Spoilers VOY: Acts of Contrition by Kirsten Beyer Review Thread

[Kirsten Beyer]

So my question is, is there a reason that the Confederacy seems to be more of an exception in how they are regarded by the fleet? Is it that you (Kirsten) feel that the casual attitude they demonstrated towards first contact in the series was a mistake made by the show, or that it is considered to be an exception due to Voyager's unique circumstances when they were stranded? Or is there something specific about the Confederacy that I have missed that makes this level of caution warranted?

Hi Stormy,

I had to go back and really think about the initial story development to answer this. There are really two issues...

The first is that Chakotay's introduction to the Confederacy came from the Protectors. What he learned about what they did to that area of space left him furious. It took General Mattings saving Voyager's bacon at the end of Protectors for Chakotay to realize that he needed to judge the descendants of those people on their own terms rather than the actions of their ancestors. But that didn't mean he could turn around and completely trust them. His inclination would be to proceed with caution.

The second has more to do with the reality that the Full Circle Fleet has a different mission than the original Voyager crew, who were just trying to get home. They are the Federation's ambassadors to the Delta Quadrant and as such, are held to a different standard. Every choice they make is going to be reviewed and scrutinized by Command. They have to proceed by the book....although, granted, I'm not exactly sure what the book says about first contact situations like this. Generous and welcoming as the Confederacy seems to be, the reality is that we don't know them at all initially, apart from their troubling past. There is always a chance that things could go south and should they, the fleet has a tactical advantage if they have withheld some of their capabilities, given that they would be a handful of ships against hundreds. Also, I feel like in traditional first contact situations, efforts are made to determine another culture's technological capabilities prior to sharing all of our toys. I don't think that's something Voyager's crew had the luxury of doing the first time out, but it strikes me as the way things would work under more normal circumstances.

Best,
KMFB

 

[Kirsten Beyer]

Spoiler: All the awesome

But even given the complexity of the Confederacy, I was still expecting this to ultimately be a more complex variety of the prototypical Voyager story where a society at first seems friendly until they cross The Janeway Line at which point she tells them off in a huff and leaves, angry aliens at her back. I spent most of my time thinking "oh shit, we really are going to pay for making enemies of these dudes." But at the end: not so much. Forcing the Federation and the Confederacy into being allies, she pushes this into even thornier, more fascinating territory - how do you live and work with people whose beliefs are so thoroughly toxic to your own? How can an alliance work between people with fundamentally incompatible worldviews?

I mean hell. What more relevant question could she be asking, at this point in our society?

Thrawn,

I'm not going to place this answer in spoilers now...I think that ship has sort of sailed. But yes...this has always been the point. "How do we live with these people"....was the big question I started with that led to the development of the Confederacy. There is no walking away. The lessons, if there are any, will be found in working through the differences and not allowing them to simply draw new lines between us that we simply cannot cross. It's tempting of course. But it solves nothing.

Now I'm not suggesting I've got this all figured out. But I've done my damndest to walk the characters through this fire, to allow them to feel the frustration, but to present a situation where they are forced to dig deeper, to decide whether or not the Federation's professed values stand up to scrutiny, and to act as I think we all hope we can when our deepest beliefs, those things we believe to be true...yes, our identity...is challenged by others who disagree with us, are never going to just come around, but we must continue to co-exist with regardless.

Yeah...a bit much to chew on, which is why I asked for three books to tell this story instead of one.

As always, thank you for your very kind words.

Best,
KMFB

 

[Kirsten Beyer]

Nasat,

I'm not going to re-post your initial review or your later thoughts in the interest of space here...but I did want to tell you that as usual, I enjoy reading your words so very much. The time you spend developing your ideas and the way you articulate them never fails to make me think.

To be completely honest, I'm not sure I really understand most of that second long post.

Are you saying...and please correct me if I am wrong, as there is a very good chance I am...that because no individual can be completely self-aware, any time you read something that resonates with you as truthful, or useful, you are forced to discount it given the fact that you cannot trust in the source? That ultimately, the source's own biases will be revealed at which point you must discredit whatever you found insightful because the beliefs on which those insights were based are in conflict with yours and therefor must be discredited?

If this is the case, and I am by no means certain that it is...I find that disconcerting. When I read, I'm happy to come across anything that resonates, that I might be able to stick in my mind somewhere and consider as new experiences happen. I honestly don't give a shit about the source and what they intended when they wrote it. If it works for me, or inspires me, or just makes me think and leads to more questions...I'm in.

