If it fits is completely irrelevant when it comes to the question of being canon.That's ridiculous. It's not canon because it doesn't fit with rest of Trek for a list of reasons a mile high.
If it fits is completely irrelevant when it comes to the question of being canon.That's ridiculous. It's not canon because it doesn't fit with rest of Trek for a list of reasons a mile high.
Doesn't mean much. There are hundreds of officially produced books, are they canon? Are all the officially produced videogames canon? May have been their intent as creators, but it was not the result as it just doesn't fit. Death of the author etc.
Doesn't mean much. There are hundreds of officially produced books, are they canon? Are all the officially produced videogames canon? May have been their intent as creators, but it was not the result as it just doesn't fit. Death of the author etc.
It's not if canon does or doesn't exist, it's probably being used in the wrong context. It's more what continuity it belongs to. I see Star Wars as two continuities, the original (now called Legends, I think?) and the new. Both are canon, just separate.Star Wars handled it in a pretty specific manner by establishing what materials outside of the main movies were and were not canon (to the point where after the Disney purchase they changed the definition to exclude a lot of stuff that previously was considered canon or semi-canon). Not sure if Star Trek does the same, but I imagine someone at CBS/Paramount have some ideas about this.
Re: death of the author, I think that's a valid stance to take, but I feel like that taking a hardline stance on canon as something that can't be established by the author (or else ignored completely) just means the concept of "canon" doesn't exist. As a reader you're free to decide whatever elements of the franchise are canon to you or not, and justify potential contradictions using whatever connective tissue you like.
It's not if canon does or doesn't exist, it's probably being used in the wrong context. It's more what continuity it belongs to. I see Star Wars as two continuities, the original (now called Legends, I think?) and the new. Both are canon, just separate.
I see Trek the same, it's all canon but I (and a lot of people) don't believe it is the same continuity as 'Prime' universe, same as Kelvin.
I don't think death of the author applies here. I think that refers to interpretation, not whether something "counts" or "actually happens" in a fictional sense.
For Star Trek the current rule is that all live action series and movies are canon, everything else is not. This might change with the new animated series, we'll see.Doesn't mean much. There are hundreds of officially produced books, are they canon? Are all the officially produced videogames canon? May have been their intent as creators, but it was not the result as it just doesn't fit. Death of the author etc.
Why has STO never featured any Captains? Too costly to hire? Only thing they done is I think a badly voiced Sisko impersonation speaking out of the wormhole for like 2 words.That reminds me, STO has announced its new update, featuring...
Guess that's why they got her actress onboard.
The interpretation of a lot of people is seeing redesigned Klingons after 35 years of consistency (and which was acknowledged on DS9 and explained on Enterprise), redesigned iconic ships (not minor changes like the Enterprise, but completely unrecognisable things like Bird of Prey or D7), redesigned visuals (remember TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise all visited these eras and kept the look identical as original, STD is breaking this consistency like those shows never did), technology other shows have made a point doesn't exist in that era etc etc, they interpret all this as being a different continuity.
Unlike minor continuity errors like missing a line some other show said that conflicts with another line, which you can fairly interpret as an error and not an attempt to be different, STD seems to have gone out of its way and made an intentional attempt to be different, ignore establish things and break continuity. Well it worked, many now interpret it as a different continuity, and that is where it 'actually happens'.
Edit: was typing this while you replied above. Was trying clarify but I see you got it.
Why has STO never featured any Captains? Too costly to hire? Only thing they done is I think a badly voiced Sisko impersonation speaking out of the wormhole for like 2 words.
Thanks for explaining further. I see what you mean. I agree, a lot of the changes in S1 of disco are odd, especially the changes to the Klingons. I've often thought that the series makes more sense as a sequel series than a prequel, but I'm willing to wait and see a Fuller-less season 2 proceeds.
That's the dumb thing about it. In the original series basically nothing required being a prequel besides the "here's the adopted sister we never talked about" connection for Burnham. Set it in the 25th century and two-thirds of the issues with the show go away instantly.
Instead they made it a prequel, and now we're getting Star Wars level "it's a tiny universe" syndrome with Spock and Pike and the Enterprise.
