‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Officially Erased From Canon
giantfreakinrobot.com
giantfreakinrobot.com
I wouldn't be surprised to see this happen in Harry Potter soon if it hasn't already.
In my opinion, it's one of the worst (non canon now) Star Trek shows but it does get marginally better if you can struggle through the first season or two.
I would not recommend it unless you have nothing else to watch
Kinda sad Dadmiral Vance's replicator quote is technically non canon now.
I never knew that the action packed space drama came from a preachy arduous allegory to irrelevant social dilemmas. Unwatchable.
The rebrands are pretty interesting but I’m trying to figure out how those even happened now.
How did the IP go from controversial lessons to flashy space wars.
Some of them, others not so much. In the original series there was an episode on computerized warfare and efficiency (Season 1 Episode 23 A Taste of Armageddon). In the later series "The Next Generation" there was an episode on AI and rights (Season 2 Episode 9 The Measure of a Man).
Both still get cited in actual work, probably because it's easier to direct someone to watch a reasonably short and entertaining TV episode than some 300 page book on the subject.
IIRC there were behind the scenes politics involved due to who owned the rights, like they were able to use the names and setting but it had to be "thematically" different to not infringe on previous series, which were owned by a different company.
I tried myself, but failed. At first I thought it meant the movie was either feminist, antiracist and/or Marxist, but it then became clear it was actually an union of unpopular and one of the three criteria (see no time to die, or guardian 3 that are suddenly not woke). So from this, Star Trek, despite being the most Marxist utopia ever, isn't woke, since it's popular.
But Barbie is quite popular and still woke. But Alien is not despite featuring the biggest Mary Sue. Like I said, to complex for me, I leave wokespotting to professionals.
Discovery is mostly bad, but based on the first half of S1, I think there was a screenwriting seed of a much better show that got mutated. Jason Isaacs's base character was wonderful, it would have been awesome to see a crew with a captain that is controversial and not liked. It would have been a great twist on ST shows where captains are always spotless role models. Clicks in the team, conflicts of interest would have been a bold new direction. Also side props for Anthony Rapp.
Try this link instead which seems to extract some of the original article
https://www.reddit.com/r/trektalk/comments/1hk8c34/opinion_g...
I'm sad to see it isn't getting renewed, but glad to see that it gets to stay canon, especially considering that it constantly mocks the extremes of what is Star Trek canon.
That’s an unexpected statement, I thought Archer’s Enterprise wasn’t considered a good series[1]. I personally prefer others; I guess everyone has their own favorite.
[1]: “Following the pilot, the critical reaction became mixed. David Segal said in The Washington Post that the series ‘has a bargain basement feel that lands this side of camp.’", https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek:_Enterprise
But I think that, like Voyager, it's gotten a retroactive boost in popularity. Apparently the same thing has happened for Star Wars? Lots of fans of the prequels and new trilogy, when original fans despised them.
I liked Enterprise when it first aired. It was no where near as good as Deep Space Nine and Voyager still felt more like TNG, but as a whole, those older shows stand together. But Picard was awful (somehow, S2 didn't happen and the Borg returned), Discovery was awful (S5 was middling but better).
It's the same with Star Wars. Episode 1 through 3 did suck, but were nowhere near as bad as 7 through 9. Episodes 1 through 3 made the whole series Vader's story, with Luke's echo part of Vader's own redemption. It added something. The new ones added nothing. Worse, they were the beginnings of the attempt to tear everything down (Luke bad, Jedi bad, you don't need training, you don't need self-control...).
> Generally, all live-action Star Trek television series and films have been considered part of the canon, up to the point of contradiction or material the creators consider bad. Star Trek: Lower Decks and Star Trek: Prodigy are accepted as canonical as well.
In all cases it's fraud. You claim to write a story inside a complex established universe but deliver something that just superficially uses some assets and then just does its own thing. Then just develop your own universe, ffs!
If you want to write Star Trek or Star Wars or whatever, adhere to the canon and stay within the established constraints. If you feel that the canon constrains your creativity too much, go find some other playground.
It’s not the first time the Klingons got a new design.
So why is the change between TOS and TNG ok but the change for Discovery isn’t?
Because the changes to the Klingons are too trivial to be canon or not canon. It's mere makup not writing.
While the changes in Discovery are not mere makup.
Because of the intention. The TOS Klingons were always supposed to look like the TMP/TNG Klingons, but the producers didn't have the budget until the movie and next show.
It's an entirely different thing when the original designers correct a budget constraint vs. new designers arrogantly throwing away prior art.
Correct, but how that proves that Discovery in the main universe does not exist? We seen a Garak for an other universe and that does prove that you can have same people , same ships, same uniforms in different universes, this was shown durin TNG.
So the only thing proven is that Discovery exists in a different universe, it is not proven that it does not exist in the main universe.
Let me know if my logic is wrong, we can try and formalize it better using any, exists, implies etc .
Given that Lowerdecks is an extremely canon-oriented fan-service love letter to earlier shows that are known to be canon (ie, that it demonstrates consistency with obvious canon like TOS and TNG) the hypothesis that it's NOT in the main universe seems to be the one that requires a proliferation of assumptions and therefore more argumentation and data to support.
I think it would make sense Disco is different universe , would make the fans happey too , but this episode brings no proof for it , though in a trek form or reddit I would let the fans to enoy this "fake news" , here or in Daystrom subreedit I am though expectic more logic.