As an author, I'm pretty much stuck in the Tabitha Fortis camp...."My job as a writer is to hold your attention for however long I have asked for it. If I stumble into truth, I got lucky."

What you do with what I write is yours. It has nothing to do with me. I don't need it to. But I truly hope that suspicion of my motives does not limit or taint the reading experience for you. I'm just presenting my thoughts, as best I can, filtered through a universe that has been created by thousands of people and by which I have been blessed by being allowed to contribute. Whether those thoughts have any real value or truth is never going to be for me to say.

Anyway...thank you again for taking so much time to dig into this.

Best,
KMFB

And to everyone else...many thanks for your patience with the annoying multiple posts.

 

[Stoek]

"But you fuck one sheep...!"

Anonymous Scottish farmer on his death bed.

I am sorry, but that just killed me. Hilarious.

One of my favorite jokes and I've gotten to use it twice on the beebs. *L*

Quick question about Tom's advocate, am I correct in assuming that Shaw is related to Areel Shaw?

I really wish I could say that I am that cool. That I have those kinds of details about all of the series at my fingertips.

Sadly, I am forced to disabuse you of that notion. While there is no reason, now that I know who she is, that they could not be related, I named Shaw as a little nod to the first employer I had out of school...also an attorney named Shaw.

Serendipity is a funny thing. There are some, (I may or may not be one of them) who believe that all is real, and the things we view as fiction, are just the mind of the storyteller open to receiving information from other realities. So maybe its that, or maybe it was pure dumb luck, but either way it is kind of awesome how these things sometimes work out.

I am really really really hoping that Section 31 will not end up being involved.

Spoiler alert: You have nothing to worry about on that front. Largely because I agree with you.

Good. I kind of figured what with Mack having plans for that group but I will admit to being both relieved and not surprised at your reply. S31 in some ways is on a par with the infamous Reset Button, and considering how much work you've done to disable that thing I probably would have died of shock had they ended up being involved.

While the previous books are very good, this one has hit a McCormackesque level of quality. I am very much looking forward to the next installment.

High praise, indeed. Humbling really, as my envy of Una's work knows no bounds.

Honestly, Una, and yourself and CLB, and many others are a big part of the reason why I tend to get a little snarly when I come across people demeaning those who write tie-in fiction. Sure, there's plenty of hackery to be found. Just like in a lot of "original" works. But to me a book like this reenforces the idea that art is art and excellence is excellence, and only short sighted fools dismiss a work because of superficialities.

As to your incredibly strong response to the Paris family storyline, while I am thrilled to have evoked such passion in a reader (which is really kind of sick, right? Who enjoys enraging anyone so much?) I must gently suggest for the purposes of the story's conclusion that you realign your thoughts more along the lines that rmfcdpei articulated so eloquently. I get why you feel the way you do. But for me, Julia is not the person you are describing here. She is in a ton of pain. People do horrible, unspeakable things when they are in pain. I have personally known folks who could be so incredibly hateful from time to time, but then turn around and be absolute joys to be around, which was so challenging. I mean, yes, part of you wants to walk away. Toxic people are dangerous and all of us would do well to avoid them. And yes, from time to time I have ended relationships with people who were very close to me. But never in anger. Always with love. Always having come to realize that whatever these people need, I can't give it to them and I am wasting both of our time trying. The endings were painful. But necessary, for my sanity and theirs. For those who are still in my life and still lapse into insanity, I usually just find myself looking at them and asking myself, "Who hurt you? How much pain are you in that you could come to this?"

I get why what is going on between Tom and Julia would be hard for you to see. But for me, Julia is a whole person. For you, she is a handful of scenes, many of them difficult to witness. Because we really are seeing her at her worst. But Tom knows that. When I am writing in Tom's head, I know all of the other things he remembers about her and they complicate matters tremendously. There is no way Tom could walk away from her at the end of that mediation. Tom has a history with his mother, just as he did with his father. They aren't one big parental ball for him. They are individuals. And there was a lot of healing that took place between Tom and his father shortly before his father's death. That doesn't just go away because Julia has temporarily lost all perspective. And Tom is still grieving his father's loss along with her.

I understand that from a reader's perspective it might have felt good to hear Tom tell her to fuck off at the end and cut all ties. But that's just wouldn't have been true...at least for me. I hope that as you see how the rest of the story unfolds, you'll understand what I'm going for here.

As to the rest, it is always wonderful, and fascinating to hear your thoughts. Thank you again.

