RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,215
Posts: 5,404,989
Members: 24,760
Currently online: 573
Newest member: R.Data

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


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 September 18 2013, 04:27 AM   #46
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Dimesdan wrote: View Post
Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
2) due to Bad Robot dictates, Abramsverse novels are not allowed. So this can't have much of anything to do with STID.
Link?
Here you go.
That link doesn't prove your claim in the least. In fact, it contradicts it. The quote there says it was Pocket's own decision "to hold off on telling new stories."

And the claim doesn't even make sense. There was an article more recently claiming that Bad Robot wanted all tie-ins to be in the Abramsverse but CBS was unwilling to abandon its successful Prime-universe tie-in lines. If BR had that much unilateral power to tell CBS what to do, wouldn't they have cancelled the Primeverse novels instead of the Abramsverse ones?

As I keep saying: we don't actually know what led to the novels being cancelled. I wrote one of the cancelled novels and even I don't know. And so any theory about the reasons behind it is guesswork, not fact.


The Wormhole wrote: View Post
But then there must be some reason why no novels in the Abramsverse are being done.
I suspect it's a business reason involving corporate or marketing considerations that aren't evident to the fanbase.
__________________
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 September 18 2013, 04:39 AM   #47
David Mack
Writer
 
David Mack's Avatar
 
Location: New York, NY
View David Mack's Twitter Profile
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Although I would not presume to speak for David Mack, I do get the impression that he pitched a Section 31 story because it's a story he wanted to tell and their presence in STID in no way influenced the decision. But I do not presume to speak for David Mack.
And yet you are 100% correct. Well done.
__________________
~ David Mack | "Where were you when the page was blank?" — Truman Capote

Join me on Facebook & Twitter
David Mack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18 2013, 11:11 AM   #48
Lonemagpie
Writer
 
Lonemagpie's Avatar
 
Location: Yorkshire
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Man of Steel wrote: View Post
Lonemagpie wrote: View Post
David Mack wrote: View Post
Precisely. … And yes, I have been watching a lot of classic Mission: Impossible on Netflix lately….
Well, that's a guaranteed sale here...

Also, colour me amazed that the Mission Impossible movie series didn't spawn a tie-in book series for the franchise in some form. I'd have thought it was a no-brainer for Pocket...
Start pitching it to them
I suspect that pitching a licence would be a very different process than pitching a novel... I wouldn't knowhere to atart on that side of things.
__________________
"I got two modes with people- Bite, and Avoid"
Reading: Wolfsangel (MD Lachlan)

Blog- http://lonemagpie.livejournal.com
Lonemagpie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18 2013, 05:17 PM   #49
Man of Steel
Fleet Captain
 
Man of Steel's Avatar
 
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Send a message via AIM to Man of Steel Send a message via Yahoo to Man of Steel
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Lonemagpie wrote: View Post
Man of Steel wrote: View Post
Lonemagpie wrote: View Post

Well, that's a guaranteed sale here...

Also, colour me amazed that the Mission Impossible movie series didn't spawn a tie-in book series for the franchise in some form. I'd have thought it was a no-brainer for Pocket...
Start pitching it to them
I suspect that pitching a licence would be a very different process than pitching a novel... I wouldn't knowhere to atart on that side of things.
Isn't that what agents are for?
__________________
"To Thine Own Self Be True" - Willie Shakespeare.
Man of Steel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18 2013, 05:29 PM   #50
Lonemagpie
Writer
 
Lonemagpie's Avatar
 
Location: Yorkshire
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Man of Steel wrote: View Post
Lonemagpie wrote: View Post
Man of Steel wrote: View Post

Start pitching it to them
I suspect that pitching a licence would be a very different process than pitching a novel... I wouldn't know where to atart on that side of things.
Isn't that what agents are for?
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Ah, you evidently don't know the agent I used to have.

