I know that I am going to get a lecture from TSN for this, something to the line that I should be curing cancer with the energy I spend here. Considering the number of threads he has here to my number of threads, I think maybe he should cure cancer. Oh, well.
Here is the proof. For this exercise in pointlessness, I will look at the original, which I will call 'Ancient' Trek, and the four series, which I will call 'Modern' Trek, as two separate entities.
'Ancient' Trek Set in the near future Key: 0="Where No Man Has Gone Before". -=number of years approximately before 0.
-235 Zephram Cochrane is born on Earth. He will invent warp drive. ("Metamorphosis") -203 to 199 Eugenics War. Last global war on Earth. Period of the DY-100 Class interplanetary transport/scout. ("Space Seed") -200 SS Valiant, a warp ship, leaves Earth for deep space exploration. ("Where No Man Has Gone Before") -177 Sleeper ships, which included the DY-100, are retired by advances in impulse drive. ("Space Seed") -148 Zephram Cochrane, a resident of Alpha Centauri, vanishes. In his life time, he knew Vulcans and, possibly, created new battle techniques utilizing warp drive. ("Metamorphoses", "Wink of an Eye") -98 USS Archon, which was destroyed by the mega-computer Landru in the C-111 Star System, is the oldest known starship. ("Return of the Archons") -11 "The Cage 0 "Where No Man Has Gone Before"
'Modern' Trek Set between 2363 to 2378 and, now, 2151 to 2158 Key: 0="Encounter at Farpoint"
2053 World War III concludes. 2063 Zephram Cochrane flys the Phoenix, the first warp powered ship. He greets Vulcans as an Earth representative. ("First Contact") 2067 Friendship One. ("Friendship One") 2105 First colony on Mars. ("The 37's") 2123 Flight of the SS Mariposa, DY-500 Class, NAR-7678. ("Up the Long Ladder") 2151 'Enterprise'. Enterprise NX-01 is first starship and is property of Starfleet. (Series-Enterprise) 2161 Charter of the United Federation of Planets. Starfleet Academy is founded. ("Friendship One", "The First Duty") 2173 Eugenics War. ("Dr. Bashir, I Presume?") 2200 to 2233 Sleeper ships in operation. ("11:59") 2265 to 2270 'Ancient' Trek's placement in this timeline. ("Q2") 0 "Encounter at Farpoint". This is the start post for 'Modern' Trek.
Since the second series, the timeline for 'Ancient' Trek has been revised and redacted by the scribes of 'Modern' Trek. 'Enterprise' will, for better or worse, continue this process of change.
I feel the legitimate issues with the new series will be the writing, acting, and directing.
posted
I am implying the principle that what comes next is the more authoritative opinion. The 'what comes next' opinion is that the wars started in the 22nd century. 'Enterprise' may put these wars into a different century. In that case, that is the more definitive opinion.
My point is to show how the history changed from one set of historical facts to the next set.
posted
Has it ever occured to anyone that these might BE the Eugenics Wars? We're fighting a geneticly-engineered species as our main adversary in the timeframe. What if genetic engineering also gets back to Earth somehow? Of course, they'll have to mention the wars, either way, once genetic engineering comes up...
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The Eugenics wars occurring in the 22nd century seems far more comfortable and agreeable. But I personally cannot ignore on-screen dialogue, ie when Khan says they were from 'the year 1996'.
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
Well, the Eugenics Wars were supposedly on Earth when humans started dabbling in genetic engineering. They created a generation of "superhumans". These superhumans believed they were superior than everyone else and tried to take over the world. It is speculated that Khan himself ruled most of the eastern world. If one follows the Eugenics Wars book by Greg Cox, Khan was ruling half the globe before he was 30 (According to the book, he was born in 1970).
-------------------- I haul cardboard and cardboard accessories
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
targetemployee: Go easy on TSN, I was the one who made the point about the cancer. It wasn't so much a statement about the amount of labour you put into this stuff as the amount of response your theories are likely to get around here, which sadly enough is probably not really grounds to kill yourself over recreating what Trek chronology would look like if it were put together in 1972 and not 1992.
Anyway, while the 1996 date is certainly the most blatant timestamp for the Eugenics Wars, the "two hundred years ago" line, as I'm assuming you're working with, certainly contradicts this when one considers the mid-23rd century placement of TOS that has been locked in since the show went off the air. Doesn't "Dr. Bashir I Presume" also cast something of a shadow over the 1996 timeframe, too?
