I believe that rationality in Star Trek is limited by, "Does it make a good story" and "can it be explained with technobabble." But mind you, I don't mind when Doctors find themselves as Kings of Fairytale Land.
This came out when I was . . . 11, I guess. And I was so excited. I loved DS9 almost as much as I loved MacGyver and TNG, and I'd loved The Siege, enjoyed The Big Game, and Fallen Heroes was, like, a formative reading experience for me that I'm glad I encountered at that age rather than as an adult. (I loved it so much I even made it through all four of ab Hugh's Doom novels -- and even enjoyed at least two of them!) (Also, yes, I was the kind of kid who played computer games for the plot. As a Star Wars fan, too, I was thrilled to find that the X-Wing flight game walkthrough guides had prose filling in story between the missions!) And I was so excited -- finally, a DS9 "giant novel" as they had been called in the TNG line, a prestige hardcover, written by a prestige author -- who had been tapped to write further Blade Runner novels, no less, though I probably didn't know that yet the first time I tried to read this book. And I just. I couldn't. It defeated me time and again. Jeter and DS9 just don't go together. And DS9 never got another hardcover -- even the ones that really should have been, like 34th Rule and Stitch in Time. I'm tempted to revisit this as an adult and see if I find it more approachable on its own merits rather than as a DS9 novel. But not tempted enough to actually do it. I've got plenty to read without revisiting childhood disappointments.
I made it through the book when I was in my early teens, but I bounced off the writing style hard. Whenever I hear about the book or see the cover, I think of having a headache. I'm glad the Literary Treks hosts were able to find more value in it.
The writing style was difficult, I just wish that and the character's voices were better. That said, the themes of this book are just lights out, 100% DS9!