Mister Fandango wrote:
I've had absolutely no exposure (or desire to be exposed to) any of the alternatives, and I've also had absolutely no problem keeping up with the show. Not sure where that faulty idea is coming from at all.
I come across it all the time in discussions of Trek literature. Because the novels share a common continuity and Easter-egg cross-references, there are a number of readers who assume that you're required to read them all or you'll be lost. People are constantly asking, "Do I need to read X to understand Y?" They never seem to get that we're not deliberately trying to confuse people, that we want each individual story or series to be able to function both
as a satisfying standalone work and
as part of a greater whole.