I like to think of the show being forced to balance authenticity and continuity. And while 10% of the audience might be quite willing to ignore authenticity ("well, Trek's in a parallel universe...") in favour of a rigid continuity-fundamentalism ("The bastards didn't show the Eugenics Wars in 1996!") the vast majority of people are more likely to pick out authenticity errors than continuity ones. Even Sternbach and Okuda, I'd venture, fall into the latter camp -- for example, Ares 4 reflects how we see technology behaving 30 years from today, not 30 years from the DY-100.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
The_Tom, don't you think, though, that it would be better not only for continuity but also for dramatic effect to have had the Ares IV episode take place in 2001 or 2005? The entire episode was about mankind exploring despite the obvious dangers and risks and the instrinsic value of space exploration. IMO, the episode would have brought home the point so much better if the timeframe was from a 1960's viewpoint. As it was, anybody that might've been affected by the episode could still say to themselves, 'gee, well we got another 30 years. we can afford to slack off for a little bit longer.'
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by The_Tom: Anyway, while the 1996 date is certainly the most blatant timestamp for the Eugenics Wars, the "two hundred years ago" line, as I'm assuming you're working with, certainly contradicts this when one considers the mid-23rd century placement of TOS that has been locked in since the show went off the air. Doesn't "Dr. Bashir I Presume" also cast something of a shadow over the 1996 timeframe, too?
Yes and no.
quote:Originally posted to the AOL Message Board by Ronald D. Moore: This is my personal screw-up. When I was writing that speech, I was thinking about Khan and somehow his dialog from "Wrath" starting floating through my brain: "On Earth... 200 years ago... I was a Prince..." The number 200 just stuck in my head and I put it in the script without making the necessary adjustment for the fact that "Wrath" took place almost a hundred years prior to "Dr. Bashir." I wrote it, I get the blame.
So, on the one hand, Moore does say that he screwed up and the Eugenics Wars were not two hundred years before "Dr. Bashir, I Presume?" On the other hand, he doesn't dispute the idea that it is only two hundred years before The Wrath of Khan.
Incidentally, in my own research, I divide dates into three categories, generally prioritized in the following order:
(1) Gregorian date directly given ("1996"). (2) Relative date directly given ("two hundred years ago"). (3) Relative date approximately given ("about two hundred years ago").
I also consider who says what. In this case, given that Khan is from the era of the Eugenics Wars, it seems likely that he would know better than anyone else what the date was when he left.
quote: I like to think of the show being forced to balance authenticity and continuity. And while 10% of the audience might be quite willing to ignore authenticity ("well, Trek's in a parallel universe...") in favour of a rigid continuity-fundamentalism ("The bastards didn't show the Eugenics Wars in 1996!") the vast majority of people are more likely to pick out authenticity errors than continuity ones. Even Sternbach and Okuda, I'd venture, fall into the latter camp -- for example, Ares 4 reflects how we see technology behaving 30 years from today, not 30 years from the DY-100.
I agree. Personally, I'd prefer if they just avoided mentioning any events prior to 2050 or so, just so that anyone watching the show will be old enough to not care anymore when things don't come to pass.
posted
Normal people watching Voyager, that is, the 99% of the audience who have better things to do with their time, would watch an episode based around a manned Mars mission in 2001 and laugh. And laugh. And laugh.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
quote: Normal people watching Voyager, that is, the 99% of the audience who have better things to do with their time, would watch an episode based around a manned Mars mission in 2001 and laugh. And laugh. And laugh.
Not if it were written well.
Oh.
Shit.
Seriously though, there would obviously have to be some sort of exposition explaining why it was such. But that's a given.
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
posted
The Eugenics definitely were going on in 1996. This is said explicitly in both "Space Seed" (TOS) and TWOK. The other dates are incorrect. You cannot accept that the history was changed, unless you can think of a decent explanation such as an alternate timeline, etc.
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
I think anyone who thinks that Voyager showing Los Angeles to be a perfectly normal place in 1996, and having that totally be a screw up, really isn't thinking straight.
First, lets think here. Khan is of Indian (India the country) descent, correct? Now, from what I remember, Khan was to have taken over about 1/3rd of the world during the war. Now, seeing as how Khan was from India, what area of the world do you think he MIGHT just be taking over? Asia and Africa seem like the logical places to me. Heck, he could have been starting after Europe, and that's what got the rest of the world ticked off. Now, seeing as how the war WASN'T taking place in America, Los Angeles wouldn't be ravaged.
And if you think that America might still look like crap because of being involved in the war, maybe they aren't in the war, and even if they are, it still wouldn't affect America. Not only that, but we knew that "Future's End" took place AFTER Khan left, since Rain Robinson had a picture of the Botany Bay's launch in her office. Therefore, America would be getting "back to normal".
-------------------- "Lotta people go through life doing things badly. Racing's important to men who do it well. When you're racing, it's life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting."
Oh, well.
It wasn't so much a statement about the amount of labour you put into this stuff as the amount of response your theories are likely to get around here, which sadly enough is probably not really grounds to kill yourself over recreating what Trek chronology would look like if it were put together in 1972 and not 1992.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
