RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,084
Posts: 5,398,601
Members: 24,735
Currently online: 581
Newest member: extremedalek

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Retro Watches
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

New DS9 eBook To Debut
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Trek Ice Cube Maker and Shot Glasses
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

City on the Edge of Forever #3 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

TV Alert: Shatner TNG Documentary
By: T'Bonz on Aug 25

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22


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."

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 7 2009, 04:32 PM   #31
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

Lonemagpie wrote: View Post
captcalhoun wrote: View Post
transporters that can't lock on to moving people when Archer's first time being beamed up was when he was running...
There's a big speed difference between a middle-aged man running along, and a body falling at terminal velocity...
Add to that massive gravity distortions due to the planet collapsing on itself.

To answer the question: It doesn't bother me as long as the characters are right.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 04:51 PM   #32
William Leisner
Scribbler
 
William Leisner's Avatar
 
Location: Minneapolis, MN
View William Leisner's Twitter Profile
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

seigezunt wrote: View Post
It also helps to have a piss-poor memory.
Quoted for... something...
William Leisner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 05:03 PM   #33
Sci
Admiral
 
Sci's Avatar
 
Location: "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

captcalhoun wrote: View Post
transporters that can't lock on to moving people when Archer's first time being beamed up was when he was running...
The transporters in ENT were always much faster than the transporters in TOS. I always took that to mean that there was some additional aspect added to the transport process by the 23rd Century that made it slower: The bio-filters.

Think about it. Transporters in the 22nd Century would necessarily be more primitive, and the ability to detect and then filter out foreign organisms sounds like a much more complex process than just transporting whatever's there. So I figure, by the 23rd Century, they added bio-filters to the transporters, and that both slowed the process down and required the subjects to be relatively stationary (unless the transporter operator was really good, as in the new movie).
__________________
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic Socialism, as I understand it." - George Orwell, 1946
Sci is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 05:05 PM   #34
seigezunt
Vice Admiral
 
seigezunt's Avatar
 
Location: Splashing on some Tiberius before a night on the town
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

Sci wrote: View Post
captcalhoun wrote: View Post
transporters that can't lock on to moving people when Archer's first time being beamed up was when he was running...
The transporters in ENT were always much faster than the transporters in TOS. I always took that to mean that there was some additional aspect added to the transport process by the 23rd Century that made it slower: The bio-filters.

Think about it. Transporters in the 22nd Century would necessarily be more primitive, and the ability to detect and then filter out foreign organisms sounds like a much more complex process than just transporting whatever's there. So I figure, by the 23rd Century, they added bio-filters to the transporters, and that both slowed the process down and required the subjects to be relatively stationary (unless the transporter operator was really good, as in the new movie).
I love this stuff.

Star Trek Fans: Explaining Away Production Goofs Since 1966.
__________________
I am constantly surprised by the close-mindedness of some fans...this means change as well as a positive attitude. Without those things, how can we ever achieve that Trek future we enjoyed so much on TV? --Bjo Trimble
seigezunt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 05:35 PM   #35
rahullak
Fleet Captain
 
rahullak's Avatar
 
Location: India
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

I find it quite amusing that a certain Nasat that takes continuity issues quite seriously has not made its presence felt on this thread yet.
rahullak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 05:50 PM   #36
Paris
Fleet Captain
 
Paris's Avatar
 
Location: In the future's past
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

rahullak wrote: View Post
I find it quite amusing that a certain Nasat that takes continuity issues quite seriously has not made its presence felt on this thread yet.
Agreed . WHERE ARE YOU NASAT?! SHOW YOURSELF!!
__________________
"I don't use plot to serve continuity porn, I use continuity porn to serve plot." - Christopher L. Bennett July 2, 2013
Paris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 05:51 PM   #37
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

Sci wrote: View Post
The transporters in ENT were always much faster than the transporters in TOS. I always took that to mean that there was some additional aspect added to the transport process by the 23rd Century that made it slower: The bio-filters.
But there's no evidence that biofilters existed before the 24th century, and episodes like "Miri" and "The Omega Glory" suggest that transporters of the era didn't have the ability to filter out disease organisms. Not to mention "The Mark of Gideon." Would Kirk still have had Vegan choriomeningitis microbes in his blood if the biofilters edited them out?

So I figure, by the 23rd Century, they added bio-filters to the transporters, and that both slowed the process down and required the subjects to be relatively stationary (unless the transporter operator was really good, as in the new movie).
But in "Assignment: Earth," we were shown that transporters could beam up people in rapid motion so long as they were set to wide-beam. As others have stated, the far-from-ideal circumstances of the transport in the movie probably made it more necessary for the target to be still than would normally be the case. (After all, Spock in the Jellyfish was moving quite quickly relative to the Enterprise when he was beamed aboard.)

