When Will the Novels Catch Up the Events Preceding the Reboot?

[TrekReader]

So, it's been six years since Star Trek XI. We're still getting some great TNG and DS9 novels set after Star Trek X. Really enjoying them.

*However* the elephant in the room is that they are all set before the 24th century events that set the stage for Star Trek XI.

Without having any inside knowledge, it seems like perhaps the book folks are avoiding getting there intentionally. Maybe they don't have permission from CBS to go past that point with the original timeline. Who knows? You've got me.

I thought maybe people here would have some insight into this- I know in the old days authors and editors used to hang out here, and maybe still do, and, even if they no longer do, I'm sure we've at least got some Star Trek book fans who are more plugged in to the behind the scenes news than I am (I'm not plugged in at all these days). Do you think they have clearance to go beyond that point in the original universe? If so, when do you think they'll get to it and why do you think they haven't done so yet?

Will the books reflect the events of the Countdown comics leading up to Star Trek XI? If possible, try to avoid spoilers- I've seen the movie, but I only just read the first of the four comics. However, that's enough to know that things are a bit different for at least one key character and one key ship or space station from the status quo in the latest books.

Traditionally, comics and written books aren't canon, and thus are free to ignore each other. The movie, which was the only thing on-screen, didn't really establish anything about the 24th century beyond the destruction of Romulus and Spock going back in time. However, the comics were billed as canon by the folks involved with the movie.

Personally, I'd be fine with the books counting the comics as real and building up to that point and then going beyond it, or the books going into a completely different direction than the comics and just remaining true to what's on-screen. I'm just curious about if they've indicated which way they'll go. The TNG books kind of infamously ignored Commander Madden being the Enterprise-E's new first officer because it was a scene cut from Nemesis rather than being in the movie itself. So, to me it's a real question whether they will count comics or not.

But most importantly, what's the time table for getting past the 24th century events of Star Trek XI? Are are they even allowed to do it?

It's not that I'm not enjoying the Typhon Pact and all that stuff. It's just that, well, for a series about the future, it's kind of odd that they are six years in the past, so to speak. You'd think they'd want to catch up with the last events we've seen on screen and go beyond them.

 

[Christopher]

^The novels have already conflicted with Countdown on a couple of issues, like the specifics of Data's resurrection and his career path afterward.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

It is a little amusing-slash-frustrating. After speeding along with in-universe time gaps of months or even years between stories in a given series or following a given crew (Voyager being an exception, Beyer taking a more compacted and in-depth approach), it seems that we might be putting the breaks on now. Much as I enjoy the approach of, say, the old DS9 relaunch or those Voyager books, with a specific year or so covered in detail for the characters in a given setting, I'm really curious to see what happens post-Hobus. That's currently (and for the foreseeable future) the final hurdle before we cross into the truly unknown, with an entirely unscripted plot, so to speak. And while I was long disgruntled about the necessity of another bloody crisis, I've come to hope that the authors can present a Hobus aftermath that actually tries to take a positive approach, to make something worthwhile out of tragedy.

With Nimoy having left us, a concluding/climatic Spock story for the novel 'verse timeline is appropriate, I think.

EDIT: For what it's worth, the bleeding edge has crossed over into 2386. We're potentially only a year away, and closer than two.

 

[Idran]

I'm almost certain it's nothing to do with word from Paramount; it's simply because in-universe, there were 8 years between Nemesis and the Hobus supernova, and there've been a lot of events that have taken up those 8 years; the Litverse is extremely decompressed as compared with real-life chronology. The books aren't lagging, they just aren't rushing through events to jump there purely for the sake of jumping there.

We aren't too far off it now, though. Disavowed (the latest book right now chronologically) was set in January of 2386, and the Hobus supernova was some time in 2387.

Also, official word when it comes to licensed fiction from Paramount is the books have to abide by what's in the finished on-screen products but otherwise they aren't restricted at all, regardless of what the producers/writers of the shows or movies say in terms of what is or isn't canon. Orci's comments about the comics are no more binding for the licensed books than Jeri Taylor's comments about Mosaic or Pathways were back during Voyager.

