Discussion in 'Trek Literature' started by Drago-Kazov, Oct 12, 2012.
Is it any good?
I would really llike to read it.
Do anyof the characters show up anywhere else?
I enjoyed it. One of the relationships in the story near the end left me uncomfortable, though.
Spoiler: bit icky
One character develops feelings for another, who although alien and much older, has the appearence of a 12-year-old.
I don't recall if it's contradicted anywhere. Certainly no more than the episodes and movies contradict themselves.
The characters haven't shown up again, AFAIK.
That was an interesting book, with some relevant cameo appearances from Picard, Jadzia etc.
I hope Boothby had a significant role. He had to have one.
Yeah, that is definitely very..... odd.
I really enjoyed this book. Give it a read
Definitely worth a read.
What if we said it was excellent and worth reading even though it had major contradictions?
It doesn't, but if you're curious, read it. I enjoyed it very much. And I have no doubt that some pf the characters will pop up one day. All it takes is for an author who is passionate about those characters and sees an opportunity to make good use of one, or some, and there you go.
I have been pleasantly surprised, over the decades, to see Ingrit Thomson and Mahase and Naraht and Lori Ciana and Moron/Bernie (as Kobry) and Pava and Moves-with-Burning-Grace and numerous other original, non canonical, characters pop up in novels written by others.
He appears once, giving advice to one of the cadets.
Too bad, i will probably still check it out.
I would not read it. I am a canonista.
So, how do you cope with TV/film Trek and it's many continuity errors? Click the two youtube video links in my sig for just a few examples. They're a match for any contradictions in the books.
Are there any so glaring that they cannot be retconed or ignored?
See for yourself:
I think of the new one as alternate reality. Like the ones that appear in the Worf mind screw episode.
Every field has its wonks.
I've never understood this mentality to be honest?
Just seems silly to reject a story because it doesn't match up exactly with another story. But, different strokes for different folks.
Ditto. And fans in the 80s who'd say of each movie novelization, "But it has scenes that weren't in the movie!"
Its like sports or politics. Some people care about details some don't.
Why don't you see the books in the same way then - and view them as an alternative reality rather then incompatable because of continuity issues?
I like to say that if Trek canon is "history," tie-ins are historical fiction. You don't have to accept them as "true" events, just as entertaining works of make-believe set against the backdrop of the Trek universe, or as explorations of what might have been. (Especially since the "true" events of canon are every bit as imaginary to begin with.)
Separate names with a comma.