posted
ok, i dunno whether its been discussed but perhaps the reason why stuff looks more modern in ENT than TOS was because the timeline was polluted when Picard & Co. helped out with the launch of the phoenix. So the history that we knew as TOS and its design style and wat not was an evolution of previous designs - but when the timeline was polluted, somehow the 'akiraprise' was designed and a more modern design look was developed. It would be scary if from here on out, we see a 'modernized' Connie (in the silver-gray scheme of Archer's enterprise.)
if this is starting to make me look like a BWC post, please stop me and lock down the thread.
Just an idea to bounce around the forum.
Buzz
-------------------- "Tom is Canadian. He thereby uses advanced humour tecniques, such as 'irony', 'sarcasm', and werid shit'. If you are not qualified in any of these, it will be risky for you to attempt to decipher what he means. Just smile and carry on." - PsyLiam; 16th June
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
You're right. I actually understood this topic.
I think the idea is plausible, but lets' look at what design evidence was left behind:
Lily was aboard the E-E for some time and we could argue that she would have had something to do with starship design and construction over the next few decades. But she only saw the ship from the inside.
Cochrane saw the ship from the outside, but it was only about 2 inches big. I doubt he could glean any meaningful details from what he saw in the telescope. The other time he saw the ship, was in space right before it launched torpedoes at him. He was likely too busy trying to control his bowels to pick up much details there either.
However, it's certainly possible that a general design influence stuck around a bit.
posted
I would submit it is exceedingly unlikely and totally unnecessary, however. I can "account" for the weirdness of, say, Antonio Gaudi's cathedral without invoking time travelers bringing the secrets of art nouveau from the distant future.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
We all know that all of this is part of the temporal cold war, and things will revert to the crap-tasticular looking ship designs as soon as the series ends.
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
Or, just perhaps, the powers that be, with their stated goal for this series being an opportunity to see the origins of the Trek we already know and love, might, I dunno, be actually making a prequel rather than some alternate timeline St. Elsewhere-ified Trek-like show?
Besides, how could the timeline "revert" to some other version of 22nd century Trek chronology and technology if for all intents and purposes we didn't know of its contents before now. Revert implies changing back to something. Considering the net sum of our knowledge of the 22nd century before Enterprise was about two pages of the Chronology full of almost exclusively conjectural dates and a conjectural starship design, I don't see how this is possible.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I suppose Tim may just be pulling my leg, but I was intrigued enough to spend about twenty seconds looking, and it would appear the word gaudy dates back to 1582, so no, sadly.
Art nouveau architecture is really cool.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I think you should already know I was joking. After all, I keep a dictionary on top of my computer. If I were really wondering about the etymology of "gaudy", I would already have known it before posting.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Of course, such a theory wouldn't explain why the Phoenix itself, once separated from the launch booster, looks decidedly more advanced than.....say some of the "early" Earth ship models of TOS.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The bookshelf is across the room. The computer is right next to the desk. It's got my dictionary and Trek Encyclopedia on top of it, right at hand.
And I don't really use m-w.com. I'm on campus, and the school subscribes to oed.com (Oxford English Dictionary), so I use that. In what other dictionary could you find the etymology of "d'oh"?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
