Plagues of Night and Raise the Dawn – conclusion of the first TP arc

[DigificWriter]

^ Christopher is starting to get what I was truly trying to say. The Forgotten Realms D&D campaign setting contains a number of novels which have been connected in some fashion, either be it through appearances by a character or characters from one set of novels in a completely separate set of novels, or else by one set of characters traveling to a locale that is central to an entirely unrelated set of novels. This doesn't make the connected novels part of one cohesive story arc, but instead weaves them into the larger tapestry that is the Forgotten Realms campaign setting. Each of the novels releaed under the Forgotten Realms banner and set in that world remains a distinct, separate thing, but on those occasions when novels are connected, it creates a broader picture of the campaign setting and the world therein.

This is what I feel has been done with regards to the Typhon Pact novels with PoN and RtD; DRGIII has turned the TP branding into a 'campaign setting' akin to Forgotten Realms, connecting threads from several novels into a larger tapestry, while still allowing those novels to remain individual, distinct, separate tales focused on a particular, separate iteration of the broader ST brand-name/franchise.

[RonG]

Christopher wrote:

---

And I still don't think that's an entirely correct assessment. As I said, the "arc" is a retroactive creation of Plagues/Dawn, which drew in the events of Rough Beasts of Empire, Zero Sum Game, and Paths of Disharmony and tied them together into a larger whole; while A Singular Destiny, Seize the Fire, and The Struggle Within are more independent Typhon Pact tales that weren't tied together with the connective tissue of the duology.

And by the same token, it's too early to say it's the end of that arc, since we don't know yet whether Brinkmanship will be a separate thing or a direct continuation of the same threads, and we don't know whether future works will do a similar kind of retroactive arc creation/consolidation.

I didn't claim that the arc was pre-planned - just that it exists currently as an extended narrative. As for Brinkmanship - I don't see how it can directly continue the threads in Rtd, as IMO, they have reached a conclusion, or current end-point - of course, time (and Una McCormack) will tell..

[RonG]

DigificWriter wrote:

---

^ Christopher is starting to get what I was truly trying to say. The Forgotten Realms D&D campaign setting contains a number of novels which have been connected in some fashion, either be it through appearances by a character or characters from one set of novels in a completely separate set of novels, or else by one set of characters traveling to a locale that is central to an entirely unrelated set of novels. This doesn't make the connected novels part of one cohesive story arc, but instead weaves them into the larger tapestry that is the Forgotten Realms campaign setting. Each of the novels releaed under the Forgotten Realms banner and set in that world remains a distinct, separate thing, but on those occasions when novels are connected, it creates a broader picture of the campaign setting and the world therein.

This is what I feel has been done with regards to the Typhon Pact novels with PoN and RtD; DRGIII has turned the TP branding into a 'campaign setting' akin to Forgotten Realms, connecting threads from several novels into a larger tapestry, while still allowing those novels to remain individual, distinct, separate tales focused on a particular, separate iteration of the broader ST brand-name/franchise.

I totally get the analogy (as a former D&D/AD&D player, as well as several other settings in TSR), and I think that the "setting" in this case is the Post-Destiny 24th Century TrekLit "universe". The TP is a brand / series name (more marketing-related than story-related, at least as conceived originally -- thanks,Christopher ).

The novels I mentioned in the OP are IMO part of the first arc post-Destiny - created "retroactively" by PoN and RtD - some novels are TP branded and some not, and tell the story of the Pact's rise and first clashes with the UFP.

[Christopher]

RonG wrote:

---

The TP is a brand / series name (more marketing-related than story-related, at least as conceived originally -- thanks,Christopher ).

Don't thank me for that, because it's a complete misunderstanding of what I actually said. As conceived originally by Marco Palmieri and Keith R.A. DeCandido and introduced in A Singular Destiny, the concept of the Typhon Pact was, hell yes, absolutely, story-related, because the people who created it were people whose job it was to come up with stories. They wanted to create a new astropolitical status quo, to introduce a new antagonist now that all the previous big bads were either gone or turned into Federation allies, and to shine a spotlight on alien races that hadn't been explored much in the past. All of those were story considerations. Then, later on, when Margaret Clark began developing a four-novel miniseries involving the various Trek crews interacting with various member races of the Typhon Pact, that was also a story decision. Now that this new status quo had been introduced, the natural next step was to tell stories exploring how it would play out.

