However, given the information that has been realized thus far, I am not optimistic. I was disappointed when I heard the Klingons would have “ridged” foreheads, and I became totally disheartened when I saw the new “Akiraprise.”

What is wrong with the NX-01 Enterprise, one may ask? Some people claim to have no problem with it whatsoever. Everyone is, of course, entitled to his or her opinion, but I think that anyone who has any deep knowledge and understanding of Star Trek ship linage and history knows that the new ship just doesn’t work.

While it is true that we have actually seen few Federation starships of the TOS era on screen, I for one cannot just ignore the hundreds of pages of documentation that has been published on TOS era ships. I grew up studying and scrutinizing pages and pages of designs by Franz Joseph, Michael McMaster, Todd Guenther, and others. If you haven’t heard of these guys, or flipped through a copy of Ships of the Star Fleet, then you have missed a significant part of Star Trek history and lore.

Are such publications “canon”? Not officially, but to ignore them entirely is ignoring an important part of the Star Trek mythos and fandom.

The point is that there is a precedent of TOS ship linage, whether it be “cannon” or not. Many “die-hard” long-time fans, such as myself, are well versed in this linage and cannot just dismiss it so easily. Likewise, I become agitated when the folks who produce Trek ignore it altogether. (I have always been particularly aggravated that the Enterprise-A is referred to as Constitution class ship, despite the fact that Andrew Probert, the designer of the E-A, referred to the ship as an Enterprise class vessel.)

Can one “rationalize” the new ship design? Sure, one can rationalize just about anything, and frequently one has to in Star Trek. But in my opinion, fans shouldn’t have to go through this as often as they do. I really despise having to rationalize out continuity flaws that could have (and I believe should have) been avoided. I really fail to understand why Berman did not allow Eaves to develop a true pre-TOS Enterprise, or perhaps, why they just didn’t avoid calling the ship Enterprise altogether so we don’t have deal with this “first starship called Enterprise” issue.

Now granted, you can’t please all of the people all of the time, but there really seems to be a great deal of dissention amongst the fans regarding the new ship. Everyone has there own list of problems with it, but a few of mine are as follows:
“Excelsior-like” edge of saucer (no precedent for this prior to Star Trek III)
“TNG-like” deflector (no precedent for this prior to Star Trek TNG)
Reaction Control Thrusters (no precedent for this prior to Star Trek TMP)
Angled Warp engine pylons (no precedent for this prior to Star Trek TMP)
Impulse Amplification Crystal (no precedent for this prior to Star Trek TMP)
“Plated” Aztec pattern (I would not have had as much of a problem with a “smooth” Aztec hull, like the Enterprise-A)
Too “streamlined” for pre-TOS (again, no precedent)
Too much like the Akira-class (duh… )

Some may find it strange that I really don’t have a big problem with the warp engines themselves, including the illuminated “warp grill.” I am sure all fans have a few minor disagreements as to what is acceptable and what is not, but despite this, there is still a large number of fans that are in agreement that the “Akiraprise” is a major let-down.

What would I have expected? Well, I was hoping for a totally original design. You would certainly think that Paramount is paying Berman and his cohorts enough that they could have come up with such. At the very least, I would preferred a detailed version of a pre-Daedalus class or even the “Hoop-ship”

It certainly would have behooved Berman, Eaves, and the rest of their cronies to go “retro” on the Enterprise design. This does NOT mean a 1960s ship with smooth detailing and few features. On the contrary, one might have expected a pre-NCC-1701 vessel to have pipes, cabling, and all sorts of primitive gizmos on the exterior.

What I would have liked to have seen is a design team start with the Phoenix (from First Contact) and work forward from there, while constantly keeping the TOS Enterprise in mind. Obviously, the ship’s detailing should be adequate for 21st century television viewing, but the designers should have always kept TOS ship linage “in-check” as they proceeded with their designs so that the final product would look “futuristic” by today’s standards while AT THE SAME TIME appearing to have existed before the TOS Enterprise. A difficult task? Yes. Impossible? I say No.