My take on the transporter-lock problems in the film's Vulcan sequence is that the subjects moved after the initial transporter lock had been established. With Kirk and Sulu, the transporters were initially targeted on the platform, and then once they fell off, the operator had to retarget the scanners and "catch up" with two people who were falling at terminal velocity, much faster than simple running, as someone said above. With Amanda, she moved after the transport had already been initiated. So the beam was calibrated to a stationary target, and since transport was already engaged, it was too late to reset when she fell out of the beam.
__________________
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 offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 06:12 PM   #38
Lynx
Rear Admiral
 
Lynx's Avatar
 
Location: Lynx Empire
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

Not that much.

I have all the Star Trek Voyager books covering seasons 1-3 and I found no problems to sort them into a timeline without having too many errors and contradictions which disturbs it.

There are some small contradictions here and there but when I come to one of those I just shove it aside mentally and continue to read.

(For those who like the Voyager seasons 1-3 books and wonder where the odd things and contradictions are, read my comments about them in my book reviews)
http://lynx677.110mb.com/bookreviews.html

As for books from other series, I've read some of them occasionally and have no problems with contradictions there either.
__________________
Who'd let that cat in here?

Welcome to visit the Kes Website at: http://lynx677.byethost12.com
Lynx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 7 2009, 11:03 PM   #39
Cap'n Crunch
Captain
 
Cap'n Crunch's Avatar
 
Location: Knoxville, TN
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

I don't really have much problems with contradictions. If it's something big I just do what some call "mental gymnastics" to get it to work. For example, when reading Federation I mentally changed some dates, imaged some extra scenes, and "deleted" a few scenes. Like at the end


One thing that is somewhat annoying is when you have one page that says something different than the previous one. For example, in Mission Gamma: Cathedral


But when things are that small, I just tend to shrug them off and continue (even though it does stick in my head for a while).
Cap'n Crunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8 2009, 12:27 AM   #40
Section 31
Commander
 
Location: Everywhere
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

To be honest, continuity errors do bother me, but much less so today now that the books pretty much exclusively carry the story forward and the authors and editors make a substantial effort to keep them consistent with each other. In the old days (1990s), it was pretty annoying when something happened in one book, and then was contradicted by another (or the tv series itself). I guess I'm not a real big parallel universes kind of guy...

Another thing that's annoyed me in the past are errors with copy-editing, for instance if a book has several typos in close proximity. I enjoyed reading the Errand of Vengeance books, but there was one point where several Klingon names that started with 'K' were incorrectly used interchangeably. Needless to say, it was a little confusing, though in most instances I was able to figure out who it really was by looking at the context.
__________________
Currently Reading: Paths of Disharmony

Recently Finished: N/A
Section 31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8 2009, 06:51 AM   #41
DarKush
Rear Admiral
 
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

They don't bother me all that much. I do wish though that Berman and Braga had perhaps brought Michael Jan Friedman in as a consultant for ENT. I enjoyed many aspects of his Starfleet: Year One series more than their take on the 22nd century. For the most part though it's cool to see alternative versions of things. It's all fiction after all.
DarKush is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8 2009, 07:21 AM   #42
Desert Kris
Lieutenant
 
Desert Kris's Avatar
 
Location: Here and there.
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

I'm starting to discover that I love the kinds of stuff that is phenomenally difficult to explain. I think it's connected to a certain amount of interest over apocryphal material. I the other night I was flipping through the chronology at the back of my copy of Voyages of Imagination, goggling at all the things that need to be done to make the books fit in with the television stories and movies. I found myself shaking my head, feeling that I didn't find it necessary for me personally. I came across a footnote about the dating for My Enemy, My Ally, which clicked with something Christopher Bennet mentioned elsewhere here on the forum.

I bought Diane Duane's Rihannsu books because I was interested in learning more about that interpretation of the Romulans. The fact that they were not an approved development of their culture by higher authorities later on down the line somehow made the idea of them more interesting to me. I hunted down the originals with their "timeline continuity errors" because I didn't want to read a "corrected" version from the Rihannsu omnibus (I'm not ruling out getting the omnibus, for an easy way to get a hold of the later two books).

