I thought it'd be interesting to get everyone's POV on TAS. Canonical or non-canonical?

Give your reason why too.

Hmm. This is a toughie.
I think TAS deserves to be called canonical because it was on TV,(just like TOS) it cost money, it's available on video in some areas, the original cast did the voices..what more can be said? I think it should be considered canon.

Of course, this creates the question... if it's "real" did the universe somehow start looking like a cheap cartoon but fixed itself in time for the films?

Hmmm....Maybe Trelane escaped and turned everyone into cartoon characters then restored them for the movies.

I believe it should be cannon. It was executive produced by Gene Roddenberry, produced by Dorothy Fontana (with Trek from the very beginning), written by many of TOS' original writers, and voiced by the original actors. How could it BE any more official?

STAR TREK: THE ANIMATED SERIES
http://www.mainengineering.hispeed.com/tas_main.html

The question should be "Why shouldn't TAS be considered canonical?" Just because Paramount says it isn't? Why should we as fans let Paramount dictate these kinds of things?

Because Paramount owns Star Trek.

It was filmed. It was advertised. It exists. It is canon as canon can be.

Yeah, well, so was The Star Wars Holiday Special, and I don't see anybody at Lucasfilm rushing to embrace it...

Seriously though: going by the several eps I've seen, TAS has an excellent claim to canonicity. It doesn't contradict anything in the rest of the Trek universe - in fact it gives us many valuable new details; it's clearly designed as an intelligent, well-crafted (OK, barring the animation) show in and of itself; it involved the participation of many of Trek's original creators.

What's not to accept?

Good point about the Star Wars Xmas, I had managed to push it out of my brain. :-)

Theres not too much to decline from TAS.Many of the episodes could have been done quite well as live action (assuming the SFX could be there) and showed technologies in their infancy better than Enterprise has. Plus Roddenberry himself was involved in the creation of it. So it had a few episodes that were more cartoonish than others so have the live action series (and by cartoonish I am talking about the plot as the whole blooming thing was a cartoon) It was still a good and valid bonefide member of the Star Trek universe and should be considered canon.In look and feel it was a much closer fit than Enterprise is to the rest of the Trek Universe.

Several of the live episodes had very cartoonish qualities too. For example, "Spock's Brain"

Why shouldn't it be canon-it kept continuity better than Voyager and had better plots Star Trek V.

And, it had Kzinti. Put Kzinti up against NextGen Borg, I'd bet on the Kzin.

Put my nephew up against Voyager Borg, I'd put even money on my nephew. (He's three.)

What about a three year old Kzinti? Which would be scarier? (I know what you mean my son is two and already I am considring making everything in the house out of Nerf :-) )

I thought I'd mention this here, since it's appropriate...
Over on the "New TAS online comic" board, some discussion of TAS being canon or not came up. Kail brought up the point that one reason TAS isn't considered canon is the Kzin, a non-Star Trek property. I wondered why Paramount then just doesn't declare the one TAS episode featuring the Kzin to be non-canon, so the rest of the series could be, or else maybe they could come to a licensing agreement in order to keep the Kzin. (I acknowledged that in Real Life, it's not that simple to arrange for licensing, but you'd think that an entertainment juggernaut like Paramount could afford the legal process.)
Anyway, I concluded with the idea that it's just a tv show (I mean that in a positive way), and the viewer should take what he/she wants from it and enjoy what's there. (Of course, I'd enjoy it a lot more if all of TAS were on dvd! )

At the risk of making a simplistic argument, the cartoon characters appear on the inside covers of some of the TNG videos, alongside pictures from TOS and the movies. If they aren't canon, then what on Earth are they doing there?

There is also a section devoted to the animated Star Trek on startrek.com, the official Paramount website. Why is it there, if they don't concider it canon? There is no section there devoted to the Star Trek books, or comicbooks. Also, several TAS referances have crept into the later series. But CR is right, it's up to the individual to decide whats "canon" and whats not. It's just a shame that the series does not get mentioned in the encyclopedia and such.

Star Trek The Animated Series
http://startrekanimated.com

Didn't some of the creatures encountered by the Enterprise in TAS show up on a classroom board of Keiko O'Brien's in a DS9 episode?

I never noticed that one CR. But there have been others. Like the name of Kor's ship on DS9 was the same name used for it in TAS. Also the Vulcan mountain range "Vulcan's Forge" was created on TAS, and was mentioned on Voyager. I have a list somewhere of TAS referances, I'll see if I can find it.

I don't know if I'm right about that board in Keiko's classroom, and even if I am, it was probably in the background & not noticeable, like one of the many inside jokes the set decorators are known to have made.

A picture of the board is in the "Making of DS9" book. It shows the Excalbians, Hortas, the Catspaw creatures, Tribbles, Regulan Bloodworms, Spock's favorite Flying Parasites and Denebian Slime Devils.

That's where I'd seen it! Thanks, electron!

I always thought of the animated episodes as canonical. I thought they were the episodes that would have concluded the third season of TOS. I was disappointed to learn that they were not.

I know that there were issues with making them live action, including some issues like Arex' third limbs that I still don't think would be solved. But as basic plotlines, I thought they fit how the third season was going.

And, as others have mentioned elsewhere, certain aspects of these episodes have entered the Trek canon after they were created.

Star Trek V's trip to the center of the galaxy and our heroes meeting a non-corporeal alien trapped there, for two. And the hideous notion of people being born elderly and growing younger over time popping up in Voyager. (Although Tim Russ' scenes with the girl are wonderfully well acted.)

Wasn't the cartoon the first place that they told us that the T in James T. Kirk stood for Tiberius? I remember reading that someplace.

Yup. David Gerrold established it in the ep, "BEM".

Live long and prosper.

Now I've that I've rewatched all 22 episodes of The Animated Series, I am now willing to say that despite all its myriad flaws, despite the fact that it's a cartoon series with (extremely) limited animation, I accept TAS as canon. Most of the stories told in The Animated TREK could have, with a few adjustments, been expanded into an hour long live action show. Sure, most of the aliens would have to have been rethought out. And most of the sets. But overall, TAS had some good stories and carried on the spirit of STAR TREK. As far as I'm concerned it happened. It was a part of the Enterprise's original five year mission.

"Live long and prosper."

Hey, Kail, or whoever the moderator is (any moderator, really), could you edit out that first "I've" in my first sentence of my previous post? It looks like I was stuttering or something.

Thanks!

"Live long and prosper."

The question should be "Why shouldn't TAS be considered canonical?" Just because Paramount says it isn't? Why should we as fans let Paramount dictate these kinds of things?

Relax, Todd - we've had the same argument about Star Trek V: the Final Frontier!

According to this, characters from TAS may be making their way into future Trek live action series. That may make TAS canonical once and for all.