The Star Trek Encyclopedia getting first update since 1999!

[Christopher]

And the thing is, I could understand doubting the veracity of silly-sounding things that TAS includes...

TAS has some silly things, yes, but no sillier than, say, space gangsters/Romans/Nazis, alien haunted houses and Greek gods, a giant space amoeba, a superspeed disease, a super-overcrowded planet with enough room to build a whole starship replica, and so forth.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

I suppose not. I guess you accept what you want and reject what you don't.

 

[Christopher]

I suppose not. I guess you accept what you want and reject what you don't.

An ordinary fan can do that, sure. But a reference text has an obligation to be inclusive and unbiased. It's not supposed to tell people what they should think, it's supposed to give them access to all the information they need to make their own decisions.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Ideally.

 

[ryan123450]

Hello everyone (and especially ryan123450),

Since it’s something that I’d have done first anyway, here’s my look at how the new Star Trek Encyclopedia revises and extends the last version of the Star Trek Chronology. This isn’t intended as a nit-pick or criticism of the new book, and it’s not a detailed transcript of all the available information. I’ve only had time for a brief look, but here goes:

The new timeline is very brief, running to three pages. Most major events are dated. Star Trek: Insurrection is in 2375, and Star Trek: Nemesis is in 2379. The last date is 2387, for the Hobus supernova. Whether this means that the “Prime” timeline is subsequently “overwritten” by the new course of events isn’t stated, but the first date is 1957, so I doubt that’s the intention.

The really major innovation is that each season of Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek: Deep Space 9 and Star Trek: Voyager are listed as extending into the following year. For example, the first season of TNG is assigned to 2364, but a note in brackets says that it continues into 2375. Obviously, the seventh season of VOY starts in 2377, but continues into 2378. How that applies in practice isn’t clear. In general, the entries in the main body of the text seem to support the old exact correlation between each season and a calendar year. As far as I could see, the only changes seem to be ones where it don’t involve too much editing (although that’s only a guess on my part). “Shades of Gray” now falls in 2366, although “Peak Performance” is still dated to 2365. “In Theory” is dated to late 2367, and the whole of “Redemption” Parts 1 & 2 are in 2368.

Well that is odd. On the one hand it never struck alot of people as the best way of handling things have each season run Jan-Dec. But that train has left the station long ago, particularly as far as dates go in the Liturature. It seems like a horrible idea to suggest that we change it now. Especially since they seem to do so haphazardly, inconsistently, and not even by a huge amount. Why change only an episode or two at the end of some years? Why not a stretch of 10 or more episodes proceeding into the following year, if you are going to make the change at all.

Most notably (and frustratingly), the departure of Neelix in “Homestead” and the return of Voyager to Earth in “Endgame” are dated to 2377, quite specifically.

If there was any year in which it would be appropriate to split the final episodes into the next year it would be that one. This is really crazy.

I think the only way that the questions this all raises could be answered would be with a revised edition of the Star Trek Chronology. I certainly can’t guess at what decisions the Okudas would make if they constructed a detailed timeline (or why they’ve made the decisions they have in this book). Although it’s a book I’d really like to see, I’m not sure I can afford another lavishly-produced (and priced) new version, even though the Encyclopedia is a really lovely-looking book.

At this point I'm pretty much hoping that we never see another Chronology. I hope the Okuda's just leave the Star Trek timeline alone. They made enough strange decisions over the years, and if they are only going to come up with even more, I'd just as soon not have any more reference works from them.

As for the shortcomings to it (and there are certainly some whoppers in just my brief chronological investigation), I don’t see that the Okudas are any more likely to have “magic answers” than anyone else. If something doesn’t work, then it just doesn’t work. (To totally digress: if you put “Homestead” in 2378, then it’s difficult to see how “The Best of Both Worlds” can start any later than 2367. Star Trek: Deep Space Nine runs into problems if it doesn’t start in 2369, but it’s supposed to be “three years” later. If there’s a good answer to that, I can’t find it, and that’s before you add “Second Sight” into the mix.)

Where mistakes have been carried over from previous books, that can be because of factors outside their control. If the publisher said that modifications to the text from the previous editions had to be kept to the absolute minimum, then the choices are limited. If you think I’m giving the writers too easy a ride, remember that last edition? I doubt anyone other than a publisher would think that re-issuing the exact book that people already have with a magazine-sized supplement tacked onto the end and calling it an “updated and expanded edition” was a good idea. On that basis alone, this is a major improvement.

As far as I’m concerned, TAS occupies an awkward place in Star Trek, and the decision to omit it isn’t always straightforward ignorance. (Although I admit I dropped it from my own timeline mainly because I just couldn’t fit it in plausibly. That could easily be because I’m lazy and insufficiently clever to make it fit, though.)

In the end, this book is likely to be the “go-to” source for Star Trek writers, like the earlier editions. That there are mistakes is a pity, but unavoidable. At least the errors will be more consistent.

