VOY: The Eternal Tide by Kirsten Beyer Review Thread (Spoilers!)

[JD]

Oh yeah, I completely forgot she was in Alcatraz, I did watch the first couple episodes of that. So I guess I have seen her before.

[BrotherBenny]

JD wrote:

---

Oh yeah, I completely forgot she was in Alcatraz, I did watch the first couple episodes of that. So I guess I have seen her before.

She's primarily known for her role in ER.

[Halliwell]

Christopher wrote:

---

What you feel has nothing to do with the topic under discussion. The books, by definition, are not part of the canon, therefore yes, Kirk's death was canonical, and his resurrection was not.

And whether or not you liked Kirk's death does not change the fact that it did happen, that someone wrote a story where Kirk died, just as someone wrote a story where Janeway died. And a lot of people do feel that Kirk's death was mishandled -- and evidently you're one of those people! So you're contradicting yourself when you say Janeway was the only captain whose fate was mishandled. It's simply not a statement that holds up to scrutiny.

Uhh, no, not really; you're confusing two different Janeway finales. It was her actions in "Endgame" that were important to the factions in the future, because they triggered the events that led to Destiny and the Caeliar's redemption of the Borg. The events of Before Dishonor were essentially peripheral to that.

They aren't. Come on, if you've really read the literature, you know the current crop of authors is dedicated to introducing new, strong female characters and to treating all characters equally regardless of their sex. You're manufacturing a pattern that doesn't exist, partly by fixating on captains to the exclusion of other characters who are often equally important in the literature.

It's been pointed out many times that the person who decided to kill Janeway in the novels was a woman, editor Margaret Clark, so it's completely ludicrous to claim that there was any sexism behind it. You'd have to ask Margaret what her reasons were, but I'd imagine she may have felt that as an admiral, stuck in a desk job, Janeway wasn't doing anything really interesting anymore, so it might serve her character better to let her go out with a bang saving the Federation one last time. Not a gendered decision, simply a decision based on the rank and status the character canonically ended up in.

As for Kira, yes, she left a leadership position for a different life, but let me remind you, so did Sisko. Right now, the situation is that Sisko is in command but Kira isn't, but five years ago it would've been the other way around, and there's no telling where it'll be five years from now. Again, it's nonsense to read anything gendered into it; it's simply the current slice of an evolving continuity.

Also, you're forgetting one female captain, Ro Laren, who's still in a leadership position in the DS9 novels. Not to mention Captain Sonya Gomez of the da Vinci, Captain Afsarah Eden in command of the Delta Quadrant fleet, Captain Regina Farkas of the Quirinal, Captain Clarissa Glenn (commander by rank but captain by title) of the Galen, Captain Claudia Alisov of the Everett, admirals such as Nechayev, and numerous civilian authority figures like Nan Bacco and Gell Kamemor. And captains from earlier eras like Erika Hernandez, Hallie Gannon, Atish Khatami, Saavik, Demora Sulu, etc.

On the male side, it's incorrect to say that Archer is "still" a captain. As of the most current time we've seen Archer, the founding ceremony of the Federation in August 2161, Enterprise has been decommissioned for more than a year -- and if you look carefully, you'll see that Archer is never referred to as "Captain Archer" in that chapter. Onscreen bio information from "In a Mirror, Darkly" suggests that Archer went on to become an admiral and the Starfleet Chief of Staff; it's quite possible he's already an admiral by that final scene in To Brave the Storm. But whatever his rank, he's not still in command of a starship as far as we know.

So you're interpreting the data very selectively in order to support an entirely illegitimate claim that male and female characters are being treated differently. It just isn't so.

I have read the literature. And you've proven you're point. I was being literal about out of the 5 captains Janeway is the one dead. I wasn't saying that the writers haven't written strong female characters. I guess this Akin controversy had clouded my judgement but I can admit I was wrong.

As far as Janeway's actions having an effect on the Temporal cold war my main point was that her life had an impact on the Federation's future. Which was really cool. Lucsley's attitude toward her reminds me of a lot of the attitudes about her from a lot of fans here on the BBS. He was pissed off that she wasn't charged with a crime. She had an impact. Good stuff.

[lonewriter]

I can't wait, I'm almost finished reading The Dark Knight Rises novel so this will be great read. I like these new Voyager novels.

[Therin of Andor]

Defcon wrote:

---

So there are already people out there with the book.