Best,
KMFB

*s* I get exactly what you're saying. And in my defense I will reiterate both that I find Tom to be a better person than myself where this is concerned, and that intellectually I agree with rmfcdpei and yourself. But emotionally it is what it is. At the moment. However who knows where I will be when I re-read this book. Also I have faith in you as an author to show me more of Julia Paris in the next book to perhaps help me get to a different perspective. It's kind of the Anya situation. When the character first showed up on Buffy I pretty much couldn't stand her. She was just... annoying. And then came The Body. And she's talking about how she just doesn't understand. About death, about grief, and suddenly I just wanted to hug her and tell her that it was going to be okay. Now I won't say that she became my favorite character after that. But it changed the way I saw her for sure, and it was a lot harder to dislike her the way I had before. So I'm sure that my feelings about JP will evolve. I mean if I can forgive Patrick Stewart pretty much anything is possible.

Anyway, thanks for your replies, and now get back to your dungeon young lady, you have a novel to finish.

 

[Marika]

Kirsten , I have found this joke around facebook and i think it's saying what exactly i am thinking sometimes:


" The curtains were blue"

What the teacher thinks the author means:

" The Author sees these curtains like his despair , like he doesn't find any reason to go out and he is very disappointed with life..."

What the Author really means :

" The curtains were FUCKING blue" .

That's why i hate reviews and i always i had a hate for teachers who would force me to dissect even the tiniest sentence . When i read i just love immersion. It's true that sometimes i wonder about some realities depicted and such but in the end i love to read a book for the story not trying to guess what the author really means or what he or she was thinking off at the given time . LOL

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Hmm. I have this vague recollection of a reference to a race known as the

Spoiler: **

Planarians

early in the book, and all I remember was thinking it was just throwaway. And now, I've just read the chapter that reveals that the species was

Spoiler: **

a "Chekhov's Gun." Rather interesting that a race with unusually robust regenerative abilities would have the same name as a genus of flatworms with the same distinction.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Nasat,

I'm not going to re-post your initial review or your later thoughts in the interest of space here...but I did want to tell you that as usual, I enjoy reading your words so very much. The time you spend developing your ideas and the way you articulate them never fails to make me think.

That's very humbling to hear; thank you.

Once again, you've delivered a novel that provokes a great many ideas, and I feel like making crystal clear that any issues I personally had with the book stem from the fact of its quality, and my enjoyment of it - that is, the flaw, if flaw it is, is within me and not in your work.

To be completely honest, I'm not sure I really understand most of that second long post.

Are you saying...and please correct me if I am wrong, as there is a very good chance I am...

It was no doubt my tendency to waffle that's responsible for any confusion. Clarity is not exactly my strong point at times; sorry!

that because no individual can be completely self-aware, any time you read something that resonates with you as truthful, or useful, you are forced to discount it given the fact that you cannot trust in the source? That ultimately, the source's own biases will be revealed at which point you must discredit whatever you found insightful because the beliefs on which those insights were based are in conflict with yours and therefor must be discredited?

Then I have failed to explain myself, at least partially. The first half of what you write here, though, is probably generally accurate, save for one detail. That is, while I wouldn't have described it like this, your summary - "because no individual can be completely self-aware, any time you read something that resonates with you as truthful, or useful, you are forced to discount it" - is rather too on the nose for me to protest. I think you rather eloquently summarized it there, for the most part. The only issue I'd have with this summary is that the usefulness or quality of the experience isn't discounted but simply tarnished slightly - and that's because my hopes for it, and for other people, were too unrealistic and ultimately selfish. I agree entirely with what you say regarding the individual's capacity to be moved or inspired by any given piece of writing on its own terms; if it means something to an individual then that's what matters. The problem, really, is my tendency, not yet conquered, to be a little too much like the Borg; I want perfection, and can never reach it. The closer I get, the more the disappointment becomes potentially dangerous. The more I respect a person, for instance, the more likely it is that their perceived flaws (from my perspective), which usually don't mean a thing, will become massive irritants. It's selfish, and I know why it happens. But it means that in most instances I need to work to distance myself from that which I find affecting and inspiring, at least at a later point, lest the fact of the meaning, truth and insight I found in it become too intense in its conflict with my otherwise buried disappointment or offence, and erupt.

But that's me all over. 98% of the time I'm a very easy person to deal with, the other 2% I'm a nightmare, in part because it comes out of nowhere.

