queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 See, the ship they find in "In a Mirror, Darkly" is the very same one which was lost in "The Tholian Web". Since that ship is the only interaction between the Mirror Universe and the normal one in that episode, I placed it after "The Tholian Web". "Mirror, Mirror" has no Stardate, and so can, theoretically, be placed anywhere in TOS's run. As such, I placed it right after "In a Mirror, Darkly". That way, you immediately see the "sequel" to "The Tholian Web", which serves as an introduction to the Mirror Universe, just before the TOS crew encounters it. So, while you are correct that they couldn't possibly have happened in chronological sequence, they did happen in a non-linear sequence. The Prophets would know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcmullet Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Queenhank, you are mistaken. In a mirror darkly (ENT) does not belong after Tholian Web. It belongs along w/the rest of ENT 150 years before Kirk's era. The Defiant starship not only was transferred to the evil universe, but was transported back 150 years to Archer's time. And it does NOT properly introduce the "mirror" universe concept; "Mirror Mirror" (TOS) does that. Chronological is not everything (contrary to what I used to think). You should watch all ST in production order (generally, with the *very* few exceptions having been stated by others). Annika and other are right. Leave Enterprise til the end. And I think Paramount goofed when numbering the Unification pair. So what if they shot it out of sequence. They still should have numbered I before II. Of course they're fallable humanoids like the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 well they made 700 eps - bound to be the odd error here and there :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 tcmullet - I gave an ordering consistent with CANONICAL order, not production order. Whether you believe the series should be watched in production order or not is immaterial. The subject of this thread is not which order is best, but rather which order is canonical. Now, since some episodes have no Stardates attached, there can be no truly canonical orsder, but my list is as close to it as I could come. Now, I understand the arguments (entirely valid) for placing "In a Mirror, Darkly" in its place within the production order, or within its timeframe inside Enterprise's run, but I chose to place it after "The Tholian Web" because the events in "In a Mirror, Darkly" are directly impacted by the events of "The Tholian Web", while having absolutely NO impact on any part of Enterprise, since the two universes do not cross over at all. I then chose to put "Mirror, Mirror" directly after because it contains no Stardate, and can thus be placed ANYWHERE in the run of TOS. So, the decision must then be made whether to place it in its place in the production order, or somewhere else. If somewhere else, with the decision to have the ENT episodes after "The Tholian Web", why not put it directly after them? Now, because, as I said, it is impossible to make an absolutely certain canonical ordering, mine is not intended to be "official", or even "the last word" on the subject of canonical ordering. What it is is the ordering I am watching the episodes in. Since I saw somebody ask about a canonical ordering, I posted my (in-progress) list, in order to help them out, as well as any other people who may wish to watch the episodes in canonical order. Now, as a clarification to the canonical order: Episodes which contain no Stardate must be placed by some other means. Now, if one plays off of events in a previous episode, as often happens with Voyager and DS9, then that's not so hard to do. If they are stand-alone episodes (ie, those which contain no allusions to previous episodes, and have no impact upon future episodes), then they can, conceivably, be placed anywhere in the run of the series. Of course, in such instances, it is likely preferable to place them in production order (ie, right before the episode produced after it, and right after the episode produced before it). TOS often has the opposite problem. For instance, the Animated Adventures contain characters which do not appear in TOS, and vice-versa. And yet, due to explicitly stated Stardates in the episodes, you cannot place them all together, so as to give the explanation that AA takes place after a chnge in staff for the Enterprise. As such, one must assume that the Enterprise has a complex duty-roster, allowing for radical changes in crew from one episode to the next. In other words, everybody is there, they're just off-duty in some episodes. (That sort of reasoning also helps to explain how Khan knew Chekhov in Star Trek II - He had been onboard the Enterprise, but an episode had not yet occurred during his duty shift when Khan came onboard.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcmullet Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 tcmullet - I gave an ordering consistent with CANONICAL order' date=' not production order. Whether you believe the series should be watched in production order or not is immaterial.