RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,612
Posts: 5,425,917
Members: 24,808
Currently online: 431
Newest member: Dustyinn

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing December Trek Comics
By: T'Bonz on Sep 17

September Loot Crate Features Trek Surprise
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

USS Enterprise Miniature Out For Refit
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Comic Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Trek 3 Shooting Next Spring?
By: T'Bonz on Sep 16

Star Trek: Alien Domain Game Announced
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Red Shirt Diaries Episode Three
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Made Out Of Mudd Photonovel
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Takei Has Growth Removed
By: T'Bonz on Sep 15

Retro Review: Tears of the Prophets
By: Michelle on Sep 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Misc. Star Trek > Trek Literature

Trek Literature "...Good words. That's where ideas begin."

View Poll Results: Rate Tower of Babel.
Outstanding 15 23.44%
Above Average 29 45.31%
Average 19 29.69%
Below Average 1 1.56%
Poor 0 0%
Voters: 64. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 20 2014, 08:19 PM   #196
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

^The other major stumble is Alyssa Ogawa, whose last appearance as a nurse aboard Titan comes only a couple of months before she appears as a doctor aboard Challenger and is said to have been with the ship "for some time."
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2014, 08:48 PM   #197
Enterprise1701
Captain
 
Enterprise1701's Avatar
 
Location: Sol III, Sector 001, 2014 C.E.
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Christopher wrote: View Post
It was my intention that the refitted Endeavour is the first of multiple Columbia-class ships (or maybe the second -- I'm open to the idea that Enterprise was refitted to Drexler specs sometime during the Romulan War, since the books never say it wasn't). Since they're variants on the same class, it's possible people in later centuries could confuse the NX and Columbia classes.
But you do mean that during A Choice of Futures/Tower of Babel there are no NX class ships active, correct?
Enterprise1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 20 2014, 08:57 PM   #198
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

I don't know for sure. It hasn't come up yet. There may well be more under construction, at the very least.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2014, 07:53 AM   #199
Mage
Commodore
 
Mage's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

It would be nice if there were some nodds to other UESPA/Human ships as well. So far, the only two Starfleet ships provided by Earth have been Endeavour and Pioneer. Which makes sense of course, since they are the heroes of the tale. But a nod to some other Earth-provided ships out there would be cool.
__________________
Niner. Lurker. Browncoat.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2014, 07:56 AM   #200
Skywalker
Admiral
 
Skywalker's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Didn't Bryce Shumar's USS Essex feature in A Choice of Futures? Without digging up my copy to check, I thought the Essex ferried Soval to Sauria.
Skywalker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2014, 08:00 AM   #201
Mage
Commodore
 
Mage's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Skywalker wrote: View Post
Didn't Bryce Shumar's USS Essex feature in A Choice of Futures? Without digging up my copy to check, I thought the Essex ferried Soval to Sauria.

Well don't I feel stupid now...... I am not a smart man......
__________________
Niner. Lurker. Browncoat.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2014, 10:10 PM   #202
Enterprise1701
Captain
 
Enterprise1701's Avatar
 
Location: Sol III, Sector 001, 2014 C.E.
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Don't forget the Andorian starships that appeared in A Choice of Futures: the Sevaijen class U.S.S. Thejal, commanded by Thanien's cousin Trenkanshent sh'Lavan and the Kumari class U.S.S. Vinakthen, commanded by Nisverin th'Menchal
Enterprise1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2014, 10:28 PM   #203
Mage
Commodore
 
Mage's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Enterprise1701 wrote: View Post
Don't forget the Andorian starships that appeared in A Choice of Futures: the Sevaijen class U.S.S. Thejal, commanded by Thanien's cousin Trenkanshent sh'Lavan and the Kumari class U.S.S. Vinakthen, commanded by Nisverin th'Menchal
Yes, I know. I was more curious as to how big the Earth-part of Starfleet is. I mean, we know of three ships so far, but you'd guess there must be more, right?

Usually I don't care so much about things like ships and so. But I'm kinda intrigued about how Starfleet was formed, and since we know now that all founding members contributed ships and performed different functions, I'm curious as to how many ships and what classes Earth was able to supply, after the heavy losses it must have suffered after the war.
__________________
Niner. Lurker. Browncoat.
Mage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 21 2014, 10:28 PM   #204
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

The Earth/UESPA ships are mostly involved with exploration and diplomatic missions, so they're not as prone to conducting joint operations as the Andorian defense ships would be. And of course when I have an exploration or diplomacy story to tell, I'm likely to tell it from the perspective of one of my three hero ships, Endeavour, Pioneer, and Essex (yes, I consider Shumar and his crew recurring characters). So there hasn't really been an opportunity yet to portray any other UESPA ships (besides Enterprise in the museum). But I'm sure there will be other ships mentioned as the occasion warrants.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2014, 12:38 AM   #205
Deranged Nasat
Vice Admiral
 
Deranged Nasat's Avatar
 
Location: I am here. You are here too. Yes.
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Prepare for words, people. Lots and lots of words.