The question that keeps nagging me in my mind is, “Why didn’t they do this?” Presumably, Berman has no love for The Original Series, and this may be the answer. I am frightened that he may take on a “to hell with any continuity” approach and forget The Original Series entirely.

There has been some talk about the use of a “time travel” crutch in order to explain why the NX-01 is so largely based on the Akira class. This same plot design could also be used to create an “alternate” time-line in which Berman would have an “excuse” to circumvent events in TOS entirely. Granted, that is some pretty “far-out there” speculation, but if it were to come to pass, I suspect I will be gone from any future Star Trek fandom.

This brings us to the question, “What obligations does Berman and company have to past Star Trek?” This largely depends on one’s point of view.

Financially speaking, their only obligation is to Paramount’s accounting department. Despite the fact that Star Trek has a religious following of sorts, it is merely entertainment. “It’s just a TV show,” as the saying goes, and I certainly always try to bare this in mind.

As far as Paramount is concerned, Star Trek is about making money. Therefore, Berman certainly has the authority to do whatever he deems necessary to make a buck for his employers. Presumably, no life-threatening decisions are being made at Paramount Studios, and the Star Trek franchise will ultimately have little or no impact in the overall grand scheme of the universe.

I am, admittedly, one of these Star Trek traditionalists that cringes at the thought of stomping on TOS, and I feel that if Berman is going create a show and call it “Star Trek” (albeit, he is dropping that from the title, but you guys get the point), he DOES have an obligation to adhere to a great deal of previous history, linage, and development in the Star Trek universe. Otherwise, it is not Star Trek at all.

Berman seems to have truly taken on the role of Gene Roddenberry in that he thinks that Star Trek now belongs to him and can do whatever he wants with it. Does Berman have the right? I do not know if this is what Gene intended, but certainly fans like myself are becoming aggravated at Berman’s lack of acknowledgment of Gene’s previous vision that we grew up with.

I was very hopeful that we would have some explanations for the Klingon’s altered appearance that is seen by the time of TOS, or the development and use of the term “UESPA.” We still may, and that will be great, but I am certainly pessimistic at this point in time. I would certainly like to see a great deal more homage to TOS than has currently been observed.

I rather like the idea of NASA-like jumpsuits for uniforms, but what about adding rank stripes like those on TOS on the sleeves? How about no transporters? Or, no easily recognizable matter/antimatter intermix chamber (there was none on TOS) to really change things up and get things more primitive looking? How about consoles with flip and toggle switches and TV monitors that more closely resemble what one would see on the space shuttle?

And what about the Romulan wars? Lithium versus dilithium? Earth Starfleet versus Federation Starfleet? The 2161 Federation date? Will they maintain a SMOOTH (“smooth” being the keyword) continuity with established Trek history? (I doubt it.) Or, will it all become a “rationalization nightmare”? (More likely.)

Anyone can take on a “screw continuity” approach to make a buck in television (which Berman and company certainly have the right to do). However, it takes a little more thought, work, creativity, respect, and pride to create a show that entertains while paying tribute and remaining true to its roots. Personally, I think the later is the way to go if you want to produce quality TV.

Berman and company really have a chance to do something cool here. Yet, I fear that we will get stuck with the same ol’ same ol’. They have, in my opinion, already dropped the ball in regards to the ship.

Have I already pre-judged the show before it airs? Possibly. I am certainly biased towards Trek of yesteryear, and as previously stated, I was looking forward to a great deal of homage and tie-ins to TOS in this new show. It would seem at this point, however, that will not be the case.

I will try to remain open-minded, and I will give the show a look. I will watch, and if the stories are good, I will enjoy, and that will make it easier to overlook such shortcomings as the ship design. It is, after all, only a TV show, and its goal is to entertain. Make no mistake, however. I do have my own convictions and opinions as to how this show should be presented. The Original Star Trek played to an “intelligent” audience. Is Berman doing that with Trek today?

