Sign in to follow this  
Maltz

The Federation-Klingon War in 2257 (SPOILERS)

Recommended Posts

Okay, so the Discovery has now returned to the prime universe to find that 9 months have passed, making it late 2257, the war with the Klingons is still on, and twenty percent of the Federation has been conquered, with a third of Starfleet wiped out. Hmm, that doesn't really fit with other info we have. We know from TOS "The Conscience of the King" that Kodos' Shakespearean group began touring the Federation at this time, which wouldn't be very likely if a major war was raging. We also know it was in this year that Kirk was serving on the USS Farragut when it encountered the vampire cloud creature at Tycho IV, as detailed in TOS "Obsession." The war's been going on for a while now, and with so much damage, I can't quite believe Starfleet would be conducting run of the mill planetary surveys, and there's not much time for the war to end and normal functions resume before the end of the year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Maltz said:

We know from TOS "The Conscience of the King" that Kodos' Shakespearean group began touring the Federation at this time, which wouldn't be very likely if a major war was raging.

Possibly. But, when they started, it could have been some sort of USO type presentation.

 

29 minutes ago, Maltz said:

We also know it was in this year that Kirk was serving on the USS Farragut when it encountered the vampire cloud creature at Tycho IV, as detailed in TOS "Obsession." T

Who knows why they were surveying the planet?

 

Now, this protracted war deal does create some questions continuity-wise, but, so far, it's nothing insurmountable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, prometheus59650 said:

Possibly. But, when they started, it could have been some sort of USO type presentation.

 

Who knows why they were surveying the planet?

 

Now, this protracted war deal does create some questions continuity-wise, but, so far, it's nothing insurmountable.

I doubt the Farragut would be carrying out surveys at all in such a time of extreme war; they'd more likely be at the front lines of the conflict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Maltz said:

I doubt the Farragut would be carrying out surveys at all in such a time of extreme war; they'd more likely be at the front lines of the conflict.

If the war is collapsing and there are hints of something there that might help, "Check it out."

Who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are at least a half a dozen Klingon episodes in TOS. Most of these episodes have Klingons and Humans talking. I just can't see where one of the characters wouldn't have referenced the war. A human bragging about how we trounced you at ... like Picard did in Yesterdays Enterprise. Or a Klingon bragging about how many humans he killed in the last war... if we hadn't been betrayed by weak leaders, you would be kneeling at my feet now, human. 

There was just too much conflict between Klingons and Humans and it was too recent for it not to come up. If you have a story set in america in 1955 and there are multiple stories that had groups of Germans or Japanese in them mixing with Americans in them. I can't see how you could have avoided mentioning WWII. I've never watched the show Mad Men, but if a German or Japanese company had asked the company to create an add campaign for them, I really think that someone would have mentioned the war at some point.  On the other hand, a show set in 2015, you wouldn't have to because anyone who would personally remember the war would be in their 70's at least and the war is ancient history. 

I don't care about the uniforms or designs of the ships. It's like you gave the same story to three artists, one living in 1917, one in 1967, and one in 2017 and asked them to draw an impression. There would be similarities between them and a lot of differences. On the other hand, if you asked them something like, "Would Kirk shoot someone down in cold blood without a very good reason," all three artists would say no. In 1927, WWI was still fresh in peoples minds. In 1955, WWII was fresh in peoples minds. The Great Klingon War would still be fresh in the minds of TOS characters.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, prometheus59650 said:

Now, this protracted war deal does create some questions continuity-wise, but, so far, it's nothing insurmountable.

Especially if one’s head canon accepts DSC as another variation of the prime universe (like ENT) and not the actual prime universe from TOS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Especially if one’s head canon accepts DSC as another variation of the prime universe (like ENT) and not the actual prime universe from TOS.

That's pretty much where I'm at because it's almost required at this point.

The TOS timeline could be accurately described as FUBAR after 5 other series got through with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sehlat Vie said:

Especially if one’s head canon accepts DSC as another variation of the prime universe (like ENT) and not the actual prime universe from TOS.

What is the difference between a variation of the prime universe and a separate universe in a multiverse? TOS and ENT are in closely related universe. The mirror universe split off long ago. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, scenario said:

What is the difference between a variation of the prime universe and a separate universe in a multiverse? TOS and ENT are in closely related universe. The mirror universe split off long ago. 

