View Single Post
  #42  
Old 02-06-2008, 04:25 AM
starbase63's Avatar
starbase63 starbase63 is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 1,727
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tygrrius View Post
This is a great point. In fact, if Star Trek doesn't introduce new ideas and concepts but, rather, only focuses on hitting well-established notes of the past, then it is setting itself up for failure.

However, I think we're going to be in for a lot of surprises.

As for canon and the franchise's "definitions," I don't mind if they stretch things a bit as long as it makes logical sense within the context of the story they're trying to tell.

Besides, with TOS there's still a lot of gray area that could be filled in. I think a lot of fans (and I don't mean you, Ethaelmar) take the Star Trek Encyclopedia and the Star Trek Chronology to be canon. While they are both fine works, they also contain a lot of conjecture, particularly about Kirk and co.

As long as we allow them some literary license, there's plenty of room for J.J. Abrams and his team to tell new, exciting stories in this timeframe and keep the franchise moving forward.
Keep in mind any conjecture the Okudas did in those books is a) clearly marked as such and b ) based on pertinent canon.
__________________
Never keep a Vulcan waiting...
Admin, sb63's Star Trek Logs, member of the Trek Webmaster Program
STL is now also on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/StarTrekLogs
Reply With Quote