[/quote'] No it's not immaterial. I was responding to your own statement, "I embarked on a mission to *watch* every episode and movie ... in canonical order (ie by Stardate)". I agree and appreciate most of your derivation of Canonical order. But *you* had said "watching". Yes, *giving* your canonical order is good, but I'm saying knowing the chronological order doesn't mean one should *watch* it in that order. I *am* specificly saying people should NOT watch like that. But "watching" order *is* the topic as expressed both by you and by the starter of the thread. The starter of the thread (Zarkov) was mistakenly thinking that "watch" order is the same as canonical order. (Which I hope for his wife's sake he has changed.) The subject of this thread is not which order is best, but rather which order is canonical.After "watch" order (being the main subject), yes knowing the canonical order is good. Thanks for your big list and for your efforts. ... Now, because, as I said, it is impossible to make an absolutely certain canonical ordering, mine is not intended to be "official", or even "the last word" on the subject of canonical ordering. What it is is the ordering I am watching the episodes in. Since I saw somebody ask about a canonical ordering, I posted my (in-progress) list, in order to help them out, as well as any other people who may wish to watch the episodes in canonical order.As I've said, they were asking about what order to watch in, and with the mistaken notion that they should see in chrono. order. But nevertheless, your list is helpful as, no matter what order watched, we *do* need to know the chronology. Now, as a clarification to the canonical order: Episodes which contain no Stardate must be placed by some other means. Now, if one plays off of events in a previous episode, as often happens with Voyager and DS9, then that's not so hard to do. If they are stand-alone episodes (ie, those which contain no allusions to previous episodes, and have no impact upon future episodes), then they can, conceivably, be placed anywhere in the run of the series. Of course, in such instances, it is likely preferable to place them in production order (ie, right before the episode produced after it, and right after the episode produced before it).I agree. To muddy the water a bit concerning watch order, one *might* make the case of watching TOS in original airing order. I don't know about the DVDs yet, but the published VHS and LDs had the original 1-min. teasers at the end of the episode and before the credits which showed the next episode *to be aired the following week in the 60's*. I don't think anyone would affirm that TOS should be watched in THAT order. The original aire order was dictated by the goons at NBC; probably one reason why Paramount decided in '87 to do TNG by syndication rather than thru a network; more control. So from '87 onward, Paramount generally aired them (with the silly rare exceptions mentioned) in production order, a good move. ...That sort of reasoning also helps to explain how Khan knew Chekhov in Star Trek II - He had been onboard the Enterprise, but an episode had not yet occurred during his duty shift when Khan came onboard.I've heard that, but I think it just a hokey excuse for genuinely careless mistake. Chekhov shouldn't have been the one to accuse Khan of attempting to kill the captain. Chekhov wasn't even in the mind of the writers until after the 2nd season. So someone else should have lashed out at Khan. Of course, maybe Chekhov simply read about the Space Seed incident in the ships logs. But he did get pretty emotional about it; like someone who lived thru it. I do remember reading somewhere that Paramount has never felt the stardates should be taken all that serious; that they feel trekkers have made too much of the thing. They should have thought of that when they were picking the dates throughout the last 40 years. When you're going to announce it at the beginning of each episode, you shouldn't make it a random number. I think Roddenberry *did* make a valient effort to make it work. (Of course we have to somewhat forgive the errors of AA vs TOS; in '69 they had no idea of what would happen to ST, and even in '70s w/AA, they were still under severe network control, hence the poor animation quality. And since AA, no way anyone could have imagined the blossoming of ST into the movies and 4 great series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I do agree that a first-timer should probably not start with Enterprise (personally, I think it should be TNG). But Zarkov did ask for the canon order. As for STII, Khan recognized Chekhov, thus eliminating any possibility that he hadn't been a crew member at the time. The way I see it, the writers of Star Trek aren't nearly as invested in things as we are, and as such, will make mistakes. It is then up to us fans to figure out how those mistakes can actually work within the context of the series. I mean, if it happens in an episode or movie, it IS canon, whether we like it or not. Since the canon can never be CHANGED, only added to, we must figure out how Khan knew Chekhov, even though we hadn't yet seen him when Khan was aboard the Enterprise. Many people like to simply complain about that sort of thing, or they choose to ignore it, but I say that we have a duty as Trekkies to clean up the messes left for us by the creators of Trek. Either way, none of that has anything to do with this thread's topic. This, however, does: since I have not seen Insurrection in a very long time, could anybody possibly tell me whether there is a mentioned Stardate in it? If not, then are there other clues as to episodes it must take place after/episodes it must take place before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I havn't actually seen TOS....yet - but as i watch episodes of the other series i do see gaps where it's clear knowlege of TOS is needed - so perhaps TOS first is a good idea....^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Another off-topic comment: when you do finally watch TOS, I suggest you go into it not expecting to watch Star Trek, at least not as you know it. TOS was, more than any other series, Science Fiction, more akin to The Outer Limits, or The Twilight Zone, than to TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT, or any of the movies. The stories were very episodic, and almost without exclusion heavily allegorical in nature. If you want to find out more about the Star Trek universe, or the classic Trek characters you know from the movies, not gonna happen. There are, off the top of my head, about 3 or 4 episodes which deal with the crew's history, or character development, and none which deal with the Trek universe itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Yeah - that's why i havn't watched it so far - it dosn't seem like Trek - i know it's what started Star Trek but it's just not the Trek i know or grew up with.