For My Enemy, My Ally, I was intrigued by the notion that the author wrote the book, placing it during a hypothetical second 5-year mission after the first one, but also before ST: TMP. Even though most modern ST timelines would not be able to accomadate that, back at the time it was published, it might not have been an issue to be confused over. It might have been more difficult in those days to know what you needed to know about the time frame that separates the original 5-year mission from TMP. Of interest here to me is how people might have interpreted the unfolding ST universe at that time. In the same way, I've been reading through the old Marvel Star Wars series in an attempt to capture an understanding of how the SW universe was thought of in those days, and tried taking notes on how the events of the Clone Wars might have originally been imagined.

All of this also made me reflect on the way covers for the ST novels where done years ago. There were some curious oddities going on there, and I'm not even talking about colonial vipers on the cover of The Romulan Way. I'm thinking of the covers of Dreams of the Raven and Uhura's song, which show crew members in TOS uniform, but depict the Enterprise in all her post-TMP glory. It inspires me to play games with how to explain the visuals. I once suggested the idea to a friend that TOS could be looked at as dramatization of a crew that became well known for their exploits, but Starfleet discouraged an accurate portrayal of their starships control centers. Later on, for other productions they approved more accurate sets to represent their ships on screen. I should point out at this juncture that I can be completely bonkers sometimes. It's a pointless idea, but fun to play with. When I read Dreams of the Raven, I tried picturing the characters in their TOS uniforms, walking around in TWoK version of the Enterprise (which was interesting since the ship is badly crippled in both of those stories).

I don't dismiss Federation because ST:First Contact came out. To me there equally entertaining legends on how the Star Trek universe reached a certain turning point in it's history. They have very different approaches. I am open minded about what Strangers From the Sky is like when I get around to reading it.

But then again, how different have various versions of The King Arthur legends been to each other? Some versions have approached it through a very powerful Merlin's eye's. Clive Owen's Merlin was hardly worth mentioning, I can barely recall that version.

The DC Comics Star Trek series holds it's own fascinations as well. I can't wait to get to the issues which have Kirk and company on board the Excelsior. Realistically, I can't imagine that happening between the movies. But it's a fun exploration of how things might have turned out (since that was the plan, after all, before they backpedalled and gave the crew a new Enterprise that looked exactly like the old one).

These continuity "errors" make things more interesting to me, because I like seeing the different versions of how things might have unfolded. I'm sure people can imagine by this point how much I got a kick out of the new Star Trek movie. It's fun playing games with these ideas.
Desert Kris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8 2009, 07:58 AM   #43
rahullak
Fleet Captain
 
rahullak's Avatar
 
Location: India
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

^ An interesting perspective and something I can identify with.
rahullak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8 2009, 12:01 PM   #44
neogothboy74
Commander
 
neogothboy74's Avatar
 
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States
Send a message via AIM to neogothboy74 Send a message via Yahoo to neogothboy74
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

Christopher wrote: View Post
neogothboy74 wrote: View Post
Yes. If I read a Trek book, and then a later movie or episode contradicts the story I've read (or has contradicted the book before I've read it) the story is ruined for me. That's why I found it hard to take the fiction seriously when the shows were still running. It's just the way my brain works.
Sorry, I just find that strange.
It's always encouraging when someone responds to let you know that you are (or at least they find you) strange; unusual; odd; queer. And there's always that 'sorry' just before, which always comes off as disingenuous to me, no matter how much they may mean it. Especially when it's followed by a series of questions that all boil down to "Why can't you be more like me?", instead of just accepting you as you are. It's kind of like when someone says "No offense, but..." right before they say something really offensive. Perhaps I'm reading too much into this. I'm extremely tired and probably a bit wacky.

Anyways, strange or not, the above quote by me does reflect how I feel. And your apparent need to question the way I'm able or not able to enjoy Trek (the way you did in the rest of your post) is...fascinating. In all fairness, I'm finding it hard to understand you and your inability to accept that different people enjoy fictional worlds in different ways.

Christopher wrote: View Post
By the same token, shouldn't all of Star Trek be "ruined" for you because it contradicts real life?
Not at all. Star Trek is not reality, and to confuse the two is foolish. But Star Trek has developed a rich fictional world with rules and events of it's own, which should IMO be adhered to. If that 'history' is contradicted, it takes me out of the story and leaves me feeling unsatisfied, and not surprisingly, I don't like feeling unsatisfied. I like continuity between stories. I like the various Trek stories to make sense when taken as a whole. I like actions to have consequences. I like characters to grow, and remain consistant with that growth. I'm not asking anyone else to be like me, but I'd like to think that this is at least somewhat understandable. Imagine a Star Trek series in which every episode completely contradicts every other episode...would you watch it? I wouldn't. I had a hard enough time with Voyager. To me the books are episodes of Trek.

