Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!
Good. I'd say excellent, except for the fact that the last 12 months contained three books of the TNG-r which I'm not liking as much as I would like to.
Sxottlan said:
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
The highlight of the year was Reap the Whirlwind and the Mirror Universe books. Which was expected (for me). The standout pleasant surprise (again, for me) was The Good that Men Do.
Sxottlan said:
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
As stated above: The TNG-R books. Q&A was by far the best of the four (or three if you don't count DIW) but even it, to me, wasn't all that stellar. Given my disappointment with DIW in 2005 I'm shocked to find that two and a half years later I consider it a VERY close second-best in the series.
Sxottlan said:
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
These are mostly with announcements of things to come, but yes, I like the fact that the novel line is thinking "outside the box" with new ideas to keep things fresh like more Mirror Universe books, the Myriad Universes books, and keeping up the Lost Era type books (although I've yet to read any of those).
Sxottlan said:
5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?
I'm bitching this year like in the past about anniversaries and the too many books that relate to that series in a given year. Another thing that seems a trend (even though I realize it's not intentional necessairily) is a shocking lack of Voyager books (be them during or after series). And no, a couple characters in TNG don't count, nor do Mirror Universe, I'm talking about normal and full-fledged Voyager stories.
Sxottlan said:
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
The upcoming Myriad Universe books. I like the idea of what Destiny appears to be, where we have this huge scale epic event that doesn't occur often but does happen that will greatly impact and change every series it touches.
Sxottlan said:
7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?
The most egregious decision here is part of what made Before Dishonor worse than it already was. And that being the decision that Q&A wasn't necessary information for Peter David to have before writing his novel.
Sxottlan said:
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
Other than the uneven heavy focus on one series over another at times, I say none, none at all. Even with the TNG-R, I realize I may not start liking it and if that's the case I'll stop reading those but someone else may like it. I understand that the line is setup to appeal to different people across the different series so maybe TNG is the one that won't appeal to me, much like VOY-R doesn't appeal to many around here.
Trek Books have been very strong since the late 90's but I have noticed a slight downward trend recently. I can't put my finger on a single exact I find the books I feel are weakest have all been relatively recent and I find myself not buying books more than had been the case a few years ago.
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
I liked the chances they have taken by setting books outside the mainstream settings. The mirror universe, the past (The Buried Age), other crews (Vanguard) etc. This is not a knock against the more traditional books. If Trek's "normal" settings weren't interesting, none of us would be here in the first place but with years of history it is necessary to stretch the boundaries and Trek books are masterful at this.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
Like I wrote above, there have been some weak books. Unlike many here, I liked Before Dishonor (despite the mischaracterizations of the new characters) but I found Resistance to be a chore to get through. I think because there was just nothing new there. Years ago, just using the Borg as a villain gave a book novelty but that isn't true anymore. Resistance seemed to assume that just including the Borg was enough and didn't present anything that seemed new and exciting (unlike Before Dishonor, which despite it's "nuts and bolts" problems was at least an engaging story.
I also found Sword of Damocles to be a weaker effort. It may be because it was coming off of what I felt was one of the best Trek books ever (Orion's Hounds) and thus had high expectations for it but I found Sword difficult to get through. It had many interesting ideas but I felt there were parts that were difficult to get past, in some cases because it was confusingly written in parts and in others because I had already seen what was going to happen but it seemed to take forever to get there.
Also, it seemed the previous books in the Titan series had a more "epic", galaxy-spanning feeling (without using the cliche of putting the entire Federation in Jeopardy) while this story felt more like just a weekly episode.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
No real trends other than it seemed that books that don't work for me for one reason or another seem to be among the more recent. But because this seemed to be a book by book situation, I can't really call it a trend.
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
I could be wrong but was anything other than the Mirror Universe introduced this year? IT seemed we got mostly more of what we had been getting which is not necessarily a bad thing because I liked what we had been getting for the most part
7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?
Not sure there is anything I can point to here. I am disappointed by some of the delays we have had for certain books but those are real world circumstances, not editorial decisions.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
I guess I feel obligated to say I wish the SCE omnibuses came out more often but I understand why that is.
The other item I wanted to mention isn't a change but a request of sorts. I am looking forward to the JJ Abrams movie in November but it is obvious that while they are being respectful to the history of Trek, they aren't going to prioritize continuity (and they shouldn't from a creative and realistic standpoint). As such, I am hoping the book line will treat this new beginning as just that, a new beginning, rather than try to shoehorn it into the universe the books currently use.