This idea is strengthened by the fact that Discovery and Strange New Worlds are clearly shown to take place in the same universe, with Discovery introducing the characters and ship that appear in Strange New Worlds, and Spock from Strange New Worlds reflecting on the events of Discovery. And SNW later shows TNG style Klingons, establishing that both styles (as well as presumably TOS style Klingons) coexist in the same universe. So I don't think the Lower Decks episode resolves anything about the Klingon-look at all, it was just a fun reference/gag.
It could be that the shows exist in different timelines, but it could also be that any of the shows exist in different timelines that are just similar enough to make the references make sense. For instance, Lower Decks establishes that a Picard exists in it's universe, but also exists in many other universes (see the purple enterprise), so it doesn't necessarily take place in the same universe as TNG.
Genuinely this is really good headcanon though -- a great illustration of why canon matters as an imagination tool.
I used to love star trek. I have a good friend whos a hardcore trekky. He would talk like this, and I just thought, the mental hoops people jump through to give corporations money, like they're so invested in a story that they'll justify anything. He would talk about how much he hates discovery, and then watch the next episode.
I just turned it off. I gave up on star trek entirely. Who cares? They've destroyed an entertainment staple. They can backtrack if they want. They'll do this again in a few years. These things aren't made to last forever. They call them "properties" for a reason. Novel stories will be way more interesting if anyone wants to try to create some.
It's alright for people to like what they like. It's alright for me to point out that they're mentally captured by a propaganda corporation.
40k is intended to be a silly franchise from a lore perspective. But consistency goes a long way to making even the most ridiculous settings something people can engage with. Autobots v Decepticons, Tom v Jerry, etc all rely on people being more engaged with what they would be based on what’s on the screen in that moment.
And you're making the point for yourself: you just turned off of Star Trek. That's a business loss. That's why execs should care.
Even if it were the case that LD established that Discovery was part of another timeline, which it didn't, Discovery would still be canon.
Second season does give closure on a few characters new and old, maybe worth watching if you got the time. But overall don’t let it stop you from getting to season 3.
Part of the problem with Picard is that it was for all intents and purposes a character study of Jean-Luc Picard, and what people wanted was another season of TNG. It had a lot of good ideas, particularly around the Borg, but it just wasted their potential.
They built the show around his character, but that version of the character kind of sucked. It wasn't the Picard we knew. There was even the moment where Riker was the cautious one, and Picard reckless. It was less a character study and more a character deconstruction, and I hate those.
The only thing I'll miss about Discovery are the "Disco" t-shirts. Those were great merch.
The LD finale absolutely did not make Discovery non-canon. It simply showed that Discovery style klingons exist in other universes.
Assuming that because the Discovery klingons were shown in an alternate universe therefore Discovery must be an alternate universe would mean assuming everything shown from any multiverse that could map to another series would mean that series was also in an alternate universe.
Which is nonsense. Very shoddy reasoning.
TOS, TNG, DS9, Lower Decks. Wrath of Kahn, Undiscovered Country. Maybe First Contact.
I think that's the core canon.
Or that the things that happened in one episode had little impact on the next.
Doctor Who doesn't worry about this.
Versus a new show comes along that is 20% aligned and would need an 80% patch to bring it into alignment.
As an executive trying to revitalize a property where fans are complaining about lack of alignment, do you understand why you might just erase the 20% rather than create 80% more of an otherwise-failed project?
If you're an executive, you understand that the purpose of these properties is to make money. Discovery makes money. It has fans. It sells merchandise. You don't erase money because of the rancor of some pedantic nerds, most people do not care.
Discovery is still canon. The premise of this thread is a conspiracy theory which is not factual. Star Trek Discovery is still a part of the Star Trek franchise. You can still purchase official Discovery memorabilia. You can still stream it. It has an official Blu-ray release.
The issue of canon really occurs when different groups of people work on a singular fictional world over a long period of time. The people who work on these worlds have to take fiction seriously, and need a way to communicate with the fans which other works they are going to building on. It is a bit tiresome and over played, but is a natural consequence of large corporations handling these fictional universes.
Harassing people because they don’t like how it’s done is plain wrong.
Sometimes you have to realize it’s not always to make existing fans happy but to try something new to get new fans.
Otherwise is always the same in repeat.
They're entirely captured by the corporations that produce this stuff. Their minds are trapped arguing over the validity of literal nonsense because it's profitable to some company for that to be the case.
The owners do whatever they want, then lip service the fandom after the fact, and the fandom takes it because they can't cut loose from their attachment. A die hard fan that won't drop something the minute it begins to be destroyed is a sucker for abuse, and their willingness to look past it afterwards is why the owners get away with it. And they'll do it again.
Investing time in fiction has been shown to increase empathy. Potentially causal.
It's not fiction which you are taking seriously. It's copyright. Canon in fiction is an expression of territorialism from the entity owning the legal rights, not some sort of intrinsic attribute of the collection of stories.
https://www.startrek.com/news/a-look-inside-star-trek-series...
It makes sense to consider a set of interlocking bibles a canon.
The fans are just using industry terms (they're that into their fandom!), not inventing something new for the sake of "Internet quibbling."
Canon is a platform for fiction creation.
"Darth Vader put on the One Ring and told Frodo to go back to Endor" is not going to be something that fans take seriously enough to make economically viable.
Edit: someone prove me wrong, please.
It’s agreeing that A follows B and C follows B, etc. It’s agreeing that “A” and “a” are two forms of the same thing, and make the same vowel sound. You run into trouble when you say “A” makes a “k” sound and the lowercase of “a” is “w”.