• 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!

The State of Star Trek Literature

^^Oh, definitely. The Choblik even have nanotech "chromosomes" that govern the replication of some of their bionic parts.

However, I'm not sure if they're UFP members.
 
^You're not sure? I thought you were the one who came up with their whole appearance and backstory.
 
Sxottlan said:
Very interesting comments so far!

Brendan Moody said:
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.

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.

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.

Great observations. I agree.

TITAN. GORKON. CoE. VANGUARD.

I'm not a Golden detractor, like some, but I just can't get my brain around the current VOYAGER crew. I'd have loved a crack at the original team. DISTANT SHORES was loads of fun.

Now their story is told, so...
 
RedJack said:
TITAN.
Loaded with established characters as well as a few new creations, and the first two books are a sequel to a movie and another novel. But as I said, the recent Titan books are a model of what I'd like to see more of.
Again, full from the beginning of established characters, and aimed at elaborating the culture of a well-known race. I like the Gorkon/Klingon Empire books, but they're exactly what I'm talking about.
Strikes a tolerable balance, you're right, but I was thinking of the novel line rather than the e-books.
VANGUARD.
A tightly-plotted series, devoted to an ongoing story that runs parallel to established Trek and involves some familiar races as well as new ones. Not quite what I'm looking for, though it's closer than a lot of other stuff I could name.

The bottom line is that even the most arc-heavy TV Trek wasn't as interconnected as the recent fiction; they still found the time for planet-of-the-week stories. That's the kind of thing I'd like the novel line to do more than once every sixteen months.
 
JD said:
^You're not sure? I thought you were the one who came up with their whole appearance and backstory.

Yeah, but I don't remember at the moment whether I established anything on their UFP-membership status. It's been a couple of years, and I've written a lot of stuff since then, so I'd have to check my notes to refresh my memory.


And Brendan, if you're not happy with elaboration on existing material, maybe you should read more original SF. It's kind of the nature of tie-in literature that it, well, ties in to familiar elements to at least some degree.
 
the Denobulans are UFP members at least by 2268/9-ish when the U.S.S. Defiant was lost in the Interphase because MIrror-Phlox mentions to Mirror-T'pol that the Humans, Denobulans and Vulcans are all members of the Federation and equals in IaMD pt 2

personally, I tend to believe they'd joined by 2170 at least, they may not have been Founders, but they were in in the next few years...
 
captcalhoun said:
the Denobulans are UFP members at least by 2268/9-ish when the U.S.S. Defiant was lost in the Interphase because MIrror-Phlox mentions to Mirror-T'pol that the Humans, Denobulans and Vulcans are all members of the Federation and equals in IaMD pt 2

She doesn't say that Denobulans are Federation Members, just that Humans, Vulcans, and Denobulans are all considered equal.
 
Christopher said:
And Brendan, if you're not happy with elaboration on existing material, maybe you should read more original SF. It's kind of the nature of tie-in literature that it, well, ties in to familiar elements to at least some degree.
I read plenty of original SF, thank you. I just don't think it's unfair to expect the Trek universe to expand its breadth as well as its depth.

Anyway, your last comment is a bit misleading. Of course Star Trek fiction has Star Trek elements; the question is of proportion. I refer you back to my comparison to actual televised Star Trek, which managed to be recognizably Star Trek (by dint of, you know, having the characters and the ship and all that) without the degree of interconnectedness and continuity porn of the current fiction. Even the arc-based series like DS9 and the last couple years of Enterprise found time for standalone stories and new guest characters alongside the metanarrative. Orion's Hounds is actually not a bad model for this; in a minor sense it's a sequel to "Encounter at Farpoint," but even I wouldn't diminish it by calling it just a follow-up- the canvas is substantially widened beyond 'look, it's the star-jellies again.' That sense of wonder is part of what I think is missing from a fiction line that's dominated by "wouldn't it be cool to learn more about this?" Well, yes, it would; but sometimes it's also cool to show us what else is going on in an awfully big universe.
 