As an author, I'm pretty much stuck in the Tabitha Fortis camp...."My job as a writer is to hold your attention for however long I have asked for it.

Well, you're definitely doing your job as an author, then.

What you do with what I write is yours. It has nothing to do with me. I don't need it to. But I truly hope that suspicion of my motives does not limit or taint the reading experience for you.

I would like to emphasise that it's really myself who is the "problem" here. It's simply the knowledge that you and I, like anyone else and myself, have a chasm between us that usually provokes in me at worst friendly indifference and at best fascination and insight (I tend to get on well with pretty much everyone, and I value the individual and not the group, so my disagreements with people, even over Really Important Things, don't tend to mean much or cause much friction); but the more that gap is closed, the greater the potential for discontent, with everything I admire in a person or a work emphasising the parts I don't until they're too painful to bear. And I know that I'll try to close that gap far too quickly and eagerly, and in my respect and admiration wind up savaging that person.

This must sound odd, but I know the reasons why I work like this.

Anyway...thank you again for taking so much time to dig into this.

Best,
KMFB.

Thank you, for taking the time to answer (and to provoke further thought on my part). It's greatly appreciated, and I very much look forward to the third book of this trilogy.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

I came here last night and sat for about two hours composing responses to many of the questions that have been raised and adding some thoughts. I did the standard multi-quote thing. I edited the quotes. I made sure it all looked right in one massive post. And then, I kid you not, as I was previewing the final version I got a message that internet explorer was experiencing a problem and before I could submit the post, I lost all of it. All of it.

Gah! It's awful when that happens. My standard joke around here is that Future Guy is deleting my posts from history because they threaten his inscrutable goals. I hope you managed to resist the urge to scream curses at the gods or bury your face in your hands and weep, which are, in my opinion, entirely justified responses.

Hmm. I have this vague recollection of a reference to a race known as the

Spoiler: **

Planarians

early in the book, and all I remember was thinking it was just throwaway. And now, I've just read the chapter that reveals that the species was

Spoiler: **

a "Chekhov's Gun." Rather interesting that a race with unusually robust regenerative abilities would have the same name as a genus of flatworms with the same distinction.

Heh. When I first read the name, I thought "Flatworms, then?" Turns out that yes, the name was chosen deliberately and isn't a coincidence.

 

[Man of Steel]

I came here last night and sat for about two hours composing responses to many of the questions that have been raised and adding some thoughts. I did the standard multi-quote thing. I edited the quotes. I made sure it all looked right in one massive post. And then, I kid you not, as I was previewing the final version I got a message that internet explorer was experiencing a problem and before I could submit the post, I lost all of it. All of it.

Gah! It's awful when that happens. My standard joke around here is that Future Guy is deleting my posts from history because they threaten his inscrutable goals. I hope you managed to resist the urge to scream curses at the gods or bury your face in your hands and weep, which are, in my opinion, entirely justified responses.

Hmm. I have this vague recollection of a reference to a race known as the

Spoiler: **

Planarians

early in the book, and all I remember was thinking it was just throwaway. And now, I've just read the chapter that reveals that the species was

Spoiler: **

a "Chekhov's Gun." Rather interesting that a race with unusually robust regenerative abilities would have the same name as a genus of flatworms with the same distinction.

Heh. When I first read the name, I thought "Flatworms, then?" Turns out that yes, the name was chosen deliberately and isn't a coincidence.

IE sucks and I didn't think anyone still used it. Firefox and Chrome are the way to go these days.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

I came here last night and sat for about two hours composing responses to many of the questions that have been raised and adding some thoughts. I did the standard multi-quote thing. I edited the quotes. I made sure it all looked right in one massive post. And then, I kid you not, as I was previewing the final version I got a message that internet explorer was experiencing a problem and before I could submit the post, I lost all of it. All of it.

Gah! It's awful when that happens. My standard joke around here is that Future Guy is deleting my posts from history because they threaten his inscrutable goals. I hope you managed to resist the urge to scream curses at the gods or bury your face in your hands and weep, which are, in my opinion, entirely justified responses.

Hmm. I have this vague recollection of a reference to a race known as the

Spoiler: **

Planarians

early in the book, and all I remember was thinking it was just throwaway. And now, I've just read the chapter that reveals that the species was

Spoiler: **

a "Chekhov's Gun." Rather interesting that a race with unusually robust regenerative abilities would have the same name as a genus of flatworms with the same distinction.

