View Single Post
Old January 2 2011, 11:24 PM   #96
David R. George III
Writer
 
David R. George III's Avatar
 
Location: California, USA
Send a message via AIM to David R. George III Send a message via Yahoo to David R. George III
Re: Typhon Pact: Rough Beasts Of Empire review thread

flemm wrote: View Post

David R. George III wrote: View Post
You can debate about the wisdom of believing in prophecy, but what the Prophets offer is not really prophecy; it's eyewitness testimony.
It presents that same problem that regular prophecy does to human beings in that the words are enigmatic. What does that mean? What does that mean? is the constant refrain when dealing with the prophets. A good example of this is the episode Destiny, wherein everyone misinterprets the prophecy about the Temple Gates in one way or another, which influences their actions as they struggle to understand what the words mean. It's only once the prophecy has fulfilled itself that full understanding is possible. Part of the question becomes: what would you have done in this situation had there been no prophecy? This is an important question because the quandry is something like the following: "We can't really know what the words mean or whether the prophecy will be fulfilled, but we can be true to ourselves and do what we think is right."

Inevitably, if characters begin to betray themselves and do things that are manifestly wrong because of what they have heard in prophecy, that is catastrophic because (1) they are probably misinterpreting the prophecy, (2) they are acting out of fear and (3) betraying their own sense of ethics and morality. This is relevant whether or not we believe in prophecy because the same scenario can arise whenever human beings act out of fear or believe they know what the future will bring. The story in RBoE seems to be unaware of these types of issues.


flemm wrote: View Post



flemm wrote: View Post



flemm wrote: View Post



JoeZhang wrote: View Post

I thought this was fairly poor, it's well written in many ways and would make a great space opera book if done with original characters but not so great as a Star Trek book. The first problem is that it simply feels like a Spock book with some DS9 aspects rammed into it rather than a coherent novel.


JoeZhang wrote: View Post



JoeZhang wrote: View Post



Ronald Held wrote: View Post

I am uncertain that without Spock, the Reunification movement will go much farther than it will go in those years. Then again, I do not think the Typhoon pact will last that long.
Interesting thoughts.

Ronald Held wrote: View Post

This may be an unpopular sentiment, bu I think that without the influence of the Prophets, Sisko would have been an unexceptional individual.


flemm wrote: View Post



kkozoriz1 wrote: View Post



flemm wrote: View Post

David R. George III wrote: View Post
Really, this has always been the case, ever since the final episode of the television series.
Agreed, certainly, on this point. The DS9 novels have always required a different approach. It's also true that we are probably subjecting the DS9 aspect of RBoE to a disproportionate amount of scrutiny given that the focus is largely on the Spock and Romulan Empire plot thread.
Agreed.

flemm wrote: View Post

There was a certain amount of editorial box-checking going on here (now we know where most, if not all of the DS9 characters are in the current timeline) and that's fine. Obviously, it was a necessary part of bringing the DS9-R up to speed with everything else.
I don't agree with the "box-checking" characterization. But yes, the decision was made at the editorial level to bring the Deep Space Nine characters into the "current" Trek literary timeframe.

flemm wrote: View Post

That being said, the Sisko storyline strikes me as very poorly conceived for reasons I described above.
Really? That didn't quite come through.

Look, I know you didn't like it, I know you think it was a bad choice. I take no offense at that. The appreciation of art is subjective. But I suspect that far more thought went into this story than you think. Maybe I failed in my job as a writer. Maybe you brought your own preferences and preconceptions to bear on the story and took away from it things I did not intend. Maybe I brought my own preferences and preconceptions to bear and did not successfully convey what I wanted to convey. Maybe you have poor reading comprehension. You and I obviously disagree about the novel, and that's fine. Sure, I would prefer if every reader loved my work, but that's seems pretty unlikely. Plus I always understood that, for some readers, the Sisko tale would be a hard sell--and for some, an impossible sell. I conceived and wrote this story and I more or less am pleased with how it came out. Sorry it didn't work for you.

flemm wrote: View Post

It could probably be salvaged in a subsequent novel, and I certainly hope it will be.
I'm guessing you hope I don't write the next Sisko tale.

rfmcdpei wrote: View Post



rfmcdpei wrote: View Post

What you say gets to the heart of my own feelings about this.


kkozoriz1 wrote: View Post

__________________
Regards, David

On Facebook
David R. George III is offline   Reply With Quote