Well, I think it's possible to do both -- follow up on established ideas while also exploring new ones. Yes, The Red King was a sequel to a couple of other novels, but it was also an exploration of a whole new galaxy and a whole new form of life. Yes, Vanguard is filling in TOS-era history, but it's also introducing us to a whole ancient civilization we knew nothing about before.
 
Christopher said:
JD said:
^You're not sure? I thought you were the one who came up with their whole appearance and backstory.

Yeah, but I don't remember at the moment whether I established anything on their UFP-membership status. It's been a couple of years, and I've written a lot of stuff since then, so I'd have to check my notes to refresh my memory.
Ah, I see. My apologies, that came across as a little more snippy than I meant it to be.
 
Brendan Moody said:
Christopher said:
And Brendan, if you're not happy with elaboration on existing material, maybe you should read more original SF. It's kind of the nature of tie-in literature that it, well, ties in to familiar elements to at least some degree.
I read plenty of original SF, thank you. I just don't think it's unfair to expect the Trek universe to expand its breadth as well as its depth.

Anyway, your last comment is a bit misleading. Of course Star Trek fiction has Star Trek elements; the question is of proportion. I refer you back to my comparison to actual televised Star Trek, which managed to be recognizably Star Trek (by dint of, you know, having the characters and the ship and all that) without the degree of interconnectedness and continuity porn of the current fiction. Even the arc-based series like DS9 and the last couple years of Enterprise found time for standalone stories and new guest characters alongside the metanarrative. Orion's Hounds is actually not a bad model for this; in a minor sense it's a sequel to "Encounter at Farpoint," but even I wouldn't diminish it by calling it just a follow-up- the canvas is substantially widened beyond 'look, it's the star-jellies again.' That sense of wonder is part of what I think is missing from a fiction line that's dominated by "wouldn't it be cool to learn more about this?" Well, yes, it would; but sometimes it's also cool to show us what else is going on in an awfully big universe.

I have to say that, across the breadth of the Litverse, there is actually something for everybody. I agree about OH. It's got an almost perfect balance of "straight" sci-fi and Trek elements. But, so does Burning Dreams. If anything it reminds me more of AC Clark's "YA" fiction than traditional Star Trek.

And, regardless of the TOS meta story, I'd say the same for Vanguard. I haven't the first clue about a lot of the TOS references so it reads like a scifi novel series to me. Only the physical motifs are familiar.
 
I'll take a stab at this (though less extreme than the one being performed by Senator Palpatine in Sxottlan's avatar):

1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?

A diverse selection of titles, with the appropriate focus on TNG as it was the anniversary. I was disappointed that - while we did get the relaunch - the only tales set during the show were in the anthology. I would have preferred also seeing a trilogy or something along the lines of David R. George's Crucible (not literally...but something set during the series aboard the Enterprise D). It did feel a bit like having an anniversary of TOS with all the stories set aboard the Enterprise-A.

I also do miss there being more than one title per month. I'm not saying there should be without exception...but I wish the goal was at least one title (as in a novel...not a crossover or anthology like the Mirror Universe books) from every series (TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, TITAN, VAN, NF, KE, and...yes, even Stargazer). And I'd prefer a "dead tree" COE collection every 3-4 months...which I do think we received (but please...keep it up).

However, the titles there were did show great variety and allowed a number of solid authors to be published.

2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?

What I have liked in past years...the diversity of the titles. I would say my complaint is...I like the spice in the soup...but I'd like a little more).

Also, Keith R.A. DeCandido continues to write for it. As I told him in an email I sent him a few months ago...I've read much of his work (though - I will admit - not his TNG relaunch book or A Burning House yet) and been entertained by most of it.

3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?

My biggest complaint was that the TNG relaunch sort of fizzled. I've only read half of it so far, but I will admit I am not crazy about the idea that part of the relaunch is so Borg-centric, and I wish we would see the TNG crew taking on some missions of scope. I've always enjoyed Michael Jan Friedman's work, but Death In Winter should have had so much more scope and depth to it - it should have given us more of the world building and character depth shown in Christopher L. Bennett's Ex Machina, but it fell back to some rather usual TNG cliches. Resistance had much of the same flaw for me - it felt like "just another book"...competently written (I certainly didn't hate it the way I loathe JM Dillard's Lost Years), but nothing of the scope and depth shown in either Ex Machina or the DS9 relaunch.

