posted
So far, nothing revealed about the premise of Enterprise directly violates canon, though some of it thrashes many fundamental assumptions that have arisen through the years, as well as many generally accepted facts. What I'm going to consider in this thread is ways in which Enterprise might violate canon in the future.
The Founding of the Federation: I can see a temptation to, after seven seasons, have the finale portraying the founding of the Federation... in 2158, three years early. Of course, it may well turn out that Enterprise seasons need not exactly equal years, and we can stretch the series a bit, but I wouldn't count on it.
Subspace Radio: This one is questionable. I'm willing to bet that the Enterprise is equipped with subspace radio, or will be soon. As we saw in the original series, the concept of having the ship completely independent and not in contact with command doesn't last long. On the one hand, this seems to contradict "A Piece of the Action," which suggests that the radio was invented after 2168. On the other hand, "Balance of Terror" had subspace radio in use before 2167, at the end of the Romulan Wars.
Phasers: "The Cage" and "A Matter of Time" suggest these were invented in the twenty-third century. Early script reviews of "Broken Bow" have indicated that the crew uses "phase pistols," which are clearly a predecessor to the phaser, but not actual phasers. However, those were early reviews, and true phasers might be invented during the series if they aren't already called such in the final script.
Nuclear weaponry: "Balance of Terror" has ships of the era using nuclear missiles. We don't know yet what the Enterprise packs, so it could be a contradiction. The again, having the Enterprise not armed with nuclear weapons doesn't mean they aren't in use by the Earth Starfleet at large. Again, we just have to see what happens.
Finally, I'd like to touch on one point that Enterprise can't contradict, even though many people might believe otherwise.
The Romulan Wars: According to "Balance of Terror," the Wars were one hundred eyars before that episode, which would put them circa 2166. Mike Okuda violated his own rules to put the wars a full decade earlier, based on a facet of dialog that was ignored in all other cases. Many post-Federation ships (including the Enterprise NCC-1701 herself) were called "Earth ships," Federation representatives called "Earth ambassadors," and so on... but nobody questions that they are affiliated with the Federation. In other words, not showing the Romulan Wars during the run of Enterprise fits in better with canon! I wouldn't rule it out yet, though. So far, the producers seem to be big on the idea of putting in as many references to future continuity as possible... we have yet to see if they're big on executing that idea.
[ July 15, 2001: Message edited by: Ryan McReynolds ]
posted
Just because they said 100 years in the episode doesn't mean it was EXACTLY 100 years ago. I mean, they were probably just approximating. The difference between 2157 and 2166 isn't exactly much. In fact, he may have been talking about the end of the war, so it's even closer. 2161 vs. 2166.
-------------------- "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."
-Steve McQueen as Michael Delaney, LeMans
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You know, it occurs to me that since dialogue doesn't strictly state that the wars happened before the founding of the Federation, might it not make more sense to assume that they didn't? "Earth" may have just been a generic term for anything Federation, since we're the founding and leading member. Maybe the Vulcans complained later on. This might lend credence to the theory that the villan from the future is a Romulan. If they can use the Suliban to destroy the Federation before the Federation encounters the Romulans, then the Earth-Romulan war will never occur, and they will never be hampered by the existence of the Neutral Zone. They also run a lower risk of creating a causality loop by simply giving theirselves tech from the future.
Perhaps that's the reason for their chronic isolationism: they've been planning something like this for centuries, and they knew that any interaction with outsiders would cause the changes to the past to affect them, as well. A bit of a stretch, I know...
I wonder: if the writers are intending the identity of Future Guy to be some major secret in the series, how are they gonna feel if we've figured it out three months before the show even airs?
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
posted
Excellent post, Ryan. I was wondering how long these debates were going to continue until someone mentioned that if the Federation is founded at the end of the series, then it will be founded too early. Everything else you mentioned is along the same thoughts I mentioned in another thread. Subspace radio should be in use or in the experimental stage because it is what is used to negotiate the end of the Earth-Romulan War. Phasers are a no-no, etc.
Another thing that really shouldn't exist is the replicator. However, what would be in place of the replicator? Are we going to see food synthesizers or a galley setup? One also has to wonder about the computer technology. Isolinear optical chips are a big no-no and duotronic technology from The Original Series aren't going to be in existence yet, either. That was created by Richard Daystrom and he hasn't been born yet. But would transtator technology be available yet?
