So we're undoing Indistinguishable from magic?

[Lonemagpie]

shanejayell wrote:

---

According to the Chronic Rift podcast, Mack thinks IFM is simply non-canon.

http://chronicrift.com/node/2744

Quote?

I'd love to think of something else to say

[MatthiasRussell]

Maybe Geordi is just juggling 2 women now. Geordi, you dog!

[shanejayell]

At about 12:47 minutes in he mentions the current romance, then talks about IFM and that it "IfM just doesn't fit the continuity."

[David Mack]

Lonemagpie wrote:

---

Quote?

I'd love to think of something else to say

I did not say anything about "canon" or "non-canon." Starting from time reference 12:50, what I said was --

"Geordi is also ... now enmeshed in a new romantic relationship, which was established over several of the recent books, with a doctor from the Enterprise crew named Tamala Harstad. There was one sort of glitch in the continuity when, in the book Indistinguishable from Magic, Geordi somehow got put back together with Leah Brahms. Much as I hate to say this about any book in the recent history of the line, Indistinguishable from Magic just doesn't fit the continuity. It sort of is a unique animal that stands apart from most of the other current Star Trek literary continuity."

In addition to the Leah Brahms/Geordi relationship, other deviations from the current literary continuity include Alyssa Ogawa being an MD when she's still depicted as a nurse in the concurrent Titan continuity, and Nog's new role, which contradicts David R. George's ongoing DS9 literary continuity.

In short, before anyone starts complaining about how the new books are "undoing" IFM, it might be instructive to realize that if most of the other works in the literary continuity fit together except for IFM, maybe that one book lies outside the current continuity, as a unique expression/interpretation of its author, much as David R. George's acclaimed Crucible trilogy represents its author's unique vision of the classic Star Trek mythos.

Also, just to make sure no one gets confused here, saying that a book stands apart from the current shared literary continuity is not a value judgment on the work or its author, merely an observation on the work's relationship to the other books in the recent schedule.

[Defcon]

Longer version:

"Geordi is also [...] in a new romantic relationship, which was established over several of the recent books [...]. There was one sort of glitch in the continuity, when in the book IfM he somehow got put together with Leah Brahms. Much as I hate to say this about any book in the sort of recent history of the line: IFM just doesn't fit the continuity. It sort of is a unique animal that stands apart from most of the other current Star trek literary continuity."

ETA: Beaten to it by the man himself.

[shanejayell]

I don't like to argue with a author, but as far as I can tell there's no reason IFM can't fit into continuity. Challenger was sunk, after all. Nog could quite easily have served there then moved on to DRGIII's books. As could have Nurse Ogawa.

What it looks like is editorial didn't point out to authors that stuff they were doing contradicted IFM, building up to the errors in Cold Equations. And now the book's being ignored to make up for that....

[Hartzilla2007]

David Mack wrote:

---

and Nog's new role, which contradicts David R. George's ongoing DS9 literary continuity.

Except I believe Nog's stint as a security chief was mentioned in Raise the Dawn, David R. George even acknowledged and explained Sela's character change between Indistinguishable from Magic of Plagues of Night/Raise the Dawn. Really the only major thing is the Ogawa thing which could just be a continuity glitch the editors missed, I mean its not like Titan didn't already have one of those in the last novel Seize the Fire.

[David Mack]

shanejayell wrote:

---

I don't like to argue with a author, but as far as I can tell there's no reason IFM can't fit into continuity. Challenger was sunk, after all. Nog could quite easily have served there then moved on to DRGIII's books. As could have Nurse Ogawa.

What it looks like is editorial didn't point out to authors that stuff they were doing contradicted IFM, building up to the errors in Cold Equations. And now the book's being ignored to make up for that....

Hartzilla2007 wrote:

---

Except I believe Nog's stint as a security chief was mentioned in Raise the Dawn, David R. George even acknowledged and explained Sela's character change between Indistinguishable from Magic of Plagues of Night/Raise the Dawn. Really the only major thing is the Ogawa thing.

