RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,959
Posts: 5,391,456
Members: 24,722
Currently online: 479
Newest member: Jadakiss

TrekToday headlines

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Dorn To Voice Firefly Character
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

No ALS Ice Bucket For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Free Star Trek Trexels Game
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

New Trek-themed Bobble Heads
By: T'Bonz on Aug 21

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Literature

Trek Literature "...Good words. That's where ideas begin."

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 3 2012, 03:18 PM   #46
Fer
Commander
 
Fer's Avatar
 
Location: Pittsburgh PA area
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Timewalker wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
Something can be part of the canon and still be disregarded by the individual.
Isn't that what I've been saying all along???!

Jarvisimo wrote: View Post
Isn't Timewalker suggesting that Dorn subsumed the identity of those shows beneath himself? I certainly don't agree, but that seemed to be his intention.
I am saying that (in my not-at-all-humble opinion) Worf went from being one of the "and the rest" characters to one whose point of view nearly took over the shows. There was far too much Klingon stuff. There was far too much preaching about "Klingon honor" trumping everything else, including Starfleet regulations and Federation law. Worf was the most judgmental s.o.b. I've ever seen on any Star Trek series that I watched regularly. The only other character who comes close is Vedek/Kai Wynn (I totally despised her, too). And Jadzia was already an intolerable character to me before Worf joined DS9; the combination of the two of them just made it that much worse. I'll say this, though - Worf had ONE good line in all his time on DS9: "Nice hat."

BTW, please don't refer to me as male; that little pink icon below my username indicates I'm female.

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
Of course, there are no savings to be made re costuming and sets on any new project, because Paramount sold everything in the Christie's and It's a Wrap! auctions. That budget-savings component was what made a "Captain Sulu" series slightly more viable in the early 90s.
I really wish they could have done a Captain Sulu series.
Ahh, okay. Thanks for clarifying.
__________________
http://fersforum.blogspot.com
Fer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 04:30 PM   #47
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

newtontomato539 wrote: View Post
I consider something in my personal canon (TAS, Gold Key, Power Records, DC, Marvel, etc) unless it sucks.

Paramount doesn't control my mind. Since when did we ever need Paramount to tell us what to like?
See, this is the kind of misapprehension that comes up when you mistake the word "canon" for the concept of "what is real/acceptable." That's just not what it means. Canon is not about telling the fans what to accept. Fans can accept or reject whatever they want. Canon has nothing whatsoever to do with the fans. Nor is canon about telling the makers of the shows and films what stories they can tell, because the makers of new canon are free to retcon or ignore past canon. The only people who are actually restricted by canon in any way are people like me, who write tie-in works, because we're obliged to conform to it and don't have the freedom to ignore it. (At least not in the licensed fiction we write. As a fan, I build my own personal continuity that includes a lot of non-canonical tie-in works and excludes some canonical episodes.)

And nobody is trying to "tell you what to like" except you. CBS (not Paramount anymore) doesn't want to tell anyone "You can't buy these stories anymore because they don't fit with these other stories." That would be self-defeating. I mean, think about it. Why does CBS (formerly Paramount) produce Star Trek shows and movies and license Star Trek tie-in books and comics and games? To make money. The more stuff you buy, the more money they make. So they want you to buy all of it, regardless of what continuity it's in. They're not going to tell you not to buy something that's not in continuity anymore, because that would be against their own financial interest. Indeed, having multiple continuities is good for them financially, because that means they can appeal to a wider range of audiences, since someone who doesn't enjoy one continuity can still be drawn in by a different one.

And most of the audience doesn't worry that much about continuity; they just want to read adventures of the characters they like. If different adventures are inconsistent with each other, big deal; they're all made-up stories anyway, all equally unreal, so all that should matter is whether they're entertaining. It's only a small minority of fans who think that canon and continuity have a bearing on what stories they should enjoy. That's not Paramount or CBS imposing anything on you. That's just you imposing a set of assumptions on yourself.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 06:30 PM   #48
Dimesdan
Rear Admiral
 
Dimesdan's Avatar
 
Location: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Dimesdan
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Christopher wrote: View Post
newtontomato539 wrote: View Post
I consider something in my personal canon (TAS, Gold Key, Power Records, DC, Marvel, etc) unless it sucks.