I expect to enjoy the new movie but I am sure it will flip what we know about those characters history on its ear and that is fine; to try to make it fit with what we know has come before would be a fun creative exercise but I personally would prefer to see the continuing adventures of the Enterprise grew I grew up with and let these new guys have there own adventures over here in a new sandbox.
The other item I wanted to mention isn't a change but a request of sorts. I am looking forward to the JJ Abrams movie in November but it is obvious that while they are being respectful to the history of Trek, they aren't going to prioritize continuity (and they shouldn't from a creative and realistic standpoint). As such, I am hoping the book line will treat this new beginning as just that, a new beginning, rather than try to shoehorn it into the universe the books currently use.
I expect to enjoy the new movie but I am sure it will flip what we know about those characters history on its ear and that is fine; to try to make it fit with what we know has come before would be a fun creative exercise but I personally would prefer to see the continuing adventures of the Enterprise grew I grew up with and let these new guys have there own adventures over here in a new sandbox.
From what I've been hearing, I don't think this movie is going to make any more changes in continuity than any prior Trek series has. The canon has never been a consistent, unchanging thing. TOS was making up its own backstory as it went along and had things constantly in flux. (Is it 200, 300, or 700 years in the future? Are they Vulcans or Vulcanians? Is it lithium or dilithium? Is it UESPA, Earth Central, or Starfleet Command?) The TOS movies added their own retcons. (Suddenly Chekov was aboard in the first season and Kirk had a son by an old flame we'd never heard of, not to mention that Starfleet is suddenly more militaristic than we've ever seen it, oh, and Klingons had bumpy heads now.) And each successive series added its own reinterpretations to what had come before. The various showrunners and directors have taken different approaches too, some striving for realism in the science and storytelling, others embracing a more broad and fanciful approach.
For that matter, different novelists have put their own twists on the Trek universe to some extent. Even while we're require to stay consistent with existing canon, we're still able to add our own interpretations. For instance, my Trek novels are set in a universe that follows the real laws of physics more closely than the shows usually did, and much the same can be said of novels by the Reeves-Stevenses or George Zebrowski, say; while Peter David's are set in a universe whose rules and tone are more like that of a comic book, and K. W. Jeter's have been in a Philip K. Dick-type world where reality is mutable.
All Trek creators try to work within the conceit that it's all a consistent reality, but the truth is that each showrunner, each director, each novelist and editor brings a distinct interpretation to the universe. That's what Abrams & co. are doing -- adding their own spin to the fiction, just as each and every one of their predecessors has done. So if we can accept the conceit that Gene Roddenberry's version of ST, Harve Bennett's version, Ira Behr's version, and Brannon Braga's version are all the same reality, then we should be able to accept the same about Abrams' version of ST, regardless of its differences of interpretation.
I think things are going very well. The sheer amount of material is often overwhelming to me, since I don't have the budget at the moment to go out and get every book new. I wish I did.
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
I really enjoy the original booklines, and am happy those keep developing... Vanguard, Titan, Corps of Engineers... while I do enjoy the reboots that allow us to revisit familiar friends (like the TNG relaunch), the new series really keep me reading.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
Book prices keep going up. Not that I don't necessarily think a paperback isn't work $8, but it severely cuts into my book budget. I've been trying to get books out of the library whenever possible, but their Trek selection is limited.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
I rather enjoyed the anniversary lines. Revisiting TOS in new and exciting ways was interesting. The TNG anniversary books look to be equally promising -- I've not had a chance to really dig in yet.
5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?
I do not like Mirror Universe stories. Has nothing to do with the authors who write them, or even the plots... I just fundamentally do not like the concept.
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
I like the eBook miniseries that have come out. I think that's a great concept, and they're cheaper than paper books. Now that I finally have a PDA that can run the books, I've been scooping them up.
7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?
Uhm... well, I don't like the font on the TNG relaunch books. It doesn't look "Trek" enough. I have "Resistance" sitting next to me by J.M. Dillard (one the library actually DID have...)
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
More anthologies. That's more stories for the bucks. Other than that, I think things are going pretty well for this reader... unless someone wants to donate some books to me... I own a house now... I'm poor.