Also...again...I wish we would see at least a single title from every series each year.

4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?

No. I didn't feel the literature started any new trends...just continued old ones from the past few years.

5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?

My only complaint may be the aforementioned lack of scope...it seems like only a few novels (Orion's Hounds and...from what I've read so far A Burning House) really reach for something truly epic. A lot of the books have felt more "episodic" lately...missing that spark of showing us things we can't routinely see on the screen.

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 don't have anything to comment on here. If the Klingon empire banner is what is needed to keep that series going...I say more power to Keith and Marco.

I do hope we will see more Excelsior books (I have this strange wish to see Keith and Christopher tackle this crew...no offense to Andy and Mike, who remain two of my favorite Trek authors).

7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?

You could say approving the outlines of a disappointing TNG relaunch to be an editorial decision I suppose. Perhaps a better way to put it would be...the aforementioned lack of scope in the relaunch...not showing us something too far "outside the box."

8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?

The big one is more books with more scope, depth, and complexity - I feel that the books of the past year - for the most part - did lack some of that which was present in the 3-4 years before. And...as I said...something from every line. I know that will probably not happen, barring a true reinstatement of the type of Trek "fever" we saw in the mid 90s, but a guy can dream...can't he?
 
Also, Keith R.A. DeCandido continues to write for it. As I told him in an email I sent him a few months ago...I've read much of his work (though - I will admit - not his TNG relaunch book or A Burning House yet) and been entertained by most of it.
Aw, thanks!

And hey, if it makes you feel any better, Q & A is completely Borg free! :borg:
 
And hey, if it makes you feel any better, Q & A is completely Borg free!

That is a beautiful thing...though I would have read it anyway since you wrote it.

I think this is clear in my original comments, but I will add it nonetheless...I don't have any problem with the Borg, as either a villain, a Trek race, or even a story focus.

But...I'm also in the camp of...been there, done that. It's the same reason I'm glad the Joker wasn't the villain in Batman Begins...for a "relaunch" I'd like to see something different applied. A Q story doesn't rub me the wrong way...after all, TNG began and ended with Q, so it's an appropriate thing...and the idea of Q - his power - can provide so many storytelling opportunities.

But, frankly nothing in Resistance...or what I read on the cover copy of Before Dishonor...makes me jump up and down with glee. The problem is...the Borg were created to be the ultimate villains...but I feel, like the alien of the Alien films we've seen too much, so the mystery and effectiveness is gone. And I think we need them to go away for a long while...and not come back until there's a story that makes you go "Holy s--t" - something that evokes that feeling of dread when Picard said, in BOBW, "Tell Admiral Hansen that we've engaged the Borg."
 
I'm realizing I never answered my own survey. A good way to bump the thread too.

1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?

On the whole, I think everything is proceeding alright with one noticeable exception (more on that below). It's certainly better than I felt the book line was doing a couple years ago when I didn't agree with any of the directions the series were going in. I remember how I nearly dropped reading Trek books altogether. Now, while I am starting to get interested in other works outside of Trek, things appear to have a somewhat brighter future.

2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?

Nothing in particular comes to mind. I base it more on if the number of books I liked outnumber the ones I didn't. For 2007, I liked more books than I disliked.

3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?

Someone higher up in the thread summed it up beautifully that the books have been more elaboration than creation. Sometimes that elaboration can be very well done, as in the case of Forged in Fire, which I just finished reading last night. Other times, it can be aggravating, if not stale, as in the majority of the MU novels. No one is saying balancing pre-used and fresh elements is easy, but it does seem like there are more misses than hits.

Certainly one case of elaboration that was nearly sunk by its sheer...elaborateness... was the much hyped Enterprise Relaunch and The Good That Men Do. It's one of those times when you wonder if the cure is worse than the sickness. After reading a book like that, it gets very hard not to see where the jack is inserted and the story jacked up to slip in different content. So often, it doesn't come across like a singular vision, but a mix where the lines between what's before and what's after are jarringly obvious. Kind of like when my mom punches up left overs of her homemade spaghetti sauce with the store bought Ragu.

