[janeway72]

I'll probably get chucked off the board for rabble rousing with this thread but we often talk of the Canonites, who generally dislike the new movie. But if ST XI was made by the people who own the rights to the Star Trek franchise, does that not now make it canonical?

[kevin]

It's completely canonical in terms of what is 'official' canon per Paramount. Which is, all aired material.

It just falls under 'alternative universe' canon.

Personal canon is a different ball game and from that perspective people can do what they like with it. It doesn't change the official studio status.

[Roysten]

I guess it pretty much is canon, it's canon in relation to Enterprise (whose canon status is often debated) and as it does have prime Spock in it that also cements its claim to canondom, it's just simply set in a different universe. For all we know one of the Enterprise Ds that came through in Parallels was from the new universe, anyone notice an excessive amount on lens flair from any of those ships?

[kevin]

I think Enterprise's canon status is only really debated by those who don't like it, or have to try and come up with some 'explanation' for it's production reality based problems in relation to TOS.

It's canon status should officially be the same as every other aired episode and film.

[MrQ1701]

Yes, it is canon. Just like the mirror universe is canon. This is just another universe

[celticarchie]

I used to be the kind of fan that would find a way to accept anything from the Officially Paramount Issued Star Trek Productions. If it wasn't consistent, then I'd find away to make it consistent...my attitude used to be "paramount makes it, we (the fans) make sense of it"...

But...

I have grown so sick of having my favourite books, comics, games, short stories etc., dismissed "officially" as non-canon, what? Flotsam?! No matter good or consistent they are or well they are written.

And yet it's allowed for films and TV series to be inconsistent, poorly written and just not good...or worse are being good, but are being dismissed anyway.

Now, I just don't recognize the Court of Canon. If it's good then I like it, if it's not...then I don't.

There are no canons on the Enterprise.

[kevin]

Which is the personal canon element.

One could argue there are already millions of alternate Star Trek universes out there because there's already a slightly different one rolling about the brain of every individual fan anyway.

[jla1987]

I guess I fall under a personal canon type. I mean, let's face it...we probably won't see anything that retcons post-2002 novels or games since we'll probably never see the Prime universe in a new production again.

[chator]

I'm sorry, but i thought canon referred to what Roddenberry considered to be 'Star Trek', not what Paramount says is canon.

[kevin]

Given the frequency with which Roddenberry changed his mind, I wouldn't put huge stock in what he specifically considered as such.

If only because you'd have to prepare yourself for him to change it's status when you were least expecting it. Which would include rumours that de-canonised parts of TOS. Of course, the biggest problem with GR is that he never explained what he meant when he said he didn't consider some things to be canon.

Therefore, it's completely undefined what he meant.

Currently,as I understand it 'official' canon is at the decision of Paramount.