|
And as goofy as its comprehensiveness sometimes is, it is actually useful that it has entries for mundane things as well so if you're trying to remember which episode Wesley got a banana split in the face, there's an entry for desserts.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 05:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
The problem with the skant in TNG is not that it’s a skant but that it’s as ugly as the rest of the early TNG uniforms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 06:09
|
|
|
for an episode that seemed like voyager's version of "wesley stepped on plants and gets the death penalty" "Random Thoughts" was surprisingly good. Hella fun Tuvok poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
Memory Alpha is really good for reading alongside the episode you're watching. It's how you learn that most of DS9 is a happy accident
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 07:47
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:The problem with the skant in TNG is not that it’s a skant but that it’s as ugly as the rest of the early TNG uniforms. Yeah, we don't see men in skants often in SNW but when we do they pull it off way better than TNG. Then again, the SNW skant is pretty subtle, because there's pants underneath, so it often just looks like they just have a longer top. It's closer to the TNG dress uniforms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 11:40
|
|
|
Isn't the SNW version meant to be more directly the minidress from TOS? I remember reading that Rebecca Romijn insisted on it being an option because of that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 14:45
|
|
|
Kibayasu posted:The problem with the skant in TNG is not that it’s a skant but that it’s as ugly as the rest of the early TNG uniforms. That and the lack of conviction in it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 16:02
|
|
|
When did Trek fans start using the term 'canon'? Back in 70s fanzines arguing about the validity of TAS? 80s Usenet posts griping about TNG? 90s BBSs?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 17:23
|
|
|
I'm not sure, but it probably faded in from a broader use of the word canon to mean 'all the works in this universe/area' or 'an author/creator's body of work'. So initially 'The Star Trek Canon' likely just meant all of the works of Star Trek, and then the term became useful as they wanted to exclude certain things from that. That said, I have a vague recollection that maybe its use in the sense of arguing about what's canon/not canon might have originated with Tolkien fans. MikeJF fucked around with this message at 17:38 on Sep 23, 2023 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 17:34
|
|
|
The word "canon" originally referred to the accepted body of scripture comprising the Christian Bible, which is perfect for how it's used in fandom today.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 17:42
|
|
|
Yeah, I knew that, just wondering when it worked its way into Trek fans' discourse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 17:53
|
|
|
I wonder how many people still subscribe to the idea that only "Star Trek" that was produced in Roddenberry's lifetime counts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 17:55
|
|
|
egon_beeblebrox posted:I wonder how many people still subscribe to the idea that only "Star Trek" that was produced in Roddenberry's lifetime counts. A few, from what I've seen in various YouTube and Reddit comments. That said, a lot of these dinguses believe that Late TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, and all the post-TMP movies are "Roddenberry Trek", and it breaks their itty bitty brains when you inform them that more Trek has been made outside of Gene's control and purview than was ever made under it. Hagiography is a hell of a drug.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
egon_beeblebrox posted:I wonder how many people still subscribe to the idea that only "Star Trek" that was produced in Roddenberry's lifetime counts. There was one particularly vitriolic poster at Trek BBS who was an ardent proponent of "it doesn't count if Roddenberry wasn't involved." He later outed himself as a neo-Nazi and advocate of ethnic and genetic cleansing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 18:19
|
|
|
I often just use it jokingly, I'm very much anti-canon. It just bogs everything down. If something's directly contradicting something from two episodes ago, sure, stupid, but tell the story at hand, don't worry too much about what happened way back in episode whatever of blah-de-blah 25 years ago. And no, I don't give a gently caress about Ice Cream Maker man in Cloud City and his super important secret spy mission. I wonder what the Star Trek equivalent of Ice Cream Maker man is. Is it Skant Guy?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
I know there was a point that Roddenberry said TAS (and maybe later Star Trek V?) didn’t count - I’m not sure whether he specifically said they were non-canonical or whether this was a word put into his mouth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 18:38
|
|
|
Timby posted:There was one particularly vitriolic poster at Trek BBS who was an ardent proponent of "it doesn't count if Roddenberry wasn't involved." Wow, Doomcock was around back then too? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 18:45
|
|
|
Timby posted:There was one particularly vitriolic poster at Trek BBS who was an ardent proponent of "it doesn't count if Roddenberry wasn't involved." Wow surprised it wasn't pedophilia again
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 18:54
|
|
|
Soul Dentist posted:Wow surprised it wasn't pedophilia again
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:09
|
|
|
Timby posted:There was one particularly vitriolic poster at Trek BBS who was an ardent proponent of "it doesn't count if Roddenberry wasn't involved." Holy poo poo. Even in less extreme cases, I have always had a hard time understanding reactionaries being super into Trek. Trek has always been progressive relative to its own time (TOS for the 1960's, TNG for the 1980's, DS9 for the 1990's, etc.) I mean, not with everything, but generally it's progressive. How someone could watch the particular kind of moralizing going on in Trek and still be a fan if their worldview would call it "bleeding heart" or whatever is just vexing to me.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
Zaroff posted:I know there was a point that Roddenberry said TAS (and maybe later Star Trek V?) didn’t count - I’m not sure whether he specifically said they were non-canonical or whether this was a word put into his mouth. There is also only second hand knowledge on what Roddenberry thought about DS9, it was in the early stages of preproduction when he died and the only certain thing we know is that he was briefed on the topic. Berman and Piller of course say that he greenlighted the idea and was supportive, others that he hated the thought of having a show set on a station which just stands still in one system. And they seriously at one point considered if the DS9 station could have some capability to jump or travel from place to place.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:28
|
|
|
Zaroff posted:I know there was a point that Roddenberry said TAS (and maybe later Star Trek V?) didn’t count - I’m not sure whether he specifically said they were non-canonical or whether this was a word put into his mouth. He did specifically call V apocryphal, but he was also still whiny about having no real say in the movies from TWoK on plus freshly whiny about Shatner stealing one of his ideas to use for Final Frontier.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:30
|
|
|
Railing Kill posted:Holy poo poo. I think it makes more sense when you only had TOS, TAS and some random novels as well as fan product to work with. While there were moral lessons and poo poo there, they tended to either be unfortunately close to United States policy consensus of the period or to be generally humanist, and at the time I believe Objectivists neither loved organized religion nor Nazis all that passionately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
Zaroff posted:I know there was a point that Roddenberry said TAS (and maybe later Star Trek V?) didn’t count - I’m not sure whether he specifically said they were non-canonical or whether this was a word put into his mouth. According to Susan Sackett (who is, shall we say, not the most reliable source of information), Roddenberry considered TAS and "parts"--specifically Sarek having another son with a Vulcan priestess--of The Final Frontier "apocryphal."
