Charting the Novel-verse

[captcalhoun]

titanic: the ship sinks.

Downfall: Hitler dies.

Soylent Green: it's people.

Empire Strikes Back: Vader is Luke's dad.

[Relayer1]

Christopher wrote:

---

Well, we've all got our own writing styles, but we're all obligated to respect the canon -- just part of the rules of writing tie-ins -- and a lot of us work tons of continuity references into our books. However, the majority of the novels published in the past decade have had a shared continuity that Crucible is not a part of, because the decision was made to ground that trilogy solely in the original (and animated) series.

What are the 'out of continuity' elements of the Crucible books ? They are on my to be read pile at the moment.

And why would a a decision be made for a recent novel to deliberately violate continuity ?

[Christopher]

Relayer1 wrote:

---

What are the 'out of continuity' elements of the Crucible books ? They are on my to be read pile at the moment.

And why would a a decision be made for a recent novel to deliberately violate continuity ?

Let me be clear: Crucible, like all tie-in novels, is consistent with the continuity of canonical, onscreen Star Trek. It was simply decided to take it in a different direction than other novels have taken when it comes to things beyond established screen continuity. For instance, its version of the events in the years following Star Trek: The Motion Picture is incompatible with what my novel Ex Machina established, and its version of the elderly Admiral McCoy's life in the 24th century differs from what various other novels and short stories have established. This is because Crucible was meant to be a celebration of TOS itself, one that would be accessible to readers who aren't necessarily familiar with the broader prose continuity.

And differing from that prose continuity isn't "violating" anything, because that continuity is optional, not obligatory. It's something that various writers and editors have chosen to build between them, but it was never intended to prevent alternative paths from being taken. As it stands, it's just one of several alternative continuities in the books, alongside the Shatner novels, Crucible, and Diane Duane's concluding Rihannsu novels, plus assorted standalone novels and stories. Not to mention the distinct continuities of other tie-ins like the IDW and TokyoPop comics and Star Trek Online.

[Relayer1]

Christopher wrote:

---

Let me be clear: Crucible, like all tie-in novels, is consistent with the continuity of canonical, onscreen Star Trek. It was simply decided to take it in a different direction than other novels have taken when it comes to things beyond established screen continuity. For instance, its version of the events in the years following Star Trek: The Motion Picture is incompatible with what my novel Ex Machina established, and its version of the elderly Admiral McCoy's life in the 24th century differs from what various other novels and short stories have established. This is because Crucible was meant to be a celebration of TOS itself, one that would be accessible to readers who aren't necessarily familiar with the broader prose continuity.

And differing from that prose continuity isn't "violating" anything, because that continuity is optional, not obligatory. It's something that various writers and editors have chosen to build between them, but it was never intended to prevent alternative paths from being taken. As it stands, it's just one of several alternative continuities in the books, alongside the Shatner novels, Crucible, and Diane Duane's concluding Rihannsu novels, plus assorted standalone novels and stories. Not to mention the distinct continuities of other tie-ins like the IDW and TokyoPop comics and Star Trek Online.

Fair point, and thanks for the answer.

I just find it odd that novels are being released that deliberately ignore the current novel continuity (note I don't say canon !) when they could easily be written to 'fit in'.

Obviously contradictory 'old' novels are unavoidable, and presumably can be filed as 'Myriad Universes'.

My problem with it is probably just symptomatic of my anally retentive fanboy mentality...

[Christopher]

Relayer1 wrote:

---

I just find it odd that novels are being released that deliberately ignore the current novel continuity (note I don't say canon !) when they could easily be written to 'fit in'.

Because continuity isn't the reason we tell stories. We tell stories to explore interesting ideas. It can be interesting to explore an evolving, interconnected continuity, but the continuity is a means to that end, not an end in itself. If someone has a great idea for a story that can't fit with that continuity, they shouldn't be forbidden to tell it.

And Crucible could not have been written to fit the main novel continuity. Its storyline contains elements that take the characters and their lives in very different directions than what the other novels have done. It's a huge, epic, sweeping story, and its author and editor decided that it needed the freedom to strike its own course -- grounded in canon, of course, but otherwise not held back by anything else. It's what the story needed, and that's the priority.