1992-2003: unagented, regular contracts.
2004-2006: Agented, no contracts, ended up working in a supermarket bakery for 18 months
2007-present: Unagented, regular contracts.

Yeah, I have a different view than most writers on what agents are for...
__________________
"I got two modes with people- Bite, and Avoid"
Reading: Wolfsangel (MD Lachlan)

Blog- http://lonemagpie.livejournal.com
Lonemagpie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18 2013, 05:53 PM   #51
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
Christopher wrote: View Post
My take on the first M:I movie is that Voight's character was some impersonator wearing a Jim Phelps mask.
Mission Impossible 2 was nice enough to point out that it is possible.
Really? How did it do that?
The fact that they seemed to treat one IMF agent posing as another one when that agent was unavailable as something completely normal.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 18 2013, 11:09 PM   #52
tomswift2002
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

With Section 31 the current DS9 books have been building up a Section 31 thread with Sarina Douglas and Dr. Bashir, so it sounds like the book might tie into that thread some how (could we see the collapse of 31??? I don't know but it would be interesting.)
tomswift2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2013, 04:42 AM   #53
Rush Limborg
Vice Admiral
 
Rush Limborg's Avatar
 
Location: The EIB Network
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

^To be honest, though, The Good That Men Do notwithstanding, I do NOT see how an organization-wide collapse of something like The Bureau would be particularly believable or realistic. To paraphrase Michael Crichton, The Bureau has survived everything, in its time--it will surely survive Bashir...or Jake and Nog, while we're at it.

BTW--take what I say below with however much salt you must, as I'm currently waiting for my copy of the latest DS9 book to come in, but...I'm still of the firm belief that--

__________________
"I have been wounded but not yet slain. I shall lie here and bleed awhile. Then I shall rise and fight again."

"Forget it, Jake...it's Chinatown."
Rush Limborg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2013, 06:18 AM   #54
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Rush Limborg wrote: View Post
^To be honest, though, The Good That Men Do notwithstanding, I do NOT see how an organization-wide collapse of something like The Bureau would be particularly believable or realistic. To paraphrase Michael Crichton, The Bureau has survived everything, in its time--it will surely survive Bashir...
"Pride goeth before a fall."

The original Star Trek: Section 31 miniseries twelve years ago went to quite a bit of trouble to end with each captain learning of Section 31's existence and vowing to bring it down, and Section 31: Abyss established the continued existence in 2376 of the anti-Thirty-One cabal Kirk established in 2268 at the end of Section 31: Cloak.

If we see the final fall of Section 31, I suspect the Kirk Cabal will come into play, not just Bashir.

BTW--take what I say below with however much salt you must, as I'm currently waiting for my copy of the latest DS9 book to come in, but...I'm still of the firm belief that--

You just want Julian and Ezri to get back together.
__________________
"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 September 19 2013, 11:34 AM   #55
James Swallow
Writer
 
James Swallow's Avatar
 
Location: UK
View James Swallow's Twitter Profile
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

This novel is sounding very cool... Covert ops in the Star Trek universe are a compelling combination, all the way back to 'The Enterprise Incident'....

Lonemagpie wrote: View Post
Also, colour me amazed that the Mission Impossible movie series didn't spawn a tie-in book series for the franchise in some form. I'd have thought it was a no-brainer for Pocket...
O/T for a moment... Actually, it did, kinda. As well as publishing a novelization of the 1996 movie, Pocket solicited two original tie-ins - The Aztec Imperative by James Luceno and The Doomsday Summit (possibly retitled Ring of Fire) by Tom Philbin but I don't think they were ever actually produced. There was also a single issue of an M:I comic published by Marvel's Paramount Comics imprint around the same time.
But you're right, it would be a neat tie-in franchise...
James Swallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 19 2013, 01:56 PM   #56
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

David Mack wrote: View Post
The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Although I would not presume to speak for David Mack, I do get the impression that he pitched a Section 31 story because it's a story he wanted to tell and their presence in STID in no way influenced the decision. But I do not presume to speak for David Mack.
And yet you are 100% correct. Well done.
But it have influenced the editor's decision to give the novel the goahead?
__________________
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 September 20 2013, 12:33 AM   #57
David Mack
Writer
 
David Mack's Avatar
 
Location: New York, NY
View David Mack's Twitter Profile
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote: View Post
But it have influenced the editor's decision to give the novel the goahead?
I doubt it. It wasn't even on their radar until I pitched it, but then they approved it, conceptually at least, on the spot.