That's an interesting theory on the Roluman War, Ryan and Omega. There'll probably be howls of outrage from a certain segment of the Trek fan population, but there hasn't been mention of the Romulan War leading directly to the founding of the Federation on-screen. In my mind, it would make more sense for the Federation to be formed prior to the outbreak of hostilies. It would be a prudent move for Earth and her allies to combine their efforts in the face of a growing threat. Real world example? The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed with the purpose of defending Europe against invasion by the Soviet Union. NATO was formed in the face of a growing threat and not at the conclusion of armed conflict between the two parties.
posted
I still say that "A Piece of the Action" and "Balance of Terror" are both right when concerned with the subspace radio. One was refering to the use of subspace radio [not mentioning where it was based], while the other episode only indicates that subspace radio was not on ships until after both.
-------------------- Later, J _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ The Last Person to post in the late Voyager Forum. Bashing both Voyager, Enterprise, and "The Bun" in one glorious post.
quote:Originally posted by The359: Just because they said 100 years in the episode doesn't mean it was EXACTLY 100 years ago. I mean, they were probably just approximating. The difference between 2157 and 2166 isn't exactly much. In fact, he may have been talking about the end of the war, so it's even closer. 2161 vs. 2166.
Of course, and that's exactly my point. We don't know when the war is, so it's not a contradiction even if Enterprise makes no mention of Romulans.
And I only mention the idea of the war being exactly one hundred years before the episode because that is the basis of Okuda's dating scheme. The Horizon was at Sigma Iotia II in 2168 because that's exactly one hundred years before the episode, even though they were probably rounding. The same goes for almost every reference... except for the Romulan War. There's no logical reason for an exception.
posted
Or, possibly, Earth and her allies got together to fight the Romulans, realised the advantages of being, er, allies, and formed the Federation. Like the League Of Nations, the UN, or (for a fictional option), the Interstellar Alliance from B5. Formed in the aftermath of a war.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
wolf530
Ex-Member
posted
Okay... this was supposed to go in another forum, and was a direct reply to someone stating that basically the fans will never be happy with what they (the producers) create, so they may as well go and do their own thing. ---------------------------- Regarding continuity:
I'm sorry, but keeping with continuity really isn't that hard. I mean, what the hell do the people at Paramount DO that takes up so much time? Seriously, would it be so impossible to have like two or three people on staff in the Star Trek division, who were required to check over the scripts being created, to ensure that they followed some well written rules?
For example, why has the registration number fiasco never been formalized? Anyone who worked with Trek could have said (and can still say) "Okay, all ships from here-on-out will be numbered like this: Galaxy classes have registration numbers 'x' numbers long and begin and end in this range. Nebula classes have registration numbers 'x' long and...", right? So then we say: "Writers of scripts should always leave the registration numbers blank. The appropriate number will be filled in during script editing." So these two or three continuity people look in their little "Continuity Book" and find the page for registration numbers. They see that the writer has decided to put in a Nebula class ship that has never been seen in an episode before. So they give it a high number, in the number scheme set out.
That's not exactly rocket science. We don't even need to say that those "continuity checkers" were exclusively hired for that! Any script editor could go through and check specific variables like registration numbers, or stardates, to ensure they fall in the correct ranges.
My entire point is: Paramount CAN make us (hard core trekkies) happy. It's not a matter of "We'll never make them happy so let's not try." That's not true. It's simply that they barely put any effort into it, and then they compound the problem by making stupid decisions. Case in point: 'Enterprise'. As we all know SPOCK was the first Vulcan in the Federation. Why does 'Enterprise' have a Vulcan on the bridge? Don't give me any BS about it not being the Federation yet.
It all comes down to Berman and all his cronies deciding that a pre-Federation show was the best choice. Where did he get this idea? It was obvious that the Excelsior campaign had a lot of steam, and beyond that, the fodder for stories would have been a lot better. But instead of going for what the fans wanted, they decided to NOT do what they wanted, and take a middle-of-the-road approach by DISTANCING themselves from the Trek genre (ie- dropping "Star Trek" from the title to make it look less like Trek).
posted
I'm all with you on this one, Wolfie. But, BTW, Spock was the first vulcan to join Starfleet, not just be in the Federation. (The Vulcans were one of the founding members of the Federation, along with Earth and others.) They've gotten around having a Vulcan on the Bridge in Ent, by saying she's not actually a Starfleet officer, but rather that she's "on loan" from the Vulcan Navy. Funny how thay always seem to find a clever way to violate the audience's perception of how things are, huh?
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
"Funny how thay always seem to find a clever way to violate the audience's perception of how things are, huh?" -------------------- Sorry. Maybe I misunderstood. I thought that you were criticizing how they were doing it (violate). I was stating that it was a perfectly acceptable way of doing it.
-------------------- 'One man's theology is another man's belly laugh.' - Lazarus Long
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
"As we all know SPOCK was the first Vulcan in *Starfleet*"
You know, I'm still waiting for someone to find me the exact quote that states this. What episode or film was it said in? Huh?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