Another form that this problem can appear as includes hammering home the same details over and over again. We get some detail in the show and then it's blown up in the books. Is there just Klingon opera, or are there rock bands? Seems they'd love speed metal. Do they play anything else on Cestus III besides baseball? See what I mean?

Look, it's the nature of the beast, but the difference for me between a light diversion and a truly memorable Trek book is something that may just come down to editing. It's a huge, but subtle aspect that I'll admit I really don't think about much. I guess you shouldn't. It should be invisible. When thinking about Trek book editors, I usually think of them as the idea generators only. Seeing a kind of tightness that we got with the slick early DS9R books that really hummed along would be a nice way to bring that karmic blend of new and re-used material.

4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?

There appears to be regular hints about.. something.. happening in the upcoming Destiny trilogy. I've liked what "appears" to be hints anyway showing up in the books over the last several months. Whatever the end result, it's cool that they're going for another series of books that will greatly affect everything. They haven't done that since the Gateway series and while that series was hit and miss, I've always appreciated the attempt.

5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?

The TNG Relaunch. Yikes! What happened? I believe that the years of limbo following the failure of Nemesis in 2002 probably contributed to the delay in the relaunch getting rolling in the first place. That lead to a build up of anticipation that may have been difficult to overcome. Yet I doubt that that is entirely to blame when taking into consideration the majority of the TNGR books released so far: often stale echos of previous episodes and stories. Even the successful Q&A suffered from this to a degree. Resistance experienced from one stretch too many with uninspired guest characters and had the remarkable characteristic of actually becoming dull when the action picked up on the Borg ship. Before Dishonor. Sheesh. I believe it gets worse the more I think about it. It seems whenever PD does something not relating to NF, it feels like we're getting the middle finger. I nearly gagged on the hero worship afforded Calhoun in BD, keeping that "old" Galaxy-class starship together through sheer force of will.

The new bridge officers are a bust. I've said elsewhere that this may have even been intentional that we not like them, but I'd doubt they expected this kind of reaction. With each new additional book series, you need new characters that are increasingly memorable or even outlandish to keep me interested. Leybenzon, Kadohata and T'Lana are neither. So they're banal to begin with and then turn just reprehensibly dumb with this mutiny. Kadohata is ret-conned into the series, but that feels as authentic as when a long lost relative shows up i.e. not at all. I'd rather they just transfer off the ship and be done with them.

I personally find it frustrating because I've been wanting to see a new crew under Picard for years now, yet the TNGR almost appears to be establishing itself as the series that'll never have any consistency when it comes to the crew. We even still had Worf debating his role as recently as Resistance. C'mon! As much as this isn't in keeping with the current popular mindset, let's just pick a crew and move on!

With this and the Voyager Relaunch, I'm starting to wonder if the DS9 Relaunch was a fluke? I hope not (and even my love of DS9R has dimmed considerably).

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)?

While you're paying twice the amount as the old MMPBs for 1-1/2 times the number of stories, moving the SCE to trade paperback has been beneficial and successful in my opinion. Namely, it just feels like the series is really moving along now. No longer is there the feeling that the reprints are falling farther and farther behind.

7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?

That said, what's going on the SCE? So there's no ebooks planned after March is that right? Curious. Usually they announce stuff way in advance. While they very well may have plans for after March, I'd imagine it would be counter-productive not to promote it early on. Maybe this relaunching the series as CoE had the opposite desired effect? My guess would be that the SCE is kaput, but I hope I'm wrong in this case. Sounds like we'll find out soon either way.

Another thing: this decision to really shake things up with the upcoming Destiny trilogy could see major backlash. Just look at the backlash against the TNG Relaunch. Many unhappy with the direction chosen for the series reminiscent of the Voyager Relaunch. So TPTB better hope readers actually like the Destiny trilogy because if they don't and this thing really messes around with a lot of the TrekLit Universe, I could see a lot of people turned off to any subsequent books. Obviously, here's hoping that's not the case though.

8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?