I like that we're getting back to a more diversified approach to the Trek line, after TOS-a-rama last year. The TNG anniversary wasn't as overbearing as the TOS one, and what we've seen of 2008 speaks well of a broader conception of the Trek literary universe.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
Unfortunately, the TNG Relaunch has been rather weak, entries being either dull (Death in Winter), ridiculous, over-blown 'event' (Before Dishonour), or both (Resistance). What was once the flagship sales series deserves better than one good book out of four.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
The Mirror Universe books, which seem to have set up this year's anthology and Myriad Universes projects. Probably has to be a limited engagement or else it loses its originality, but I've enjoyed the trip outside the usual Trekverse so far.
5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?
The Borg. VOY dealt a serious blow to them at the end of the series, such that there was really no need to be revisiting them as a threat anytime soon. If you are going to have stories about the Borg, do something interesting with them instead of just counting on the hype and "First Contact" nostalgia to sell books.
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
I'm not entirely sure. Which is probably an unfair answer, by virtue of the editorial task. When editors are doing a good job, they fade into the background, and we have no direct evidence of the hard work they put into the work (unlike the authors, whom we interact with more often and more direct, via books or boards like this). I suppose I'll give Keith props for keeping the S.C.E. line vibrant after many stories (though I'm a few years behind in that regard), and Destiny sounds like a gutsy--not to mention complex--decision, though of course we won't know how that'll turn out until next year's State of the Trekverse.
7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?
Other than the TNG-Relaunch, which I've already complained about? Enterprise. The Good That Men Do took a bad but simplistic story, and then made things worse by making it into a bad complicated story, so convoluted as to be even less belieavable than the crappy original. And then there's the constant metafictional sneering at the finale in the book itself, which, while I agree with the sentiment, just came across as being vulgar. There are several editorial decisions about ENT I sitll don't understand, let alone like, such as rejigging the timeframe of TATV's events. And I hope that the next books in the series won't be another instalment of the Charles Tucker Show, a character already suffering from overexposure.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
More books! I miss the two-a-month days. What else? Avoid any more anniversary-type floods of one series over another. The DS9-R has suffered from long breaks (not all intended, I know) between books, particularly given how tightly-linked it is continuity wise; I'd like to see something more regular on that front, if possible.
Ceterum censeo VOY-R esse delendam.
EDIT:
Christopher said:
So if we can accept the conceit that Gene Roddenberry's version of ST, Harve Bennett's version, Ira Behr's version, and Brannon Braga's version are all the same reality, then we should be able to accept the same about Abrams' version of ST, regardless of its differences of interpretation.
Except that the Abrams film is a reboot, positing a new continuity by having all these characters meet up well before they originallly had, and likely giving the Enterprise herself a different history if rumours prove accurate. And if by some misfortune the film proves successful, likely they'll all be together again in the next film.
Of course, if rumours of time travel from the future to young Kirk's time prove accurate, then you have a simple way of explaining the new continuity by saying its a new timeline created by the actions of the time-travelers, distinct from the original timeline we've witnessed so far.
Any books dealing with the new continuity ought to be published in their own line, like Marvel's 'Ultimate' series. And the spetacular failure of the continuity acrobatics in TGTMD, I've no wish to see even more extreme examples of the same.
^ Casting has been confirmed, and that's sufficient to see that the history of the TOS crew is being rewritten. We won't know the details until the film is released, of course, and it'll probably be a while after before Pocket even gets around to TOS-based books since they're giving Abrams room to work in at the moment, but that doesn't mean we can't state our wishes for a clear distinction between the two continuities now.
I've felt that the books I've read, while they had interesting premises and were generally by writers I enjoyed, were less satisfying than the line has been in the past. They remain competent, but the spark that once drew me to Trek fiction is missing. Whether this is because the books have changed or I have must of course remain an open question.
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
I've liked the willingness to explore alternate realities or other divergences from the fictional continuity, as in the Mirror Universe duology or the Crucible trilogy.
In principle I like the idea of the new TNG line, but as I'll explain below I don't particularly enjoy its execution.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
The continued emphasis on past continuity rather than moving the fiction forward.
2007 saw the release (or in one case the paperback rerelease) of the first four post-Nemesis TNG books. They were about Romulans, Borg, Q, and more Borg. The Borg thread will evidently continue in the next TNG book. This is just too much use of previous continuity for my taste. The series didn't spend this much time on its recurring elements; it balanced them with new antagonists and situations.
