For my first post: a poll.
I, personally, have never understood why people like to read novels about Trek, so, I thought I would post this.
This seems a curious statement, given that you have constructed a poll that covers a number of reasons that make it easy enough to see why people would choose to read ST novels. Without meaning to seem confrontational, it seems to hint at a specific viewpoint towards the general quality of ST Lit vs. any other literature that's non-media tie-in, and the readers who prefer reading one type or another exclusively. Giving it the benefit of the doubt, would you care to clarify?
Would it be more accurate to say that you're curious about how the data looks, in terms of ranking the reasons, from major or lesser, for wanting to read ST?
And yeah, Abrams rant...lurked and seen so much that is so dispiriting. It's just a movie. It didn't kill the franchise. It's been so successful, so that's frustrating for people looking for very specific things in ST that they feel the movie doesn't have. I enjoyed it, so maybe I don't understand what proper Trek is supposed to be (
), therefore I resolve to not care and continue to enjoy it while looking forward to the next one. Cheers.
The top three reasons listed in that poll are the reason I read ST and other media tie-in novels, including Star Wars and Doctor Who novels (and many others), same reasons for them. Another reason I like reading media tie-ins are for those groundbreaking, earth shaking novels ambitious enough to try to change the readers' perspectives on the fictional universe they are set in. Way back, without video players or a TV network playing re-runs, the novelizations of televised stories were sometimes the most convenient way to experience or re-experience a TV story that you wouldn't be able to see. Alan Dean Foster kept the animated show's stories alive in circulation while the animated series itself was unavailable to see.