None really; it’s the same type of variation that allows an audience to accept Robin Curtis taking over for Kirstie Alley as Saavik.  Suspension of disbelief...;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sehlat Vie said:

None really; it’s the same type of variation that allows an audience to accept Robin Curtis taking over for Kirstie Alley as Saavik.  Suspension of disbelief...;)

Saavik changed actors between The Wrath of Khan (1982) and The Search for Spock (1984). VCR's were expensive and uncommon until a few years later. A typical fan would have seen The Wrath of Khan once or twice in the theaters and a few times on TV between showing. Most of them didn't notice that the actor had changed. I remember that I didn't really notice until I bought a VCR and watched the two movies a few hours apart rather than a few months apart. 

But, point taken. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scenario said:

Most of them didn't notice that the actor had changed.

This is a bit of a stretch... the character was also played very differently, as well.  Even a casual viewer had to have noticed the change.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

This is a bit of a stretch... the character was also played very differently, as well.  Even a casual viewer had to have noticed the change.  

I can say that I didn't notice the difference. But in my defence, at that point, I had seen each movie once two years apart. I really don't memorize movies until I have watched them multiple times.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, scenario said:

I can say that I didn't notice the difference. But in my defence, at that point, I had seen each movie once two years apart. I really don't memorize movies until I have watched them multiple times.  

I remember seeing TSFS with my older, non-Trekkie sister and she assumed Robin Curtis was playing a different character.  

Later on, she asked me, “Where’d Kirstie Alley’s character go?” :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Sehlat Vie said:

I remember seeing TSFS with my older, non-Trekkie sister and she assumed Robin Curtis was playing a different character.  

Later on, she asked me, “Where’d Kirstie Alley’s character go?” :laugh:

Kirstie Alley was just another actress to me in 1982. I remember seeing it a few years later and saying to myself "is that Kirstie Alley. I don't remember her being in this movie."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, scenario said:

Kirstie Alley was just another actress to me in 1982. I remember seeing it a few years later and saying to myself "is that Kirstie Alley. I don't remember her being in this movie."

As a kid I didn't ever realize those two actors were supposed to be playing the same person.  Just assumed it was a different character for a while. And I grew up with on VHS. 

On 1/31/2018 at 5:35 PM, scenario said:

There are at least a half a dozen Klingon episodes in TOS. Most of these episodes have Klingons and Humans talking. I just can't see where one of the characters wouldn't have referenced the war. A human bragging about how we trounced you at ... like Picard did in Yesterdays Enterprise. Or a Klingon bragging about how many humans he killed in the last war... if we hadn't been betrayed by weak leaders, you would be kneeling at my feet now, human.

Eh...I don't think it really screws anything up.  The shows weren't about talking about the past, TOS stories were usually about "here's what is happening NOW." I can imagine them not going on about it.  I can imagine Klingons, possibly so close to winning a war then losing it, not bringing up such a dishonorable thing, and I can imagine Kirk and co. not wanting to poke the bear by bringing it up, or too focused on the current situation to go on about the past.

 

Honestly this is the main reason I was hopingthey'd go way into the future, persnickety fans poking the continuity thing was a big issue for Enterprise as well.  Why invite that nonsense?  But, since I am enjoying the series, moreso then I ever really enjoyed Enterprise to be honest.  And so far I can still go with the continuity and say it's possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, kenman said:

As a kid I didn't ever realize those two actors were supposed to be playing the same person.  Just assumed it was a different character for a while. And I grew up with on VHS. 

Eh...I don't think it really screws anything up.  The shows weren't about talking about the past, TOS stories were usually about "here's what is happening NOW." I can imagine them not going on about it.  I can imagine Klingons, possibly so close to winning a war then losing it, not bringing up such a dishonorable thing, and I can imagine Kirk and co. not wanting to poke the bear by bringing it up, or too focused on the current situation to go on about the past.

 

Honestly this is the main reason I was hopingthey'd go way into the future, persnickety fans poking the continuity thing was a big issue for Enterprise as well.  Why invite that nonsense?  But, since I am enjoying the series, moreso then I ever really enjoyed Enterprise to be honest.  And so far I can still go with the continuity and say it's possible. 

I agree about Enterprise. I watched it again about a month ago and really enjoyed it. The first couple of seasons were uneven but there was usually something good. I'm really liking Discovery as well. I'm not going to stop watching it because of canon. I'm not the type that nitpicks stuff really minor stuff. It's more stuff like Vulcan's have green blood. I'd bet that in TOS, someone must have mentioned that Vulcan's have green blood in 25 or 30 episodes. Usually McCoy calling Spock a green blooded... 

