<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Oddly enough, &#8216;NX-01&#8242; never occurred to me</title>
	<atom:link href="http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jul 2010 11:59:48 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117742</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:04:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117742</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://scifiwire.com/2009/07/whats-next-for-spock-prim.php#more&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;What&#039;s up&lt;/a&gt; with Spock Prime, btw.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://scifiwire.com/2009/07/whats-next-for-spock-prim.php#more" rel="nofollow">What&#8217;s up</a> with Spock Prime, btw.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117634</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117634</guid>
		<description>&quot;...but with the Abrams version of Trekâ€™s continuity being the only game in town for now the original timeline been sidelined as a source of future stories.&quot;

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.simonandschuster.net/content/index.cfm?pid=523075&amp;tab=24&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Nope&lt;/a&gt;.

&quot;...which I assume are still free to tell stories in the various settings far away from the Enterprise-as-seen-on-TV....&quot;

There are those, but the primary novels are just continuing the mainstream continuity (which has gone on past the series into also sorts of later permutations of wars and whatnot, I gather.)

There&#039;s &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.startrekonline.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;also this&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;but with the Abrams version of Trekâ€™s continuity being the only game in town for now the original timeline been sidelined as a source of future stories.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.simonandschuster.net/content/index.cfm?pid=523075&amp;tab=24" rel="nofollow">Nope</a>.</p>
<p>&#8220;&#8230;which I assume are still free to tell stories in the various settings far away from the Enterprise-as-seen-on-TV&#8230;.&#8221;</p>
<p>There are those, but the primary novels are just continuing the mainstream continuity (which has gone on past the series into also sorts of later permutations of wars and whatnot, I gather.)</p>
<p>There&#8217;s <a href="http://www.startrekonline.com/" rel="nofollow">also this</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117590</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 05:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117590</guid>
		<description>OK, the original continuity is still there in a parallel universe, but with the Abrams version of Trek&#039;s continuity being the only game in town for now the original timeline been sidelined as a source of future stories.

(Unless, of course, the of Abrams&#039; next effort turns out to be &lt;em&gt;Star Trek: The Search for Vulcan&lt;/em&gt; and sees Spock-Prime team up with SylarSpock to jump even further back in time, save Romulus, undo Nero&#039;s actions and reboot the reboot.)

(Except, I&#039;d imagine, in the tie-in novels which I assume are still free to tell stories in the various settings far away from the Enterprise-as-seen-on-TV that were created so that the writers can kill and maim their major characters without screwing with the franchise.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, the original continuity is still there in a parallel universe, but with the Abrams version of Trek&#8217;s continuity being the only game in town for now the original timeline been sidelined as a source of future stories.</p>
<p>(Unless, of course, the of Abrams&#8217; next effort turns out to be <em>Star Trek: The Search for Vulcan</em> and sees Spock-Prime team up with SylarSpock to jump even further back in time, save Romulus, undo Nero&#8217;s actions and reboot the reboot.)</p>
<p>(Except, I&#8217;d imagine, in the tie-in novels which I assume are still free to tell stories in the various settings far away from the Enterprise-as-seen-on-TV that were created so that the writers can kill and maim their major characters without screwing with the franchise.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117589</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:42:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117589</guid>
		<description>&quot;Yeah, thereâ€™s a certain sick irony to the fact that now that the JJ Abrams reboot has swept away ST:[TOS&#124;TNG&#124;DS9&#124;VOY] and all the other feature films the only on-screen Trek that is still canonical is Enterpriseâ€¦&quot;

I don&#039;t think that&#039;s right: there are simply (at least) two different canonical universes side-by-side.  Although really, there are more, since there&#039;s also the Mirror Universe, and the reboot pretty much retroactively established that every example of time travel in the &lt;i&gt;ST universe&lt;/i&gt; created a &quot;real&quot; separate parallel universe.

That&#039;s the way the creators of the new movie claim it, and I don&#039;t think that&#039;s at all an unreasonable interpretation, myself.