But -- the sales and marketing people at Pocket wanted that miniseries to be branded in a manner similar to Destiny so they could sell it as a similar kind of "event" (even though that's not really what it was story-wise). So the decision was made to label those books with a Typhon Pact banner and without their individual series titles. But that was about what went on the covers, not about what went between the covers. Don't confuse the two. And that marketing decision to turn Typhon Pact into a brand/label was made more than a year (maybe closer to two) after the creation of the Typhon Pact as a story concept in the wake of Destiny.

I'm not in the loop about what came next, so I don't know whether the sales department asked for the subsequent TP books to be more connected or if it was DRGIII and his editor's own choice to use his duology to tie the others together. But I'd be inclined to think it's mostly the latter, because that's a story decision and that makes it the purview of the writers and editors. Either way, though, the Pact absolutely was created primarily for story reasons, and the marketing decisions happened later.

[RonG]

Christopher wrote:

---

Don't thank me for that, because it's a complete misunderstanding of what I actually said. As conceived originally by Marco Palmieri and Keith R.A. DeCandido and introduced in A Singular Destiny, the concept of the Typhon Pact was, hell yes, absolutely, story-related, because the people who created it were people whose job it was to come up with stories. They wanted to create a new astropolitical status quo, to introduce a new antagonist now that all the previous big bads were either gone or turned into Federation allies, and to shine a spotlight on alien races that hadn't been explored much in the past. All of those were story considerations. Then, later on, when Margaret Clark began developing a four-novel miniseries involving the various Trek crews interacting with various member races of the Typhon Pact, that was also a story decision. Now that this new status quo had been introduced, the natural next step was to tell stories exploring how it would play out.

But -- the sales and marketing people at Pocket wanted that miniseries to be branded in a manner similar to Destiny so they could sell it as a similar kind of "event" (even though that's not really what it was story-wise). So the decision was made to label those books with a Typhon Pact banner and without their individual series titles. But that was about what went on the covers, not about what went between the covers. Don't confuse the two. And that marketing decision to turn Typhon Pact into a brand/label was made more than a year (maybe closer to two) after the creation of the Typhon Pact as a story concept in the wake of Destiny.

I'm not in the loop about what came next, so I don't know whether the sales department asked for the subsequent TP books to be more connected or if it was DRGIII and his editor's own choice to use his duology to tie the others together. But I'd be inclined to think it's mostly the latter, because that's a story decision and that makes it the purview of the writers and editors. Either way, though, the Pact absolutely was created primarily for story reasons, and the marketing decisions happened later.

It seems I didn't get my point across in my last post, so just for clarification:

I was responding to DigificWriter's post about RPG settings, etc, and I wanted to superimpose his terminology over my OP meaning.

When I wrote "The TP is a brand / series name", I meant the name of the "series", not the alliance itself - i.e. Star Trek: Typhon Pact, rather than the alliance of Romulans, Breen et al- we were never in disagreement on this matter, as you had explained on many threads your (inside) views on the TP's creation, and I gladly accepted them for what they were...

[Christopher]

Okay... I guess what misled me is that you said "the TP." The Typhon Pact is the astropolitical entity that's depicted within the books. The label/brand is simply Typhon Pact.

[RonG]

Christopher wrote:

---

Okay... I guess what misled me is that you said "the TP." The Typhon Pact is the astropolitical entity that's depicted within the books. The label/brand is simply Typhon Pact.

exactly

One thing you wrote, Christopher, did catch my eye and I was wondering what you meant:

And by the same token, it's too early to say it's the end of that arc, since we don't know yet whether Brinkmanship will be a separate thing or a direct continuation of the same threads, and we don't know whether future works will do a similar kind of retroactive arc creation/consolidation.

What threads do you feel require continuation or are left "hanging" post-RtD?

[Christopher]

RonG wrote:

---

One thing you wrote, Christopher, did catch my eye and I was wondering what you meant:

And by the same token, it's too early to say it's the end of that arc, since we don't know yet whether Brinkmanship will be a separate thing or a direct continuation of the same threads, and we don't know whether future works will do a similar kind of retroactive arc creation/consolidation.

What threads do you feel require continuation or are left "hanging" post-RtD?