There are plot-related scenes on the Chelon homeworld and in an undisclosed location with Kirk, Grev and Not-The-Assistant-Director, but the real meat of this chapter is Federation/Rigel relations and the question of politics, so I'll focus on that.

Soval's analysis/judgement of Thoris' speech and the wisdom or logic of it from the perspective of political capital is interesting. I also like his bland internal commentary on the competitive journalism of the non-Vulcans. I think it's all convincing as a logical, Vulcan perspective on what we've just seen.

Lots of interesting points raised. As Thoris says, the Federation has thrown itself together rapidly; if anything, I think he might be understating on this one - a decade ago, most of the founding members were on the brink of war with one another, now they're best friends.

I hope no-one will mind if I get a bit bogged down in personal opinion here, and ground this next piece in my own perspectives. Personally, I really enjoyed this chapter because it deals with the nature of politics. Politics, as I see it, can be understood in two possibly non-compatible ways and that is where the first difficulties come into play for me. It can be considered the means by which people, communities and individuals organize themselves and achieve functionality, an inherent social instinct that is now extended beyond immediate clan but is fundamentally the same thing - in which case, everyone is political and all interaction is politics - or it can be considered a process removed from private human behaviour and instead be a particular type of interaction, or interaction in a particular set of contexts, that employs its own rules. Again speaking personally, the core of politics as I relate to it - and not really deciding on either of those positions - is the tribalistic worldview that most humanoids (to my knowledge...) possess. A perspective that (as I see it) is almost paradoxical in its two primary goals - to be accepted as part of the group (so to gain the security and power that comes from collective identity; strength in numbers, the relief of being un-exposed and unknowable) and to gain status within the group relative to others (affirm the individual desires or ego, get attention), so to be conformist and aggressive in equal measure. I've long maintained that a higher degree of "sociability" goes hand-in-hand with a greater degree of relational aggression. There's little doubt in my mind that most social interaction and discourse has its basis in tribalist assumptions (or tribalist behaviours have their basis in what is normal human social interaction, whatever).

Another paradox is the assignment or acceptance of responsibility (which contrary to what many claim, they do not take automatically as a necessary companion to power). One who affiliates or identifies with a grouping will defend a fellow member on principle, but if they find they truly can't - that the consequences of solidarity and shared protection will be too severe - they'll employ what is almost an opposite response and throw the person in question out, severing them from the group in order to protect it. The individual is subordinated and sacrificed to group identity, with the individual used as a scapegoat to shield the group, indeed often described in terms revealing of what the true concern is: "doesn't represent us", "gives us a bad name", etc. What is often lauded as an emphasis on individual responsibility actually strikes me as the very opposite - it's all about denying the individual responsibility of seeking or keeping membership, official or unofficial, within a shared identity. So there's a fundamental conflict there, between my assumptions and those of others, it seems.

So too (he says) do people make their affiliations their identity. We don't say "my religious beliefs are Xantist" or "I'm a follower of Xantism", we say "I'm a Xantist". It's I = Xantist; we're not in a relationship, we're synonymous. We don't say "My political beliefs tend to be to the political left", for instance, we say "I'm left-wing". Okay, using linguistic convenience like that is a poor basis for an argument, I know, but it's useful, I hope, in making the point. People take their political (and ideological, philosophical, religious, etc) positions and affiliations as synonymous with - or at least permanently Joined in Trillish fashion with - their very identities. An attack on the former is taken as an attack on the latter.

I also believe that all other concerns are ultimately secondary in the tribal mindset to what - taking a position on that original question - I might choose to call "politics"; that is, to a reading of the social situation in its complexities and the desire to remain both within the conformity of the identified group and in a leading or prosperous position relative to other members. This isn't at all to say that people have no regard for a sense of consistent ethics, reason, truth, or other virtues, or that they don't try to, say, honestly represent constituents or play by principles held to be objective, merely that these will be discarded or ignored when the alternative is to truly disempower or weaken whatever groups one has affiliated or identified with (and not necessarily without regret or internal conflict). I would also propose that this is not so much a conscious decision as a simple consequence of the way most people work.

