no. As CBS has stated many times, Discovery takes place in the same continuity as TOS.
You may not like it, you may pretend it’s not true, you may say it’s impossible, but if you search your feelings you know that’s the official stance.
Which version of TOS is canon??
- Thread starter Lt. Tyler
- Start date
You may not like it, you may pretend it’s not true, you may say it’s impossible, but if you search your feelings you know that’s the official stance.
The official stance isn’t binding on anyone other than those working on the product or merchandising.
You're misunderstanding what the word "continuity" means. It doesn't mean that every last detail fits perfectly. It means that the stories maintain the pretense of being continuous with each other, even when inconsistencies of detail exist. The current Marvel comics asserting that Tony Stark built his first Iron Man armor in Afghanistan or in some made-up Mideast conflict are in the same continuity as the 1960s Marvel comics asserting that it was in Vietnam, because the overall events are treated as continuous even as the details are adjusted. Similarly, Discovery is in the same continuity as TOS and TNG because it directly references "The Cage" and "Unification" as events that happened in its narrative universe. Changing the visual depiction or the surface details does not make it a separate continuity; it just makes it a different artistic interpretation of the same continuity.
This is fiction, after all. It's just pretending. So you can pretend two things fit together smoothly even when they don't. You can pretend that what happened one way in an old story "really" happened a different way instead. Continuity is as much a part of the illusion as anything else. As with every other aspect of fiction, we know it isn't actually real, but we choose to suspend disbelief about it and accept the pretense.
Same continuity, different styles of representation. In the same way that the Star Trek and Star Wars animated series are in the same continuity as their live-action movies and series. Clone Wars Anakin hardly looks anything like movie Anakin; he has a very different face and voice, even aside from being a cartoon instead of flesh and blood. But we understand and accept that the two very different portrayals represent the same character in the same continuity. They are narratively continuous even though their superficial details are discontinuous. It's the same with different portrayals of the Enterprise or the planet Vulcan or Pike or Saavik. Continuity is about story, not imagery.
Nothing is available to everyone, but that doesn't mean it's been destroyed or replaced. I can't afford to go to the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa, but it's still there to be enjoyed, and if someone paints their own new interpretation of it, it doesn't affect the continued existence of the original.
It is virtually impossible for TOS and Discovery to take place in the same universe.
sure, but presenting your personal interpretation, an interpretation that’s opposite to the official stance, as a fact is misleading.
i’m not too informed on the marvel continuities, but sure the movies and the old comics aren’t meant to be set in the Same universe...?
i can sympathize with your feelings (and share them), but the official word is that they are.
I've not seen anyone present their thoughts as facts.
Of course it isn't impossible, because there is no "universe," there are just stories that we're pretending we believe in. We can pretend that two things go together even when they're different in a lot of ways, because that's how imagination works. If a child can believe their front porch is a starship bridge, if a theatergoer can pretend the bare slab of wood in front of them is Elsinore Castle, then TV viewers can exercise enough basic human imagination to pretend that the Discovery version of Enterprise or Pike or Talos IV is the same as the TOS version.
I never once mentioned the movies. I'm talking about the present-day comics, which purport to be in the same continuous reality that all Marvel Comics have been in since 1939. Marvel Comics follow what's known as a "sliding timescale," in which the broad strokes of the events in the characters' lives are all presumed to be canonical, yet the specfics of a given time period are glossed over and reinterpreted in later retellings. It's still canonical that the events of Amazing Fantasy #15 or Fantastic Four #1 still happened largely as shown, but the modern comics retell the specifics to have those events take place more recently, with more modern technology and geopolitics. For instance, the original idea of the FF trying to beat the Rooskies into space has long since been retconned into testing an experimental hyperdrive, and modern comics retellings of Peter Parker's origin story have it happen in an age when smartphones and texting existed, rather than in 1961.
my mistake, then, I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying.
Yes. It is their interpretation of what is going on. Whether anyone likes it or not, Discovery was made 54 years after the original Star Trek. From my point of view, there is simply no way they can occur concurrently in the same universe. We are simply too different in what we believe, our general experiences too different from the creators of five decades ago.
From CBS point of view, calling it “Prime” is a calculated business decision, designed to pacify fans who can’t or won’t let go of the past
Let me just say how great it is that we've found yet another way to argue about what's canon and what's not.
That's just fantastic.
If we’re in Hell, might as well enjoy it!
That's always been along the lines of my thinking too, which is that Gary got it wrong on purpose to add insult to injury.
Maybe in an alternative timeline??
Last edited:
I'm sure it's been said before, but it bears repeating: different books within both the Torah and The Old Testament are contradictory on various matters and they're the literal source of "canonical", so to say contradiction ≠ canon rather misses the point by a light year. And that's my entire contribution to this entire tired topic.
Exit, stage left, even.
Exit, stage left, even.
The Oz Canon is filled with contradictions. So is the Holmes Canon. So is the Humanx Commonwealth Canon. So is the Biblical Canon.
As I recall, Douglas Adams himself declared something to the general effect that in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy milieu, any new interpretation was required to contradict all other interpretations, in order to be considered canonical.
Why should Star Trek be any different?
As I recall, Douglas Adams himself declared something to the general effect that in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy milieu, any new interpretation was required to contradict all other interpretations, in order to be considered canonical.
Why should Star Trek be any different?
Hell, real life is filled with contradictions. No idea why we expect a 54 year old sci-fi show to hold up any better.
Similar threads
