Am I doing Ward wrong?

I have tried reading every single of these books and can't get past the half way point. Do you have an author like this? Seems like the current pantheon of Trek writers are such a high caliber.

Beyer's dialog pops with each of the Voyager characters actually being better than their on screen depictions. Mack is Mack. Dynamic, inventive and emotional. Una is quite frankly the best. The biggest regret I have about her is that she hasn't been writing Trek books for 20 years. Greg Cox is just fun. Always has been. Bennett, is a true tie in author, his books answer the questions we all had on the play ground about making sense of plot holes.

But Ward and the Ward\Dilmore Duo, just seem so... bland? I don't know what it is. Its just not interesting to read. Even Andoria leaving the FEderation was so DULL, and its joining again was just as boring.

So, who is your least favorite writer?

 

Yeah, I'm not fond of Dayton Ward either. Especially his Fall finale; that was a completely useless novel. No one learned anything or changed at all or made any major moral point or triumphed over a surprising challenge. Nada.

I have enjoyed his Vanguard entries, just from the weight of the story being told. He's not especially good at telling it (or I suppose he and Dilmore together aren't especially good) but it's a great story so I'm happy with it. When he, or he and Dilmore, are on their own though, not part of an overarching narrative...sheesh. Those A Time To... novels are useless, too. Outside of Vanguard, I've never read a novel Ward or Wardilmore wrote that told me anything about a character I didn't already know, or made me laugh, or made me excited. They're just things that could plausibly happen next.

Like, in Tales From The Dominion War, they wrote the SCE entry. And it's... a couple of SCE characters in the Dominion War, sure enough, but it doesn't tell you anything you wouldn't already know or surprise you in any way. It just is what it says it will be.

Michael A. Martin is definitely the weakest TrekLit author that I've read recently; where Ward is boring, Martin is actively shit, sabotaging or ignoring major character arcs and long-term stories for no reason at all. Fallen Gods walked back every piece of character growth any of those characters had experienced since Taking Wing, it was goddamn surreal. Ward, at worst, still pretty much leaves things pleasantly rolling along.

But I don't think you're doing Ward wrong; I just think you want your stories to go somewhere or mean something. If all you want to do is spend some time with characters you know well, Ward will get you there. But that's about it.

 

I totally agree with you. I forgot about Martin. HIs Romulan War books come off to me like Dennis Kucinich narrating Operation Iraqi Freedom. Doesnt want it fought, wants no war at any cost, but was hired to write it.

 

You're not doing anything wrong, sometimes a certain author just isn't your cup of tea.

Personally, I've had some ups and down with Ward. I loved everything he did for Vanguard, but Paths Of Disharmony and Peacable Kingdoms weren't that great to me personally. Thing is, I know others that loved those two novels.

Least favorite is Michael A. Martin.

 

I kinda feel you OP. I've read all the books you posted, and the only one that I actually really liked was "In The Name Of Honour", which does really well on Kirk's anger and the Klingon's hypocrisy in their transition. Peacable Kingdoms really ended The Fall with a whimper.

Least favourite author? Ever is probably the Marshak/Culbreath combo, right now it's either DRG3 or Martin. Probably Martin, because at least DRG3 used to write books I like (The 34th Rule is one of my favourite trek books ever).

 

I hate to say it, but I do agree also. Bland, or unexciting, or unchallenging, or even repetitive - these are all words I'd use with the Ward or Ward/Dilmore books I've read, including even the Vanguard novels everyone else seems to laud - I nearly stopped reading Stop the Thunder because it felt so dully-written compared to Harbinger. I find it dificutl to say, because they are great guys from their online presences, but their work is not something I feel positive about. Maybe I shall check out 'In the Name of Honour' though.

 

Mmh, guess I'm on the other side of the argument here.

I'm always happy to see a Ward(/Dilmore) book on the schedule, as I know I'll get a good novel.

Other regulars like DRG III,Christopher and especially Martin are a whole lot more hit and miss for me personally.

 

It's a fascinating difference to me that the two Vanguard books I've read by Ward/Dilmore were so much better than The Fall: Peaceable Kingdoms. Can't quite see why it'd be so different either but there it is.

