RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,385
Posts: 5,357,832
Members: 24,626
Currently online: 589
Newest member: suryaprabu02

TrekToday headlines

The Gene Roddenberry Project Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Moore: No Deep Space Nine Regrets
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Pegg Star Wars Rumor
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28


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 July 12 2013, 02:39 PM   #46
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Thrawn wrote: View Post
I agree with you about telling the same basic story over and over again, though. That's what ultimately drove me away. Philosophically, I simply disagree with how the Star Wars EU has developed; some things are cyclical in history, but the world also progresses. Star Wars, by this point, has painted a portrait of a universe in which, functionally, nothing has changed in 5,000 years except the durations of the spaces between the repeats of the same goddamn war.
I suppose they're kind of trapped by their own title, though. They're pretty much obligated to tell stories about interstellar war, so that limits their options.
__________________
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 July 12 2013, 03:23 PM   #47
Thrawn
Rear Admiral
 
Thrawn's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Christopher wrote: View Post
Thrawn wrote: View Post
I agree with you about telling the same basic story over and over again, though. That's what ultimately drove me away. Philosophically, I simply disagree with how the Star Wars EU has developed; some things are cyclical in history, but the world also progresses. Star Wars, by this point, has painted a portrait of a universe in which, functionally, nothing has changed in 5,000 years except the durations of the spaces between the repeats of the same goddamn war.
I suppose they're kind of trapped by their own title, though. They're pretty much obligated to tell stories about interstellar war, so that limits their options.
Which partially explains my problems, but doesn't make them any less true
__________________
The Almighty Star Trek Lit-Verse Reading Order Flowchart - be confused no longer about what to read next, or what to read first.
Thrawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2013, 06:15 PM   #48
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Christopher wrote: View Post
Thrawn wrote: View Post
I agree with you about telling the same basic story over and over again, though. That's what ultimately drove me away. Philosophically, I simply disagree with how the Star Wars EU has developed; some things are cyclical in history, but the world also progresses. Star Wars, by this point, has painted a portrait of a universe in which, functionally, nothing has changed in 5,000 years except the durations of the spaces between the repeats of the same goddamn war.
I suppose they're kind of trapped by their own title, though. They're pretty much obligated to tell stories about interstellar war, so that limits their options.
I know, but you'd at least bother to invent new wars instead of essentially using the same war over and over and over again!
__________________
"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
Old July 12 2013, 07:03 PM   #49
zarkon
Captain
 
zarkon's Avatar
 
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

They were doing that in the nineties. The decline of the empire, warlords, the Ssi-Ruuk, the war with the Yevetha, the Corellian secession, bounty hunter intrigue.... :/
__________________
In defeat, malice. In victory, revenge.
zarkon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2013, 07:54 PM   #50
Thrawn
Rear Admiral
 
Thrawn's Avatar
 
Location: Washington, DC
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

I even liked the Yuuzhan Vong, actually. The first few books were rocky but from the second hardcover on, that series was awesome.

But after that: same... uh, stuff, different series.
__________________
The Almighty Star Trek Lit-Verse Reading Order Flowchart - be confused no longer about what to read next, or what to read first.
Thrawn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2013, 10:30 PM   #51
Mysterion
Rear Admiral
 
Mysterion's Avatar
 
Location: SB-31, Daran V
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Christopher wrote: View Post
I suppose they're kind of trapped by their own title, though. They're pretty much obligated to tell stories about interstellar war, so that limits their options.
I've seen you wite this sentiment before, and I don't think this is at all true. Or fair. Isn't that like saying the only stories you could do with Star Trek would be about exploration or traveling somewhere? Obviously, not all Trek stories have been that.

Just because a story is set in the Star Wars universe does not require it to be a war story. Off the top of my head, you've got Spinter of the Mind's Eye, the Lando Calrissian novels, and any number of short stories that have been published that were not stories about the rebellion. Sure, it was there in the background, but the stories themselves were not "war stories" per se. The same way that not every episode of MASH was a "war story" despite having the Korean War as a backdrop.

There is a vast variety of stories that could be told in the SW universe, just as there are in the ST universe.

That being said - I think you could probably write some really good stuff set in the SW universe if you gave it a chance.
__________________
USS Galileo Galilei, NCC-8888
Prima Inter Pares
Mysterion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 12 2013, 10:45 PM   #52
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Mysterion wrote: View Post
I've seen you wite this sentiment before, and I don't think this is at all true. Isn't that like saying the only stories you could do with Star Trek would be about exploration or traveling somewhere? Obviously, not all Trek stories have been that.