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:31
|
|
|
disaster pastor posted:He did specifically call V apocryphal, but he was also still whiny about having no real say in the movies from TWoK on plus freshly whiny about Shatner stealing one of his ideas to use for Final Frontier. Yeah, Roddenberry hated pretty much every production after he was ousted to the executive consultant role which meant he didn't have any final say on anything anymore. Roddenberry leaked several drafts to press and spoiled several major events before the movie release, just to try to manhandle his ideas into what was finally made.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:32
|
|
|
Railing Kill posted:Holy poo poo. Reactionaries tend to be, to a one, A) really loving stupid, like, ghastly unintelligent, and B) media illiterate. So that special brew of ignorance is how you get gross crusty dillholes with more hair on their necks than their heads going "This new woke Star Trek really sucks!" without a hint of irony.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:39
|
|
|
All Trek is canon until proven otherwise, gently caress Roddenberry
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 19:59
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I remember an old paperback about Trek fandom from like 1980 having a lot of talk about how some of the early big wheels in Trek fandom were equally fanatical about Trek and, uh, Objectivism. A couple of the really super influential early fanfic (and slashfic) writers were hardcore Randians. They caused problems. This link will start you off but be aware this rabbit hole runs deep.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:A couple of the really super influential early fanfic (and slashfic) writers were hardcore Randians. They caused problems. nine-gear crow posted:Reactionaries tend to be, to a one, A) really loving stupid, like, ghastly unintelligent, and B) media illiterate. So that special brew of ignorance is how you get gross crusty dillholes with more hair on their necks than their heads going "This new woke Star Trek really sucks!" without a hint of irony. This does explain a lot, and articulates the issue pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:05
|
|
|
Big Mean Jerk posted:All Trek is canon until proven otherwise, gently caress Roddenberry They're all true, especially the lies.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:A couple of the really super influential early fanfic (and slashfic) writers were hardcore Randians. They caused problems. star trek: we're sorry for nerd culture existing at all
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:13
|
|
|
Star Trek is about Space America going around in their high tech military vehciles showing all those silly foreigners why American values and morality are superior to whatever foreign gibberish they're going with.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:32
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Star Trek is about Space America going around in their high tech military vehciles showing all those silly foreigners why American values and morality are superior to whatever foreign gibberish they're going with. Exactly. As long as the Federation can be considered analagous to America, and the Federation (ergo America) is being portrayed as having already solved all its problems, it doesn't necessarily matter if Roddenberry suggests that those problems were stuff like capitalism, racism, traditional sexuality, or even religion. What matters is America fixed it and they're the good guys and they're winning. It's not unlike how even the most extreme right-wingers speak pretty highly of MLK, but from the angle that he fixed racism and now we must never confront it again. (Never mind how they would've treated him back then.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
Timby posted:There was one particularly vitriolic poster at Trek BBS who was an ardent proponent of "it doesn't count if Roddenberry wasn't involved." lmao I think I know who you're talking about and I'm not surprised
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:23
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:Star Trek is about Space America going around in their high tech military vehciles showing all those silly foreigners why American values and morality are superior to whatever foreign gibberish they're going with. Add to that the bigotry we've collectively cringed over itt and the *intense* male gaze across most of the franchise, and there's plenty for reactionaries to latch onto. None of this erases the good stuff in trek btw, I just think it's good to avoid hagiography.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:39
|
|
|
Tighclops posted:lmao I think I know who you're talking about and I'm not surprised The God Thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:42
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:That said, I have a vague recollection that maybe its use in the sense of arguing about what's canon/not canon might have originated with Tolkien fans.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:44
|
|
|
Timby posted:The God Thing. Oh hey I remember him Yeah that makes sense
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 21:56
|
|
|
Timby posted:The God Thing. Bingo
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Sir Lemming posted:Exactly. As long as the Federation can be considered analagous to America, and the Federation (ergo America) is being portrayed as having already solved all its problems, it doesn't necessarily matter if Roddenberry suggests that those problems were stuff like capitalism, racism, traditional sexuality, or even religion. What matters is America fixed it and they're the good guys and they're winning. It's not unlike how even the most extreme right-wingers speak pretty highly of MLK, but from the angle that he fixed racism and now we must never confront it again. (Never mind how they would've treated him back then.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2023 23:24
|
|