Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
Discovery Starships
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardian 2000: [QB] Let's step back and review for a moment, Mim. Earlier, I said "From FASA to Masao's Starfleet Museum and from the Constellation and Soyuz classes to the Nebula and Intrepid (old or new), there has been a consistent effort to make ship designs fit known designs of an era." You responded that FASA ships are ugly, as if that is relevant. Still trying to treat you fairly, I noted that fixating on FASA ignores the point I was making, and reasonably noted that the possible presence of outliers doesn't change the general rule. That, I would note, is the approach that most reasonable people take, rather than trying to suggest that outliers render the whole enterprise moot. Another alternative is to do what you did and *literally declare the TOS Enterprise moot*. And when the notion of hypothetical outliers was mentioned, you took that as an opportunity to try to excitedly argue that the FJ ship designs seen on-screen should be ejected from consideration, because reasons. This is not rational behavior. Speaking of irrational, your absurd viewpoint even requires you to not only claim TAS is canon when it isn't (because you think Bonaventure vs. NX Class creates enough confusion for you to slip through), but also to make challenge against "The Cage" being canon when it is (because you think having the Enterprise look the same in 2254 and 2266 hurts your case, which is true). "The Cage" is canon. I've already had a debate with an STD sufferer about it, because he wanted to pull the same malarkey. So, as a public service, here is the perennial reminder that "non-canon" is not equal to "things you don't like." [qb] [QUOTE] Now, explain why a configuration from a rejected and unaired pilot, depicted in the series proper only as [i]literally and explicitly[/i], not speculatively, a Talosian illusion—of [i]attested[/i] veracity, and yet with the testimony to this effect coming nested inside [i]another[/i] Talosian illusion that calls the entire proceeding into question—and moreover through footage that was also re-used to represent the [i]current[/i] configuration in episodes both before and after, should "count" any more than...anything else? [/qb] [/QUOTE]1. "The Cage" was broadcast on television via the TNG package in 1988 to help offset the issues related to the writer's strike. Naturally, rather than show a different, two-decade-older program with color and black-&-white bits cold, they had an introduction wrapper which also featured ST5 and TNG2 previews at the end. 1A. The Cage is released with the rest of TOS on home media. 2. Your claim that Kirk would not have known that his ship had been, structurally and aesthetically, totally different around eight years before he took command is absurd. [QUOTE] [qb] they did generally make an effort at being somewhat self-consistent, even if this wasn't always entirely successful. [/QUOTE][/qb] I'd have thought you'd say that is irrelevant. Oh wait, you do. [QUOTE] [qb] Yet the truly persnickety will note even [i]those[/i] didn't always line up with the original document in every detail. "Trials and Tribble-ations" (DS9) follows along with a prior retcon in stating the command uniforms were gold, when they were actually green, and Jein's models weren't 100% accurate re-creations in every detail; "In A Mirror, Darkly" (ENT) imparted a number of slight physical refinements to the [i]Defiant[/i], both inside and out, and her uniforms received a different insignia instead of the delta, despite such practice having been [URL=http://www.startrek.com/article/starfleet-insignia-explained]deprecated[/URL] behind the scenes of TOS as an [i]error[/i] not to be repeated. (Not that I'm implying any of these are worthy of complaint, mind.) [/QUOTE][/qb] 1. Yes, you are making them into a complaint, as you are trying to use them as evidence against the very concept of Trek's fictional reality. 2. Kirk's standard uniform is gold. Federation ships are gray. A whiff of other color that scarcely shows on-screen, or even not at all… be it "avocado" or "duck egg"… doesn't change that. Or do you argue that some of the kitbashes made for UV matte filming had highlighter-color windows and other gaudy-colored features? 3. The minor differences between ships (I am surprised you didn't reference the four-footer Enterprise-D) are split hairs compared to trying to fit the Discovery fleet into the TOS Federation. [QUOTE] [qb] Perhaps not the best comparison for [i]you[/i] to make here, considering registry anomalies have abounded in canon from the beginning as well, [/qb] [/QUOTE]Oh, no, I am happy to make the comparison. Starship registries flow chronologically. So do ship designs. [QUOTE] [qb] I'm not seeing why the DSC ships pose a threat to any of this, honestly. [/QUOTE][/qb] Because you don't want to. You want to pretend the Eaves copy-paste stylings, previously mostly limited to the 2370s, can just flit back and forth with no concept of or thought to the engineering principles that might be involved. You reference the Sarajevo, for instance, not recognizing that the very reason it is so memorable is because it was contentious as a design. Disco ships are akin to having modern plastic bumper covers and headlight assemblies atop a unibody frame show up on the 1957 Thunderbird. Not only would they not have built it that way, but they couldn't have. Having a chronological design ethos helps imbue a sense of reality to the fiction because the audience sees it in cars, as just one example. Sure, we may not be privy to every background detail of engineering and Subspace physics that goes into Starship design, but the design ethos changing over time helps give us the idea that such things exist. On the other hand, just slapping different era details on willy-nilly breaks that realism. [QUOTE] [qb] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardian 2000: I'm not suggesting they need to conform to our *speculations*. I am suggesting they should've conformed to existing *canon*.[/QUOTE]Practically every second word out of the mouth of the makers of this show has been about their devotion to canon; it's among their prime concerns (no pun intended), to an even greater extent than any production team before them! [/qb] [/QUOTE]I certainly agree that they have paid more lip service to the term "canon" then other production teams. However, they have also contradicted more of it, complained more about it (e.g. Enterprise), and also used the term "reboot" more. Certainly in an age of weaponized canon policies . . . that is to say, a time when transmedia entertainment company marketing folks realize that "canon" is a concept that sells, rather than just being some esoteric nerd thing . . . it behooves us to pay a bit more attention to the *results* than to just rest upon the *claim* like we could in the old days. [QUOTE] [qb] It's simply that their interpretations of existing canon, and what conforming to it looks like, are not the same as yours. [/qb] [/QUOTE]Nope. They totally conform to it, for certain tiny values of the word "conform". You cannot "interpret" 1+1 to be 3. [QUOTE] [qb] And the thwarting of expectations is undoubtedly quite deliberate on their part. [/QUOTE][/qb] Bob Iger called. He said to cut that shit out, Kathleen. [QUOTE] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardian 2000: There is no logic, however, to the Disco fleet, or the Discoprise.[/QUOTE][qb] There is a logic, just not the logic you or I would have elected to follow, had it been up to us. [/qb] [/QUOTE]No, there is no logic. There *was*, briefly, a potential for some. Remember the first trailer Discovery? Ever see the early Shenzhou? They both had mostly-smooth, mostly-rounded hulls and three Bussards on rectangular nacelles. That could've totally served as a gateway between the Constitutions as seen in TOS and the TMP ships, even if the Disco fleet at large had a lot of crappy designs. Instead, they chose to go with Eavesian-sharp designs with widely varying nacelles and whatever ugliness they could muster, except for the smooth-but-ridiculous-looking main ship. [QUOTE] [qb] Firstly, nobody (except perhaps a mere handful of us) would take a show that looks like TOS seriously today, either... [/QUOTE][/qb] Wrong. [QUOTE] [qb] {"The Cage" Enterprise has} what might be retroactively interpreted as a bridge viewscreen window! [/qb] [/QUOTE]No it doesn't. Don't start that crap. I've already had that debate and the other guy lost. More later. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3