Heh. When I first read the name, I thought "Flatworms, then?" Turns out that yes, the name was chosen deliberately and isn't a coincidence.

IE sucks and I didn't think anyone still used it. Firefox and Chrome are the way to go these days.

I still use it, because I'm usually about ten years behind everyone else when it comes to computers.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Hmm. At home, I use a G4 "Bionic Desk Lamp" iMac, and a 486 notebook that has absolutely no Internet capabilities.

And I try to avoid using Imploder. Usually, the only time I absolutely can't avoid it is if I'm using a computer carrel in a hotel. For some reason, they tend to be big on Imploder.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Now that the sentient race named after a flatworm (some of the ambassadors from Kathleen Sky's Death's Angel come to mind) is out of spoiler tags, would anybody happen to remember at what point that species is first mentioned?

 

[Markonian]

I know the sentient race named after a flatworm (some of the ambassadors from Kathleen Sky's Death's Angel come to mind) is out of spoiler tags, would anybody happen to remember at what point that species is first mentioned?

Chapter 6. Frist commends how C. made a theoretical breakthrough in the Planarian genome research.

I'm still using IE but keep a Word document open where I copy&past long texts every few minutes because the IE crashes often.

Also, did anything catch Farkas went from Regina to Roberta in chapter eleven?

 

[Kertrats47]

Also, did anything catch Farkas went from Regina to Roberta in chapter eleven?

Ah ha, I *thought* so! I was seriously questioning myself when I read that. "Has it always been Roberta?" and so forth. Didn't have Internet access at my fingertips to check!

 

[Jim Gamma]

^ IE gets used mainly by firms that don't want to pay an IT outsourcer to install a better browser when Windows comes with its own, and has fully-integrated security management with Windows itself.

 

[Gul Re'jal]

^Because installing Firefox or Chrome is suuuuch a hard and complicated work.


I enjoyed the novel very very very VERY much! All plots were very interesting, and as someone upthread mentioned, none of them felt like a B or C or Z plot.

I must admit Axum annoyed me to no end with his plotting, and "I love yous", as if that was any excuse for his plotting against Seven. Even more than Tom's mother.

I also couldn't shake that feeling that the Confederacy is a mirror of the US — a bit distorting mirror, as it emphasised the "bad", but still a mirror. After reading through the thread (which I did only after I finished the book), I can see I'm not the only one with that impression.
It didn't bother me, though, because it didn't feel like a commentary on the current world affairs, but rather as a certain society picture in general, which coincidentally fits something from RL.

There was one thing that was pulling me out of the story, though: quite a few Confederacy names that sounded very "earthly", like Mattings, Creak, or Hsu. I guess I expect something more exotic from aliens

I voted "outstanding", and was absolutely shocked by "average" and "below average" votes present.

 

[Thrawn]

I realize this is beneath me as a human; I'm posting it anyway.

Someone just posted a review on amazon.com that was three stars and said "Still reading it. Waiting for storyline to develop."

WHO DOES THAT?! Can we not, maybe, finish the book first?!

 

[Deranged Nasat]

I realize this is beneath me as a human; I'm posting it anyway.

Someone just posted a review on amazon.com that was three stars and said "Still reading it. Waiting for storyline to develop."

WHO DOES THAT?! Can we not, maybe, finish the book first?!

As bizarre at it seems to me, some people appear to be like that - they present conclusions half way through. Then they see if their feelings change going forward. I suppose they feel the need to establish some sort of certainty rather than holding the conclusion in suspension. Or you can blame the same impulse that has people post updates of their lives on messaging sites every five minutes, or update friends on their travel plans by text every ten.

Of course, in one of the threads on here (possibly this very one?) someone claimed to have voted "Outstanding" before even starting the book...

 

[Marika]

yes, it was me Nasat lol... and I knew why i voted like that because I knew it will be a great book

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

I would say that the Confederacy is a reflection of what the U.S. would be, had the reforms of the 20th century (going back to President Roosevelt -- President Theodore Roosevelt) hadn't taken place.

Great. A major cliffhanger on multiple threads, and the next book hasn't even been given a release date. Just lovely.

The one thing I'm still trying to wrap my mind around is

Spoiler: **

Seven has been in a stasis chamber, experiencing an artificial reality, for how long? And what about the scene where she'd witnessed a "medical experiment"? And why is this somehow reminding me of a DS9 episode (can't quite put my finger on it, not even dead sure it was DS9) in which the climax revealed that several important members of the regular cast had been abducted?

That said, it was an excellent book.