 

[TrekReader]

^The novels have already conflicted with Countdown on a couple of issues, like the specifics of Data's resurrection and his career path afterward.

Thanks. That answers one half of things.

So, I guess we're down to- Are the books currently allowed to catch-up with the 24th century events depicted or referred on-screen in Star XI and continue the original universe beyond them? And, if so, how far away are we in real time from that happening?

I don't have any inside knowledge, obviously, but it seems to me that there's almost got to be something standing in the way here. CBS says that the original universe continues to exist, but maybe they don't actually want adventures of that universe continuing in print. Or could it be that the book folks have only licensed the rights to do novels from TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY, and explicitly have not paid for the rights to do anything related to Star Trek XI, which might be preventing them from even doing doing TNG and DS9 books that reference the small portion of it's events from the 24th century?

 

[Christopher]

I missed this before...

However, the comics were billed as canon by the folks involved with the movie.

This is actually not true. Roberto Orci has made it repeatedly clear that the comics are not canonical. What happened was that on one occasion, a writer from Trekmovie.com was interviewing Orci about the comics and basically trying to browbeat him into admitting that the comics were canon, and Orci eventually gave in and went along with it just to humor him. But within a day, he was walking that statement back in the comments section. Outside of that one isolated instance, he's never alleged the comics to be canonical and has overtly stated the opposite.

 

[TrekReader]

We aren't too far off it now, though. Disavowed (the latest book right now chronologically) was set in January of 2386, and the Hobus supernova was some time in 2387.

Cool. I wonder what that might translate to in real time. Post STXI books in early 2016, or will they stretch it out for a few more years? They skipped past several years of DS9 just to catch it up to TNG. It seems odd from a business perspective not to try to get passed the last on-screen event. You'd think those books would have a little more juice sales wise.

Star Trek is about exploration and going where no one has gone before. You'd think they'd want to explore the time no one has explored before where anything can really happen. What was that comment in one of the first ten movies about the future being the real final frontier or something?

I mean, in a way, creatively, it's a shame the position that Romulus' fate leaves them in. I'd imagine that probably wouldn't have been what they'd have chosen (It was chosen to advance the storyline of the films), but I'm sure they can work with it and do something cool storyline wise in the novels. Certainly, it's going to have a big impact on the Typhon Pact and the politics and diplomacy of the Star Trek universe overall. And what Romulans survive and how they organize or fail to organize and who they affiliate or fail to affiliate with, and whether they are a power or part of a power or just refugees, is plenty of fodder for future Trek books to explore.

Also, official word when it comes to licensed fiction from Paramount is the books have to abide by what's in the finished on-screen products but otherwise they aren't restricted at all, regardless of what the producers/writers of the shows or movies say in terms of what is or isn't canon. Orci's comments about the comics are no more binding for the licensed books than Jeri Taylor's comments about Mosaic or Pathways were back during Voyager.

That's the impression I've always had as well. I have a friend who insists that the comics are canon and I don't think they are. We've actually had arguments about this. I'm not a big comics guy, but with the advent of e-comics and stuff, I've started to read some of the traditional type comic books and, naturally, I'm now getting into the Star Trek stuff as well (I've been reading non-comic Trek novels for probably 25 years or so). But I don't mind the novels and comics giving us two alternate takes on things at all.

In fact, as a fan of alternate universes and stuff, I kind of like the concept. I wouldn't mind seeing a comic series that does it's version of the 24th century post-STXI and the relaunch books continuing with their version and getting basically two separate branches of that original timeline's future.

I'd also love to see the 24th century that branches from the new reboot universe, but I realize that's not going to happen. They want to the future to be wide open for the movies, that was the point of doing them the way they did them, which I thought was a stroke of genius- it gave them a connection to the Trek we've always known instead of just redoing everything from scratch, but in such a way that we really don't know what happens to this Kirk, Spock, McCoy, etc. and the universe they inhabit. As the events surrounding Vulcan in Star Trek XI's 23rd century demonstrated, truly anything can happen, and that's great.

