• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread

Is it wrong that I get just the slightest amount joy whenever the show takes something that everyone assumes was canon and tramples all over it, even when it wasn't canon to begin with?

The Farragut not being a Constitution class has already brought out the nerd rage in a "certain" segment of the fandom and I am absolutely loving it.
 
I got over it in five minutes. I was like: "it's not a Connie? That's a shame. Oh well, at least this now gives them a empty slot when naming all 12 Connies in the TOS Era."
 
Is it wrong that I get just the slightest amount joy whenever the show takes something that everyone assumes was canon and tramples all over it, even when it wasn't canon to begin with?

The Farragut not being a Constitution class has already brought out the nerd rage in a "certain" segment of the fandom and I am absolutely loving it.

... People thought the Farragut was a Connie? Really?
 
Yep, which is why it was almost a foregone conclusion. Paramount and CBS have been pretty respectful of a lot of the Okudas' theories and references.
 
It was a Connie in a lot of non-canon material.

The registry they chose for it in SNW even came from non-canon material that called it a Connie.

Huh. The books I remember reading it wasn't a Connie. But that was like 30 years ago. It always made sense to me Kirk got promoted up to a Connie after his heroism on the Farrogut, especially since the Connies were so rare.
 
According to Memory Alpha, the earliest source to use that Registry number was:

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/The_Case_of_Jonathan_Doe_Starship

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/USS_Farragut_(NCC-1647)#Background_information

Making of Star Trek and the FJ Tech Manual also called it a Connie.

"The following names have been established for starships: Enterprise, Exeter, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valiant, and Intrepid. The latter four are listed as destroyed in various episodes." - The Making of Star Trek, p.165.

Notes on this claim:
1.) I have no memory of the name Kongo appearing in aired Trek.
2.) "Obsession" only establishes that the Cloud Creature killed half the crew, not that the Farragut itself was destroyed.
3.) The Valiant listed is presumably the one that was lost at Eminiar VIi fifty years earlier (or ca. 2217), or some 28 years before the Enterprise entered service in 2245.

4.) A reference elsewhere in TMoST claims that starships of the class to which the Enterprise belongs have been in existence for forty years (by TOS), so since ca. 2227, contradicting the assumption that the Valiant lost at Eminiar VII was a Connie.

5.) If that Valiant wasn't actually a Connie, it's possible that the Republic (NCC-1371) and the Farragut weren't also.

6.) Alternately, it's possible that there was a class of starships that looked much like Constitution-class starships constructed between ca. 2227-2245 with NCC numbers lower than 1700 - like the Sombra-class starships, and that the Constellation (NCC-1017) and possibly the Republic (NCC-1371) and all those presumed Connies with registry numbers in the NCC-1600 range (except obviously the Farragut as of SNW) were actually constructed as Sombra-class vessels.
 
"The following names have been established for starships: Enterprise, Exeter, Lexington, Yorktown, Potemkin, Republic, Hood, Constitution, Kongo, Constellation, Farragut, Valiant, and Intrepid. The latter four are listed as destroyed in various episodes." - The Making of Star Trek, p.165.

Notes on this claim:
1.) I have no memory of the name Kongo appearing in aired Trek.
2.) "Obsession" only establishes that the Cloud Creature killed half the crew, not that the Farragut itself was destroyed.
3.) The Valiant listed is presumably the one that was lost at Eminiar VIi fifty years earlier (or ca. 2217), or some 28 years before the Enterprise entered service in 2245.

4.) A reference elsewhere in TMoST claims that starships of the class to which the Enterprise belongs have been in existence for forty years (by TOS), so since ca. 2227, contradicting the assumption that the Valiant lost at Eminiar VII was a Connie.

5.) If that Valiant wasn't actually a Connie, it's possible that the Republic (NCC-1371) and the Farragut weren't also.

6.) Alternately, it's possible that there was a class of starships that looked much like Constitution-class starships constructed between ca. 2227-2245 with NCC numbers lower than 1700 - like the Sombra-class starships, and the Constellation (NCC-1017) and possibly the Republic (NCC-1371) and all those presumed Connies with registry numbers in the NCC-1600 range (except obviously the Farragut as of SNW) were actually constructed as Sombra-class vessels.

There was also the SS Valiant which was self-destructed by its Captain after in encountered the Galactic Barrier 200 years before the events of TOS S1 - Where No Man Has Gone Before.
 
It’s a rare interview that gets an actor to share his technique in a meaningful way, but what Mount had to say about preparing for the Admiral Pike role was smashing. Replaying those scenes, I saw and heard exactly how effective that preparation was.

And, for our friends who want a paler, less political Trek experience, the kicker tells us where this production team stands in no uncertain terms:
Anson Mount said:
The easy way for the show would be to be value-neutral, especially right now. But that’s just not what Star Trek is.
 
There was also the SS Valiant which was self-destructed by its Captain after in encountered the Galactic Barrier 200 years before the events of TOS S1 - Where No Man Has Gone Before.

Yes, we all know that, but the listing of starships in TMoST comes after a series of memos between Roddenberry, Fontana, and Just man trying to establish the definitive names of the 12 starships that make up (or made up) the contemporary Star Fleet of Kirk's era. The Valiant that encountered the Galactic Barrier in "Where No Man" is much too early for that. The destroyed Valiant of the TMoST list is most likely to be a reference to the one from "A Taste of Armageddon."
 
Yeah, no way was that starship named Valiant a Connie. She was lost at Eminiar VII in 2217 so maybe at best she was a Walker-class starship or some other vessel launched in the first years of the 23rd century. She may even have been an older class predating the year 2200.
 
You're correct that it was never used TOS, but it was part of a list of 14 names considered by the writers of the show starting in Season 2.

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/USS_Kongo
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Constitution_class#Footnotes

Considering that I was quoting from THE MAKING OF STAR TREK and from a section on the discussion in August, 1967 of the production team trying to come up with names for Starships, I think it's clear that I know that Kongo was a name under consideration at the time.

However, under the prevailing operational definition of the c-word that dominates fan discourse (and that I would banish if I had my druthers), only information that is incontrovertibly used onscreen is definitive, hence my observation.
 
Yeah, no way was that starship named Valiant a Connie. She was lost at Eminiar VII in 2217 so maybe at best she was a Walker-class starship or some other vessel launched in the first years of the 23rd century. She may even have been an older class predating the year 2200.
Perhaps it was Sambra classs? :shrug:
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top