I know that DRG3 did his best to reconcile the continuity details from IFM with PoN/RtD, but I was instructed by my editors simply to move on and proceed as if with a clean slate. So before you start accusing me of making "errors," be advised that I worked in good faith based on the instructions I was given.

[Lonemagpie]

shanejayell wrote:

---

I don't like to argue with a author, but as far as I can tell there's no reason IFM can't fit into continuity. Challenger was sunk, after all. Nog could quite easily have served there then moved on to DRGIII's books. As could have Nurse Ogawa.

What it looks like is editorial didn't point out to authors that stuff they were doing contradicted IFM, building up to the errors in Cold Equations. And now the book's being ignored to make up for that....

It'll probably get me banned from ever writing Trek again, but what happened was:

S&S/CBS asked for more familiar characters - not only did nobody say "hey, that character's unavailable cos they're on Titan or wherever", they actually chose Ogawa from the suggestions of "Ogawa, Pulaski or a new character".

When I specifically asked "is there anything in Typhon Pact or current continuity/plans that conflicts with this?" they said "no."

They approved the outline at several stages, knowing the conflicts.

Then, at the copyedit stage after delivery - which was just when one editor left and the office was in chaos - they went "hey, how come Reg and Ogawa are here! WTF!?" They actually suggested making it set before Destiny or something, but I fought against that.

Ed Schlesinger was very strong on repeating "we don't want it to be apocryphal" - that's the word he used repeatedly - with the inference that being apocryphal would mean "you're screwed". So I guess they now decided it is. Which almost certainly means I'm out, which would explain why I haven't heard from them for two years...

I think this post is what they call career suicide, but since I'm convinced my Trek career has been shot in the head anyway...

[Lonemagpie]

David Mack wrote:

---

In short, before anyone starts complaining about how the new books are "undoing" IFM, it might be instructive to realize that if most of the other works in the literary continuity fit together except for IFM, maybe that one book lies outside the current continuity, as a unique expression/interpretation of its author, much as David R. George's acclaimed Crucible trilogy represents its author's unique vision of the classic Star Trek mythos.

Also, just to make sure no one gets confused here, saying that a book stands apart from the current shared literary continuity is not a value judgment on the work or its author, merely an observation on the work's relationship to the other books in the recent schedule.

Being compared to Crucible would be cool... But if I'd known that I'd have gone further...

not blaming you, BTW! Will be picking up the trilogy when the third book is out!

[shanejayell]

Ugh.

Well that's... rather frustrating. As a reader, I mean. It just seems deeply stupid to take a well written novel and have editorial say it's not in continuity, especially when the author in question was obeying editorial instructions.

[Lonemagpie]

David Mack wrote:

---

I know that DRG3 did his best to reconcile the continuity details from IFM with PoN/RtD, but I was instructed by my editors simply to move on and proceed as if with a clean slate. So before you start accusing me of making "errors," be advised that I worked in good faith based on the instructions I was given.

Thought as much. Been expecting it. Like I said - not blaming you!

TBH, I'm not sure I'd want to work with that editor again for being such a... My wife suggests the word unprofessional, but I'll settle for being as much that here today. The whole thing has somewhat soured me on the whole damn franchise...

[Julio Angel Ortiz]

^ I don't see anything here that should get you banned. You followed the process and wrote the story you were hired to tell.

[Lonemagpie]

Julio Angel Ortiz wrote:

---

^ I don't see anything here that should get you banned. You followed the process and wrote the story you were hired to tell.

And then dished the dirt on a public forum...

[King Daniel]

Continuity glitches are a fact of life in a shared universe as big as Star Trek. I don't think there's anything in IFM that couldn't be reconciled with the rest of the Typhon Pact-era continuity and I'm disappointed in the editorial choice made to sweep it under the rug.

As I said on page 1, I think it's bad for the entire Trek novel line when they publish a novel whose story explicitly puts in in the same shared universe as the rest (minor continuity glitches aside) then a little while later decide otherwise.