I didn't say I felt anything of the sort. But I'm not the one writing the next book. If PoN/RtD could take previously standalone books and unify them into a tighter narrative, then another author could take a seemingly "finished" story and decide to carry it further. I'm just saying that the way the storyline looks to you now isn't necessarily how it might look a year from now after more has been done with it -- just as the way it looks now isn't the way it looked a year ago.

[ATimson]

Christopher wrote:

---

So the decision was made to label those books with a Typhon Pact banner and without their individual series titles. But that was about what went on the covers, not about what went between the covers.

No, the Typhon Pact branding was carried inside the book, too. The novels used a brand new, unified page design (unlike older supposedly-similar crossovers like Gateways, which used each series' own designs, or like Destiny which used the post-Nemesis TNG design).

The marketing decision may have not affected the text itself, but it certainly affected the presentation of it!

[Christopher]

ATimson wrote:

---

No, the Typhon Pact branding was carried inside the book, too. The novels used a brand new, unified page design (unlike older supposedly-similar crossovers like Gateways, which used each series' own designs, or like Destiny which used the post-Nemesis TNG design).

Have you been taking Spock lessons? I didn't mean it that literally. I was metaphorically saying that the sales decision did not dictate the creative decisions that led to the story.

[Jarvisimo]

Brinkmanship - so much potential based on author and constituent elements (Aventine - dearly needing Destiny-level attention, Cardassians, Ferengi, and Tzenkethi!) I am hoping for some cameos - or indeed more than that - from Hollow Men, Lotus Flower and The Never-ending Sacrifice. And hopefully old favourites like Keiko, Rom, Leeta and Brunt (the bounty hunter?!) too.

[JD]

Yeah, Brunt's new gig was introduced in Reservoir Ferengi, which was a great story by the way.

[ATimson]

Christopher wrote:

---

Have you been taking Spock lessons? I didn't mean it that literally. I was metaphorically saying that the sales decision did not dictate the creative decisions that led to the story.

And that's what I thought you meant.

I'll admit I have something of an axe to grind here. We keep being told by you and other authors that the Typhon Pact books aren't meant to be what they're packaged as. But... well, that's how they're packaged. I think it's perfectly fair that they should be judged as what they're presenting themselves as: a coherent narrative unit.

[Sci]

ATimson wrote:

---

And that's what I thought you meant.

I'll admit I have something of an axe to grind here. We keep being told by you and other authors that the Typhon Pact books aren't meant to be what they're packaged as. But... well, that's how they're packaged. I think it's perfectly fair that they should be judged as what they're presenting themselves as: a coherent narrative unit.

But... they weren't packaged as a coherent narrative unit. None of the plot synopses before Plagues of Night/Raise the Dawn indicated any sort of narrative cohesion. They were packaged as a group of novels about the Typhon Pact, that's all. Sure, they were an "event," but that's not the same thing.

I mean, Star Trek: Section 31 was an "event," but it wasn't a cohesive narrative unit. Star Trek: The Lost Era was an "event," but it wasn't a cohesive narrative unit. Star Trek: Section 31 and Star Trek: The Lost Era, like Star Trek: Typhon Pact, were miniseries with a unifying theme but no cohesive narrative. Are you going to object to the way Star Trek: Section 31 and Star Trek: The Lost Era were advertised, too?

[Christopher]

ATimson wrote:

---

I'll admit I have something of an axe to grind here. We keep being told by you and other authors that the Typhon Pact books aren't meant to be what they're packaged as. But... well, that's how they're packaged. I think it's perfectly fair that they should be judged as what they're presenting themselves as: a coherent narrative unit.

And I wouldn't be surprised (though I'm just speculating here) if that was part of the reason why the duology was more interconnected than the first set of books -- because it's a better fit for what the readers are expecting based on the presentation.

But you're still talking about a different issue from what I meant in the statement that you quoted. I thought (incorrectly, it seems) that RonG had the mistaken impression that the creation of the Pact concept was dictated by marketing considerations, and I was clarifying that it was conceived for creative reasons and the marketing choices came later. After all, the first Typhon Pact book, A Singular Destiny, came out 21 months before the first book with a Typhon Pact label. So all I'm saying is that the creation of the story concept preceded the creation of the brand. (And it seems to me that people sometimes forget the key role ASD played in the Pact narrative because it doesn't have the label on it. I've seen a number of posters call Zero Sum Game the first Pact novel, overlooking ASD altogether.)