Which 23rd Century is canon?

Modern Trek, and it’s insistence on “reimagining” the 23rd century, has kind of thrown that time period into chaos. Discovery gave us a 23rd century that was nothing like TOS. Even Strange New Worlds is basically a visual reboot. However, Lower Decks and Prodigy have shown us that the 23rd century that was canon in legacy Trek, is still in place. It’s kind of confusing.

 

Both. And yes, it *is* confusing.

 

Both, just as Saavik canonically looks like Kirstie Alley and Robin Curtis. Canon is a statement of author-/ownership, not a guarantee of internal consistency.

 

Visual incongruity can only be addressed in your own head. To me, despite them, I just see them all the same in my head. Solved.

Do you really want to spoil your Trek experience by fretting over things you cannot change?

If you keep trying to pound square pegs into round holes, (which is which does NOT matter!) you will not have a pleasant Trek.

 

It's like how TNG movies and Voyager hopped back and forth with Borg Queen actors a few times. Just they've recast the Enterprise, uniforms and look of the era. It's either/or.

Picard season one showed the SNW Enterprise. Short Treks showed the SNW Enterprise as the TOS one. Picard season two showed the TOS Enterprise. Prodigy had the TOS Enterprise next to Discovery on a holo.

 

Again, not every change in art direction (or casting) requires an "in-universe" explanation.

Nor is "canon" a black/white, yes/no situation. There's a fudge factor. Just assume that, giving the practicalities of real-life show business, it's all canon, more or less. Or maybe this or that show or episode is 87.6 percent canon, allowing for artistic license.

Seriously, most of these discrepancies can be explained away simply by acknowledging that these are theatrical productions, made by divers hands over the course of more than half a century. It's just that simple.

 

How it looked in the TOS Movies is what I think of as the 23rd Century. The closer it looks to that, the better. That's my take.

I'm glad DSC is out of there now. Not that show's problem anymore.

I don't care what the animated shows do in this regard and won't pretend. I can go either way with it, and can see why they've made the choices they've made.

And like I've said before, I treat SNW like a reboot. I prefer that SNW be a reboot because I don't want the women to be screwed over by TOS.

 

More confusing than that even, given that Garrovick’s uniform and the nacelle caps of the Enterprizians’ structure were from the JJ-verse. I think it’s best to think of them all as the 23rd Century. Like each version a different color of the light spectrum shown through a prism. Honestly The Cage/Where No Man Has Gone Before/TOS/TAS/TMP/TWoK-TSFS/TVH-TFF/TUC/JJ/DSC/SNW could all be different universes.

 

It's all canon.

How that squares is up to the viewer.

 

Both are Canon.
Neither are Canon.
Kurtzman is a Hedonistic Fool.
Gene's Vision.

I think that about covers all the talking points that will be addressed throughout this thread.

 

There just wasn't a way they could make a whole show look exactly like a series from the 60s and expect it to be taken seriously, much less writing it exactly like that.
And even with that, SNW does sometimes include bits that are *very* close to TOS style, like the hairstyle Una wears in some episodes (the high ponytail bound by a braid of hair) looks very TOS-esque for example, especially the variation where, instead of a ponytail, it's a straight up beehive looking chignon.
The other changes were only sensible.

The reason they include genuine TOS style in the other new shows is because those are cameo appearances meant to tug on the heartstrings of nostalgia. A cameo of an outdated style is much easier to take seriously than a whole show featuring it (unless its a comedy show)

As to canon. Ugh, at this point just pick and choose what's canon for you, it's all good, and there have always been canon inconsistencies in Trek.

 

Vene's Gision!!!!

 

"I created this show so I could retire to some tropical island filled with... naked women. THAT's Gene Roddenberry. THAT's his vision."

 

it’s all canon because it’s on screen. But for me, I consider at least SNW and Disco as existing in a different quantum reality from TOS-ENT. So that helps me.

I know in all this discussion I’m in the minority but speaking strictly about the visuals, I do think they could have done a series in the TOS/60s style and it would have been fine. It’s a broad example but I equate it to when a show or movie is set in the past…WW2 for example. The newer movie about Midway didn’t show Enterprise, Hornet and Yorktown launching sleek retro style fighters and bombers that kinda looked like what they flew in ‘42. They were period accurate or really damned close. TOS is Treks past…warts and all. So in my mind if you are gonna go there be period accurate. And because the series are set pre-TOS you don’t have to worry about making Michael or Tilly wear a micro-mini skirt or any of that kinda stuff. It would have been a very fine needle to thread though. I think you are correct about the writing of the show though, you couldn’t get that exact style but SNW does a pretty good job of matching the tone.

 

I am incorporating 'Fudge Factor' permanently into my book of phrases.

I love that alliteration! Genius!

(This is why you are such a good author.)

 

Modern Trek hasn't thrown anything into chaos. It's a visual reimagining in the same way TMP was, TMP just had the fortune of being to ascribe all of it's visual changes to a 'refit'. In reality The Enterprise was updated in TMP because Roddenberry had the money to do so and because production values had changed in the 10 or so years since TOS first aired.

If you're confused because Modern Trek has decided to make the most of modern tv budgets and visual effects to depict the 23rd century then you should be equally confused by the fact that modern trek has decided to depict the 24th century as 2d animation. But if you can understand that an animated tv show is just an animated tv show and subject to artistic license, why can;t the same be done with live-action modern trek?

 

You've not heard that term before?

I see this a lot and I do have agree. Star Trek is about humanity's future, not an imagined historical period. Updating tech makes sense if you're working with this idea that it is still humanity's future.

 

But that's like comparing apples to oranges. A movie set in WW2 is a historical movie, depicting a real life time period. SNW depicts a fictional future (that even works under the pretence that it's "our" future, to some extend at leas) And idk, I have this idea that the future should look more advanced than the present...by today's standards, not those of the 1960s.
In a way completely fictional universes, such as Star Wars have it easier here because they don't have to exist in relation to the real-life present.