique -- it is consistent with past precedent on how ST has handled unexplained contradictions.

We will have to agree to disagree about this. I know the line that CBS/Paramount is toting. I choose not to interpret what I'm seeing to be that cut-and-dried.

1) Yes.

2) T'Pring isn't as caring as you make her out to be in SNW.

3) T'Pring isn't as malicious as you make her out to be in "Amok Time."

Again, we will agree to disagree about what is being presented to us.

 

[Sci]

I guess I don't need to be spoon-fed details that I can assess on my own.

Sure! No one's saying that the fact that TMP does not explain its contradiction means it's nullified from the canon or that you can't develop your own interpretations. But the text itself does not explain the contradictions between elements of TMP and elements of TOS. Just like the texts of DIS/SNW do not explain their contradictions from elements of TOS. Yet they are all set in the same continuity. Nothing about the lack of an explanation for contradictions is new or keeps them from being set in the same continuity.

I just gave a perfectly valid reason for Spock's attitude change, which you have decided you don't want to agree with.

I never said I didn't agree with it! I said the explanation is not present in the text. That's an entirely different thing.

I know the line that CBS/Paramount is toting. I choose not to interpret what I'm seeing to be that cut-and-dried.

And you have every right to disagree about how to interpret the text! But you need to distinguish between your interpretation and the actual content of the text itself.

By actual content of the text itself, DIS, SNW, TOS, and TMP all take place in the same continuity. Period.

If you personally choose to reinterpret DIS and SNW as in a different continuity, that's your right. But your creative reinterpretation of the text is not present in the text.

 

[fireproof78]

Sure! No one's saying that the fact that TMP does not explain its contradiction means it's nullified from the canon or that you can't develop your own interpretations. But the text itself does not explain the contradictions between elements of TMP and elements of TOS. Just like the texts of DIS/SNW do not explain their contradictions from elements of TOS. Yet they are all set in the same continuity. Nothing about the lack of an explanation for contradictions is new or keeps them from being set in the same continuity.

Precisely this.

No, it doesn't mean abandoning your faculties to reason with the text to make it work. It just means a willingness to engage with the text in a way allowing for explanations that are not explicitly present.

 

[Dukhat]

Sure! No one's saying that the fact that TMP does not explain its contradiction means it's nullified from the canon or that you can't develop your own interpretations. But the text itself does not explain the contradictions between elements of TMP and elements of TOS. Just like the texts of DIS/SNW do not explain their contradictions from elements of TOS. Yet they are all set in the same continuity. Nothing about the lack of an explanation for contradictions is new or keeps them from being set in the same continuity.

My argument wasn't that TMP took place in the same continuity as TOS, or it didn't. My point was that Roddenberry's intent was that TMP was what Star Trek was always meant to be and look like, and that what we saw in TOS was just an imperfect accounting of events which should be largely ignored (i.e. that it wasn't in continuity with TMP), which was also his intent when creating TNG. Except his intent was invalidated by fans and future productions which treated TOS as part of the same continuity with the films and TNG, exactly as how it was depicted on screen.

The producers of DSC/SNW are doing the opposite. They are taking the Roddenberry approach: That what you're seeing now is actually how everything looks and everyone acts, despite the look and feel of the show not being consistent with the look and feel of TOS, and that it is now hugely inconsistent with all the 24th century shows. That is CBS/Paramount's stance. It is not my stance, and just like in the past when fans and future producers come along and say that the creator of that show's intent is no longer valid, then that's what it will be. Nothing is written in stone as far as canon and continuity are concerned. I choose to enjoy SNW on its own merits, not by the merits of some other show it is trying to mimic on the surface but in reality is quite different.

And you have every right to disagree about how to interpret the text! But you need to distinguish between your interpretation and the actual content of the text itself.

By actual content of the text itself, DIS, SNW, TOS, and TMP all take place in the same continuity. Period.

If you personally choose to reinterpret DIS and SNW as in a different continuity, that's your right. But your creative reinterpretation of the text is not present in the text.

See above.

 

[fireproof78]

Enjoying on the own merits and connected to another show are not mutual exclusive.

Otherwise, why bother with TMP at all? Or any Trek. I find TOS to be quite sufficient.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Except, there's no indication of why Spock would want to do so.

Perhaps not, but there is a gap of several years between the end of TOS and the start of TMP, so I figure something must have happened to Spock that made him wish to pursue kolinahr.

Edit: At least one Trek novel has dealt with this question: @Christopher's Forgotten History.

 

[fireproof78]

Perhaps not, but there is a gap of several years between the end of TOS and the start of TMP, so I figure something must have happened to Spock that made him wish to pursue kolinahr.

Years?

The time frame is ambiguous and assumed by fans, not in the text.

 

[Sci]

My argument wasn't that TMP took place in the same continuity as TOS, or it didn't. My point was that Roddenberry's intent was that TMP was what Star Trek was always meant to be and look like,

Yeah, well, Roddenberry's intent didn't carry over onscreen and it was never matched by the actual writers or director of the film. There's nothing in the text to imply that it's a separate continuity -- there are just contradictions that aren't explained, and that's all you can say about the text itself.

The producers of DSC/SNW are doing the opposite. They are taking the Roddenberry approach: That what you're seeing now is actually how everything looks and everyone acts, despite the look and feel of the show not being consistent with the look and feel of TOS.

Says who? There's been nothing onscreen to indicate that there's no explanation for the differences between DIS/SNW and TOS. There are just contradictions that aren't explained, and that's all you can say about the text itself.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Years?

Yes, years.

In TMP, it's said that Kirk hasn't logged a single star-hour in two and a half years (during which time he was Chief of Starfleet Operations), so the gap between TOS and TMP must be at least that long.

I believe it's an episode of VOY which nailed TMP down as taking place in 2273, in which case the gap's even longer than that.

 

[cooleddie74]

Yep. "Q2" established that Kirk's five-year mission ended in the year 2270, meaning TMP is a 2273 storyline.

 

[Dukhat]

Yeah, well, Roddenberry's intent didn't carry over onscreen and it was never matched by the actual writers or director of the film. There's nothing in the text to imply that it's a separate continuity -- there are just contradictions that aren't explained, and that's all you can say about the text itself.

So take that word you keep using, 'text,' and throw it out the window. Because that isn't what I'm talking about. As I said, I don't need someone to spoon-feed me 'text' in order for me to interpret things.

Says who? There's been nothing onscreen to indicate that there's no explanation for the differences between DIS/SNW and TOS. There are just contradictions that aren't explained, and that's all you can say about the text itself.

So when you look at the sets of the TOS Enterprise, you're seeing the exact same sets in SNW? When you look at the portrayal of SNW Chapel, you're seeing the same portrayal of TOS Chapel? Because I don't see that at all. If you do, more power to you.

 

[fireproof78]

Yes, years.

In TMP, it's said that Kirk hasn't logged a single star-hour in two and a half years (and that Kirk has been Chief of Starfleet Operations for that same amount of time), so the gap between TOS and TMP must be at least that long.

I believe it's an episode of VOY which nailed TMP down as taking place in 2273, in which case the gap's even longer than that, since TOS ended in about 2269.

Yep. "Q2" established that Kirk's five-year mission ended in the year 2270, meaning TMP is a 2273 storyline.

Thank you. Shows which parts of Star Trek I did not pay attention to.

TMP and VOY rank lower on the list, largely because TMP was not like TOS and not enjoyable for me at the time. I have not revisited TMP in a long time.