I strongly disagree on both points. I believe we want the exact opposite, in fact.
Apparently, so does CBS.
I have been wrong before, and I'll be wrong in the future, but for me the Trek'verse should always be a world we would want our grandchildren to inherit, not a world filled with our grandparents' horrors.
Personally, I can't stand the "darker and edgier," trend of modern TV/movies. If I wanted to watch something full of nasty, selfish and evil people, I'd turn on the news.
And CBS has since retracted that statement. THERE IS NO CANON. CBS gives themselves a fluid, blank slate on every single outing. The belief that Star Trek can or should exist in some perfect crystalline state is a fantasy cherished only by a particular breed of fan.
You CAN'T. You KNOW you can't. You keep pointing to a 10-years-out-of-date copy of a copy of a page that is long gone.
The belief that Star Trek is a world building exercise instead of a storytelling exercise IS. A. FANTASY.
They don't care. It's not important to them. That's why they go back and do prequels that can't ever line up with the content that follows chronologically. That's why every single series has gross internal consistency errors.
It's the fans that keep trying to stitch it together.
And I repeat- you're pointing to a 10 year old quote rather than a current statement of policy. Show me the current statement. I'll wait.
Or, instead of the exact dogmatism that makes the word 'canon' so appropriate to the rabid fanboyism it conjures to mind, you could use your eyes and see that CBS does not feel constrained by what has gone before when creating new content.
Fortunately, the upside of having to rub shoulders with people like that here is I get to watch the Screen-is-God purists suck it up that Discovery is, by their own unwaivering faith, canon. Indisputable and absolute. And then watch the dance as they try to justify the massive leap backwards that TOS will become in its aftermath.
And CBS has since retracted that statement. THERE IS NO CANON. CBS gives themselves a fluid, blank slate on every single outing. The belief that Star Trek can or should exist in some perfect crystalline state is a fantasy cherished only by a particular breed of fan.
They retracted nothing, they simply no longer have a page dedicated to what canon is on their new website. That does not make comments made by CBS staff in the past null and void.
Trying to mislead people through lying is never helpful.
You're needlessly polarizing again. While you're right, in the absolute, that CBS did not officially retract anything, nonetheless, taking off the page with their definition of 'canon' is, as the very least, an acknowledgement on their part, that their previous definition of 'canon' was either too rigid, or simply too problematic (i.e., not fully thought-thru).
'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!'
Judge Dan Haywood
'As l speak now, the words are forming in my head.
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
The belief that Star Trek is a world building exercise instead of a storytelling exercise IS. A. FANTASY.
This is made worse by the "reboot" trend in movies, TV and video games that has surfaced in the last decade. In some cases, you have something that is essentially a new IP with a recognizable name slapped on to make sure the final product makes some money based on nostalgia.
Since Trek is more about story than consistency in setting, it becomes a prime target for this sort of trend.
Well, this has certainly gotten well off track and degenerated into an argument that just won't die.
Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator and Resident She-Wolf
Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of Gearbox/Cryptic
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Comments
You CAN'T. You KNOW you can't. You keep pointing to a 10-years-out-of-date copy of a copy of a page that is long gone.
The belief that Star Trek is a world building exercise instead of a storytelling exercise IS. A. FANTASY.
They don't care. It's not important to them. That's why they go back and do prequels that can't ever line up with the content that follows chronologically. That's why every single series has gross internal consistency errors.
It's the fans that keep trying to stitch it together.
Or, instead of the exact dogmatism that makes the word 'canon' so appropriate to the rabid fanboyism it conjures to mind, you could use your eyes and see that CBS does not feel constrained by what has gone before when creating new content.
Fortunately, the upside of having to rub shoulders with people like that here is I get to watch the Screen-is-God purists suck it up that Discovery is, by their own unwaivering faith, canon. Indisputable and absolute. And then watch the dance as they try to justify the massive leap backwards that TOS will become in its aftermath.
You're needlessly polarizing again. While you're right, in the absolute, that CBS did not officially retract anything, nonetheless, taking off the page with their definition of 'canon' is, as the very least, an acknowledgement on their part, that their previous definition of 'canon' was either too rigid, or simply too problematic (i.e., not fully thought-thru).
l don't know.
l really don't know what l'm about to say, except l have a feeling about it.
That l must repeat the words that come without my knowledge.'
Since Trek is more about story than consistency in setting, it becomes a prime target for this sort of trend.
Well, this has certainly gotten well off track and degenerated into an argument that just won't die.
Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of Gearbox/Cryptic
Moderation Problems/Issues? Please contact the Community Manager
Terms of Service / Community Rules and Policies / FCT
Facebook / Twitter / Twitch