Deranged Nasat wrote:
While I do recall some discussion about whether Janeway's death was a "worthy" one - as well as protests from some fans that the death wasn't handled in a manner they thought did justice to the character - the main issue always seemed to be the fact that she died at all. Had The Eternal Tide been the final adventure of Janeway, those who disagreed with the move to kill her would be saying "you brought her back briefly only to throw it away and kill her again. She's still dead, so what's the point?" Maybe they would indeed find the new death "worthier" or more in keeping with how they wanted to see the character handled - and maybe they'd find some satisfaction in that - but I think any concerns over the nature of her death were only ever a secondary layer of irritation; the main sore point was the death itself. So I assume that those fans who disagreed with the decision to kill Janeway would find her "better" death a pointless exercise - if you're going to give the impression that a "mistake" was made and Janeway's death needed "fixing" (because that's what it would look like to many readers), the quesion some fans would ask is "why fix the manner of her death and not fix her death" - which was the point they had issue with.
Exactly. If Janeway had been brought back in The Eternal Tide
only to be killed again for the sake of a cleaner death I would not have been nearly as impressed by the book as I was.
Even though I was not impressed by the manner of her death in the first place, I am by no means an advocate for the "take two" idea when it comes to character deaths. If a character is dead and someone plans to bring them back, bring them back for good (i.e. the rest of their natural lifespan) or don't do it at all.
I honestly wouldn't be satisfied with simply "fixing" the manner of death, and as you said, why not fix her death entirely?
In this instance it should be that the character is brought back or not at all. There really isn't a middle ground.