It's been a while since I read it, but I thought The Procrustean Petard was more Kirk/Kor than Kirk/Spock?
Trek Books that are just horrible -- new and old
- Thread starter Nathan
- Start date
It's been a while since I read it, but I thought The Procrustean Petard was more Kirk/Kor than Kirk/Spock?
Spock and Kor both wanted Kirk.
Are you referring to the first or second (and more available version) printing? Since "Killing Time"'s original printing had more of the slash content.
In addition to the Marshak/Culbreath books, I will add that anything by Diane Carey is just horrible - no matter which series.
I'm pretty sure I have the first printing. There's some strange dialogue of Kirk insulting a bully saying he played with dolls and wore lipstick until he was 12. I've read that only the first printing had that dialogue, which was an identifier for which edition of the book you had.
I do find Diane Carey a chore to get thru most of the time. I did enjoy her TOS Invasion! novel, I'm a big fan of that crossover in general. But seriously, you love sailing, we get it.
Well of Souls took me several months to get through but I made it because I wanted to get to know the Enterprise-C better. Indeed, the characters weren't likable at first but they grew on me. Poor Captain Garrett - they don't have effective analgesics in the future.
The interpersonal dynamic of the Trill engineer and his ex-girlfriend were intriguing, to say the least, and I started liking the second officer when she came to grips with herself and stopped victimizing herself.
I'd like to see another story with that (mentally healthier) crew - preferably not written by "Let's dig into psychological trauma" Blick.
The interpersonal dynamic of the Trill engineer and his ex-girlfriend were intriguing, to say the least, and I started liking the second officer when she came to grips with herself and stopped victimizing herself.
I'd like to see another story with that (mentally healthier) crew - preferably not written by "Let's dig into psychological trauma" Blick.
I read "Dreadnought" around 20 years ago and I remember really enjoying the secondary character perspective.
Listen, sometimes I'll finish a Trek book and be like: "Eh." But only once have I actively become angry about how terrible a Trek book was, how insulting it was to me that I had paid for something so poorly written, so poorly edited, so poorly researched. That book was:
Ship of the Line by Diane Carey
Ship of the Line by Diane Carey
This post almost makes me want to read Ship of the Line just to see how bad it is!
I cannot express too highly my dislike for the TOS book "Death's Angel". All of the crew so out of character swooning at the feet of a Mary Sue. And I'm not talking the quality of the writing here just the characterisations. Terrible.
I haven't read "Spock Must Die" for years. But didn't basically Kirk agree to kill a Spock because it wasn't good form or something to have an extra Spock around. I'm not sure. I felt in it Kirk and Spock were mere acquaintances and Kirk didn't care that much for Spock even as a friend. And I love all Blish's non-trek works.
I'd prefer the Marshak/Culbreth books over this one. At least Kirk cared if Spock died in their books. Perhaps cared too much according to some. But I read these books years before I knew slash existed. I think they skirt the line sure. But don't be afraid to read them.
Their short stories on the other hand - even I get it .
I haven't read "Spock Must Die" for years. But didn't basically Kirk agree to kill a Spock because it wasn't good form or something to have an extra Spock around. I'm not sure. I felt in it Kirk and Spock were mere acquaintances and Kirk didn't care that much for Spock even as a friend. And I love all Blish's non-trek works.
I'd prefer the Marshak/Culbreth books over this one. At least Kirk cared if Spock died in their books. Perhaps cared too much according to some. But I read these books years before I knew slash existed. I think they skirt the line sure. But don't be afraid to read them.
Their short stories on the other hand -
even I get it .
It was more because one of the Spocks was evil. He was mirror-inverted from the original, and somehow that caused his psychology to be "reversed" too.
And to Kirk's credit, when each Spock insisted that the other must be killed, Kirk resisted the suggestion and found it out of character for either Spock to make.
I will admit that I found the part about Piper's "Outlast" experience interesting.
Piper was nothing more than a "Mary Sue" character - an unlikeable one, at that.
'Shadow Lord' is one of the very few Star Trek novels I've refused to read again. It's been ten years or so since I did, and my vague memory of it tells me that my opinion of it was that it felt like someone got contracted for a Star Trek novel, but had no intention of actually writing one, focusing on their separate idea and characters, while having Spock and Sulu tacked into the story and making arbitrary remarks in order to keep the Star Trek logo on it.
Morgan Bateson getting command of the E-E, his entire command crew is the crew of the old Bozeman, and they are all male, even though what we saw in 'Cause And Effect' clearly showed us two female bridge officers.
Picard going on a secret rescuemission, while playing holo-programs in which he's worshipping Kirk.
Now I remember! The Italian title was quite different("Salto nel Tempo" - "Time Leap"). And yes, it was quite bad.
But (IMO) the "Phoenix" saga was much, much, much worse.
And in defence of "Spock Must Die!", is the very first Star Trek adult novel. Some growing pains are understandable.
Last edited:
Popular as it is, I wasn't a big fan of that one. I wouldn't say it was horrible though.
Similar threads