Paramount doesn't control my mind. Since when did we ever need Paramount to tell us what to like?
See, this is the kind of misapprehension that comes up when you mistake the word "canon" for the concept of "what is real/acceptable." That's just not what it means. Canon is not about telling the fans what to accept. Fans can accept or reject whatever they want. Canon has nothing whatsoever to do with the fans. Nor is canon about telling the makers of the shows and films what stories they can tell, because the makers of new canon are free to retcon or ignore past canon. The only people who are actually restricted by canon in any way are people like me, who write tie-in works, because we're obliged to conform to it and don't have the freedom to ignore it. (At least not in the licensed fiction we write. As a fan, I build my own personal continuity that includes a lot of non-canonical tie-in works and excludes some canonical episodes.)

And nobody is trying to "tell you what to like" except you. CBS (not Paramount anymore) doesn't want to tell anyone "You can't buy these stories anymore because they don't fit with these other stories." That would be self-defeating. I mean, think about it. Why does CBS (formerly Paramount) produce Star Trek shows and movies and license Star Trek tie-in books and comics and games? To make money. The more stuff you buy, the more money they make. So they want you to buy all of it, regardless of what continuity it's in. They're not going to tell you not to buy something that's not in continuity anymore, because that would be against their own financial interest. Indeed, having multiple continuities is good for them financially, because that means they can appeal to a wider range of audiences, since someone who doesn't enjoy one continuity can still be drawn in by a different one.

And most of the audience doesn't worry that much about continuity; they just want to read adventures of the characters they like. If different adventures are inconsistent with each other, big deal; they're all made-up stories anyway, all equally unreal, so all that should matter is whether they're entertaining. It's only a small minority of fans who think that canon and continuity have a bearing on what stories they should enjoy. That's not Paramount or CBS imposing anything on you. That's just you imposing a set of assumptions on yourself.
Why does it bother you so much Chris? You seem to expel a lot of energy on these exercises.
__________________
People in third world countries are so lucky they don't have to deal with these problems. - TheGodBen

I'm on twitter now. @DimesDaniel
Dimesdan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 06:51 PM   #49
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Dimesdan wrote: View Post
Why does it bother you so much Chris? You seem to expel a lot of energy on these exercises.
Why do you assume it "bothers" me? It puzzles me when people assume every discussion on a BBS must be somehow personal or emotionally motivated. A lot of discussions are simple matters of fact, and this is one of them. Lots of fans have assumptions about canon that are simply counterfactual, based in false and misguided beliefs, and they get themselves worked up or worried or angry when they have no need to. Why wouldn't I want to help them free themselves from that needless worry or frustration by explaining to them how irrelevant canon actually is to their experience as fans? And why wouldn't I want to provide accurate information when I'm able to, just on general principle? I just see that as being helpful.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 07:03 PM   #50
Dimesdan
Rear Admiral
 
Dimesdan's Avatar
 
Location: The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Dimesdan
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Christopher wrote: View Post
Dimesdan wrote: View Post
Why does it bother you so much Chris? You seem to expel a lot of energy on these exercises.
Why do you assume it "bothers" me? It puzzles me when people assume every discussion on a BBS must be somehow personal or emotionally motivated.
You come on here and contradict people over sometimes trivial matters, write walls of text outlining why in very detailed ways that they're wrong.

So yeah, maybe you don't mean to come across as you do, you may actually believe you're not making it personal, but given you directly quote people and often write walls of text, it doesn't come across like that and given you always seem to contradict someone regarding canon/continuity/whatever when the topic comes up, it does give the impression it bothers you.

If it really doesn't matter to you, why spend so much time and energy trying to educate people on differences that rather frankly doesn't matter.
__________________
People in third world countries are so lucky they don't have to deal with these problems. - TheGodBen

I'm on twitter now. @DimesDaniel

Last edited by Dimesdan; June 3 2012 at 07:17 PM.
Dimesdan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 07:20 PM   #51
ICW
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: New Jersey
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Dimesdan wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
Dimesdan wrote: View Post
Why does it bother you so much Chris? You seem to expel a lot of energy on these exercises.
Why do you assume it "bothers" me? It puzzles me when people assume every discussion on a BBS must be somehow personal or emotionally motivated.
You come on here and contradict people over sometimes trivial matters, write walls of text outlining why in very detailed ways that they're wrong.

So yeah, maybe you don't mean to come across as you do, you may actually believe you're not making it personal, but given you directly quote people and often write walls of text, it doesn't come across like that and given you always seem to contradict someone regarding canon/continuity/whatever when the topic comes up, it does give the impression it bothers you.