It's not just TNG fiction where this trend can be seen. Nearly every book published recently has been a sequel to an episode, a movie, or another book, and/or been about filling in some continuity hole. This doesn't necessarily mean the books themselves are bad, or devoid of real invention; both The Buried Age and Q & A mix their old elements with clever new ones and are thoroughly enjoyable reads. But this merely lessens my "continuity fatigue" rather than ameliorating it altogether.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
More pure invention rather than elaboration. Expanding the Star Trek "universe" is a vital part of the fiction line, and I don't for a minute want it to stop. I just want to see the approach supplemented by more genuinely standalone books. The concept behind the Titan series is very much in line with this, and after a couple books that were a bit too wrapped up in the past for my taste the series itself seems to be getting there as well. But that's one book a year or less. I'd like to see more.
I like the fact that the editors and authors are starting to explore different concepts like the Mirror Universe series and the Myriad Universe books. I know the MyU books aren't coming out till this year, but I'm including series or ideas that were developed last year.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
The only thing I don't care for is anniversary celebrations that end up shifting the focus to one series for the majority of the year. But, I understand why the editors have chosen to do this over the last few years, so I'm not really angry about it. I just would have prefered maybe one short story collection and a novel, instead a short story collection, 2 new paperbacks, and a hardcover PB reprint.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
I liked the Crucible trilogy and grew to like the Mirror Universe trade paperbacks. I like the fact that there were projects that was a nice diversity in the line, given it was an anniversary year.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
The TNG relaunch was something of an anomaly. Viewed one way, it's great, grab-your-popcorn-and-stop-thinking fun. Q&A was the best one of the bunch, and had the most depth (and transcends the above view). However, all four of the TNG relaunch books were, in a way, sequels. Death in Winter followed on the events of Nemesis (understandably). Resistance not only is a sequel to First Contact, and it not only mimics a scene from the movie, it comes across as a recycled mesh of the aforementioned movie and "Best of the Both Worlds." Again, it can be taken as a dark, tense action thriller, but it never rises to be much of anything original. In short, it felt phoned-in.
Q&A follows up on just about Q story before, but cleverly ties all of it together.
And Before Dishonor... well, it's by Peter David. Typical whackiness ensues, and it's a sequel to Vendetta.
In short, I personally enjoy the TNG relaunch as fun... but they're not (excepting Q&A) substantial, unlike Vanguard, The DS9-R, or Titan. Thankfully, Christopher is writing the next book. I have some high hopes.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?
I am very pleased.
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
I don't read the entire line. Mostly TOS related stuff. Though I have ventured out of my comfort zone and read a few TNG and ENT books. They were good so more please.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
Not enough TOS
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked? Themes?
Do series like "Titan" and "Vanguard" represent a theme? I like them. So more books set away from the settings of the shows.
5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?
None come to mind
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
More Lost Era(s) I'm a sucker for that stuff.
7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?
None come to mind.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
Sxottlan said:
1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?
Comfortably to well done. I'm disappointed so many readers had a lukewarm reaction to "Death in Winter", because it seems to have set up some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy that they won't like the next three books. I've enjoyed all the TNG Relaunch.
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
My local SF specialist bookshop is ordering lots of copies of everything ST (airfreight) and selling them steadily, getting in more (sea freight) and selling them, too.
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
Ummmm. Negativity of some readers, who get testy without considering economic, licensing and marketing factors. And I miss Marco's online comments here.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
Variety of cover art styles.
5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?
I'm happy.
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
CoE reprints going to trade paperback format. "Resistance" switching to first-release MMPB. Newly-written material (introductions, mini-pedias, etc) in reprint omnibuses.
7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?
Consistency between "Resistance", "Q & A" and "Before Dishonor" - not that I minded, or really even noticed all that much (except maybe the current whereabouts of Kadohata's baby and husband?) but many readers had such bad reactions to the situation.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line?
Umm, more Andorians?
Umm, for me to finally finish a spec manuscript and send it in?
"Star Trek 101". And a "Making of ST XI" book?
The crossover and future possibilities re "Destiny", ST XI, IDW etc.
Pretty good. 2007 was clearly an anniversary year for TNG, so the line was correspondingly bent in that direction. As someone who really wanted some post-Nemesis TNG stories, it was a very good year for me.
2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?
As always, an uneven representation of each series. While I understand the one book-a-month schedule has more to do with business, the limited amount of slots each year always means a few series will have to sit out the year on the bench. It can almost be said too many series and too little available slots.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
The decision to let the VOY-R line go on hiatus until Ms. Golden was free to continue to it. Don't get me wrong, I like Ms. Golden's work a lot, but tying a book series to one very busy author can only result in very long waits and a series that will fall behind others set in the same era.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
Like the reimaging of the end of ENT. M&M have real talent.