 

[tomswift2002]

Even the books have had differing storylines. A few years ago we had "The Needs Of The Many" that actually went past 2387 and into the 2410's. But that book was written to help provide some backstory to some of the events that occur in the computer game "Star Trek Online".

 

[dansigal]

it seems to me that there's almost got to be something standing in the way here. CBS says that the original universe continues to exist, but maybe they don't actually want adventures of that universe continuing in print. Or could it be that the book folks have only licensed the rights to do novels from TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY, and explicitly have not paid for the rights to do anything related to Star Trek XI, which might be preventing them from even doing doing TNG and DS9 books that reference the small portion of it's events from the 24th century?

This seems like a lot of assumptions based on nothing at all. Star Trek XI came out in May 2009. At that time treklit was telling stories in early 2381. Now we're into early 2386, so in 6 years real time, the novels have told 5 years worth of stories. It's not such an outrageous difference that there has to be something standing in the way.

 

[Idran]

Edit: Oh wait never mind, just almost spoiled you by mistake. Forgot you said you're still working through the comics.

 

[TrekReader]

This seems like a lot of assumptions based on nothing at all. Star Trek XI came out in May 2009. At that time treklit was telling stories in early 2381. Now we're into early 2386, so in 6 years real time, the novels have told 5 years worth of stories. It's not such an outrageous difference that there has to be something standing in the way.

You may be right. I'm just sort of putting myself in the shoes of the business people and editors and thinking, you know, if I were the business people at the publisher, that's where I'd think of the money as being, and if I were an editor, that's where I'd think of the stories as being- that there would be this big interest in stories that sort of cross that threshold into the unknown. But I'm not in the publishing business and there are probably good reasons for that.

Even though I'd maybe like for them to have jumped ahead, I also like the stories they are telling now, so I'm still enjoying it. And we'll get there eventually, hopefully. Good to see the Star Trek book line alive and well after all these years.

 

[Technobuilder]

You know, it amuses me to think that everyone here just Believes that because the Hobus supernova occurred... that something won't happen where Romulus is saved in our timeline and Spock is unaware.

It's freaking Star Trek.

Veridian 3 was destroyed until it wasn't.
Voyager Crashed on an Ice Planet until it didn't.

Just because we saw what Spock knew, doesn't mean he was there for everything after he got sent across.

Hell for all we know him sealing the rift reversed time and nixed the supernova from ever happening in the first place.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Weren't hints dropped at Shore Leave that it was a licensing issue preventing the novels from officially acknowledging anything from the new movies? And that as a result, the novelverse timeline was slowed down significantly (i.e. The Fall taking place over six weeks) to delay the forthcoming issue as long as possible?

 

[Ben]

^The novels have already conflicted with Countdown on a couple of issues, like the specifics of Data's resurrection and his career path afterward.

Was there any info given about this beyond dialogue from Data? He could've been lying.

 

[Idran]

You know, it amuses me to think that everyone here just Believes that because the Hobus supernova occurred... that something won't happen where Romulus is saved in our timeline and Spock is unaware.

It's freaking Star Trek.

Veridian 3 was destroyed until it wasn't.
Voyager Crashed on an Ice Planet until it didn't.

Just because we saw what Spock knew, doesn't mean he was there for everything after he got sent across.

Hell for all we know him sealing the rift reversed time and nixed the supernova from ever happening in the first place.

That's because there's no evidence yet that it didn't, and given what we know right now, believing that it won't makes less sense than believing that it will. You can't believe everything at once; everything you say is a reason for choosing to not have a belief until it happens, but choosing to believe that it won't is completely baseless right now.

 

[Doom Shepherd]

Here's my monkeywrench...

Star Trek has already established that it exists within a multiverse. "Parallells" pretty conclusively and canonically showed us that there are hundreds of thousands of parallel timelines - minimum - that coexist without "destroying" the others (which is why when some people claimed that NuTrek "destroyed" the TOS timeline, they were talking out of their butts), and that these timelines are constantly diverging, apparently based on "many worlds" theory.