Best wishes,
Timon

Thanks for bringing all this to our attention. I for one will be ignoring everything! As I'm currently working on really diving deep into the TNG-VOY era in my chronology, I will be making my own determinations about these issues, and all this new craziness from the Okuda's won't factor in as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Lakenheath 72]

I was reading the Introduction. According to them, they left out the TAS info as it honored Roddenberry's request that the episodes not be treated as part of the "official" Star Trek universe. They left the "authenticity" of the episodes to each reader.

On another point, they wrote, "We have not used any material from the Star Trek novels or other publications." So, it is strange that they made an exception for the Titan.

There is an implication in the entries for Khan, prime and Kelvin, that Nero's incursion was actually into a parallel universe.

Khan in the alternate timeline was a warlord who committed genocide against the people of Earth. He was captured, along with his fellow Augments, declared criminals, and exiled from Earth.

Khan in the prime was not genocidal. He ruled over a sizable portion of Earth. He fled Earth with his followers aboard the SS Botany Bay.

So, is the Kelvin a ship of the prime universe or of another universe?

There is a greater emphasis on the ships of the prime universe. Heck, the Narada does not appear in the two page illustration of the alien ships of the galaxy. (I would have liked to have seen more illustrrations of the new classes introduced in the Kelvin Timeline.)

There is another oddity. For the Woden, they did not alter the text. They mentioned in italics that the Woden had been changed; however, the new Woden does not make an appearance. There is a dorsal view of the DY-100 class spacecraft. I thought I had read somewhere that the Okudas considered the remastered episodes as the new canon and the Encyclopedia would reflect this.

 

[Christopher]

I was reading the Introduction. According to them, they left out the TAS info as it honored Roddenberry's request that the episodes not be treated as part of the "official" Star Trek universe. They left the "authenticity" of the episodes to each reader.

I think that was unwise. Roddenberry's request was partly about uncertainty over ownership of TAS due to Filmation's bankruptcy -- a question that was resolved over two decades ago -- and partly due to his ill health and judgment late in life. TAS was his baby to begin with. It was the one and only part of the franchise that he ever had absolute, 100 percent creative control over. It was his own choice not to exercise that creative control and to entrust the show to D.C. Fontana and Filmation instead. So claiming later in life that it wasn't true to his "vision" was rather hypocritical, and frankly rather insulting to Fontana. Roddenberry was not making good decisions at the time he made that "request," and I think it's a major mistake to "honor" it. Especially since it's a double standard. He didn't want ST V counted either, but I assume it's in the book. And we don't know what he would've thought of DS9 or VGR or ENT.

After all, Roddenberry was never the sole creator behind ST. A lot of his successors have incorporated elements of TAS into later canon, however subtly. So it's really rather disingenuous to pretend it isn't part of the whole.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

With that in mind, a list should be made of all the TAS things not portrayed in live action Trek so that future TV/film writers can draw from it.

 

[Markonian]

^ You mean, like a rebellious counter-culture Encyclopaedia?

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

No, just a checklist to aid writers in making things canon even by their definition. Unless, of course, they reject said films/shows as well.

EDIT: Solves the problem without criticism or confrontation.

 

[Vanyel]

I hate saying it, but perhaps Paramount (They own Star Trek, right?) should set up their own wiki site, or an official site that only they can alter. It, like Memory Alpha, can be updated a day or two after episodes of STD (Sorry, I just like that abbreviation. I know it should be DIS.) It could also give us some information on STD's bible like character names, ranks, positions, a picture of the actor in uniform, the final view of Discovery and its class a week or more before the show airs. I would prefer such a site to be free, the studio has plenty of money to maintain it, but a small monthly or annual membership fee for things like behind the scenes of each series would not be a bad thing. This way the encyclopedia can be constantly updated. The site can also let people suggest updates or inform the site's admins of mistakes so long as the mistake can be verified by the informant (movie/episode/scene/approximate time marker/etc...) so the admins can correct it and give credit (maybe a free month's membership).

 

[JD]

I was reading the Introduction. According to them, they left out the TAS info as it honored Roddenberry's request that the episodes not be treated as part of the "official" Star Trek universe. They left the "authenticity" of the episodes to each reader.

On another point, they wrote, "We have not used any material from the Star Trek novels or other publications." So, it is strange that they made an exception for the Titan.

There is an implication in the entries for Khan, prime and Kelvin, that Nero's incursion was actually into a parallel universe.

Khan in the alternate timeline was a warlord who committed genocide against the people of Earth. He was captured, along with his fellow Augments, declared criminals, and exiled from Earth.

Did they say he committed genocide in STID? I know in the Prime Universe he never went that far. I don't remember the exact wording, but didn't they more or less say that he was the least nasty of the dictators in Space Seed?