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 It's not a bad show, just don't expect it to be anything like the Trek you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pall Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 The list is quite impressive, however, I do remember Gene saying that the stardates were just made up. He also said they tried to make them in somewhat of a logical order just because of the fan interest. It is hard to believe that I have seen every episode listed with the exception of a few DS9 ones that I couldnt watch because they were so different from STNG and Voyager. Ah, the good ol days when you had two Star Trek Series to chose from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Annika Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 If not' date=' then are there other clues as to episodes it must take place after/episodes it must take place before?[/quote'] Well, Janeway is back and an admiral so it has to come after Voyager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcmullet Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 It's kinda shocking to find that there are fans of ST who never saw the entire TOS. Everything else was built on that. TNG is better, and the rest are probably better, too. But only due to the foundation. I have an unfair advantage that I started watching ST as a teenager, waited from '69 to '87 for ST on TV again (TNG), and have always had the 79 episodes in mind (and later the 1st six movies) when watching any newer trek. You all really really really ought to watch all 79 TOSs, then watch all movies and newer series to appreciate all of it better. Sometime soon, I'm going to re-watch all myself. In the 70's, I wore myself out (tv-wise) watching reruns of TOS (edited for more commercial time). Now that all is full circle (all 4 series are done), I should rewatch all of TOS as I'm suggesting to you all to do for the first time. As someone said, DON'T expect '90s spfx in a 60's show. Don't expect great character development. Do realize you're watching the most revolutionary TV series to that date. You should read the book "The Making of Star Trek" written after the 2nd season. Although it was 1.5 inches thick (I think), I read it in only two days, so fascinating was it. After you read it, you'll realize how incredible a show it was, either in or out of scifi. Read it if you can get it. You'll never watch ST the same way again. Btw, I'm ashamed that when I discovered ST during it's 2nd season, I was still immature enough to be watch that dorky Lost in Space and taking it seriously. Was so glad a friend told me to switch to NBC (and even w/only a b/w TV) watch ST. Been more or less hooked ever since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcmullet Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I do agree that a first-timer should probably not start with Enterprise (personally' date=' I think it should be TNG).[/quote']Then how could they *possibly* appreciate Dr. McCoy's visit w/Data on the 1701-D?? No no no no, only if one has seen TOS and lived thru the years of McCoy's experience on Enterprise 1701 and 1701A can one truly appreciate his appearance on 1701D 76 years later. Furthermore, there are numerous references to TOS scattered throughout TNG. You CANNOT appreciate those moments unless you have seen TOS. But Zarkov did ask for the canon order.Yes, but he was asking for it from the mistaken belief that canon order is the appropriate order to view it in. And for the sake of people's *best* enjoyment of ST, I cannot back down that basic production order is and forever shall be the best and most enjoyable order for a FIRST viewing. As for STII, Khan recognized Chekhov, thus eliminating any possibility that he hadn't been a crew member at the time.Yes, d_mmit, I forgot that; too many years since watching it. Was planning to watch it (and the rest of movies) within a few months. Yes, I remember that "ChECKhov..." snidely coming out of Khan's lips; Chekhov was merely responding to that. The way I see it, the writers of Star Trek aren't nearly as invested in things as we are, and as such, will make mistakes. It is then up to us fans to figure out how those mistakes can actually work within the context of the series.Heck, talk about mistakes... When I saw Generations (ST7), it was a glaring error for Scotty to see Kirk "die" when the 1701B was part blown away. I was INSTANTLY remembering TNG Relics where (here's another case where you HAFTA see the entire TOS before any of TNG) Scotty said "I'll bet Jim Kirk himself got the ol' Enterprise out of mothballs to come lookin for me". How could he have said that in TNG when he SAW Kirk die in ST7?? Yes, a mistake indeed. I personally like much of ST7, but I really hated so much of it as being illogical and impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Well, Janeway is back and an admiral so it has to come after Voyager. Was she back in Insurrection? I thought she wasn't back until Nemesis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 It wasn't till Nemesis that we saw her as an Admiral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 That's what I thought. Which leaves the question: where does Insurrection go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 hmm....i'd say in between DS9 Season 5 and Voyager Season 2....i think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
queenhank Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Perhaps, but are there any clues in the movie which might help with an exact placement for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFMF Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 hmm...i'm not sure - but we know it would have to be before DS9 Season 6 as that's when the war happened and Worf would be very busy at that time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now