The Return of Janeway

[Gov Kodos]

But the system leaves out those that aren't interested in a soap opera back story of information. It also does little to encourage a casual buyer to get any one book as they don't know whether they might need to get other books.

It doesn't leave them out if it's written in a way that they don't need the whole backstory to understand and enjoy the story at hand. Which it is.

There is room for more than just continuity works.

Yes, there is. And there are.

If they were not doing that when the shows were on, then it is part of the problem, over-arching continuity choking off creativity.

You're saying they should move away from continuity to not confuse newcomers, right? So how would it have helped newcomers who just watched the latest episode to read a novel that was written before the episode aired which turned out to contradict it?

If a writer really wanted to write something completely original, he wouldn't be doing tie-in fiction.

It doesn't matter what the writers want to do in this. This is a problem for the publishers.

...Wait, so you've gone from "embrace writer creativity" to "it doesn't matter what writers want to do"?

Yeah, publishers, the folks who buy the stories and sell them to readers. I also didn't make this an either or choice which you seem to be reading it as or determined to cast it as.

 

[zar]

I also didn't make this an either or choice which you seem to be reading it as or determined to cast it as.

No, I don't think I'm putting words in your mouth or anything. There is a quite obvious contrast between your first post:

"Why not allow authors to create their own stories choosing whatever, if anything from other books, that they wish to be canon?"

and your recent post:

"It doesn't matter what the writers want to do in this."

First you say the writers should be allowed to choose which continuity to include in their own stories and which to reject. Then it's pointed out to you that they have chosen that they want to use other authors' continuity; and now you've changed your stance to: they shouldn't have the choice to incorporate continuity at all -- they MUST place their stories in a vacuum for the supposed benefit of the publishers.

 

[Gov Kodos]

I also didn't make this an either or choice which you seem to be reading it as or determined to cast it as.

No, I don't think I'm putting words in your mouth or anything. There is a quite obvious contrast between your first post:

"Why not allow authors to create their own stories choosing whatever, if anything from other books, that they wish to be canon?"

and your recent post:

"It doesn't matter what the writers want to do in this."

First you say the writers should be allowed to choose which continuity to include in their own stories and which to reject. Then it's pointed out to you that they HAVE chosen that they WANT to use other authors' continuity; and now you've changed your stance to: they shouldn't have the choice to incorporate continuity at all -- they MUST place their stories in a vacuum for the supposed benefit of the publishers.

I didn't say you put words in my mouth, rather, as your doing here, your trying to frame this as an either or choice.

The perspective is that of the publishers, not the writers. For now they've found a nice niche market to sell a Trek World to. That's all well and good, but like any long running franchise it will eventually become stale, just like the TV franchise. That staleness being, the casual viewer had no reason to look at the shows they knew what to expect and had no reason to watch new shows.

The same will happen with the books if they continue in a way that has casual readers over looking their offerings because they've read some in the past and suppose new books are nothing but more of the same. Sales will atrophy and die just like the audience for televised Trek did.

 

[zar]

I didn't say you put words in my mouth, rather, as your doing here, your trying to frame this as an either or choice.

I'm not "trying" to frame anything, I'm just reading what you wrote and logically interpreting it. You made two statements that appear contradictory. One post says the authors should have a choice whether to do it this way or that way; the other says they should do it this way because that way is a fiery path that leads to cancellation and oblivion.

...it will eventually become stale, just like the TV franchise ... Sales will atrophy and die just like the audience for televised Trek did...

Someone with more insight and patience than me could probably go into great detail on this, but suffice it say: TV and novels are completely different. You can't apply predictions to one based on what happens with the other.

 

[Gov Kodos]

I didn't say you put words in my mouth, rather, as your doing here, your trying to frame this as an either or choice.

I'm not "trying" to frame anything, I'm just reading what you wrote and logically interpreting it. You made two statements that appear contradictory. One post says the authors should have a choice whether to do it this way or that way; the other says they should do it this way because that way is a fiery path that leads to cancellation and oblivion.

...it will eventually become stale, just like the TV franchise ... Sales will atrophy and die just like the audience for televised Trek did...

Someone with more insight and patience than me could probably go into great detail on this, but suffice it say: TV and novels are completely different. You can't apply predictions to one based on what happens with the other.

I don't understand your problem.

 

[zar]

And that was uncalled for.

 

[Gov Kodos]

There's an easy way to have Janeway return, and not screw up Treklit's canonical paper universe.

Bring Janeway back to the screen.

Small or large, it matters not to me.

I just want to hear that VOICE say, "BATTLESTATIONS" one more time.

See those BLUE eyes BURN into some poor slob's soul one more time.

And watch that SMILE CROOK up the corner of her mouth, one more time.

I still don't see why continuing stories with Janeway is even an issue. Besides stories that can be set before the death, or some handwaving to bring her back to life, there is the option of ignoring the death altogether.