If I had to guess, I'd say the approval was motivated more by my then-recent arrival on the New York Times bestseller list than by Section 31's being mentioned in STID.
__________________
~ David Mack | "Where were you when the page was blank?" — Truman Capote

Join me on Facebook & Twitter
David Mack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 20 2013, 03:42 AM   #58
Rush Limborg
Vice Admiral
 
Rush Limborg's Avatar
 
Location: The EIB Network
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Sci wrote: View Post
Rush Limborg wrote: View Post
^To be honest, though, The Good That Men Do notwithstanding, I do NOT see how an organization-wide collapse of something like The Bureau would be particularly believable or realistic. To paraphrase Michael Crichton, The Bureau has survived everything, in its time--it will surely survive Bashir...
"Pride goeth before a fall."
And frankly, it was pretty "prideful" of Vaughn to assume that 31 was behind the events of Insurrection, when part of the point of the conflict of the movie was that the Federation, in these desperate times, was inadvertently turning blind eyes to "small"--yet highly important--things. When your reasoning is only "Oh, well, we know better--it had to have been 31", I think you've got a pride problem.

The original Star Trek: Section 31 miniseries twelve years ago went to quite a bit of trouble to end with each captain learning of Section 31's existence and vowing to bring it down, and Section 31: Abyss established the continued existence in 2376 of the anti-Thirty-One cabal Kirk established in 2268 at the end of Section 31: Cloak.
Well, technically, the DS9 book wasn't Sisko (or Ro) centered--it was Bashir. But that's spitting hairs.

Anyway--as for Picard and Janeway (and even Vaughn)...to the best of my knowledge there is absolutely no follow-up to those vows.

If we see the final fall of Section 31, I suspect the Kirk Cabal will come into play, not just Bashir.
Still, the thing to keep in mind is that 31 has much more experience in covert activities than the Cabal--assuming the Cabal does much, being little more than an anti-31 club, as far as the books seem to reveal.

(By the way, anyone curious as to exactly why we don't see any follow-up to Bashir's recruitment into the Cabal? I'd imagine at least, after learning of...well hints of 31 involvement in his life, lately, Bashir would be contacting the others, expressing his suspicions and concerns about you-know-who....)

BTW--take what I say below with however much salt you must, as I'm currently waiting for my copy of the latest DS9 book to come in, but...I'm still of the firm belief that--

You just want Julian and Ezri to get back together.
Strike "just" from there, and sure! But it isn't only that. Consider:

__________________
"I have been wounded but not yet slain. I shall lie here and bleed awhile. Then I shall rise and fight again."

"Forget it, Jake...it's Chinatown."
Rush Limborg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 21 2013, 09:32 PM   #59
shanejayell
Captain
 
shanejayell's Avatar
 
Location: BC, Canada
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

Works for me, Rush. Still, I'll wait to see the book. Heh.

Looking forward to it too!
__________________
Avatar: Priss Asagiri, Bubblegum Crisis
shanejayell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 07:08 PM   #60
DS9forever
Fleet Captain
 
Re: Star Trek: Section 31: Disavowed - Dec. 2014?

There is a quick reference by Bashir in Revelation and Dust to Sarina and Section 31; Bashir is worried that Sarina may be working for Section 31 but isn't ready to face that possibility.
DS9forever 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 01:47 AM.

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