When it comes to a war, I'm thinking of scenes like the Trouble with Tribbles. The Klingon called the Enterprise a garbage scow. If we had just beaten the Klingons in a war 10 years before, I'd bet someone on the table would have said something insulting to the Klingons about how they had lost the war. There were just too many cases in TOS where Klingons and Humans were trying to one up each other verbally. Day of the Dove would have been another good place for a human insult about the war. Just about everyone but Chekov would have fought in the war or at least been an adult or close to it when it happened. If it had happened even 25 years earlier when most of the main characters would have been children, it would be more likely that it wouldn't come up. 

But they have a few more episodes to clear it up. While wiping out the year by going into the past would be clean and solve a lot of problems, I agree with man of the people here who say it would be the easy way out. I'd much rather they use the spore drive to creatively end the Klingon war. Somehow I think that the resident, murderous Klingon will have a part in the solution. 

I remember my friend coming home from the Air Force with a new vcr he bought for $800. He was in for 4 years so that would have been around 1982 or 83. VCR's were really expensive until around 85 or 86. So most people wouldn't have had ST 2 or 3 until a few years after they were in the theaters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, scenario said:

When it comes to a war, I'm thinking of scenes like the Trouble with Tribbles. The Klingon called the Enterprise a garbage scow. If we had just beaten the Klingons in a war 10 years before, I'd bet someone on the table would have said something insulting to the Klingons about how they had lost the war. There were just too many cases in TOS where Klingons and Humans were trying to one up each other verbally. Day of the Dove would have been another good place for a human insult about the war. Just about everyone but Chekov would have fought in the war or at least been an adult or close to it when it happened. If it had happened even 25 years earlier when most of the main characters would have been children, it would be more likely that it wouldn't come up.

Well with Tribbles, the entire scene was Scotty saying "ignore him" and once he says garbage scow that's when he hits him. No talk from our boys, just attempting to ignore and then barfight.  So who knows what they could have said. Day of the Dove, maybe...but again, it doesn't really matter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Errand of Mercy was implicit, if not explicit, that up till that moment the Feds and the Klingons have always skated on the edge of war but never actually crossed the line.  Kirk and Kor mention trade & border disputes, raids, etc. but never ONCE did either mention a war where the Klingons occupied a vast swath of the Federation.

And STVI (the most Klingon-y movie of the ST movie canon) never mentioned any all-out war between the two parties either; nor did DS9, which had the Federation at war with the Klingons for nearly a whole season without ANY mention of a Klingon occupation of the Federation in the 23rd century.

Again, this is exactly why I think of DSC as just another universe within the Trek multiverse.  It works better that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2018 at 5:35 PM, scenario said:

There are at least a half a dozen Klingon episodes in TOS. Most of these episodes have Klingons and Humans talking. I just can't see where one of the characters wouldn't have referenced the war.

This is not the best way to play this game. It's much more satisfying and fun to look for all the ways that DSC does line up with TOS instead of the pointless exercise in imagining which episodes would have name-dropped DSC plot points if only the TOS writers in the 1960s had foreknowledge of what the DSC writers were doing in 2018. 

There are many positive connections that add texture and meaning to TOS episodes. Ive been telling everyone I can to re-watch Arena. Prior to DSC, Kirk's near obsession with killing the Gorn comes off wrong. But after DSC, he's clearly a captain who has had some recent experience with an alien invasion of Federation space, and is even trying to make the same decision Burnham attempted at the Battle of the Binary Stars. There are other connections, and these will only grow as the series goes on.

For all the supposed inconsistencies, the writers have proved to us they are aware of every detail of canon. They have told us to trust them. Elements of DSC that cannot be reconciled--like the spore drive--will be reconciled. Other elements that were never explicitly contradicted by TOS--like a Klingon invasion, perhaps--will be explained in a way that fits with what we did see on TOS. Hell, their design people say they even have a plan to slowly transition to the TOS color pallet. Tonight's episode may make the point of this thread moot. I'm signed up for the journey, and I trust the creative team to work out all the details.           

Edited by Justin Snead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Justin Snead said:

This is not the best way to play this game. It's much more satisfying and fun to look for all the ways that DSC does line up with TOS instead of the pointless exercise in imagining which episodes would have name-dropped DSC plot points if only the TOS writers in the 1960s had foreknowledge of what the DSC writers were doing in 2018. 