[Relayer1]

Christopher wrote:

---

Because continuity isn't the reason we tell stories. We tell stories to explore interesting ideas. It can be interesting to explore an evolving, interconnected continuity, but the continuity is a means to that end, not an end in itself. If someone has a great idea for a story that can't fit with that continuity, they shouldn't be forbidden to tell it.

And Crucible could not have been written to fit the main novel continuity. Its storyline contains elements that take the characters and their lives in very different directions than what the other novels have done.

...is a pretty compelling reason !

Not having read it yet it is hard to judge if it could have been made to fit continuity and still told an equally good story.

[Steve Mollmann]

The way Provenance of Shadows ends, at least, definitely couldn't work and would be much less powerful if it fit in with "the novel continuity."

[Yevetha]

Chrisptopher posted:

Because continuity isn't the reason we tell stories. We tell stories to explore interesting ideas. It can be interesting to explore an evolving, interconnected continuity, but the continuity is a means to that end, not an end in itself. If someone has a great idea for a story that can't fit with that continuity, they shouldn't be forbidden to tell it.

There is always a way to make the idea, you might just need a diferent sctor of space or a different era, thats all.

[Christopher]

Yevetha wrote:

---

Chrisptopher posted:

There is always a way to make the idea, you might just need a diferent sctor of space or a different era, thats all.

There are so many things wrong with that assumption that it would take all morning to go into it. But did you miss the part where I said continuity is not an end in itself? It is not something that writers should be required to obey. That's an arbitrary limitation that has nothing to do with quality. Saying that all stories need to be kept slavishly consistent with each other is like saying that all stories need to be musicals or that all stories need explicit sex scenes. Continuity is a stylistic option. It's a technique that works well in some contexts but absolutely should not be the only permitted approach.

The writers and editors developed the interconnected Trek novel continuity because it was fun and interesting, and because we wanted to pay tribute to other authors' works we respected and play with their ideas and characters further. But if the best way to tell a story is to move in a separate direction from that continuity, then it would be wrong to force that story into a mold it doesn't belong in.

[Yevetha]

But did you miss the part where I said continuity is not an end in itself?

Its not, but it keeps things straight.

It is not something that writers should be required to obey.

I dont have that expectation unless they are working for a franchise.

Saying that all stories need to be kept slavishly consistent with each other is like saying that all stories need to be musicals or that all stories need explicit sex scenes.

Not slavishly, i belive in retcons.

But if the best way to tell a story is to move in a separate direction from that continuity, then it would be wrong to force that story into a mold it doesn't belong in.
__________________

Unless you want to do it with certain charcters or planets continuity is not an issue.

[Yevetha]

Is Left Hand of Destiny canonically consistent with the following books: Diplomatic Impalusibility, Gorkon Trilogy, A Stich at a Time, Taking Wing, Orion's Hounds, Eatching the Clock and The Buried Age?

[Christopher]

Yes, The Left Hand of Destiny is in the same continuity as most modern Trek novels. It is, after all, part of the DS9 post-finale series, albeit a peripheral part. (Although there is an unintentional contradiction between the way LHoD and the Christie Golden Voyager novels depict the Klingon planet Boreth. LHoD portrays it as a frozen waste with no indigenous life, but the VGR novels depict a jungle where the Klingons conduct hunting rituals. I think those can be reconciled if one assumes the jungle is a terraformed enclave; if all the life was brought in artificially, then it can be reconciled with the lack of indigenous life asserted in LHoD.)

[Yevetha]

How does Full Circle depict Boreth?

[Deranged Nasat]

We're implicitly directed to gloss over the contradictory appearances of Boreth in Spirit Walk Book One, which while building directly on The Farther Shore also references the events of The Left Hand of Destiny. So the later Christie Golden books explicitly acknowledge that LHoD happened. No explanation is given for the climate portrayals; we're supposedly just meant to shrug it off as one of those things that happens. But I like Christopher's suggestion.

"This is our most sacred planet! I want to go hunting there!"

"But, Chancellor, there aren't any lifeforms on Boreth"

"Yes, I desire to hunt in the jungles of sacred Boreth".

"But Chancellor!"

*Chancellor gives meaningful look*

"Sigh. Yes, Chancellor. As you command".

[Yevetha]

Boreth can have different climate on different parts of the planet.

Retcon done.