Annie:
I wonder if the suppressants wouldn't have cut down on the number of births? Either from people being too drugged to care about sex or else just the drugs themselves affecting reproduction.
Certainly the current generation of happy pills have severe negative effects on the sex drive.
Tavia
Would there have been a Federation Galactic Standard Calendar? References to 'years' since something happened are never qualified with Terran/Auron/Gauda Prime (would the adjective be Gaudan or Gaudean?) - and they 'would all be different'.
Just a thought, it being the Ides of March
Jacqui __________________________________________________________________ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
----- Original Message ----- From: jacquispeel@netscape.net
Would there have been a Federation Galactic Standard Calendar?
Given that the show is supposed to be set in "the third century of the new calendar," and IIRC in "Pressure Point" it is noted that the Federation brought in this calendar, one would assume so-- but then again, was it an abstract standardised system, applicable to any/all planets (a sort of Galactic Metric?), or simply the Earth calendar used as standard? For that matter, how *would* one develop an abstract standardised system that could be used on all planets?
All terribly confusing.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
From: Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk
Given that the show is supposed to be set in "the third century of the new calendar," and IIRC in "Pressure Point" it is noted that the Federation brought in this calendar
Fanon sometimes refers to the "3rd Century of the 2nd Calendar", no canonical reference in any episode (but cited by Terry Nation in his preface to Attwood's Programme Guide). A "New Calendar" is indeed mentioned in Pressure Point, introduced at about the time the Federation started destroying churches. So the Federation preceded the New Calendar, and hence probably inaugurated it, though it might have been something ratified by a number of powers of which the Federation was but one (bit like the decision to alter the date several hundred years ago, with much ensuing complaint of lost lifespan. The decision wasn't ratified by the Russian Orthodox Church, for one, which I believe is why the October Revolution of 1917 happened in our November).
If so, then the inauguration of the New Calendar might not have been a kind of Year Zero, but merely a continuation of the old calendar with all subscribing parties brought into line.
but then again, was it an abstract standardised system, applicable to any/all planets (a sort of Galactic Metric?), or simply the Earth calendar used as standard? For that matter, how *would* one develop an abstract standardised system that could be used on all planets?
Dunno. Iain? Using the Earth calendar as the baseline seems sensible, analogous to using GMT as a baseline for measuring time across the planet (if indeed it is used in that way by anyone other than the BBC World Service). But would it be 365.25 'days' of 24 hours, or simply 365 days, with or without leap years? It's easy to see how several different systems might have been adopted across the galactic community, slowly drifting out of sync, hence the need for a 'new' calendar to bring them all into line.
Three time references in the series hint at a 24 hour clock in standard use: in The Way Back the London's departure from Earth was advanced to 1700 Earth time (about 5 pm, with the ship taking off in what seemed to be summer - it should have been broad daylight but the ship took off at night, suggesting that Earth time was based on a meridian some way away from Europe. Perhaps the Pacific, perhaps along or close to what is currently the International Date Line?).
In Hostage, Servalan's planetfall on Exbar was scheduled for '2159 standard'. In Harvest of Kairos,shuttle lift-off was scheduled for 0815.
Dates listed in The Way Back are given in what can be seen as a conventional year/month/day notation. (Renor Leesal was born on 42.1.5 and vaccinated on 42.4.3 - he could be born on January 5th and vaccinated on April 3rd, rather less likely born on 1st May and *then* vaccinated on 4th March the same year.)
Other dates are obscure at best - Travis massacred civilians on Zircaster on date code beta 2001, and the Federation surveyed Obsidian on date code 303 ('a long time ago', according to Vila). This is probably just the scriptwriters making it up as they go along (which I'd expect of Allan Prior, not quite so forgivable for the mighty Chris Boucher) and I personally don't attach much canonical weight to either of these references. Besides, TWB comes first and hence takes canonical precedence.
All terribly confusing.
You said it:)
Neil
Neil Faulkner wrote:
Besides, TWB comes first and hence takes canonical precedence.
That seems backwards. What about retconning? I've known shows to slip something in later that turns what the audience thought it knew on its head, yet does it in such a way that everything still makes perfectly logical sense.
Mistral
From: Mistral mistral@centurytel.net
Besides, TWB comes first and hence takes canonical precedence.
That seems backwards. What about retconning? I've known shows to slip something in later that turns what the audience thought it knew on its head, yet does it in such a way that everything still makes perfectly logical sense.
Surely that requires careful planning, if not forethought, on the part of the scriptwriters so as not to violate existing canon? Whereas contradictions between episodes come from different writers each going their own separate ways, or even a single writer cheerfully ignoring what s/he wrote in an earlier episode?
Neil
Neil Faulkner wrote:
From: Mistral mistral@centurytel.net
Besides, TWB comes first and hence takes canonical precedence.
That seems backwards. What about retconning? I've known shows to slip something in later that turns what the audience thought it knew on its head, yet does it in such a way that everything still makes perfectly logical sense.
Surely that requires careful planning, if not forethought, on the part of the scriptwriters so as not to violate existing canon? Whereas contradictions between episodes come from different writers each going their own separate ways, or even a single writer cheerfully ignoring what s/he wrote in an earlier episode?
Yes, a good retcon would require some thought. But there are other occasions in which what comes later is an improvement over what went before it, so (even not playing the game) I might be inclined to view later changes as additional information or revisions, rather than errors, and view canon through the lens of the revision (especially if later eps adhere to the revision).
I'm not arguing against you seeing earlier material as definitive if you want to, just wondering if this is always the case, or if you only apply this rule to B7?