So NuTrek and the Prime timeline can both coexist.

So WHY does the Spock who appeared in the NuTrek movies HAVE to be the Spock from the Prime Timeline?

He doesn't, does he? He could be Spock Prime+N, from one of the infinite number of universes where he failed and Hoban destroyed Romulus... which doesn't HAVE to be the same as the Prime universe, which could still be one of the infinite number of universes in which he succeeds.

Sure, there's no evidence for this... until there is. But there's plenty of evidence that it's possible, and none that it isn't.

 

[Christopher]

So WHY does the Spock who appeared in the NuTrek movies HAVE to be the Spock from the Prime Timeline?

In-universe, he technically doesn't; but in real-world terms, if he weren't, there would've been no point in including him in the film at all. The whole reason for the convoluted time-travel narrative was to establish the new continuity as a direct offshoot of the old one, in order to give it legitimacy in the eyes of fans who didn't want a complete reboot (although they greatly underestimated how resistant many of those fans would be). The whole reason they convinced Leonard Nimoy to come out of retirement was so that the original Spock, the very same Spock we've been following for decades, could be a part of the movie and pass the torch to the new generation. So if it hadn't been meant to be the same Spock from the same universe, he wouldn't even have been in the movie. In that case, it would've made more sense just to focus on the characters' origins and leave out the time-travel/alternate-universe angle altogether. It would've been a silly, pointless waste to introduce two new alternate universes that were both unconnected to the classic one.

Sure, there's no evidence for this... until there is. But there's plenty of evidence that it's possible, and none that it isn't.

Sure, it's hypothetically "possible," but it's obviously not what the filmmakers intended or wanted.

Besides, just in general terms, screen canon overrides tie-ins. Always. What's onscreen, what will always be onscreen, is that Romulus was destroyed by a supernova in 2387 and Spock fell into a black hole. Sure, theoretically the books could move forward into a timeline where that didn't happen, but then that would make the books an alternate timeline.

 

[Idran]

I feel like I can just pretty much repeat my last post with regard to that theory too. :P

 

[Enterprise1701]

In regards to the OP, we might have already crossed the 2387 threshold in recent novels. The epilogue of DTI - Watching the Clock takes place at an "undisclosed date", after all.

And other novels, not just ones featuring time travelers from the far future, have had scenes in the near future.

Engines of Destiny concludes with a "historian's note" describing an event in 2420.

Tales of the Dominion War - "Stone Cold Truths" is set in 2525.

Star Trek has already established that it exists within a multiverse. "Parallells" pretty conclusively and canonically showed us that there are hundreds of thousands of parallel timelines - minimum - that coexist without "destroying" the others (which is why when some people claimed that NuTrek "destroyed" the TOS timeline, they were talking out of their butts), and that these timelines are constantly diverging, apparently based on "many worlds" theory.

So NuTrek and the Prime timeline can both coexist.

I don't think your criticism here is completely correct. While yes, I have known that the Abramsverse is and was meant by the producers to be a coexisting timeline with the prime reality, Star Trek 2009 was the very first overt instance of canon Star Trek time travel creating an parallel alternate timeline instead of overriding the time travelers' home timeline. "Parallels" (as well as the mirror universe episodes, and if you follow the novelverse, "Miri") only showed simultaneous timelines, no mention of time travel.

 

[Christopher]

While yes, I have known that the Abramsverse is and was meant by the producers to be a coexisting timeline with the prime reality, Star Trek 2009 was the very first instance of canon Star Trek time travel creating an parallel alternate timeline instead of overriding the time travelers' home timeline.

Not quite. Though "Yesteryear" is ambiguous on this point, its dialogue does seem to suggest that the Thelin timeline is expected to continue to exist after Spock restores his own timeline. Before Spock goes back through the Guardian, when Thelin tells him to "Live long and prosper in your world," Spock replies, "And you in yours" -- something he wouldn't say if he expected Thelin's timeline to cease to exist. (And of course The Chimes at Midnight established that Thelin's timeline had survived, as far as the novels are concerned.)