(I have a lot of &lt;i&gt;other&lt;/i&gt; problems with elements of the movie making no sense, but not this issue.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Yeah, thereâ€™s a certain sick irony to the fact that now that the JJ Abrams reboot has swept away ST:[TOS|TNG|DS9|VOY] and all the other feature films the only on-screen Trek that is still canonical is Enterpriseâ€¦&#8221;</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s right: there are simply (at least) two different canonical universes side-by-side.  Although really, there are more, since there&#8217;s also the Mirror Universe, and the reboot pretty much retroactively established that every example of time travel in the <i>ST universe</i> created a &#8220;real&#8221; separate parallel universe.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the way the creators of the new movie claim it, and I don&#8217;t think that&#8217;s at all an unreasonable interpretation, myself.</p>
<p>(I have a lot of <i>other</i> problems with elements of the movie making no sense, but not this issue.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117588</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:50:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117588</guid>
		<description>Yeah, there&#039;s a certain sick irony to the fact that now that the JJ Abrams reboot has swept away ST:[TOS&#124;TNG&#124;DS9&#124;VOY] and all the other feature films the only on-screen Trek that is still canonical is &lt;em&gt;Enterprise&lt;/em&gt;...

Part of me wonders what would happen if Abrams used That Bloody Theme Song in his NuTrek sequel. (Answer: if they managed to keep the news from leaking, Trekkie heads would explode in unison in cinemas across the land on opening night.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, there&#8217;s a certain sick irony to the fact that now that the JJ Abrams reboot has swept away ST:[TOS|TNG|DS9|VOY] and all the other feature films the only on-screen Trek that is still canonical is <em>Enterprise</em>&#8230;</p>
<p>Part of me wonders what would happen if Abrams used That Bloody Theme Song in his NuTrek sequel. (Answer: if they managed to keep the news from leaking, Trekkie heads would explode in unison in cinemas across the land on opening night.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117587</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 20:53:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117587</guid>
		<description>&quot;Unless I blinked and missed it (possible) or my memory is failing me (very possible), we viewers never saw the E-J itself in action, we merely saw a portrait of the E-J.&quot;

Well, Archer was &lt;i&gt;on&lt;/i&gt; the E-J.  Archer is, in the future of the Enterprise-J, taken to a room with a window or viewscreen, and sees the battle (for a few seconds) it was in.  See &lt;a href=&quot;http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(NCC-1701-J)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  (My memory for trivia did not recall that it&#039;s the &quot;Battle of Procyon V.&quot;)

&quot;To my mind, an interior shot doesnâ€™t cut it.&quot;

Far be it for me to argue with your mind.  :-)

Can we &lt;i&gt;get&lt;/i&gt; any more Trekkie geeky than this?

Though I&#039;d point out that alternate timelines are now as canony as it gets.  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Unless I blinked and missed it (possible) or my memory is failing me (very possible), we viewers never saw the E-J itself in action, we merely saw a portrait of the E-J.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well, Archer was <i>on</i> the E-J.  Archer is, in the future of the Enterprise-J, taken to a room with a window or viewscreen, and sees the battle (for a few seconds) it was in.  See <a href="http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(NCC-1701-J)" rel="nofollow">here</a>.  (My memory for trivia did not recall that it&#8217;s the &#8220;Battle of Procyon V.&#8221;)</p>
<p>&#8220;To my mind, an interior shot doesnâ€™t cut it.&#8221;</p>
<p>Far be it for me to argue with your mind.  :-)</p>
<p>Can we <i>get</i> any more Trekkie geeky than this?</p>
<p>Though I&#8217;d point out that alternate timelines are now as canony as it gets.  :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117555</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 05:43:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117555</guid>
		<description>IIRC that picture of E-J is a still image of the vessel that was on display on the wall of the room in the scene where Archer was pulled into the middle of a battle and told how important it was that he not go on a suicide mission that would result in his not being around to inspire the formation of the Federation.

Unless I blinked and missed it (possible) or my memory is failing me (very possible), we viewers never saw the E-J itself in action, we merely saw a portrait of the E-J. For my money, that places it in the same category as the &lt;a href=&quot;http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(XCV_330)&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Enterprise XCV 330&lt;/a&gt;: we&#039;ve seen a portrait of the ship, we know it exists in some timeline or other, but we&#039;ve never had the pleasure of watching it in motion, flying across our screens and giving us a good look at it from the viewpoint of someone watching it go by on the way to make some history.