If it really doesn't matter to you, why spend so much time and energy trying to educate people on differences that rather frankly doesn't matter.
I tend to agree. I think Christopher means to give factual information but it comes off as if he's very irked, rather than just providing factual information.
ICW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 07:50 PM   #52
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Well, I'm sorry if I give that impression, though I'm puzzled by the assumption that there's a correlation between "walls of text" and irritation. I'm just prone to analyze things in detail; it's intellectual, not emotional.

Dimesdan wrote: View Post
If it really doesn't matter to you, why spend so much time and energy trying to educate people on differences that rather frankly doesn't matter.
I said it didn't bother me. That doesn't mean it doesn't matter. As I said, if I think people are misinformed, I want to help clear up their misunderstandings, and if they're getting themselves upset or worried over nothing, I want to help them ease their worry. Of course it matters to me if other people are having problems that I can help them solve. Why wouldn't I want to help? If I sometimes seem frustrated over the way people get so worked up about canon myths, it's because I see them driving themselves crazy over nothing and that's sad to see. My message is that they should just relax and not worry about it so much. Though I can see how the depth I go into as a matter of habit could seem to run contrary to that message.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 3 2012, 08:54 PM   #53
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

You know Christopher, you could probably collect everything you've written on canon here and sell it in book form.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 02:07 AM   #54
Paper Moon
Commander
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Christopher wrote: View Post
Paper Moon wrote: View Post
<snip>
See, the only thing you're overlooking here is that all those links pertain to the assumptions about canon made by StarTrek.com. A lot of fans make the mistake that StarTrek.com is the same entity as Paramount (or now CBS) and that whatever it says about ST is straight from the horse's mouth; but it's actually just a licensee, a promotional website about ST. So those posts only apply to how StarTrek.com itself chose to categorize the animated series, which is a separate question from how the actual producers of the shows chose to treat it. ST.com's content has been at odds with the producers' view of canon before; it continued to claim that Jeri Taylor's Voyager novels Mosaic and Pathways were canonical even though Taylor's successors on the VGR writing staff ignored those novels and contradicted Pathways in multiple respects. And ST.com still claims that Star Trek: The Motion Picture takes place in 2271, as per the old ST Chronology, even though it's been years since VGR: "Q2" made it canonical that the 5-year mission ended in 2270, so that TMP (at least two and a half years later) is now generally accepted as occurring in 2273.
That is very true, and a point that I overlooked. Again, I had assumed at the time that StarTrek.com was getting their "canon policy" directly from whomever at Paramount (separate from the writers/producers) was responsible for decreeing such things. Obviously, such a person has not existed for some time, if they ever existed in an official capacity at all. In any case, however, I failed to re-examine that assumption when using those articles to support my point. Mea culpa.

(Still, it is interesting to examine the evolution of StarTrek.com's attitude towards TAS. Another time.)


Finally, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Tr...on#cite_note-5, Ron D. Moore is quoted as saying in 1998:
And that's the crux of it right there: canon isn't some formal doctrine, it's just whatever the current makers of the franchise choose to count. And that's subject to change as the showrunners change.
Yes, and that's exactly what I meant. I should have stated it more explicitly, but I was offering up the Moore quote to gently push back on your implication that the "recanonization," or simply more widespread acceptance, of TAS occurred once Roddenberry was taken out of the picture. But since Moore said this several years after Roddenberry died, there was clearly some lethargy in the process.

(And, obviously, my case was stronger when I thought the ST.com articles were "official"! )


<snip about Star Trek becoming like Transformers with multiple continuities>
Being "on the inside," both at Pocket Books and in the sci-fi tie-in industry at-large, how likely do you think this is to happen? Is the marketability of Star Trek strong enough that TPTB would feel comfortable taking what must be somewhat of a risk?
I have no idea. I'm not that much "on the inside" -- I'm just a freelance writer. The people who'd make that decision are the folks at CBS Licensing, and I've generally only interacted with them through the mediation of my editors. It seems plausible to me, given the fact that there are now two canonical timelines and given how much the books have developed their own identity in the interim (and given that the books weren't required to conform to Star Trek Online's continuity even though it has a larger audience), that the adoption of an official "tie-in multiverse" approach could happen. But there may be other factors affecting the decision that I can't assess or predict.
On the inside or not, from the way you present it, it sounds pretty plausible to me, particularly given that point about Star Trek Online. And, of course, what you say about CBS' ultimate goal being the possession of our money... (where's a Ferengi emoticon when you need one?)