If I am not entertained, or become outright disgusted, I suspect that my long love affair with Star Trek (which has spanned many years now) will come to an end. Even recent series’ such a Voyager and Deep Space Nine have never held the “magic” for me that TOS, TNG, or the early movies did. I suppose I would simply be forced to “remember” what I consider to be “real” Star Trek through my video and DVD collection.

If that turns out to be the case, I am sure there will be some out there that will still enjoy Enterprise, even if I do not. I may not agree with them, but I will wish them well nonetheless…

Whew... Boy, am I glad to get that off my chest!

[ August 14, 2001: Message edited by: Commander Dan ]

quote:

---

I really fail to understand why Berman did not allow Eaves to develop a true pre-TOS Enterprise, or perhaps, why they just didn’t avoid calling the ship Enterprise altogether so we don’t have deal with this “first starship called Enterprise” issue.

---

1. According to rumor, Eaves did sketch pre-TOS designs, but no, Berman wanted things his way and ordered Eaves to modify the Akira. Apparently Berman has some sort of masturbatory fantasy about that design...

quote:

---

Apparently Berman has some sort of masturbatory fantasy about that design...

---

On the subject of Klingon foreheads…
This isn’t an issue. If you’re disappointed about Klingons having ridged foreheads, then you should have been disappointed a long time ago. In a TNG episode, we saw the genetic duplicate of Kahless. He had a ridged forehead. We have also seen the original TOS Klingons (Kor, Koloth, and Kang) on DS9, and they had sprouted ridged foreheads in between series. Add to that, there was no fanfare about seeing the ridged foreheads in The Motion Picture. Thus, we must assume that Klingons have always had ridged foreheads. But how do we explain the smooth foreheads? Easy, one of these: A) genetic engineering, B) more than one race making up the Klingon Empire, or C) mutations by natural or artificial means.

On the subject of Ship Design
It’s obvious that you are basing your opinions of what the ship should look like on the hundreds of designs that fandom has come up with over the years. It’s also obvious that you feel all of the fandom publications should be taking into serious consideration by the people in charge. This isn’t a bad thing because fandom has done a fair bit to influence Star Trek in some ways. However, I think that it’s not fair to hold Enterprise accountable to fandom and non-canon publications.

On the first issue, we really have no idea what was standard appearance for starships in 2151. We only know of one official design from that era, the Daedalus class. Everything else was from the imagination of people that didn’t really do any work for the series. A lot of the works by the people you mentioned (and a lot of the works by people you didn’t mention) tend to contradict each other in terms of dates of events and registries and ships. With this contradiction, the best thing to due is to find one guide to adhere to. In this case, it’s the recent Okudian works and his interpretation of the events and nature of the Trek universe. Thus, unfortunately, a lot of the work by the people you admire has already been invalidated because of this. This isn’t to say that there work is meaningless, but you have to come to terms on your own if you want fandom and official to coexist and how to go about that. As a person who was raised on TOS and the “Trek of yesteryear,” I have no problems at all in having the two coexist. I give more credence to the material that comes from on-screen, but I find that I can still believe in the Cygnus-class being used in the TOS time. Because we do not see it does not mean that it doesn’t exist. However, we cannot expect the creative staff to forced by the unrealistic expectation that they be up to date with 35 years worth of all fandom publications.