Star Trek Discovery is 100% part of the Prime Universe canon. We have been told this officially by the production and the studio.The interpretation of a lot of people is seeing redesigned Klingons after 35 years of consistency (and which was acknowledged on DS9 and explained on Enterprise), redesigned iconic ships (not minor changes like the Enterprise, but completely unrecognisable things like Bird of Prey or D7), redesigned visuals (remember TNG, DS9, Voyager and Enterprise all visited these eras and kept the look identical as original, STD is breaking this consistency like those shows never did), technology other shows have made a point doesn't exist in that era etc etc, they interpret all this as being a different continuity.
Unlike minor continuity errors like missing a line some other show said that conflicts with another line, which you can fairly interpret as an error and not an attempt to be different, STD seems to have gone out of its way and made an intentional attempt to be different, ignore establish things and break continuity. Well it worked, many now interpret it as a different continuity, and that is where it 'actually happens'.
Edit: was typing this while you replied above. Was trying clarify but I see you got it.
That's the dumb thing about it. In the original series basically nothing required being a prequel besides the "here's the adopted sister we never talked about" connection for Burnham. Set it in the 25th century and two-thirds of the issues with the show go away instantly.
Instead they made it a prequel, and now we're getting Star Wars level "it's a tiny universe" syndrome with Spock and Pike and the Enterprise.
Yup (it appears this is an official release)The Klingons don't even look that different now that they're getting hair in season 2.
How will they explain the hair? Weren't the customs also different?The Klingons don't even look that different now that they're getting hair in season 2.
Star Trek Discovery is 100% part of the Prime Universe canon. We have been told this officially by the production and the studio.
It is as canon to the Prime timeline as TOS and TNG. This is undisputable fact. It is not open to opinion. The production studio that owns the franchise says its Prime. Your opinion is irrelevant to the fact the production is officially in the Prime Timeline.
For example, Star Trek Online was never classified as canonical. The studio behind Star Trek, however, has made it 100% official on the record statements that Discovery is part of the Prime Timeline.
Fan annoyances don't overrule the actual production. We don't get to overrule the production on what is canon. You can have your own "head canon" like many people do in fandom, but that doesn't change what is official and that is Star Trek Discovery is part of the Prime timeline and part of that canon no different than TOS, TND, DS9, etc.
Cousins. Bald, weird cousins.How will they explain the hair? Weren't the customs also different?
This is worse than Remans.
I know what Death of Author is. That has nothing to do with this. We aren't "interpreting" anything. There is no author intent at work here. It's an official production of the timeline. There is nothing about intent there. This is what the is. That's like saying death of the author means we can claim Star Trek The Next Generation actual part of Star Wars and not Star Trek because the authors "intent" was its Star Trek is irrelevantGoogle Death of the Author, because you clearly do not understand. Creator intent, opinion and statements are not used to judge a work, only the work itself is. A large part of the fanbase have judged it not in continuity with good reasons, and it a perfectly valid judgement. Death of the author is not 'head canon' or "I don't like this so it not canon" (also head canon) and there are a good amount of reasons to only judge a work on itself.
You say you understand but keep making statements to the opposite. Author intent doesn't matter, only the work does. Doesn't matter if an official production. That has nothing to do with it. At all.I know what Death of Author is. That has nothing to do with this. We aren't "interpreting" anything. There is no author intent at work here. It's an official production of the timeline. There is nothing about intent there. This is what the is. That's like saying death of the author means we can claim Star Trek The Next Generation actual part of Star Wars and not Star Trek because the authors "intent" was its Star Trek is irrelevant
It's officially canon. Fans do not get to decide what is deemed official canon of the franchise.
You can have your own opinions your own fan canons, but as it stands this is is an official production of the prime timeline.
How will they explain the hair? Weren't the customs also different?
Well, in TNG Mott comments how much of a pleasure it is to cut Klingon hair because of how luxurious it is, so maybe the Klingon barbers union mounted a massive and successful campaign to abolish head shaving.Explanation per the actress is that at this point Klingons are supposed to shave their heads in a time of conflict, and since they've been in such for the last hundred years, that became the default. The explanation in turn for later works is that, of course, customs change over time, and eventually the whole 'shave your head' thing was simply lost to a Klingon people who became relatively accustomed to peace.
The work is canon. There is nothing about Discovery that breaks canon. It very much fits the Prime timeline. This is sci-fi we are talking about. There is always an explanation. There is nothing about it so far that makes it impossible to accept as prime timeline. It's canon, it's prime timeline. Just as much prime as DS9 and treated as such by CBS.You say you understand but keep making statements to the opposite. Author intent doesn't matter, only the work does. Doesn't matter if an official production. That has nothing to do with it. At all.