Hasn't Bob Orci (does anyone know how to pronounce his surname?) spoken about certain novels about being his favorites? (I feel like Prime Directive was one.) I suppose it would be pointless for them to canonize any of those novels now, since they do not affect the new continuity, but it is interesting to consider that possibility.
Paper Moon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:11 AM   #55
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Well, declaring a novel part of canon is unlikely; generally the only times that happens are for tie-ins written or plotted by the showruneners themselves, like Jeri Taylor's Mosaic, the Babylon 5 novels and comics outlined by J. Michael Straczynski, and the Joss Whedon-supervised comics continuations of the Buffyverse, Serenity, and Dollhouse.

But there's no reason a canonical work can't pick and choose elements from non-canonical tie-ins, like the way Enterprise borrowed bits of Andorian worldbuilding from a gaming supplement, or the way the movies have canonized the novel-originated first names of Sulu, Uhura, and Kirk's parents.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:20 AM   #56
Paper Moon
Commander
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Christopher wrote: View Post
But there's no reason a canonical work can't pick and choose elements from non-canonical tie-ins, like the way Enterprise borrowed bits of Andorian worldbuilding from a gaming supplement, or the way the movies have canonized the novel-originated first names of Sulu, Uhura, and Kirk's parents.
Yeah, that's always cool when they do that. It's a nice way, among other things, to show respect towards people who have put serious time, effort and creativity into the franchise.

Do they ever have to deal with royalties with that kind of stuff? I know that Tom Paris was originally gonna be Nick Locarno, but the idea was dropped, possibly because of the downsides of having to pay royalties to the writer of "The First Duty," but how do novels fit into that paradigm, particularly if more than one author has used the idea (ie. Uhura's first name)?
Paper Moon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 03:29 AM   #57
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Novelists only get royalties on actual sales of our books. Since our contracts are work-for-hire, everything we create belongs to CBS (and before that, Paramount) and they can do what they want with it without further compensating us. The contracts for scriptwriters are different.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 10:18 AM   #58
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Great responses, everyone! Well, until the canon thing, anyway.

I totally forgot to put in my two cents:

If the novelverse were fundamentally contradicted by any new canon, it wouldn't ruin those books for me at all - I still count "The Final Reflection" and "Final Frontier" among my all-time favourites, and events from them can only be imported into the current novel continuity in very broad strokes.

That said, my enthusiasm for future Typhon Pact-continuity novels, as an ongoing series, would probably diminish. That tie-ins tie-in is a big part of their appeal for me. Knowing the fate of Romulus and Spock enhances my enjoyment of the novels featuring them, as I watch the pieces fall into place. If the books say, "oh, thats not our Spock or our Romulus" it would seem.... diminished.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 10:30 AM   #59
Relayer1
Commodore
 
Relayer1's Avatar
 
Location: The Black Country, England
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

KingDaniel wrote: View Post
That said, my enthusiasm for future Typhon Pact-continuity novels, as an ongoing series, would probably diminish. That tie-ins tie-in is a big part of their appeal for me. Knowing the fate of Romulus and Spock enhances my enjoyment of the novels featuring them, as I watch the pieces fall into place. If the books say, "oh, thats not our Spock or our Romulus" it would seem.... diminished.
This is exactly how I feel on the issue.
__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...
Relayer1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 4 2012, 09:41 PM   #60
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: new canon vs novelverse: worst case scenario

Honestly, I doubt it will ever even become an issue. The Abrams films are now safely off in their own timeline, and it's unlikely we'll see any new televised Star Trek until they're done.

And, frankly, if I were to bring Star Trek Prime Timeline back to TV -- and Leonard Nimoy said in a number of interviews promoting ST09 that he thinks the film was so big that Star Trek can never go back to TV anymore -- but, if I were to do it, I'd do another TNG-style time jump and advance us to somewhere in the mid-24th Century. Plenty of time for clever authors to reconcile the Destinyverse 2380s with whatever I introduce. Obviously that's just me, but I do think that the creative advantages of such a time jump -- that you'd be generally free to both play with the same basic toys (the Federation, the Klingons, the Romulans, etc.) but also free to establish entirely new relationships among them -- are pretty obvious. There's a reason Gene put TNG in the 2360s rather than the 2290s.
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.