On the second issue, as I said earlier, it is unrealistic to adhere to all fandom publications when it comes to starship design. Some of the designs are wonderful; some of the designs are hideous monstrosities. In the end, though, human limitations simply do not allow the people on the creative staff to sift through all of the available material in a time conducive to television scheduling. Unless these people have been doing this all of their lives, they really could not hope to ever read everything and come to a consensus on what to accept over something else and what should carry more weight than something else. That’s why canonicity has become such a big deal recently. The creative staff is able to know what the most important source of information is and tap from that source. Occasionally, a fandom source may pop into the mix such as the instances of the Joseph designs and other ships being shown on displays in the movies and early seasons of TNG. In that case, more power to fandom for getting that nod, but it’s still impractical to expect the writers and designers and even the producers to know everything from fandom. I’ll bet you that Roddenberry himself was not always up to date on the things in fandom (we already know that some of the things on the show itself he didn’t know like Jefferies’ ship registration system). A line has to be drawn somewhere, and it has been drawn at the references on-screen. This isn’t a slap in the face of fandom; it’s a decision that had to be made because of limitations.

As for the design itself, I see no problem with it (and, yes, I know about all the pre-TOS designs that have been spoken of). You posted a list of things that you found flawed with the design because you said there is no precedent for those design features having occurred prior to a specific episode or movie. I can easily refute your claims by saying that we have no proof to the contrary. You cannot say that a certain element was never used before a certain time because it first appeared at this time. Just because we haven’t seen it before does not mean that it didn’t exist prior to that unless it was specifically mentioned as having not existed prior to that. Thus, we get lost in a debate of canonicity because of these very issues. You can say that x element did exist in the hundreds of design produced by fandom. I can counter that by saying that fandom is not infalliable and that a design with x element may have existed and not made it into fandom publications or on-screen. It’s an unending debate, the resolution to which is in each person’s imagination.

This is television, and to attract audiences you need a visually appealing design for the lead ship. We’ll probably see Eaves’ other designs pop up at the series progresses, but the lead ship has to be unique and stunning. I think that the final design does just that. I find her to be beautiful and completely plausible given the concrete facts of the era. Sure, they could have used a derivative of the Daedalus class and made you happy, but what about those of us who find the ship boring? We could live with it, but then the other side would be telling us to shut up because this design adheres to your definition or proper. It’d be the same current situation only reversed. They also could have used the “hoop-ship,” but that’s a boring design as well. Add to that the fact that fandom has established it to a starliner or passenger vessel of some sort. If Enterprise used that design and retained the premise of it being a vessel of exploration, then the pro-fandom crowd would be crying foul and declaring that to go against years of established fandom fact. Same situation over something else.

On the subject of TOS Homages…
I think that you are choosing not to see some of the TOS tie-ins and homages that are already evident in the limited information we have on Enterprise. How about the TOS division color system? The ship-specific patches that are worn on the shoulders? How about the limited use of universal translators and the flipup hand-held communicators? How about the need for a bridge-level communications specialist? How about the limited abilities of the one transporter they have? How about the dependence on shuttlepods? How about the consoles with their physical buttons, knobs, switches, etc.? How about the wall-mounted intercom system and not the “out of thin air” intercom system? How about the need for a chef, a galley, a mess hall? How about the somewhat strained relationship between Vulcans and humans? How about the smug superiority that the Vulcans have towards humans? How about the isolation of each ship and the limited contact available with headquarters? There are so many things that are the result of attention being paid towards TOS. They don’t have phasers, combadges with built in universal translators, or tricorders. They don’t have force fields and restraining fields. They don’t even have food synthesizers. They are paying attention to TOS, you’re just not seeing it. They are not stomping TOS out of existence because if they were trying to, they would have started with the basics to undermine it. And they haven’t done that.

On the Evilness of Berman…
Berman was Roddenberry’s handpicked successor to the Star Trek flame. I think he deserves a bit more credit than many people are willing to give him for the work that he has done. I think he’s trying his best to stay within continuity on this new series. He’s admitted in interviews that he knows this will be a difficult undertaking and that the fans will be watching for the smallest glitch. He’s also said that they have “continuity officers” responsible for keeping the writers in synch with the rest of established on-screen Trek history. However, we won’t know until the series premieres how any of this is going to used or relied upon. In the end, that is all we can say about Enterprise. To say that Enterprise is going to bad based on the information we have just one episode is pessimistic and biased. You cannot judge something until you experience it. You cannot say Enterprise is going to suck until it premieres and you actually watch a few of the episodes with an open mind. If you cannot do that, then you cannot pass judgement and expect that opinion to be treated seriously by others.