Christopher wrote: View Post
If contradictions ruin a story for you, then you should've given up on all of Trek by now.
Star Trek has been a constant throughout my life. It's unfolding story has been a joy to behold. To suggest that I should choose to do without all of Trek just because I find some installments unsatisfying or not worth my time seems illogical. There will always be contraditions and lapses in continuity in sprawling franchises like Trek. But there's only so much I can rationalize within a story before it beomes unsatisfying to me. For example, If the characters used in a book don't behave in a way that I can believe the characters from the series would behave I don't enjoy the book, and I don't keep it; things like that.

But there's also a certain amount of personal interpretation at work too. I mean...the DS9 Relaunch is what really got me hooked on Trek fiction, so any story that contradicts that series just doesn't feel real to me - and I don't keep those books, because to me they aren't part of the continuity that I've invested in. DS9 was / is my favorite Trek series, and the Relaunch really captured the feel of the series for me. To me, those books are the show; they're a continuation of the show with just as much validity (for me) as the episodes themselves. I realize that there are many others who don't feel that way (including those that produce the shows / movies), or fans who have their own preferred continuity, with the focus on some other selection of books. I guess I just assumed it was fairly common. Perhaps it's not. But for this Trek fan, that's how it is.

[QUOTE=Christopher;3158601]Conversely, if you're able to keep enjoying it as a work of fiction despite its irreconcilable contradictions with the world you actually live in, then why can't you enjoy a work of Trek fiction that's inconsistent with another work of Trek fiction?

Because asking Star Trek to fall in line with reality is just as absurd as asking it to fall in line with completely different fictional things like 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' or 'Battlestar Galactica'; those are different things just as fantasy and reality are two completely different things. But Star Trek is Star Trek, and for me to get enjoyment from Star Trek (or any other fictional universe) I need continuity from one adventure to the next - which is why I think Voyager mostly sucks, and that Deep Space Nine mostly rocks. I completely understand that there are others who don't require continuity or character development or anything of the kind to enjoy a fictional universe the way that I do but I'm pretty much fine with that.

Christopher wrote: View Post
Why can't you just treat it as an imaginary tale to be enjoyed rather than a work of "history" that has to get the "facts" right?
Why can't you just accept that the ways I enjoy Star Trek stories are apparently different than yours?

But to answer your question...I simply don't know. Maybe because I've invested years of my life into watching that imaginary history unfold? And seeing that story grow and expand has given me years of pleasure as a Star Trek fan. To abandon that investment for something that says it's Star Trek, but doesn't carry any of the weight of that fictional history seems like a waste to me.

Erg. I'm tired and emotional (cranky). I shouldn't come here when I'm sleep deprived, but it's the only time I get to log on lately. lol. I need to get some sleep.
neogothboy74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 8 2009, 12:51 PM   #45
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: Do continuity errors/contradictions in TrekLit bother you?

I’ve heard the “alternate universe” theory to fit all this stuff in before (I first heard it in James Dixon’s crazy chronology years ago), but I really don’t buy it myself. I just see different stories in the fictional Trek universe.

Also I’m all for different origin stories: Enterprise: The First Adventure, Academy: Collision Course, Vulcan’s Glory (Spock joins Pike’s Enterprise), Final Frontier, Best Destiny and Star Trek (2009) were all enjoyable IMO.


Ship of the Line didn’t bother me – but unlike every other Trek novel ever it actually made me go back and check the end of the TNG episode (no battle damage! Sadly no George Hill, either) But I just accepted that Diane Carey decided to change things around a bit for the sake of a good story (that ended up a bit hit-and-miss).

I’m not sure this counts (as it was done 100% intentionally) but it didn’t bother me that they totally retconned the finale of Enterprise in The Good That Men Do, it’s just how they did it. I loved (the last two seasons and selected earlier episodes of) Enterprise, but this continuation, and the way they’re doing the Romulan War (so far) just has me going “WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!”
I also disliked the weird selective continuity: They borrow Diane Duane’s Rihannsu language, naming, customs etc, apply them to generic TNG/DS9-style Romulans, while at the same time ignoring the Romulan War chapter in The Romulan Way (It’s wishful thinking, but I’d love the Earth ships Carrizal or Balboa to cameo in Beneath The Raptor’s Wing). Then the ship used for “9/11 in Space” (9/11 in space was already done by the Xindi on TV, btw) is named after S’Task, who definitely wasn’t some crazed terrorist!

Wow. It turns out some of these things do bother me :-P
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
novels

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 12:09 AM.

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