Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Suggest a term to replace "canon"
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by PsyLiam: [QB] Yup. For instance, the Roman Catholic church doesn't believe any more that the sun goes around the Earth, or that the universe was literally created in six days. "And the Encyclopedia contains details never seen onscreen, but which ARE considered canon by Paramount. (e.g., the Constitution-class registries.) Same counts for the TNG and DS9 Technical Manuals. That stuff is canon. It's a part of the official ST continuum that TPTB rely on when creating new stories." No, no, no. We've explained this. The Tech Manuals, Chronology and what not are "special". They are canon by dint of having been writen by people who work on the shows, and because if someone were to ask "so, er, how many transporter rooms has the Enterprise-D got", they'd ask Okuda, who'd look in his tech manual, and tell them. But if a writer wanted a plot point that conflicted with what the technical manual said, he'd ignore it. Episodes have ignored the fact that the ships computer can turn of hand phasers on board ship, and many other things stated in the tech manual. The warp speed chart alone is just there to be pointed and laughed at. And Mim, you're point about TAS doesn't hold. TAS wasn't excersised from canon for being old. It was taken out for being really, really silly. I can live without the Trek universe having contained a planet of giant Spock clones, thank you very much. [/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