Include dramatis personae at the start of every book. This would be a huge help and I'd think could cut down on the amount of background exposition needed within the book.
 
Thanks for adding a few more straws of pressure on the camel's back that is the Destiny trilogy. It's my hope that between Christopher L. Bennett's Greater Than the Sum and the trilogy, we can change your mind about at least one of the new TNG crew members, and maybe get you to accept a few new ones. I guess we'll see...
 
Thanks for adding a few more straws of pressure on the camel's back that is the Destiny trilogy.

You be sure to let us know when that baby is about to break. I've always wanted to try camel steaks, and I want to get the barbeque just right. :D

Just kidding. Think of it this way: diamonds are created under intense pressure. And diamonds are made of carbon, which is the same element that makes up pencil leads, which is a traditional writer's tool, and thus... uh... if you ass-u-me... er, what was I talking about? :confused:

Befuddledly yours, Trent Roman
 
I second what Dave said. For what it's worth, Picard's difficulties getting a new crew to mesh are actually addressed as a story point in Greater Than the Sum (which is one of the multiple layers of meaning to the title). A slightly new crew dynamic, blending old, new, and newer characters, will be tried out there and will continue into Destiny... and, assuming there's still an Enterprise and a Federation after Dave gets done with them, hopefully beyond as well.
 
and, assuming there's still an Enterprise and a Federation after Dave gets done with them, hopefully beyond as well

Yeah, I guess it's still possible that the epilogue of the last Destiny book will just be Q saying: "That's all, folks!" after the destruction of most of the known Star Trek universe. :rommie:
 
It's only fair to say that I'm ONLY interested in reading Voyager books these days. I used to read a lot of TNG ages ago, but I got hooked on Voyager and that was that. So...

1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?
In regards to Voyager, abysmally. I find I have lost all momentum after the last published of the "String Theory" series (Mar 2006), and I have no interest in reading Voyager characters cherry-picked and inserted into other series stories. I love Voyager and I want to read Voyager stories set either post "Endgame" or in the DQ time, like "String Theory".

2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time?

In regards to Voyager character growth and new stories, nothing really, cos there hasn't been anything that appeals to me in that time.

3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?

Still waiting for more full Voy post "Endgame" novels and/or DQ series books like "String Theory" in Feb 2008 - and I can't see any listed in any of the up-coming publications lists. Is this right? Also, I personally don't like the cherry-picking of VOY characters for other series books like "Before Dishonour."

4. Were there any trends or recurring themes emergent in the last 12 months or so that you liked?

In regards to Voyager and Voyager characters, no. As I say, I don't like the Voy character cherry-picking. It cheapens the Voy crew and their stories/relationships imho.

5. What trends or recurring themes evident in the last year did you dislike and why?

Yet another lack of new Voyager novels seems to be a trend. :(

"String Theory" works brilliantly, so I really can't see why more authors can't retro-fit more stories like this one into the line and feed us Voyager fans.

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 adored "Distant Shores" the 2005 Voyager DQ anthology. I could maybe get by on those sorts of publications if the Voyager crew novels really are being phased out/ditched as seems to be the case, and as long as they were published regularly without huge momentum-sucking gaps in between.

7. What editorial decisions from the last 12-15 months have you not liked?

The death of a major Voyager character seems to have happened in the TNG book, "Before Dishonour". WTF?! I can't even begin to put into words how angry I am about that - not just the death and the lack of impact on the Voyager crew, but that it took place in a TNG book. Bah!

8. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?

MORE VOYAGER-CREW STORIES, MORE OFTEN!! I realise that given Voy's premise and the fact that the crew is home now makes it difficult to keep them together, but I'm sure it could be done somehow, at least for a few books. And, if it can't, then please publish more retro-written stories set in the DQ as you've done with "String Theory". And please, please keep them coming regularly.

Oh, and some pay-off on the on-going teasing re: Janeway and Chakotay's feelings for one another would be great. I've really enjoyed the little hints and big teases from authors like Kirsten Beyer in "Distant Shores" and "String Theory", but I need to know it's actually going somewhere and won't end up doing what canon did after years of teasing - which was nothing :(
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top