Absolutely. Discovery is one of the best first seasons in Trek. In terms of first seasons (first seasons only!) I think it's second only to TOS.
You say you understand but keep making statements to the opposite. Author intent doesn't matter, only the work does. Doesn't matter if an official production. That has nothing to do with it. At all.
Death of the Author is just an opinion, it's not intrinsically authoritative. There are other opinions, and your disagreement with them doesn't invalidate them.
Your comparison makes no sense since you don't own the IP. It's a fan film. CBS owns the IP. They decide what is canon. It's that simple. You can't go into a thread about people ranking the films of the MCU and include a random fan film you made in the rankings. We have IP, we have license holders who own the IP. They decide what is official media and what isn't. They are called fan films for a reason. They aren't official productions.Death of the author makes nobody authoritative, not even the creator. The creator's view is just an opinion too, as valid as anyone else's judging a work. The creator only has an intent.
If I said I'm making a Superman fan film, then make a film about a guy in a red and blue webbed suit firing web from his wrists and swinging from buildings, anyone who watches it and concludes it's a Spiderman fan film would be valid in their opinion. My intent and statement as the creator that it is a Superman fan film is meaningless.
Your comparison makes no sense since you don't own the IP. It's a fan film. CBS owns the IP. They decide what is canon. It's that simple.
That is an absurd comparison because DS9 has that war. There is nothing about Discovery that directly contracts the Prime timeline and is impossible to explain (it's sci-fi after all, people were all bent out of shape over the Klingon ridges for years). Discovery is an official production of the prime timeline. That's it.Talk about fail to understand the point.
If I said the film was about Super Long, a guy who can stretch his limbs and is my creation, but the film had no such character and instead was a guy called Super Hot who can set himself a flame, also my creation, would you understand?
CBS own STD, they do not own people's opinion on it and don't get to tell them what their opinion of it is.
Just cos your having trouble, a Trek example too.
If CBS came out and said there was no Dominion war on DS9, are you going to say "Well they own it so I guess there never was!" or are you going to point at the countless episodes about it and say "Sorry, I disagree, you're wrong CBS"?
As I said in a post above, canon is not the right word. It's continuity.While I agree with things you are saying about the theory of Death of the Author, he isn't contradicting you. Death of the Author is irrelevant to canon. They are different things. He is talking about canon, you are talking about the messages and meaning of a work of art. They have nothing to do with each other.
^^^ That's all he is saying. That it's not a relevant concept to this.
The novels, STO, and video games have never been considered canon. They have always been clear about that unlike the old pre-Disney Lucasfilm.As I said in a post above, canon is not the right word. It's continuity.
Prime Universe is canon.
Kelvin universe is canon.
Star Trek Online is canon.
Novels are canon.
Videogames are canon.
But to their own continuities (or not! It totally depends on your interpretation), and a huge amount of people believe STD doesn't fit with Prime, with good reasons. Same as those who argue that Trek 09 erases Prime timeline because time travel in Trek doesn't work like shown in 09, with many episodes and even a movie all about changes to the past altering the timeline, not creating alternate ones like 09 does. And it's a valid view based on the history of Trek. Some people see the novels as fitting in fine with the Prime universe and take it as same continuity, others don't. Neither are wrong.
Yep. The only thing that's considered canon is anything that officially appears on screen.The novels, STO, and video games have never been considered canon. They have always been clear about that unlike the old pre-Disney Lucasfilm.
And we know that Trek 09 did not erase the Prime timeline because we have been told the Picard show takes place in the Prime timeline showing the aftermath of Romulus being blown up. Official productions say time travel can work this way so within the Star Trek universe they can.
Yep, for such a big franchise Star Trek has always been very clear about canon. If it's in a film or tv show it's canon. If it's in any other form of media be it a book, video game, comic, etc it is not.Yep. The only thing that's considered canon is anything that officially appears on screen.
Actually a lot of stuff from books and other not on screen stuff was once fully canon to the TOS continuity, as TNG grew in popularity it was decided to 'take back' control from these third parties and try to ignore it (while at the same time reusing it because fans liked it and saw is as canon).Yep. The only thing that's considered canon is anything that officially appears on screen.
As I said in a post above, canon is not the right word. It's continuity.
Prime Universe is canon.
Kelvin universe is canon.
Star Trek Online is canon.
Novels are canon.
Videogames are canon.