To my mind, an interior shot doesn&#039;t cut it. A ship can&#039;t earn iconic status if we never got to have the camera&#039;s &lt;acronym title=&quot;Point Of View&quot;&gt;POV&lt;/acronym&gt; sweep from stem to stern at some point.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IIRC that picture of E-J is a still image of the vessel that was on display on the wall of the room in the scene where Archer was pulled into the middle of a battle and told how important it was that he not go on a suicide mission that would result in his not being around to inspire the formation of the Federation.</p>
<p>Unless I blinked and missed it (possible) or my memory is failing me (very possible), we viewers never saw the E-J itself in action, we merely saw a portrait of the E-J. For my money, that places it in the same category as the <a href="http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(XCV_330)" rel="nofollow">Enterprise XCV 330</a>: we&#8217;ve seen a portrait of the ship, we know it exists in some timeline or other, but we&#8217;ve never had the pleasure of watching it in motion, flying across our screens and giving us a good look at it from the viewpoint of someone watching it go by on the way to make some history.</p>
<p>To my mind, an interior shot doesn&#8217;t cut it. A ship can&#8217;t earn iconic status if we never got to have the camera&#8217;s <acronym title="Point Of View">POV</acronym> sweep from stem to stern at some point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117530</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 23:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117530</guid>
		<description>&quot;...it would be perverse not to think of the two ships with the most screen time first....&quot;

True, but I&#039;ve never claimed not to be perverse.  

However, I do grant your point.

&quot;[Re E-J, I don&#039;t think it counts if we never saw an exterior shot of the ship in flight.&quot;

?  I linked to a picture.  Admittedly, it was a very quick shot in that one episode, but there it was.  (I&#039;m so glad that Manny Coto boot-kicked all those endless stupid &quot;Temporal Cold War&quot; plots; the fourth season of &lt;i&gt;Enterprise&lt;/i&gt; was so excellent compared to all the seasons before it!  If only they&#039;d hired him from the start!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230;it would be perverse not to think of the two ships with the most screen time first&#8230;.&#8221;</p>
<p>True, but I&#8217;ve never claimed not to be perverse.  </p>
<p>However, I do grant your point.</p>
<p>&#8220;[Re E-J, I don&#8217;t think it counts if we never saw an exterior shot of the ship in flight.&#8221;</p>
<p>?  I linked to a picture.  Admittedly, it was a very quick shot in that one episode, but there it was.  (I&#8217;m so glad that Manny Coto boot-kicked all those endless stupid &#8220;Temporal Cold War&#8221; plots; the fourth season of <i>Enterprise</i> was so excellent compared to all the seasons before it!  If only they&#8217;d hired him from the start!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117470</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 05:52:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117470</guid>
		<description>I concede re NX-01: well played, sir...

As to Enterprise B/C/E, fun as it was to see them make their appearances in an episode here or a filmÂ or two there over the years I just don&#039;t think any of them is what naturally comes to mind upon hearing the phrase &#039;USS Enterprise.&#039; Sure, your second thought would naturally go in that direction, but it would be perverse not to think of the two ships with the most screen time first. It&#039;d be like hearing the word &#039;Sith&#039; and thinking of Darth Maul before Darth Vader!

[Re E-J, I don&#039;t think it counts if we never saw an exterior shot of the ship in flight.]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I concede re NX-01: well played, sir&#8230;</p>
<p>As to Enterprise B/C/E, fun as it was to see them make their appearances in an episode here or a filmÂ or two there over the years I just don&#8217;t think any of them is what naturally comes to mind upon hearing the phrase &#8216;USS Enterprise.&#8217; Sure, your second thought would naturally go in that direction, but it would be perverse not to think of the two ships with the most screen time first. It&#8217;d be like hearing the word &#8216;Sith&#8217; and thinking of Darth Maul before Darth Vader!</p>
<p>[Re E-J, I don't think it counts if we never saw an exterior shot of the ship in flight.]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Farber</title>
		<link>http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/comment-page-1/#comment-117458</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Farber</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 02:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://soreeyes.org/archive/2009/07/03/oddly-enough-nx-01-never-occurred-to-me/#comment-117458</guid>
		<description>It couldn&#039;t have been NX-01, because that wasn&#039;t a &quot;USS.&quot;  (Geekier.)

&quot;Supplementary question&quot;: More geeky if you considered the possibility of Excelsior-class (E-B) or Ambassador-class (E-C).  Lesser points for &lt;i&gt;Enterprise-E&lt;/i&gt;.  Most &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Enterprise#Alternate_Reality&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;points&lt;/a&gt; for &lt;i&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Enterprise_NCC-1701-J.jpg&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Enterprise-J&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/i&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It couldn&#8217;t have been NX-01, because that wasn&#8217;t a &#8220;USS.&#8221;  (Geekier.)</p>
<p>&#8220;Supplementary question&#8221;: More geeky if you considered the possibility of Excelsior-class (E-B) or Ambassador-class (E-C).  Lesser points for <i>Enterprise-E</i>.  Most <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starship_Enterprise#Alternate_Reality" rel="nofollow">points</a> for <i><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USS_Enterprise_NCC-1701-J.jpg" rel="nofollow">Enterprise-J</a></i>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