You also make allusions to previous continuity mistakes on the part of the producers of Trek. What are you talking about? I’ve been a fan of Star Trek for years and I have yet to experience one of these continuity glitches. There has been bad writing, yeah, but no continuity foul ups as far as I can see. I constantly see “Berman and Braga and others don’t care about continuity” but there isn’t really any proof to that statement. It’s just a personal dislike for some people being used a formulation to prove their “wickedness.”

So of the things you were later talking about have even been said by Roddenberry that we should forget about them. Lithium as the base of matter/antimatter reactions? Nope, that’s bad science and bad writing to take a very real material and give it magical powers. That’s the reason for the change to dilithium after two or three episodes of TOS. Since then, no mention has been of lithium-based warp drive systems. The logical conclusion is that they’ve always been dilthium-based when matter/antimatter systems but part of the slang at one time was ‘lithium (like ‘tis and ‘twas and ‘spose). And the operating authority for the Enterprise bounced around a lot because it was not nailed down at the start. We’ve had no mention of UESPA since then, but it’s easier for this to be incorporated into Enterprise than the lithium-based reaction systems. And we also don’t know for certain that the NCC-1701 lacked an actual warp reactor. Scotty and Spock were adding dilithium to something on the floor of the engine room. And it could have been protected elsewhere in the ship. And many non-canon publications that have come recently do show just that. So it, too, is a moot point.

On My Opinions of the new series…
My opinion is that the new series will be good as long as the writers and creative staff don’t get bogged down in the temptation to be repetitive and derivative. That’s a problem that is faced by all television shows and movies. Enterprise is no different, and it too will probably have a period where it starts to get repetitive. All of the Trek series have fallen into that trap. It will be the writers and producers’ responsibility to get out of that trap. Are they up to it? Maybe so and maybe not. We won’t know for certain until the series gets started and actually gets on a roll. Anything we say prior to that will useless as a tool of argument because we really cannot predict that course of the series based on the first episode. So, it will be with eagerness and cautious optimism that I will watch Enterprise. I will hope for the best and give it the chance to live up to the positive aspects that I have been hearing and reading for the past several months.

If the series does not live up to the expectations I have set, I simply will not watch it. I won’t consider it decanonized nor will my love affair with Star Trek be over. I’ve gotten years of enjoyment from Star Trek. It has given me a chance to be creative and to expand the abilities of my own imagination. If this series fails, that is not enough for me to divorce myself from Trek. However, I do not foresee this being the case. I think that the series will be good, and I think that new series will reinforce my love of Star Trek. We will not know for certain until September 26, 2001, and for the weeks that follow it.

Your points are well taken and I will give them due consideration, especially the TOS homages that you pointed out; some of which I was unaware.

My position on Klingon foreheads is as follows: Prior to “Trials and Tribble-ations,” I was perfectly content to assume that Klingons have ALWAYS had bumpy foreheads. I just presumed that they were supposed to have looked that way in TOS, but alas, budget constraints prevented the more elaborate makeup.

Enter the infamous DS9 episode “Trials and Tribble-ations,” which establishes that Klingons ACTUALLY looked that way during the TOS time period. So, we are now left with the idea that Klingons’ appearance was altered during the time of TOS.

Do we know when this began? No. Does Enterprise break continuity by having bumpy-headed Klingons? Strictly speaking, no. However, in my delusional crazed world of “personally-correct” Star Trek,” this “disastrous first contact” would have been a great way (albeit, in my twisted opinion) to give some kind of reason and explanation as to why the Klingons changed their appearance. They may still deal with this issue through the course of the series, and if so, I will be one of the first to leap for joy (unless the explanation is “hokey” ).

