Sounds like good, responsible housekeeping.
What was the problem again?
What was the problem again?
Continuity
- Thread starter PrimeDirective
- Start date
If my eyes rolled any further, they'd fall out of my head.
Depending on who you ask, the problem was either that the novels had become so continuity-obsessed that they were going to do a three-book miniseries explaining why the doors in Starfleet Academy seen in TNG's "The First Duty" were hand-operated rather than automated and link it to an explanation for why the transporter effect changed between TNG, DS9, and VOY due to the mechanisms of Elias Vaughn, Garak, and the Oralian Way, thereby ensuring Certain Doom for the entire Star Trek franchise...
... or that the books were going to completely abandon all continuity between one-another to the point where Picard's marriage to Beverly and their unborn son would disappear and every other novel would feature a here-to-fore unseen relative or love interest for Picard die, only for him to instantly get over it in time for the next book, thereby causing all Star Trek fans ever to stop reading the novels.
I thought it was that the Star wars "levels" of canon thing is rather silly and that the Trek line of books is just fine as it is.
No, I see your perspective. I just don't share it, nor do I share your opinions about what makes "quality fiction."
The nonsense was the lame personal attack.
Exactly!
RobertScorpio
Pariah
^^ Good luck on getting on anyone in this forum to agree to continuity. That is why I like the new book series that will be based on the new movie series because, from what I heard recently, there will be a mandiated continuity; BRAVO!
Rob
Way to be late to the party, and wrong. Again.
Ah, but since we know we're going in circles, this loop will be different...creating an alternate incompatible timeline!
Continuity is ruined again!
Continuity is ruined again!
^ You.
Out.
Out.
How many times are you guys gonna have this debate. LOL. Nothing new has been said since the last time we had this discussion with all the same old arguments rehashed. If it rears it's ugly head again, maybe link the new topic to the old ones or tell the poster to use the Search function.
You're really limiting yourself by saying that it's not possible. It's trully sad
I'm glad that whoever holds the rights to Star Trek, is finally seeing the light
^ What are you talking about?
This comes to mind:
Wrong. Check out the back of "Enterprise: The First Adventure" for Gene Roddenberry's quotes re his admiration for Vonda McIntyre's work.
Richard Arnold followed his directives seriously (from the post-ST IV heyday till GR's death in September 1991) to attempt keep the tie-ins closer to the parent series, but this tightening (1989, during the TNG post-Season One hiatus) came to light when it was realized that TNG had huge marketing potential. The then-Star Trek Office felt that they owed it to the next generation of new fans to reflect the parent shows more closely. It was felt that some authors had strayed too far from the original material.
At no time did Roddenberry convey “they are garbage. Utterly worthless. You are an idiot and a sucker for having bought them but please keep doing it so we get more money”. He did get angry at a convention flier that called Diane Duane "The creator of the Rihannsu". You could argue that GR & RA's striving to make the tie-ins conform more tightly was showing respect to the people who would be buying them.
And someone on high, very recently, ordered the four tie-in JJ movie novels be placed on hiatus. Perhaps it's again the feeling that CBS owes it to the next generation of new fans to reflect the parent Paramount movie more closely, lest the authors stray too far from the original material too early?
It has always been a criticism of Star Trek wargames, RPGs, video games, pinball machines, choose-your-own-adventure books, video board games and computer games that essential premises of the parent TV shows must be tweaked in order to produce a ST game that a maximum of gamers actually want to play. Nothing new about the way "ST Online" has been created; if anything, it has attempted to embrace the broader ST tapestry more than any other game to come before.
I've always believed GR and co. disliked the novels, comics etc (with a few exceptions, as you pointed out, Therin) but I can't seem to remember exactly what led me to think that in the first place.
I think it might be Young Me back in the early 90's reading again and again "the novels/comics don't count" in letters pages of Star Trek mags and comics, thus giving that perception from the about the time I started reading them.
More recently i remember reading something online by Vonda McIntyre saying she wasn't given much respect from her peers for writing tie-ins, and that the novels were "low priority" or something.
I think it might be Young Me back in the early 90's reading again and again "the novels/comics don't count" in letters pages of Star Trek mags and comics, thus giving that perception from the about the time I started reading them.
More recently i remember reading something online by Vonda McIntyre saying she wasn't given much respect from her peers for writing tie-ins, and that the novels were "low priority" or something.
The mistake there is assuming that an evaluation of consistency equals an evaluation of quality. Saying that one work of fiction is incompatible with another isn't saying it's a worse story, it's just saying they don't fit. Roddenberry was saying of certain books that they weren't accurate depictions of the ST universe as he defined it. That's not the same as saying they weren't any good as stories.
That's got nothing to do with Roddenberry. It's a pervasive prejudice in the field of prose science fiction that tie-in literature is inferior hack work. Those same prose authors who are prejudiced against tie-ins also have a fairly low opinion of most SFTV, part and parcel of the same attitude. So the people who would disrespect McIntyre for her tie-in work would also tend to disrespect Roddenberry for being a TV writer.
And of course the tie-ins are a low priority relative to the show. The show is a massive production with hundreds of people working on it or economically dependent upon it, with hundreds of millions of dollars invested in it, and with the potential to generate billions of dollars of profit in the long run. The tie-ins are the work of dozens of people (at least on the creative and editorial sides; I don't know how many might be involved in printing and distribution), and the overhead and profits involved in them are a fraction of a percent of those involved in the show. They are not on an equal footing by any stretch of the imagination. The show has to be a higher priority for the people involved because it is so much more massive a project with so much more labor, money, and resources invested in it. That's not a slam against the books, it's got nothing to do with liking or disliking them; it's a simple acknowledgment of reality.
Similar threads