There are many positive connections that add texture and meaning to TOS episodes. Ive been telling everyone I can to re-watch Arena. Prior to DSC, Kirk's near obsession with killing the Gorn comes off wrong. But after DSC, he's clearly a captain who has had some recent experience with an alien invasion of Federation space, and is even trying to make the same decision Burnham attempted at the Battle of the Binary Stars. There are other connections, and these will only grow as the series goes on.

For all the supposed inconsistencies, the writers have proved to us they are aware of every detail of canon. They have told us to trust them. Elements of DSC that cannot be reconciled--like the spore drive--will be reconciled. Other elements that were never explicitly contradicted by TOS--like a Klingon invasion, perhaps--will be explained in a way that fits with what we did see on TOS. Hell, their design people say they even have a plan to slowly transition to the TOS color pallet. Tonight's episode may make the point of this thread moot. I'm signed up for the journey, and I trust the creative team to work out all the details.           

I really don't care about the little stuff. Who cares that Picard or Kirk casually mentioned something once and Discovery is ignoring it. I don't mind the spore drive. It's pretty clearly a one of a kind ship. There's no reason to mention a one of a kind ship in later episode. If there were a whole fleet of Spore Drive ship, different story. 

To me it's like someone writing a sequel to a book written 50 years ago. You can't go making major changes. Like radically changing the ages of major characters. If the lead character was 50 years old in the first book and you set the new book 2 years later and the lead character is 25 years old. TOS wrote the book. Discovery should follow what TOS wrote, not the other way around. But you should only take this so far. I really don't care about things like changing a minor character that was only mentioned in a couple of sentences in the original book.

A major war that all future stories just kind of forgot about is the kind of major change that worries me. I like the show and won't stop watching it. I'd also love to see them fix the problem in the next two episodes without going back and wiping out a whole year of episodes in some sort of timey wimey thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2018 at 11:47 AM, Maltz said:

I doubt the Farragut would be carrying out surveys at all in such a time of extreme war; they'd more likely be at the front lines of the conflict.

Why? The Enterprise-E was doing missions like that during the Dominion War. Hell - even the Defiant was doing surveys in the Gamma Quadrant while the Klingon-Federation War was raging. I don't think the exploratory arm of the UFP grinds to a halt while a war is going on. It's probably just reduced.

On 1/31/2018 at 4:35 PM, scenario said:

I don't care about the uniforms or designs of the ships. It's like you gave the same story to three artists, one living in 1917, one in 1967, and one in 2017 and asked them to draw an impression. There would be similarities between them and a lot of differences. On the other hand, if you asked them something like, "Would Kirk shoot someone down in cold blood without a very good reason," all three artists would say no. In 1927, WWI was still fresh in peoples minds. In 1955, WWII was fresh in peoples minds. The Great Klingon War would still be fresh in the minds of TOS characters.  

I agree with everything you said, but the above is why I don't like giving too much "ground" to so - called minor detail changes (ex. uniforms). Because once you do that on a minimal level, they'll start doing it on other levels. And when a fan protests, we're dismissed as whiny fanboys that need to get over it. I think after the other Treks - enough ground has been ceded to lazy writers that don't want to do research. We all agree upgrades in looks are needed, but DSC has literally gone off the rails to the point that people in this very topic are saying it's simply easier to pretend this is another universe....

40 minutes ago, Justin Snead said:

This is not the best way to play this game. It's much more satisfying and fun to look for all the ways that DSC does line up with TOS instead of the pointless exercise in imagining which episodes would have name-dropped DSC plot points if only the TOS writers in the 1960s had foreknowledge of what the DSC writers were doing in 2018.

I think that's a bit of a cop out to be honest. No one is asking for the TOS writers to have foreknowledge of DSC. We're asking the DSC writers to understand and respect the source material. Make it connect. What exactly is the appeal of creating a Star Trek show closely linked to TOS both with the time frame and characters (Spock's adopted sister) only to cry foul when we see any links are specious at best?

Upgrading looks is ok up to a point, but we should not literally be at the point where we as fan are meant to shoehorn DSC into canon.

This is why I hate the prequels of Star Wars (among many other reasons). It made little to no effort to seem like it was connected to the OT. Instead, we're told that we have to take the OT and make it fit in the PT. Nope. No. No. No. No. It's the opposite (or should be). It should be made to fit the the OT like Rogue One did. Unfortunately, now that is considered "making a movie for fanboys".

