Read & Reread "Greater Than The Sum"- My Opinion (Spoilers)

[Dayton Ward]

^ Even the real military is home to more than a few eccentric folk, whose eccentricities can be and often are tolerated to varying degrees from C.O. to C.O. because they're good at their job.

(Shit, they let me hang around for years.)

If and when she crosses any real lines, I'd imagine it'll be handled accordingly with respect to the story being told.

[nx1701g]

^ That's true. My brother's former Commanding Officer is convinced that he's Geroge Washington reincarnated.

[William Leisner]

Trys, when she isn't cracking jokes or enjoying her off-duty time in the company of gentlemen friends, does actually know her shit, and is a perfectly competent science officer -- verging on above average when she puts her mind to it. She's a bit like Reg Barclay, with different and (much, much) fewer neuroses, who was bumped from ship to ship until he ended up with a superior officer who was willing to put in the extra effort and overlook his idiosyncracies.

[Dayton Ward]

^ This is where I admit I've not read the book, so I'm not familiar with the character other than what's relayed to me here (I'll do the Trek reading catch-up thing once we put Vanguard to bed). So, if she's only acting this way while off-duty, then what's the problem?

[ATimson]

Christopher wrote:

---

She's described as having one recent/former lover, one casual fling, and one increasingly committed relationship over the course of a book that spans four months.

I wonder if part of the problem is that the book spans four months; this is a tie-in to a show where an episode normally spans a day or two. Most books (yes, I know there are exceptions, having brought them up myself in regards to Destiny possibly spanning an extended period of time!) are similarly constrained, so I can see how audience members might interpret the book through that lens even if it's not the right one for the task.

[William Leisner]

William Leisner wrote:

---

Trys, when she isn't cracking jokes or enjoying her off-duty time in the company of gentlemen friends,[...]

Dayton Ward wrote:

---

^ This is where I admit I've not read the book, so I'm not familiar with the character other than what's relayed to me here (I'll do the Trek reading catch-up thing once we put Vanguard to bed). So, if she's only acting this way while off-duty, then what's the problem?

Sorry... she is cracking jokes and behaving with less than perfect decorum while on duty. She does, however, refrain from having sex on the bridge.

[Newspaper Taxi]

Chris, I was actually directing the living universe thing to Dayton3. I suppose mentioning who you're talking to is a good idea.

Also, I wouldn't be too ashamed of the sparks line. Sparks flying out of consoles is part of the Trek Canon, after all. Also, now that you mention it, I've never thought about how a person would go about depicting a space battle in a written medium. I'll have to use that as a creative writing exercises someday.

EDIT:

William Leisner wrote:

---

Sorry... she is cracking jokes and behaving with less than perfect decorum while on duty. She does, however, refrain from having sex on the bridge.

Well, we've only read one book with her in it. Who knows what the future has in store?

[Dayton Ward]

William Leisner wrote:

---

Sorry... she is cracking jokes and behaving with less than perfect decorum while on duty. She does, however, refrain from having sex on the bridge.

Well, that's nice of her.

[Thrawn]

Dayton3 wrote:

---

Oh please.

By any rational standard,

STARFLEET IS A MILITARY ORGANIZATION.

I don't care if Gene Roddenberry denies it.

I don't care if Rick Berman denies it.

I don't care if 100 writers deny it.

Starfleet features

1) A complete military command structure lifted whole cloth from the U.S. Navy.

2) Officers keep immensely powerful personal sidearms in their quarters.

3) Their ships carry weapons in the multi megaton destructive range.

If anyone can name a "science & exploration organization" anytime in human history that featured the three above, feel free to mention them.

I find it charming, how you feel you know how Star Trek works better than its creators.

Ask yourself - is T'Ryssa any less military than someone like Barclay? Wesley?

[wew]

I read the book and found it very good. I'll admit I was a bit put off by the continual focus on the issue of the Picard-Crusher decision about having a baby, but other than that I found the book a nice read.

Obviously, several matters had to be solved by Christopher- especially regarding the actions of the newer characters in the previous book. I believe his solution with T'Lana to be an excellent choice, especially since it fits in requirements even by todays standards regarding the fitness of counselor type individuals. Leybenzon was also handled in an appropriate manner, at least in my opinion, he's shown a lack of respect towards officers in general, and his decision made perfect sense. Of course the crux of the matter is the man who thinks he's super-cop, ends up inadvertantely giving the Borg access to a new defense against them, because he overestimates his ability and didn't seem to listen.

In regard to new characters in this book, I'm not overly fond of T'Ryssa, but as others have noted she is doing her job. Other than that I like the other characters and how they've been used.