 

[BillJ]

The same will happen with the books if they continue in a way that has casual readers over looking their offerings because they've read some in the past and suppose new books are nothing but more of the same. Sales will atrophy and die just like the audience for televised Trek did.

I would have to think that the Voyager books authored by Kirsten Beyer are not under-performing. Considering there are three published and possibly a forth on the way. Pocket usually doesn't continue to publish under-performing writers.

Like you though, I'd like to see more in the way of series fiction published. But I don't want to see the changes made to post-series Voyager rolled back. Beyer has given us a great new look at the Voyager universe.

 

[Gov Kodos]

The same will happen with the books if they continue in a way that has casual readers over looking their offerings because they've read some in the past and suppose new books are nothing but more of the same. Sales will atrophy and die just like the audience for televised Trek did.

I would have to think that the Voyager books authored by Kirsten Beyer are not under-performing. Considering there are three published and possibly a forth on the way. Pocket usually doesn't continue to publish under-performing writers.

Like you though, I'd like to see more in the way of series fiction published. But I don't want to see the changes made to post-series Voyager rolled back. Beyer has given us a great new look at the Voyager universe.

I don't really see an author doing something in contradiction to others established writing as rolling back anything. I'm far more interested in the particular author and their story than in some over arching universe being built. If the writer wants to preface by having some stories being connected to the one they are telling fine, if not, it's all just as good to me.

 

[Bob Karo]

So, am I the only one who would like to see her stay dead?

 

[zar]

So, am I the only one who would like to see her stay dead?

No you're not. See this thread's counterpart in the Trek Lit forum.

 

[Gov Kodos]

So, am I the only one who would like to see her stay dead?

She's fictional, she can't be killed. However, there can be story lines where she is no longer used by saying the character died. So why is it important to you that there be no more stories with her? Is someone threatening you if the character is used again? Are you being forced to read the stories should they be written?

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Let me just say I love the thread title. I love looking at forum and seeing The Return of Janeway. It warms my heart.

 

[BillJ]

So, am I the only one who would like to see her stay dead?

She's fictional, she can't be killed. However, there can be story lines where she is no longer used by saying the character died. So why is it important to you that there be no more stories with her? Is someone threatening you if the character is used again? Are you being forced to read the stories should they be written?

I have yet to see anyone say that they want no more stories with Janeway in them. I'm more than happy to buy pre-relaunch novels featuring her. But I like the course Kirsten Beyer has plotted without the character. Former cardboard background characters now seem like they have some life to them (including Chuckles).

So shoot me.

 

[Gov Kodos]

So, am I the only one who would like to see her stay dead?

She's fictional, she can't be killed. However, there can be story lines where she is no longer used by saying the character died. So why is it important to you that there be no more stories with her? Is someone threatening you if the character is used again? Are you being forced to read the stories should they be written?

I have yet to see anyone say that they want no more stories with Janeway in them. I'm more than happy to buy pre-relaunch novels featuring her. But I like the course Kirsten Beyer has plotted without the character. Former cardboard background characters now seem like they have some life to them (including Chuckles).

So shoot me.

bang

 

[zar]

So why is it important to you that there be no more stories with her?

Nobody ever said that. He means he wants her to "stay dead" in the current continuity. He thinks that story would be hurt by having her come back to life within it.

Is someone threatening you if the character is used again? Are you being forced to read the stories should they be written?

No. Meanwhile, you seem rather threatened by the fact that there are stories where the character is dead. Case in point:

While an audience may be there for a continuous set of adventures, how many do the lose when an undesirable event is written- like Janeway dying.

Your argument could be turned around and applied to your hypothetical "lost audience": Is someone threatening you if the character is killed? Are you being forced to read the stories about her being dead?

 

[Bob Karo]

Nobody ever said that. He means he wants her to "stay dead" in the current continuity. He thinks that story would be hurt by having her come back to life within it.

Exactly.

 

[Gov Kodos]

Nobody ever said that. He means he wants her to "stay dead" in the current continuity. He thinks that story would be hurt by having her come back to life within it.

Exactly.

Nothing changes in those stories if a different writer brings her back. One writer can pursue a storyline where she's dead, another can pursue one where she's not. Is some one forcing you to read both?

 

[zar]

One writer can pursue a storyline where she's dead, another can pursue one where she's not. Is some one forcing you to read both?

Again: Nobody ever said they can't do that. We already have lots of incompatible story threads within Trek Lit, and that's fine. It's just that the currently active prolific authors tend to try to keep things consistent. You're the one saying they should deliberately not do this, for reasons still unclear.

 

[Gov Kodos]

One writer can pursue a storyline where she's dead, another can pursue one where she's not. Is some one forcing you to read both?

Again: Nobody ever said they can't do that. We already have lots of incompatible story threads within Trek Lit, and that's fine. It's just that the currently active prolific authors tend to try to keep things consistent. You're the one saying they should deliberately not do this, for reasons still unclear.

What you quoted doesn't say that at all. I don't understand your problem.