 

[Christopher]

I hate saying it, but perhaps Paramount (They own Star Trek, right?)

The company that used to be Paramount Television is now called CBS Studios. Paramount Pictures, the movie studio, is now under separate ownership and only licenses the movie rights from CBS, the owner of the franchise.

should set up their own wiki site, or an official site that only they can alter.

StarTrek.com already exists as the official site, and it has a reference section. But since Memory Alpha already does the detailed wiki stuff for free, why would CBS want to pay employees to go to the trouble?

STD (Sorry, I just like that abbreviation. I know it should be DIS.)

Actually it's DSC.

Did they say he committed genocide in STID? I know in the Prime Universe he never went that far. I don't remember the exact wording, but didn't they more or less say that he was the least nasty of the dictators in Space Seed?

When Khan in STID said he wanted to "continue the work we were doing before we were banished," Spock (the younger one) replied, "Which, as I understand it, involves the mass genocide of any being you find to be less than superior." Which does conflict with the line in "Space Seed" that there were no massacres under Khan's rule.

 

[JD]

Ok, so the Encyclopedia is consistent with the Kelvinverse version then. I haven't seen the movie since it first came out on DVD, so my memory of it isn't very clear.

 

[Nerys Myk]

When Khan in STID said he wanted to "continue the work we were doing before we were banished," Spock (the younger one) replied, "Which, as I understand it, involves the mass genocide of any being you find to be less than superior." Which does conflict with the line in "Space Seed" that there were no massacres under Khan's rule.

Perhaps the genocides happen before he started his rule, while he was consolidating power.

 

[Vanyel]

Actually it's DSC.

Doesn't DIS fit the established pattern better? Series with more than one word titles use the first letter (or use the numeral) of each word in the title: TNG, DS9; and series with one name use the first three letters VOY, ENT. The only exception being TOS and TAS. Well, people will call them what they want.

StarTrek.com already exists as the official site, and it has a reference section. But since Memory Alpha already does the detailed wiki stuff for free, why would CBS want to pay employees to go to the trouble?

Get the information out in one general location, one where the studio and fans can say, it's backed up by what was shown on screen and in the online encyclopedia; and like startrek.com be continuously updated by those working with the ones making the shows. The site can even branch between the Prime Universe and the Kelvin Universe. Paid content could include interviews with producers/staff/writers as to where they think the two timelines split since in one tl he was born in Iowa, the other aboard a shuttle fleeing the Kelvin. So the split had to happen before the events of Star Trek 2009. It was in 2009, right?

 

[Therin of Andor]

life support belts aren't beyond the realm of possibility.

Well, many science fiction writers like to ridicule the TAS life support belts.

I'm a huge TAS fan, but the Okudas did say they were sticking with the old Paramount/Star Trek Office request that TAS not be part of the Encyclopedia, so I wasn't expecting anything new in that area. For the previous editions, they squeezed in only some "Yesteryear" references (Spock's family and the bullying, now also referenced in the 2009 movie) and a Captain April photo reference (with Roddenberry's head Photoshopped onto Pike's uniform).

Doesn't DIS fit the established pattern better? Series with more than one word titles use the first letter (or use the numeral) of each word in the title: TNG, DS9; and series with one name use the first three letters VOY, ENT. The only exception being TOS and TAS. Well, people will call them what they want.

CBS said recently that "VGR" is their shorthand for "Voyager", not "VOY".

 

[Christopher]

CBS said recently that "VGR" is their shorthand for "Voyager", not "VOY".

Rather, they reaffirmed it recently. It's been the abbreviation in the Chronology and Encyclopedia since the earliest editions that included the show.

 

[Vanyel]

I would think VGR might cause some confusion with TMP. Anyway, STD better be good since I have to pay for it otherwise I'll be looking for RFND.

 

[JD]

Well, VGR isn't the name of the movie, and the character in the movie's name is spelled V'ger so I don't see it being much of a problem.

Doesn't DIS fit the established pattern better? Series with more than one word titles use the first letter (or use the numeral) of each word in the title: TNG, DS9; and series with one name use the first three letters VOY, ENT. The only exception being TOS and TAS. Well, people will call them what they want.



Get the information out in one general location, one where the studio and fans can say, it's backed up by what was shown on screen and in the online encyclopedia; and like startrek.com be continuously updated by those working with the ones making the shows. The site can even branch between the Prime Universe and the Kelvin Universe. Paid content could include interviews with producers/staff/writers as to where they think the two timelines split since in one tl he was born in Iowa, the other aboard a shuttle fleeing the Kelvin. So the split had to happen before the events of Star Trek 2009. It was in 2009, right?

A lot of TV shows and movie used to do this kind of stuff, but it seems to have gone out of favor recently. It doe seem rather unnecessary when we already have StarTrek.com, the Memories, and a whole bunch of fan sites for the kinds of things you're looking for.