USS Enterprise (eventually) on Discovery?

[Dukhat]

It _is_ relevant because it makes them appear too thin. That's part of how one appreciates the design.

I’m not quite sure what you mean by these statements. The TOS Enterprise’s pylons don’t appear to be any more ‘thin’ than, say, the Enterprise-D’s pylons. And as for ‘appreciation,’ it sounds like you’re just focusing on the aesthetics. In-universe, the pylons are just as functional as any other ship’s pylons.

 

[Belz...]

I’m not quite sure what you mean by these statements. The TOS Enterprise’s pylons don’t appear to be any more ‘thin’ than, say, the Enterprise-D’s pylons.

Do I really need to explain, again, that it depends on the person?

And as for ‘appreciation,’ it sounds like you’re just focusing on the aesthetics. In-universe, the pylons are just as functional as any other ship’s pylons.

I've already addressed this. It's irrelevant. It's fiction. In the end the only thing that matters is how we see it.

 

[Dukhat]

Do I really need to explain, again, that it depends on the person?

Subjectivity is irrelevant. I’m saying the design didn’t need to be changed, and I stated my reasons why. If you thought it did, that’s your opinion too.

I've already addressed this. It's irrelevant. It's fiction. In the end the only thing that matters is how we see it.

And because it’s fiction, anyone is entitled to their opinion as to why they like or dislike a change in that fiction. I didn’t think changing a fictional ship was necessary, because it didn’t need to be changed precisely because it’s just a fictional ship. YMMV.

 

[BillJ]

I’m not quite sure what you mean by these statements. The TOS Enterprise’s pylons don’t appear to be any more ‘thin’ than, say, the Enterprise-D’s pylons. And as for ‘appreciation,’ it sounds like you’re just focusing on the aesthetics. In-universe, the pylons are just as functional as any other ship’s pylons.

Even the Discovery-version pylons are just wider. They are just as thin when looking at the ship from the front or back, and the base of the support is about the same size as on the original.

They didn't care about functionality, just trying to make it look more like the refit.

 

[Dukhat]

Even the Discovery-version pylons are just wider. They are just as thin when looking at the ship from the front or back, and the base of the support is about the same size as on the original.

They didn't care about functionality, just trying to make it look more like the refit.

Exactly. And in-universe, functionality when referring to a ship’s propulsion doesn’t matter either. The ship is surrounded by a warp field while in flight. The design of the ship doesn’t matter. Now if the ship was at rest and somebody decided to cut through the pylons to remove the nacelles, it might be an issue. But that could happen to any ship that has its warp nacelles on pylons.

 

[Belz...]

Subjectivity is irrelevant.

What a silly thing to say. Subjectivity is the ONLY thing that's relevant here. There are zero objective measures or standards.

And because it’s fiction, anyone is entitled to their opinion as to why they like or dislike a change in that fiction.

And right here, you agree with me!

 

[Dukhat]

What a silly thing to say. Subjectivity is the ONLY thing that's relevant here. There are zero objective measures or standards.

For a “fictional” show, you sure seem to get super-defensive about it.

And right here, you agree with me!

Well, great, glad we agree, since I’m not quite sure what you’re really ranting about anymore. All I recall saying was that the TOS Enterprise design was just fine in response to another poster who said it wasn't because the pylons needed to be changed but never gave a reason why.

 

[Belz...]

For a “fictional” show, you sure seem to get super-defensive about it.

What's defensive about calling your argument silly? How about you address what I said rather than trying to shift the conversation to me?

Well, great, glad we agree, since I’m not quite sure what you’re really ranting about anymore.

Oh, ok. I see your confusion. Your mistake is that I'm not ranting about anything. I'm making an argument that there is no objective measure.

Someone: "Why does this spaceship have large boxing gloves? That looks stupid!"
You: "In this universe, boxing gloves are part of a starship's vital systems. So it's not stupid."
Someone: "No, it still looks stupid, man."

All I recall saying was that the TOS Enterprise design was just fine in response to another poster who said it wasn't because the pylons needed to be changed but never gave a reason why.

He did give a reason: they look too frail to him.

 

[Dukhat]

He did give a reason: they look too frail to him.

And as I said before, that’s a subjective opinion that’s irrelevant to what I’m asking. I’m not interested in his opinion about real-world aesthetics; I’m interested in why the pylons needed to be changed from an in-universe perspective, and I did not get a satisfactory answer to that.

And your ‘boxing glove’ analogy is just a silly attempt by you to be deliberately obtuse, and has no place in this conversation either.

 

[Ronald Held]

I see no problem with the TOS Enterprise. YMMV.

 

[Belz...]

And as I said before, that’s a subjective opinion

The fact that it's a subjective opinion is not in dispute so I don't know why you keep harping on this.

My point is not about whether it's a subjective opinion, but whether in-universe explanations mean anything with regards to those opinions. It's really simple.

 

[Dukhat]

I’m not the one harping on anything. I’ve made my points clear. I’m done discussing it with you.

 

[Belz...]

I’m not the one harping on anything. I’ve made my points clear. I’m done discussing it with you.

I don't get why you're being so aggressive.

The fact of the matter is that you claimed that the in-universe technicalities somehow made something ok even though, to a particular person, it didn't look good. I don't see where the disconnect is.

 

[Tuskin38]

https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Kirk-s-Discoprise-824368507
https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Discoprise-Redux-824368388

 

[BillJ]

https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Kirk-s-Discoprise-824368507
https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Discoprise-Redux-824368388

I'm sorry, it just looks like someone stepped on it. I prefer the tall starship we got from TOS.

 

[Tuskin38]

yes we get it.

 

[fireproof78]

https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Kirk-s-Discoprise-824368507
https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Discoprise-Redux-824368388

Love the texturing.

 

[Dukhat]

I don't get why you're being so aggressive.

You think that's being aggressive? You sure are super-sensitive, it seems. I'll tone it down for you in the future.

https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Kirk-s-Discoprise-824368507
https://www.deviantart.com/metlesitsfleetyards/art/Discoprise-Redux-824368388

I think the design works great as a class of ship immediately preceeding the TOS Constitution class, with its blending of NX and TOS Connie components.

 

[cooleddie74]

I'm sorry, it just looks like someone stepped on it. I prefer the tall starship we got from TOS.

The colors are right. But yeah, I prefer the taller TOS Enterprise.

 

[Belz...]

You think that's being aggressive? You sure are super-sensitive, it seems. I'll tone it down for you in the future.

I think this is aggressive. And being sensitive has nothing to do with that, but you don't seem to be able to converse with people without getting personal, for some reason. Apparently discussing whether someone's subjective response to a piece of art can be swayed by sone in-universe techno-jargon irks you in some way. I guess the conversation just wasn't going your way.