Mistral
From: Mistral mistral@centurytel.net
I'm not arguing against you seeing earlier material as definitive if you want to, just wondering if this is always the case, or if you only apply this rule to B7?
Only to B7, since it's the only series I care sufficiently about to worry over things like canonicity. Where possible, I use first mention as the baseline for deciding what constitutes canon, but there can be exceptions.
If a later episode deals in some depth with something that was previously only alluded to, then I will give more weight to the later material (eg Children of Auron and what it says about Cally's background, only briefly mentioned - and ambiguously at that - in Time Squad)
If a first mention is at odds with virtually all the rest of the series, then I'll go with the series. Eg: Spacefall referrred to detectors measuring distance in 'subsecs', whereas the rest of the series used spacials.
Also the significance of any particular point needs to be borne in mind. So Travis' remark about chasing Blake into another galaxy (Duel) has to be weighed up against the limits of travel explicitly stated in Star One. In the latter episode, this is far more plot-relevant than Travis' remark, and so wins out.
Neil
----- Original Message ----- From: Neil Faulkner N.Faulkner@tesco.net
Fanon sometimes refers to the "3rd Century of the 2nd Calendar", no canonical reference in any episode (but cited by Terry Nation in his
preface
to Attwood's Programme Guide).
I know, which is why I didn't give it an episode reference :). But it does seem to appear in a lot of Beeb promotional materials, so I'd be willing to make a case for its admission as extracanon but relevant.
lost lifespan. The decision wasn't ratified by the Russian Orthodox
Church,
for one, which I believe is why the October Revolution of 1917 happened in our November).
This is what I have also heard.
If so, then the inauguration of the New Calendar might not have been a
kind
of Year Zero, but merely a continuation of the old calendar with all subscribing parties brought into line.
Possible, though it does have vague echoes of decimalisation and New Pence to it, which is why I'd be inclined to view it as totally new-- para the introduction of the French New Calendar following the French Revolution. If the Federation did come to power through some sort of coup or revolt, particularly one necessitating the closure of the [older regime's] churches, it seems likely that they would try to sever as many cultural ties with the old system as possible, including changing the dating system.
with or without leap years? It's easy to see how several different
systems
might have been adopted across the galactic community, slowly drifting out of sync, hence the need for a 'new' calendar to bring them all into line.
Indeed. Some other sci-fi that I recall (notably Elizabeth Lynn's hard-sf novels) takes the convention of having two calendars in use everywhere-- a standardised galactic one and a local one. Sort of like having a universal language and a vernacular.
Three time references in the series hint at a 24 hour clock in standard
use:
in The Way Back the London's departure from Earth was advanced to 1700
Earth
time (about 5 pm, with the ship taking off in what seemed to be summer -
it
should have been broad daylight but the ship took off at night, suggesting that Earth time was based on a meridian some way away from Europe.
What's your evidence for it taking place in summer? If the story takes place in what is currently known as England <pauses, wary of cries from across the Atlantic, but hearing none, continues>, it's still pretty green in November, but pitch black by five.
Dates listed in The Way Back are given in what can be seen as a
conventional
year/month/day notation. (Renor Leesal was born on 42.1.5 and vaccinated
on
42.4.3 - he could be born on January 5th and vaccinated on April 3rd,
rather
less likely born on 1st May and *then* vaccinated on 4th March the same year.)
Just thinking... January hasn't always been the first month of the year (IIRC it was April for a long time) and so might not be the first month in the time of B7...
Other dates are obscure at best - Travis massacred civilians on Zircaster
on
date code beta 2001, and the Federation surveyed Obsidian on date code 303 ('a long time ago', according to Vila).
Which could be some sort of standardised military system?
This is probably just the scriptwriters making it up as they go along (which I'd expect of Allan Prior, not quite so forgivable for the mighty Chris Boucher) and I personally don't attach much canonical weight to either of these
references.
It could also be evidence of some long-forgotten script conference in which an attempt was made to develop a standardised ST-style dating system, which only two writers took seriously enough to adopt :)?
Besides, TWB comes first and hence takes canonical precedence.
In the case of an unresolvable contradiction, I tend to agree with you on that. Although, for the sake of argument, it could be noted that TWB is rather different from what came after, and so some bits of it could be glossed over on those grounds.
Fiona
The Posthumous Memoirs of Secretary Rontane Available for public perusal at http://nyder.r67.net
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--- Fiona Moore nydersdyner@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > -- but
then again, was it an abstract standardised system, applicable to any/all planets (a sort of Galactic Metric?), or simply the Earth calendar used as standard? For that matter, how *would* one develop an abstract standardised system that could be used on all planets?
It's not my field, as they say, but as I understand it a day is the duration of a planet's rotation whilst a year is the amount of time a planet takes to orbit it's sun. I believe someone was mad enough a few years ago to experiment with 25 hour days but gave it up because he got depressed when the experiment obliged him to go to bed just as the sun was getting up.
If, however, one's citizens are confined to domes then you can make days and years any duration you want as their biological rhythms will adapt themselves eventually to the new system. In which case the Federation could impose a metric standardised calendar which would be applicable wherever one went. Or impose the earth calendar irrespective of the year/ day length of the planet one happens to be on.
Some sort of expedient like this would be inevitable if one was living on a planet like Venus where the day is longer than the year.
Stephen.
____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
-
Fiona Moore -
jacquispeel＠netscape.net -
Mistral -
Neil Faulkner -
Stephen Date -
Tavia