TNG: Indistinguishable From Magic by McIntee Review Thread (Spoilers)

[GalaxyClass1701]

Christopher wrote:

---

I figured it was because that's what everyone expected. What's the point of giving the readers an ending they already see coming?

Because it makes sense and not stupid like what they wrote.

[JAG]

Christopher wrote:

---

I figured it was because that's what everyone expected. What's the point of giving the readers an ending they already see coming?

It's not the destination, it's the journey. (At least for me.)

[GalaxyClass1701]

JAG wrote:

---

It's not the destination, it's the journey. (At least for me.)

Again I really enjoyed the book but was very let down with the ending.

[JoeZhang]

Whatever the directives from CBS or what happens behind the scenes, the reader still has to deal with what's on the page as presented. First of all, I think it's well-written and the first few chapters are pretty good. However, I agree with the crit that it reads as a bit disjointed because of the way it is spilt into two sections.

Moreover, the author is never going to win when he puts in lots of established characters, half of the readers will love it, the other half will not - I'm in the half that didn't - it also read to me as fan wank, like the Star Trek universe should be full of people playing the banjo and marrying their cousins. Hitting over us the head with "see see this is how the last Star Trek timeline came about, see see" wasn't very good either - I'm avoiding DTI for that very reason as I expect more of the same, much more.

Still at least it's got the rare merit of being one of the few recent TNG-era books that doesn't present unpleasant or degraded versions of the characters we used to watch on the telly.

[Christopher]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

it also read to me as fan wank, like the Star Trek universe should be full of people playing the banjo and marrying their cousins.

Umm, is there a way you could've made that point without invoking a degrading ethnic stereotype of Appalachians?

Hitting over us the head with "see see this is how the last Star Trek timeline came about, see see" wasn't very good either - I'm avoiding DTI for that very reason as I expect more of the same, much more.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here, so I can't respond. What do you mean by "the last Star Trek timeline," and how did IFM dwell on how it came about?

[JoeZhang]

Sorry I meant "Last Star Trek Movie timeline" came out.

[Lonemagpie]

GalaxyClass1701 wrote:

---

Great book terrible ending why they couldn't leave the Challenger intact and Geordi as Captain is beyond me!!!!

Because I very much doubt they'd let a newbie make such a change to the ongoing range, and create a new set...

[Christopher]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

Sorry I meant "Last Star Trek Movie timeline" came out.

How does IFM make assertions about how the 2009 movie's timeline came about? We know how it came about -- we were told in the movie itself. And I don't remember anything in IFM that was tied into the '09 movie in any major way. There were moments when I thought it was setting up an explanation of Scotty's knowledge of transwarp beaming, but it didn't go that way after all.

And there's not much in DTI: Watching the Clock that pertains to the new movie's continuity either, since of course the book is set years before the 2387 supernova and the characters have no knowledge of it. There are maybe three subtle nods in the direction of concepts from the movie, but they're very indirect and implicit, since in the wake of Seek a Newer World's cancellation I was wary of including any overt references.

[Lonemagpie]

JoeZhang wrote:

---

Sorry I meant "Last Star Trek Movie timeline" came out.

Er, I'm not getting what you mean - IFM has nothing to do with the movie timeline. The movie tells us how that timeline came about...

I may be just not on top BBS form today though - my wife's father died yesterday morning and I've just spent 36 hours dealing with the practicalities of that situation.

So, if I fail to answer a query over the coming week (the funeral will be next Friday) that's why - cos I'm probably only going to be looking in online maybe once an evening, tops, and probably just a couple of times in the coming week.

But I'll try to look in and be accessible. Just can't promise.

[Christopher]

^My condolences, David.

[JoeZhang]

Christopher wrote:

---

How does IFM make assertions about how the 2009 movie's timeline came about? We know how it came about -- we were told in the movie itself. And I don't remember anything in IFM that was tied into the '09 movie in any major way. There were moments when I thought it was setting up an explanation of Scotty's knowledge of transwarp beaming, but it didn't go that way after all.

I thought that was the point of all that conservation of reality guff? It came across to me as throwing a bone to the more nerdy fans, who needs everything explained, obviously I misread it.

[Christopher]

No, I don't see any direct connection with the "conservation of reality" stuff, beyond the fact that both stories involve the general concepts of time travel and alternate timelines -- something which ST 2009 hardly has any exclusive claim on. As I read it, the "conservation" stuff was included to lay the groundwork for DaiMon Bok's plan later in the book, not to "explain" ST'09.

After all, the "conservation of reality" idea (which, by the way, was voiced by a drunken professor who might have been bending the truth somewhat to avoid revealing future knowledge to Rasmussen) was about how not to change history when you travel in time -- about keeping the threshold of change low enough that it doesn't produce a separate timeline. ST'09 was a situation where a separate timeline was definitely created. I don't see a connection, beyond having the time-travel genre in common.

[Snaploud]

I'm sorry to hear about your wife's father. My condolences on her loss.

[Lonemagpie]

Christopher wrote:

---

No, I don't see any direct connection with the "conservation of reality" stuff, beyond the fact that both stories involve the general concepts of time travel and alternate timelines -- something which ST 2009 hardly has any exclusive claim on. As I read it, the "conservation" stuff was included to lay the groundwork for DaiMon Bok's plan later in the book, not to "explain" ST'09.

After all, the "conservation of reality" idea (which, by the way, was voiced by a drunken professor who might have been bending the truth somewhat to avoid revealing future knowledge to Rasmussen) was about how not to change history when you travel in time -- about keeping the threshold of change low enough that it doesn't produce a separate timeline. ST'09 was a situation where a separate timeline was definitely created. I don't see a connection, beyond having the time-travel genre in common.

OK, I'm still here tonight - the conservation of reality stuff, is a) what Christopher says, and b) a reference to Terry Pratchett's Discworld series... (http://wiki.lspace.org/wiki/Law_of_C...ion_of_Reality)

[DS9forever]

I finished the novel tonight and have to say I really enjoyed it. To be fair, I'm not a huge TNG fan, so the return of various TNG characters (recurring and one-shot) perhaps wasn't as exciting for me as it probably was for others. I did like the revelation that Nog has now switched to security; it reminded me of "The Magnificent Ferengi" where he led the mission to rescue his grandmother.

I do have one question for the author. In the novel, Nog transports the crew of one of Bok's starships through their shields, noting it was one of Odo's favorite tricks. I don't recall Odo ever doing something like this, although I could be wrong.