Yep, and have Nero and Spock vanish into a black hole. But that's in 2387, and the books are only up to 2383 so far.
Warp drive obsolete?
- Thread starter cwl
- Start date
Fan fiction, published books, home videos, Trekkies play acting in the park ... Sojourner, all are lumped together as "non-canon." None of them count.
And yet, that does not change what I said.
Not really your call to make. Sorry.
Fan fiction, published books, home videos, Trekkies play acting in the park ... Sojourner, all are lumped together as "non-canon." None of them count.
Says who?
"Mega lame"? I see an amazing oppertunity for the books to explore the fallout from an event of extreme, galaxy-reshaping magnitude.
Fan fiction, published books, home videos, Trekkies play acting in the park ... Sojourner, all are lumped together as "non-canon." None of them count.
Says who?
Paramount, I'm guessing.
Fan fiction, published books, home videos, Trekkies play acting in the park ... Sojourner, all are lumped together as "non-canon." None of them count.
Says who?
Paramount, I'm guessing.
^ CBS, actually, which now owns all of the Trek franchise except for the right to make Trek feature films, which are still held by Paramount.
More specifically, CBS owns STAR TREK and Paramount has a license from CBS to make films based on STAR TREK (in the same way that 20th Century Fox owns Firefly but Universal Pictures got a license from them to make the film Serenity based on Firefly.)
But neither CBS nor Paramount ever said that the novels "don't count." Sure, they're non-canonical, but so what? That hasn't stopped makers of the canon from incorporating elements from the novels into the canon. And the novels have still been vetted and approved by CBS (and Paramount before them), which is more than fan fic can say.
Saying they're "non-canonical" just means that they have to remain consistent with the canon, that's all. (No, it does not mean that new canonical productions have the option of contradicting them. New canonical productions DO have the option of contradicting them, but new canonical productions have the option of contradicting old canonical productions, too, so that's not what distinguishes non-canonical from canonical.)
Either way, no one ever said they "don't count" other than fans trying to restrict what other fans can bring into consideration on the Internet.
Fan fiction, published books, home videos, Trekkies play acting in the park ... Sojourner, all are lumped together as "non-canon." None of them count.
Says who?
Paramount, I'm guessing.
Everyone, I'm guessing.
Except for a fringe of people who just can't let go.
In fairness, the novels gave us George and Winona Kirk, Uhura and Sulu's first names, the space station from TOS-R "The Ultimate Computer", Janeway's backstory and a few other tidbits. Fanfic and "Trekkies play acting in the park" have had exactly zero influence on the canon of Trek.
I'd be more inclined to say that the people who have a weird desire to decide for other fans what is "real" or "not real" in STAR TREK are more of a fringe than the people who like the books and don't automatically disregard them.
What truth? All you've pointed out is that the books are non-canonical. It doesn't follow that that means they necessarily "don't count."
I never use the word 'canon' because I think it's ludicrous to liken a sci fi series to religion. Anything that isn't officially produced filmed medium doesn't count because that's just the way it is. You can deny this for ever if you like but it won't change anything.
Why not? Says who?
Which books (or fanfic) is this in? I would like to read it!
The Star Trek: Voyager novels Full Circle, Unworthy, and Children of the Storm by Kirsten Beyer, so far. Published by Pocket Books under official license and authorization from CBS, I might add.
Your first sentence followed by these 2 sound pretty hypocritical.