 

I agree with Mage in that sometimes a certain author will have a particular way of writing that doesn't always "click" with everybody. I haven't read all of these novels by Dayton Ward, but the ones I have read I've enjoyed, some more than others. While I particularly liked the Vanguard series (not a dud amongst the lot - from any author), I found From History's Shadow the weakest, but that's probably because I was expecting something a little different than what I got.
Peaceable Kingdoms wasn't outstanding, but neither was it poor. I'd read quite a lot of negative reviews before I got my copy, so I held some trepidation before I did sit down and read it. Happily, I found it to be a good, solid read. A few bits and pieces here and there weren't the best, but I attribute those to it being the final book in the series, and believe that Ward must have had to do some compromising to fit everything in as he did. I'd certainly buy another book he's written.

As for my least favourite author, I think everyone can have a bad day (or book), but I could never get into Peter David's New Frontier writings. I think the main problem was that I didn't like the set-up or characterisations - it didn't feel very Star Trek to me. I thought maybe a novel set outside the New Frontier universe would be better, but, unfortunately, The Captain's Daughter and Before Dishonor proved me wrong.

 

I have a love-thate thing with Carey. I only like her TOS books. And then I only like First Strike and i LOVE First Frontier. That book is truly an epic adventure.

The problem is, she tries to convert 23rd century TOS sensibilities into the 24th century. The very naval quality of Kirk's Enterprise doesn't translate to the Enterprise-D, DS9 or Voyager. I can see Sulu and Chekov repeating Kirk's orders cuz that's old sailor stuff, to be heard over the wind. But Data and Wesley? No.

And Kirk WAS a libertarian like Carey, Picard... not so much.

 

I like Ward and always enjoyed his books.

The author I try to avoid (unless impossible, if a book is a part of a bigger arch) is Michael Jan Friedman. I admit I enjoyed one of his books, but suffered through everything else by him I touched, so now I try to spare myself the "pleasure".

 

I've enjoyed most of the Ward novels I've read, especially the Vanguard stuff and Paths of Disharmony.

It's a matter of personal preference. Personally, I wasn't blown away by David Mack's Destiny trilogy, and I KNOW I'm in a minority there (I'd like to point out that I loved his Cold Equations trilogy though).

 

I figured out what I dont like about Friedman. He doesnt focus on the core STar Trek characters, most of his books focus on characters of his own creation. Stargazer for example

 

I've had much and more of the 'core' characters. I LIKE new creations and would like more...

 

This pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter as well. Vanguard was just awesome, and while not the highlight of the series, I enjoyed the Wardilmore entry into A Time To... as well.

The worst critique I can give some of the weaker novels, by any author, is to call them bland -there's only ever been one ST novel I couldn't get myself to finish (Indistinguishable from Magic).

Then again, opinions will vary. David Mack is one of my ups-and-downs writers. I absolutely loved his A Time To... and Vanguard entries, and Cold Equations too... but I really struggled with Destiny, which as we know is a minority opinion here. To each his own I suppose.

The real question is of course: does the author determine if I will buy a book? Likely not. I'm influenced more by reviews of board members that I know I tend to agree with, and even then I only bother with those for books I'm already uncertain about buying.

 

I'm not sure I quite agree with that. Friedman likes to create (or recycle) strong characters for the "core" characters to play off of and have something to do, and in so doing we learn something about the core characters.

Reunion is a perfect example of that. Friedman creates an entire Stargazer crew, and he uses those characters to illuminate several of the main TNG characters. There's that passage where Deanna observes that Picard sees his crew as his children, and this reunion is, for Picard, the equivalent of his two families meeting. Crusher confronts her grief at Jack's death because of Pug Joseph. Worf learns something about honor and loyalty through Morgen of Daa'Vit. Things like that.

 

My biggest criticism with Ward is that I feel like he takes too long with his set-up, and that his rising action and climaxes are too abrupt. (No innuendo intended.)

I do think that Ward is more interested in telling more traditional TOS-style or TNG-style action-adventure space opera stories than he is in the different genres the Trek novels often play in, such as political intrigue. That's not a bad thing, but it's not my cup of tea.

 

Not the case for me. I enjoyed enough of stories turning around new characters to know that it's not an issue for me.

I guess I just don't like his storytelling style.