HUGE shout out to IDW and the steady return of graphic novels.
Cohesive storylines for the series going forward. I like a lack of contradiction. I don't need totally regimented forward marching plots with no wriggle room or time gaps.
The problem with too much planning ahead is you can get locked into a storyline readers don't like. [Mushy Christie Golden Voyager]
3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?
Dislike aspect of cohesive storylines going forward in that individual books set in different times in each series may be a thing of the past.
Are we never to get another Delta Quad VOY story?
Expensive hard cover novels of what I consider fairly fluffy stories - Death in Winter and Shatner's Collision course. The Shat sells well enough to justify taking up space on a reduced production schedule?!?!?
Titan hasn't grabbed me yet. Perhaps a graphic novel or an Art Contest over in the Fan Art forum, so that I could see the characters. Star Trek coming from television is quite visual for me.
4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?
ENT reboot, so far so good.
Sulu Excelsior nod Most Excellent
More Lost Era stuff for me.
Mirror Universe revisited
No Christie Golden VOY
Stories where our heroes are not saving the planet/universe!! or in danger themselves for their very lives. After this many books I know those kind of stories will always end well.
Picard loves Crusher, FINALLY
5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?
Mirror U and Myriad U just tossing things up to toss them up may not find favor with me.
I thnk there's plenty of room in the ST U that we've got.
Burning House and Forged in Fire very wordy, florid, repeatative. Maybe it is a new editor. Maybe it is a dumbing down for people who can't remember a character from a brief filmed appearance.
Several fiery titles, is this a trend?
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
the end of SNW. Maybe some of it was crap, but it brought some new authors to the main novels line.
The apparent disappearance of Pocket people on this board. This is the only message board I frequent. Marco used to be a regular, and Margaret could be reached. Sure there are fewer ST books coming out [and I know the editors edit non ST books and have real lives] but there is always a thread when a new ST book does appear. No comments from the editors, and some authors too, makes me think they don't care what readers think.
It was a real thrill to see Andrew Steven Harris from IDW posting in a thread. The IDW message board is sometimes wonky for me. It is great to know an editor is checking in with readers. I also really do appreciate KRAD and Christopher having a presence on the TrekBBS, too.
I just miss Marco.
8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
The movie may re-invigorate things. Possibly there could be some maturing of the TOS characters. The movie may shift focus to the younger versions and CBS would authorize the older versions die.
I'd like another stab at a young adult line. O'Brien teaching at the Academy. Icheb at the Academy. Or Kirk XI, Spock XI, Uhura XI, Sulu XI and Chekov XI at the Academy.
Another edition of the Encyclopedia, and the History of the Future EXCLUDING all mention of the XI movie. Then we can start another Encyclopedia and Timeline with the XI movie.
We'll see.
ohh ohh yeah, regular official updates to the books timeline on a webpage somewhere or as a PDF downloadable for a $1.49 every couple of months
There are readers who dislike every storyline and readers who like every storyline. There have been vocal objections online to Golden's VGR books, but those same books have sold very well. A storyline that some readers don't like may be a storyline that others would love to see continued.
Dislike aspect of cohesive storylines going forward in that individual books set in different times in each series may be a thing of the past.
Are we never to get another Delta Quad VOY story?
Even with the DS9 Relaunch, we got Hollow Men and are getting the Terok Nor trilogy. Even with the VGR Relaunch, we got the String Theory trilogy. The existence of a post-finale continuity isn't incompatible with books set during a series' run.
Expensive hard cover novels of what I consider fairly fluffy stories - Death in Winter and Shatner's Collision course. The Shat sells well enough to justify taking up space on a reduced production schedule?!?!?
The reduced production schedule applied only to mass-market paperback slots, which dropped from two per month to one per month. Hardcover or trade-paperback publication schedules are independent of that, and were not reduced when the MMPB schedule was reduced. If anything, TPBs have increased.
Burning House and Forged in Fire very wordy, florid, repeatative. Maybe it is a new editor.
Editors and writers cared about what their readers thought long before the Internet existed, and the vast majority of the readers don't post on the Internet anyway. There are other ways of getting audience feedback. For creators, participating in online discussions is a luxury, not an obligation. And it's a luxury that not every creator or editor can make time for.
Mirror U and Myriad U just tossing things up to toss them up may not find favor with me.
...
Burning House and Forged in Fire very wordy, florid, repeatative.
...
6. What changes or additions to the Trek book line have you liked editorial-wise (i.e. ebook mini-series, focus on one series over another)?