Dayton3, I don't know if you served in the military or not, but I can guarantee that in some types of units you can find more than your share of eccentrics; I know because I served in a unit like that- Very bright individuals who were extremely capable and did their jobs, but not always by the book when it came to protocol. During a hurricane down in Florida one time, one SGT on duty called the a radio station and had them dedicate a song to the unit commander; it was "Take this Job and Shove It." And that was a minor incident compared to others.

Yes, one has to be careful with how one deals with protocol, etc; yet good officers allow some leeway. I didn't really read anything on T'Ryssa that seems to have been completely overboard.

[JAG]

William Leisner wrote:

---

Thank you, Mr. Kettle.

Thus, I read T'Ryssa as having four sexual partners in the course of the narrative, and also as being bisexual. So, a Trekian Captain Jack.

My guess, based on your reaction, is that wasn't a reading you intended.

I thought the same way.

[Dimesdan]

I havn't read Greater than the Sum because the book shop it twon said it wasn't being published over here till the first of Septmeber so I have a little wait left. But Christopher, after reading The Buried Age (which I never expected to like, but gobbled it up in a few days as it was so good) and Orions Hounds, plus from what people have written about GTTS I really can not wait to read it and I might actually do something I've been meaning too for far to long and write a review!

I just want to address Dayton3 about his comments.

What you said is exceptionally arrogant and condesending (most of your comments are actually) and you come across as one of the worst form of religious bigets, you have a singular notion that for what ever reason quiet a few religious people have that they are always right. Well, your not, the good men and women who are employed to continue the Trek flame do so while haveing a full time job, they do it because they love Trek and want to share their visions with everyone else. Now I'm all for constructive critisim, but in your review, you came across as immature, argumentative and just looking for a fight.

Oh and one final note, three guys in fours months is no big deal, everyone likes sex (with the right partner) and it's what we all do at least a few times in our lives, it's just a shame that narrow minded god bothers try to make out it's wrong and the like as the year is 2008, not 1888.

[tenmei]

Uhm, Dan, I might have missed a post but when did anyone bring religion into the debate - you're the first one to bring in religion (and I've reviewed the thread) ? I have to agree with a lot (not all, because I liked the Noh Angels) of what Dayton3 said about the character of T'Rys (not the multiple partner thing but I do have to wonder how she got through Starfleet Academy - and the Barclay Defence just doesn't work for me, from what I recall he was a professional on duty and just an oddball off duty whilst T'Rys can be arguably both a bad example to junior officers and borderline insubordinate at times) and the whole Beverley/Jean Luc situation.

Picard put the idea of having children aside whilst they fought the Borg but Crusher did keep harping on about it every opportunity she got. One thing that personally annoyed me about the whole story (now I've finished the novel wholesale) was that Picard wouldn't reactivate himself as Locutus because he had Beverley and that they (or she, at that point) wanted to have kids whereas he was perfectly happy for Hugh (who had Rebekah and wanted kids too) to throw himself on the sword. Hypocritical much?

So, yeah, I have a problem with T'Rys and I have a bit of a problem with the Picard/Crusher relationship and maybe GTTS isn't my favourite book by the author (Orion's Hounds is) but it's certainly not my least favourite (I found Buried Age to be impenetrable).

I think I'm more annoyed by this thread and others like it, where if someone dares to criticise a book strongly they'll end up getting slammed by the other posters. It's gotten to the point where I'm hesitant about posting comments about things in the books that I don't like.

[Rosalind]

guys, post not the poster.

in other words, let's discuss/attack/defend the book and not each other, okay? Thanks.

[Dimesdan]

tenmei wrote:

---

Uhm, Dan, I might have missed a post but when did anyone bring religion into the debate - you're the first one to bring in religion (and I've reviewed the thread) ? I have to agree with a lot (not all, because I liked the Noh Angels) of what Dayton3 said about the character of T'Rys (not the multiple partner thing but I do have to wonder how she got through Starfleet Academy - and the Barclay Defence just doesn't work for me, from what I recall he was a professional on duty and just an oddball off duty whilst T'Rys can be arguably both a bad example to junior officers and borderline insubordinate at times) and the whole Beverley/Jean Luc situation.

My bad, I just linked his opinions with his religious opinions which is something I wouldn't ordinarily do, but too many late nights and early mornings are catching up with me.

As for

tenmei wrote:

---

I think I'm more annoyed by this thread and others like it, where if someone dares to criticise a book strongly they'll end up getting slammed by the other posters. It's gotten to the point where I'm hesitant about posting comments about things in the books that I don't like.

I understand your point, and maybe this contradictory from what I've previously wrote, but I am not a fan of critisim for critisim sacks, I personally believe that if you are going to critise something, you should back it up with why you didn't like it and further more, you should give possible alternatives to what you disliked. This is something that I confess rarely occurs and even though I do not mean any disrespect towards the writers, such a course of action might just prevent people being slammed for there opinions even if it does come across as a tad arrogant.