All this raises some problems, because if politics is the means by which peoples and communities arrange matters for their communal benefit then it can easily be argued that the political system must be tribalist or it isn't effective or representative, despite my rather consistent personal position that tribalism and group identification is "the" problem, and politics should be conducted without them (raising another issue of whether that's anything other than supremely arrogant, potentially despotic and even racist on my part, given that it potentially declares a majority of people inherently excluded). Whether politics is tribalism or whether political systems simply tend to employ it (sort of a reworking of my earlier dilemma of definition) is something I confess to struggling with a great deal. Is tribalism an infection to be removed from politics, or is it politics itself, synonymous? If the former, is that goal rather not the desire to better all individuals but rather to intolerantly declare great swathes of the populace unsuited to participation, implicitly if not in any sort of practice? Is it a case of "have you tried not being gay?".

So many questions, the answers I am unsure on.

A "non-political" position (one that tries to hold to the idea that the desires and drives of tribalism shouldn't be brought into play) is pretty much by default an extremist one, because it doesn't play by the usual rules, doesn't acknowledge the conventions that make the majority of people comfortable. It risks unrest, which is (in my view at least) the only crime and the only enemy in the perspective of a community, at the deepest levels, and understandably isn't something they want. Given that I think the person given to group affiliation always has a keen, quite possibly unconscious sense of how the group is reacting, and seeks to ensure they remain "safe" with its shifting tides, collectively feeling their way to a sort of consensus even as individually they try to assert themselves against others, I also question some of the fundamentals of a democratic and/or inclusive system, do I not? Because how can there be change at anything less than a glacial place under such a self-censoring system, when some might think drastic change completely necessary now? Can there be growth without dislocation, without conflict? Without forcing it? Social evolution. "What do you want?"

(This is also why so many people think as the Planetrists do; they are wary of large government and unifications because they know how strong that conformist instinct is, and fear their diversity being destroyed by the very forces that say they wish to include and preserve it. Think Eddington's comments on the Borg, etc).

I've always seen "my way" - that is, what I strive for based on how I've come to see myself - as ideally finding a balance, or inhabiting the balance, between unity and conflict by combining a strong sense of community (what I call my "natural socialist" ways) with an equally strong sense of independence (what I call my "natural libertarian" ways). There is only the drop and the ocean, and the ocean is made of drops, and all things are fluid but there is an organizing movement to it all.

Tribalist ethics are rather alien, I think. As the Bedouin say, "Me against my brother, My brothers and me against my cousins, then my cousins and me against strangers" - closing ranks against those outside and responding to an attack on one as an attack on all, while jostling for position within. And there are always circles of identity - like how European nations saw themselves as one Christian society at the same time as they were warring and feuding, and not just because all their royals were related now anyway).

To get back to the book at long last (I've no doubt lost 80% of the readership by this point ). Thoris, in his campaigning at Babel, is trying to balance what many would call "the necessities of politics" with his personal sense of what's right (what the Vulcans might say is cthia, as well as what will, in his personal ethics, be best for the Federation and what will be most responsible of him). He's trying to navigate the system while remaining true to his convictions; Soval is probing as to whether he truly understands the potential consequences or complications he'll be facing through doing so. This is a conflict that I really relate to and I like seeing brought into play here.

The young Federation is negotiating its sense of a shared identity and the degree to which its singular, unifying identity trumps, incorporates or stands uneasy in proximity with the smaller, original national and cultural identities of its member worlds. It's also easy to see why the Rigel admission debate is so relevant and so provocative. With Rigel, it strikes me that we have here an admissions process of a nature that we're likely never going to see again in Federation history. From here on, it'll be small states agreeing to become part of a bigger nation that dwarfs them, to incorporate themselves into an ever-bloating political/national juggernaut, a clearly unequal meeting. While that's technically true here, this is really more akin to two more-or-less equal alliances negotiating the possibility of their coming together. That is surely going to exacerbate the existing dilemma faced by the Federation's member populations. So the linking of "is Rigel right for the Federation and is the Federation right for Rigel?" with the Federation's sense of identity is very useful and provocative.

As Garak put it in my beloved A Stitch In Time: "the great determining factor of our becoming is relationship. Unrelated, I become unrelated. Alienated. Opposed, I become an antagonist. Unified, I become integrated. A functioning member of the whole".
__________________
We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile and nothing can grow there; too much, the best of us is washed away.

Last edited by Deranged Nasat; April 22 2014 at 12:55 AM.
Deranged Nasat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 22 2014, 11:37 PM   #206
Deranged Nasat
Vice Admiral
 
Deranged Nasat's Avatar
 
Location: I am here. You are here too. Yes.
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Next chapter:

T'Pol and Endeavour have arrived at Rigel; thus far, T'Pol hasn't had as much to do as she did in the first novel, and since I like how Christopher writes Vulcans (as I've said in the past), it's good to see her back in the thick of it.

More political matters, and more discussion of the intricacies of Rigel/Federation relations.