Avoiding spoilers in the this thread that has suddenly grown huge, I've just been advised that my copy has arrived in Sydney, Australia and is awaiting collection from Galaxy Bookshop!

[rfmcdpei]

Halliwell wrote:

---

I have read the literature. And you've proven you're point. I was being literal about out of the 5 captains Janeway is the one dead.

Kirk's dead. That makes two captains.

[Christopher]

^And of course Archer is dead by the timeframe of all the other TV series. So as of the "present day" of the book series, the only surviving series-lead captains are Picard and Sisko.

[Sci]

Christopher wrote:

---

^And of course Archer is dead by the timeframe of all the other TV series. So as of the "present day" of the book series, the only surviving series-lead captains are Picard and Sisko.

And when Sisko and Picard get their orders, they get them from Madam President.

Kind of hart to credibly accuse Trelit of sexism for command officers when the ultimate in command authority is a woman.

[Halliwell]

rfmcdpei wrote:

---

Kirk's dead. That makes two captains.

No. Actually as far as canon goes Kirk's dead. Janeway is not.

But I already said I've changed my views on how Trek Lit has handled women and Janeway.

[Christopher]

Halliwell wrote:

---

No. Actually as far as canon goes Kirk's dead. Janeway is not.

In the mainstream novel continuity, both Kirk and Janeway are dead as of the series "present." In the separate Shatnerverse continuity, both Kirk and Janeway were alive at last report.

[Halliwell]

Christopher wrote:

---

In the mainstream novel continuity, both Kirk and Janeway are dead as of the series "present." In the separate Shatnerverse continuity, both Kirk and Janeway were alive at last report.

I know. I really have read the literature. And even dead I like how Janeway was written in the mainstream novel continuity compared to the Shatnerverse. Especially in Full Circle.

I'm so excited to get my hands on Eternal Tide!

[Enterpriserules]

I am sorry to argue here, but Trek's path for the last few years has been very dark. Now don't get me wrong, DS9 and the Dominion War were very dark and I liked that arc, but there just seems to have been a continuation and ramping up of that darkness as the continuity has gone on. The Borg invasion and the Typhon Pact, the loss of the Andorians, so much dark. Now Chris, don't hear me saying that it's all darkness and that there are not light moments in the schedule, but the main continuity has been pretty dark. Now I do like that Trek Lit is taking a risk here and shaking things up, but I could use a little more light and having Janeway come back would be the perfect thing for me. Especially when that is coupled with Sisko being back on DS9 (or I am hoping he is)!

[Christopher]

^I just don't see how that's fundamentally different from before. In canon we've had Picard deeply traumatized by his Borg abduction, tortured by Gul Madred, etc., we've seen Klingon civil wars and Romulan invasion attempts, we've seen wars with the Klingons and the Dominion, we've seen Bajor suffer under brutal occupation and then struggle to rebuild itself while falling prey to religious fanaticism, we've seen Federation citizens abandoned by a treaty of convenience and turning to terrorism, we've seen Voyager suffer the loss of a large portion of its crew, we've seen the Xindi kill 7 million humans in one blow, we've seen a renewed surge of human bigotry in response to that event with the rise of Terra Prime, etc.

Fiction is not about routine or happy times. It's about conflict and crisis. It's about things going wrong, about the heroes struggling to survive and surmount terrible odds. So naturally Star Trek has almost always focused on times of turmoil and danger in the galaxy. The optimism is in how the characters prevail over that turmoil. So I really don't see how the current literature is so radically unlike anything that's come before.

[zarkon]

Don't like putting words in people's mouths, but I think it's about the general backdrop. Back in the days of numbered novels, it was mostly adventure-of-the-week within or on the frontiers of the peaceful federation.

Now it's against the backdrop of the aftermath of the dominion war, the borg attacks and the andorian secession et al, and the outcomes are often not definitive victories. Not saying this is a bad thing, but I have noted the difference myself.

[dodge]

Christopher wrote:

---

^I just don't see how that's fundamentally different from before.

In volume, for one.

From TNG premier till the end of ENT we had 20-50 televised episodes per year, plus 20ish novels.

Now we have about 12 novels a year.

It's of course true that Star Trek has always dealt with conflict, political turmoil, torture, terrorism and peril on the galactic scale, but for 5 of those stories one also had 50 other stories that dealt with more localized and lighter matters. So naturally the overall feel is perceived to be darker in recent years.