On the subject of the ship design, you are correct in regards to my list of “problems” with the NX-01 that no evidence proves that these things could not have existed prior to TOS. But, I can’t help but follow logic and my own common sense here. I mean, come on... We never even saw an elliptical deflector until TNG. We didn’t see PLATED Aztec patterns until TNG got their 2nd filming model.

As for the rest, no amount of “rationalization” can convince me that the design is realistic, given Star Trek ship linage, even if only considering those ships seen on screen. To be blunt, I just don’t buy it. Add to that the unoriginal ship design, and I become fairly well annoyed.

Keep in mind, however, I am only venting my own personal dissatisfaction with the show. (Although I know a few out there will agree with me.) If you don’t have a problem with the new ship, more power to you. I will admit, it’s a fairly cool design. But that doesn’t mean I am necessarily happy with it being used as a pre-TOS ship.

And what is the big deal using lithium? It’s all techno-babble anyway. What does it matter? (or anti-matter? O.K. bad joke... sorry ) Does anyone here really think that if we ever achieve faster-than-light travel that Star Trek starships will be used as a blueprint? Did anyone here pay attention in physics class?

As far as continuity mistakes go, I am no expert, but I know a few are out there. One that comes to mind is Dmitri Valtane from ST VI: TUC. He is supposedly killed (according to VOY: Flashback), yet he can clearly be seen on screen at the end of ST VI: TUC.

I know there must be more continuity errors that have occurred under Berman’s watch. Anyone... Anyone...?

Am I being unreasonable? Probably. I can be pretty stubborn sometimes. I get that from my Dad. Sorry, but don’t hate me. I certainly feel no anger towards those who actually like what is known about Enterprise thus far. It’s only a TV show, and while I fuss and complain about it, I certainly won’t lose any sleep over it.

[ August 14, 2001: Message edited by: Commander Dan ]

As for the Akiraprise:

quote:

---

Am I being unreasonable? Probably. I can be pretty stubborn sometimes.

---

Nope. Not at all unreasonable. We're fans of Star Trek, it's a law somewhere that we're supposed to argue about a lot of stuff that will make non-Trekkers scratch their head and, "Fruitcakes." I'm the same way. I felt so compelled to response to the thread that after spending a massive amount of time written a really awesome response, I accidentally erased it then immediately rewrote it taking up even more time to do it.

When it comes to Enterprise, we are all going to disagree. I've come to expect that because I also quite enjoyed Voyager. People like you and Vogon Poet and others who can bring to the table well-thought reasons for disliking something are a joy to debate with. The people who randomly pop into threads to say one derogatory thing are the people who tick me off. I must destroy those people...

Anyway, to address your newest points, yeah, "Trials and Tribble-ations" threw a giant monkey-wrench into the works about Klingon foreheads. The writers could have addressed that point right then. After all, Ron Moore is seemingly the Trek authority on Klingons. Instead, we get a copout that muddles things more. I wasn't real pleased like that, but this does kinda throw the theory back to aggressive foreign artifical mutation or that it was a smaller race of Klingons that most members either underwent a genetic makeover to fit in with the bumpy Klingons as the fad of the day (like ear piercings but more extreme).

As for the ongoing discussion of ship design features, I'll agree that the design is unoriginal. However, I still think that it fits in nicely. With the elliptical sensor dish, we never saw another ship that would have benefitted from such a shape for the dish. The NX-01 doesn't have a secondary hull, and having it suspended from the saucer like on the Joseph designs is, in my opinion, bleh. With the hull plating, this is supposed to be a special form of hull plating. Not that the polarizing properties of the hull should affect the smoothness of it, but who knows?

Yeah, I paid attention in my physics classes, and one of my professors admitted that we may yet figure out a way to travel faster than light. However, he agree that it will probably be nothing like how it's protrayed on Star Trek or in Star Wars. He seems to think that a system of wormholes or similar spatial shortcuts is feasible. I'll leave that up to the physicists to figure out and argue about.