An exploration of Rigel IV now, with its feudal, technologically-stratified society, which exists so that the First Families can be as decadent as possible. I quite enjoyed the scenes of Williams sneaking around, aided by the ability of the guards to be bribed and for everyone, Families and serfs alike, to gossip more-or-less freely. A strange and endearing mix of high-stakes danger and doors left open at opportune times due to the rather ludicrous nature of IV's society (ludicrous as a reflection on them, not the writing, just to be clear). It was also rather amusing when Williams attempts to keep herself attendant to the wider good and stick to her high-stakes mission, but of course gives in to save an adolescent girl from being raped by one of the reigning dandies. And then again faces a mix of surprisingly easy windfalls and real danger, which ends with her capture. All enjoyable, if possibly a little rushed.

I wonder who Grennex are? They seem to be producing a lot of Rigelian ships, of varying classifications.

As for Rigel IV, it's a good look here at the nastier side of this highly diverse, richly populated system, and the sheer decadence and self-absorption of the First Families comes across well. (And apparently, despite everything, some of them remain just as awful even into the 2360s, in attitude if not in overt excesses. It's almost impressive just how deep an amoral groove they've dug for themselves).

Rigel IV should not be confused with Rygel XVI, though both are decadent, despotic and self-centred:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLBgwWhEKp4
__________________
We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile and nothing can grow there; too much, the best of us is washed away.
Deranged Nasat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2014, 12:07 AM   #207
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Deranged Nasat wrote: View Post
I wonder who Grennex are? They seem to be producing a lot of Rigelian ships, of varying classifications.
I guess they're a Rigelian shipbuilding firm. Probably one of several, given the lively capitalism of the Rigel system.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 23 2014, 06:08 PM   #208
Deranged Nasat
Vice Admiral
 
Deranged Nasat's Avatar
 
Location: I am here. You are here too. Yes.
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

This post is sponsored by Grennex Transportation, for all your Rigel-related needs.

I see that James Bond has survived into the 22nd Century - or that his name and its associations have, at least. I'm genuinely curious as to whether he has in fact endured, or if the name Bond has simply become convenient shorthand for "spy" to the point where you don't have to be familiar with the character or franchise to understand/use it as a reference. Whether it's that, whether the series is considered classic entertainment, whether it's just a favourite of this one Earther, or whether we're on Bond Movie Gazillion by now is an interesting question.

So, Call Me Al and our other Sauria-side human have a nice scene here, one that's a counterpart of sorts to the sneaking that Williams is doing on the other side of the Federation. Once again, I like the slow-burning nature of the unfolding Sauria crisis, and it gives Trip something worthwhile to do, which is certainly welcome.

Next, we get to see the Chelons in their own environment (doubly so, given that these are the traditionalist Chelons). I liked the character of Jetanien in Vanguard (though he only really came into his own once he left the station, funnily enough - Nimbusian Jetanien is better than Vanguardian Jetanien), but I was somewhat disappointed that we learned so little about Chelons or Rigel in general. Aside from interesting revelations about secreting deadly poison when under stress and a running gag about foul-smelling food, the Chelon remained a mystery. One of the few wasted opportunities in Vanguard, I always felt. I'm glad that we're seeing the Chelon homeworld here and I'm glad that another Federation member race is being fleshed out. I thought the rainforest environment was well-described; certainly I got a good sense of what this part of Rigel III is like.

We end the chapter with one team in trouble on III, another in peril on VII, and Williams remaining in trouble on IV. You can see why the blurb calls attention to the dangers of Rigel.
__________________
We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile and nothing can grow there; too much, the best of us is washed away.
Deranged Nasat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2014, 12:59 AM   #209
Enterprise1701
Captain
 
Enterprise1701's Avatar
 
Location: Sol III, Sector 001, 2014 C.E.
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Christopher, did you take some inspiration from the novelverse's depiction of the Breen when you were crafting the specifics of the Rigellians?
Enterprise1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2014, 03:30 AM   #210
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: ENT: Tower of Babel by C. L. Bennett Review Thread (Spoilers!)

Enterprise1701 wrote: View Post
Christopher, did you take some inspiration from the novelverse's depiction of the Breen when you were crafting the specifics of the Rigellians?
Not in the least. I took inspiration from the fact that the writers of TV Trek have been incredibly profligate and inconsistent in their use of the name "Rigel," applying it to numerous different and incompatible species -- the Kalar from "The Cage," the humanlike Rigelians implied by the cabaret girls in "Shore Leave" and Hengist in "Wolf in the Fold," the Vulcanoid Rigelians mentioned in "Journey to Babel," the chelonian Rigelians of ST:TMP, the tattooed Rigelians of ENT: "Demons"/"Terra Prime." My portrayal of the Rigel system would've been very different if the creators of the shows could've just made up their damn minds about what Rigelians were like and which planet they lived on.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
reviewpoll_v1

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.