Just because a story is set in the Star Wars universe does not require it to be a war story. Off the top of my head, you've got Spinter of the Mind's Eye, the Lando Calrissian novels, and any number of short stories that have been published that were not stories about the rebellion. Sure, it was there in the background, but the stories themselves were not "war stories" per se.
Individual stories, sure, but the topic here is the overall saga, the main historical arcs. In Trek, even series that aren't about space travel per se, like DS9 and Vanguard, still have starships and long journeys and exploration included in them, and they fit into the larger narrative of Starfleet and the Federation spreading outward to explore or make new alliances. What was stated above was that all the major story/historical arcs in the EU seem to be one war after another, and I'm just saying that when something is called Star Wars, I can kind of see why that would be the case. Not that it has to be that way, but it could help explain why so many creators keep returning to the same wells.
__________________
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 July 30 2013, 09:52 PM   #53
Llama
Captain
 
Llama's Avatar
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Speaking of changing the status quo, I assume the destruction of Romulus plays a big part in Treklit, especially with the Typhon Pact (I'm only up to book 4 in the Typhon Pact series, so please no major spoilers)
__________________
Llamas are larger than frogs.
Llama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 30 2013, 09:58 PM   #54
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

^The books haven't caught up to 2387 yet. The upcoming The Fall is in '85, I believe. So Romulus is still around.
__________________
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 July 31 2013, 01:33 PM   #55
Llama
Captain
 
Llama's Avatar
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Christopher wrote: View Post
^The books haven't caught up to 2387 yet. The upcoming The Fall is in '85, I believe. So Romulus is still around.
Thanks. I look forward to seeing what you and the other writers come up with. The destruction of Romulus is going to have major implications throughout the alpha and beta quadrants.
__________________
Llamas are larger than frogs.
Llama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2013, 04:46 PM   #56
Relayer1
Commodore
 
Relayer1's Avatar
 
Location: The Black Country, England
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Considering we are approaching 2387 rather faster than I was expecting, I really would expect much more focus on Spock and Romulan reunification in the next few years.

It would be good to see more of his relationships with Saavik (are children likely ?) and Valeris too.

The clock is ticking...
__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...
Relayer1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old July 31 2013, 06:50 PM   #57
CaffeineAddict
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
A tough question but I was reading "The Eternal Tide" and was thinking about a tough question--how much is too much change from the status quo? What is the "line" for you guys in terms of altering the setting?



Obviously, we've had some really big changes to the SQ but other people think the destruction of the Borg was a bad thing. Others still love the return of fan-favorite characters while others believe death should remain sacred.

Is it a "as long as it's done well" for you or do you like seeing the novels shake it up?
I'm definitley of the "as long as its done well" opinion. I never used to like trek books, because there was no growth or real character/plot development, as it had to reset at the end of the book so as not to contradict the tv shows.
Thats one of the reasons I liked New Frontier when it came out, it was a new setting so stuff could actually happen, characters could grow, there could be an ongoing narrative, etc.
I like the modern trek novels because they change the status quo.
CaffeineAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1 2013, 05:32 AM   #58
RPJOB
Commander
 
RPJOB's Avatar
 
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
A tough question but I was reading "The Eternal Tide" and was thinking about a tough question--how much is too much change from the status quo? What is the "line" for you guys in terms of altering the setting?



Obviously, we've had some really big changes to the SQ but other people think the destruction of the Borg was a bad thing. Others still love the return of fan-favorite characters while others believe death should remain sacred.

Is it a "as long as it's done well" for you or do you like seeing the novels shake it up?
The criteria for "Done well" varies with the type of story. A "Done well" first contact story has a much lower bar than one that brings back a character who was previously dead. There's been much more than enough of the "back from the dead" stories, both in the shows and the books, that it's pretty much an impossibly high bar for me. For the most part, they're a cheat, letting the writer get the emotional response to the death of a character while allowing them (or a later writer) to simply press the reset button and make it all better. Feh. That's not science fiction, that's fantasy. Trek is on the fringes of science fiction at the best of times I'd rather it move close to the science that further away from it when dealing with something as important as a character death.

What would the effect be on NuSpock be if we found out that Vulcan, and by extension everyone on it, was not destroyed by the black hole but simply shifted in time and space to the past? With time travel being a given he could go back and save everyone, thus undoing the need to destroy it in the first place.

There's a belief that that is why Kirk fired on Nero's ship in STXI, because Nero was simply going to travel further into the past again. Red Matter black holes may not actually destroy anything, the may simply be time portals.

If a death can be undone, does that not mean that everyone is now immortal as long as someone cares enough to go back and save them?

With Trek being a shared universe, whatever "rules" one person puts in place can just as easily be changed, deleted or simply ignored by another. It makes it difficult to believe the characters when they say "nothing can change" or "there was noting we could have done" when something horrible happens. As a result, it makes it much more difficult for me as a viewer or a reader to care about the supposed "big changes" when they do occur. It can all be undone with the snap of Q's fingers, a phased tetryon beam or an appearance by
"godlike alien race #27"".
__________________
We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill - today! - Kirk - A Taste of Armageddon
RPJOB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 1 2013, 03:13 PM   #59
Relayer1
Commodore
 
Relayer1's Avatar
 
Location: The Black Country, England
Re: Changing the status quo - Good or Bad?

I think 'too much' is in the eye of the beholder. While I'm firmly in favour of the current developments in Treklit, killing off major characters, disbanding The Federation or any other really game-changing events run the risk of taking things too far away from Trek, which is, after all, what we all seem to like. If it's 'done well' wouldn't change that.

We just have to trust the editors and authors. They're doing a great job so far...
__________________
Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...
Relayer1 is online now   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 07:29 PM.

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