It is truly baffling why Star Trek/Star Wars has such trouble staying consistent with what has come before. The Harry Potter or LotR movies didn't seem to when they delved into prequels. (Not that I've heard at least).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Founder said:

Why? The Enterprise-E was doing missions like that during the Dominion War. Hell - even the Defiant was doing surveys in the Gamma Quadrant while the Klingon-Federation War was raging. I don't think the exploratory arm of the UFP grinds to a halt while a war is going on. It's probably just reduced.

I agree with everything you said, but the above is why I don't like giving too much "ground" to so - called minor detail changes (ex. uniforms). Because once you do that on a minimal level, they'll start doing it on other levels. And when a fan protests, we're dismissed as whiny fanboys that need to get over it. I think after the other Treks - enough ground has been ceded to lazy writers that don't want to do research. We all agree upgrades in looks are needed, but DSC has literally gone off the rails to the point that people in this very topic are saying it's simply easier to pretend this is another universe....

I think that's a bit of a cop out to be honest. No one is asking for the TOS writers to have foreknowledge of DSC. We're asking the DSC writers to understand and respect the source material. Make it connect. What exactly is the appeal of creating a Star Trek show closely linked to TOS both with the time frame and characters (Spock's adopted sister) only to cry foul when we see any links are specious at best?

Upgrading looks is ok up to a point, but we should not literally be at the point where we as fan are meant to shoehorn DSC into canon.

This is why I hate the prequels of Star Wars (among many other reasons). It made little to no effort to seem like it was connected to the OT. Instead, we're told that we have to take the OT and make it fit in the PT. Nope. No. No. No. No. It's the opposite (or should be). It should be made to fit the the OT like Rogue One did. Unfortunately, now that is considered "making a movie for fanboys".

It is truly baffling why Star Trek/Star Wars has such trouble staying consistent with what has come before. The Harry Potter or LotR movies didn't seem to when they delved into prequels. (Not that I've heard at least).

The look changing I have no problem with. It's like making a sequel to Metropolis, which was a movie made in 1927. Omg, this movie has sound. OMG, the movie is in color. OMG the movie doesn't use stop motion special effects. 

Star Wars didn't have 700 episodes to try to conform to. Harry Potter had 7 books. The LotR movies are another story. I liked them but the changed they made me quite angry. They left out an entire chapter that for me was the entire purpose of the trilogy. To me the only analogy I can think of is making a movie about the live of Jesus and leaving out the crucifiction because it would slow down the story. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, scenario said:

The look changing I have no problem with. It's like making a sequel to Metropolis, which was a movie made in 1927. Omg, this movie has sound. OMG, the movie is in color. OMG the movie doesn't use stop motion special effects. 

Star Wars didn't have 700 episodes to try to conform to. Harry Potter had 7 books. The LotR movies are another story. I liked them but the changed they made me quite angry. They left out an entire chapter that for me was the entire purpose of the trilogy. To me the only analogy I can think of is making a movie about the live of Jesus and leaving out the crucifiction because it would slow down the story. 

Again - I agree up to a point. There is a difference between upgrading aesthetics (ala JJ Abrams with the TOS movies) and completely transforming it to something unrecognizable.

Plus, I'm not asking them to conform to 700 episodes. Only the ones that are relevant to what is going on in DSC. They don't need to watch an episode about Bajoran spirituality or research the history of that sludge that killed Tasha Yar.

I'm guessing you're referring to the removal of Tom Bombadil?

Edited by The Founder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Founder said:

Again - I agree up to a point. There is a difference between upgrading aesthetics (ala JJ Abrams with the TOS movies) and completely transforming it to something unrecognizable.

Plus, I'm not asking them to conform to 700 episodes. Only the ones that are relevant to what is going on in DSC. They don't need to watch an episode about Bajoran spirituality or research the history of that sludge that killed Tasha Yar.

I'm guessing you're referring to the removal of Tom Bombadil?

No. The scourging of the shire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scenario said:

No. The scourging of the shire.

When I read that chapter in the book, it felt anti-climatic. After all that the hobbits have been through, after the major climax of the three novels, was another conflict, another rising action, another climax, which felt a lot less important than the major climax. Do you really spend another 30 minutes of movie run-time on an allegory about the evils of industrialization?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this