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

[JoeZhang]

Assuming Trek III is the last one and TPTB do something else with Trek, leaving both prime and JJverses alone, are they both fair game then ?

Could Treklit carry on with either or both continuities, or recombine them ?

Well it's as Christopher says they (within limits) can conjecture whatever they like (See the DC Series) however as soon as someone new comes out Live Action, everything moves to confirm with it - so sure if they never made anymore films or TV featuring either the sky would be limits...

 

[Jedi Ben]

This is a head-spinning mess I'm giving up trying to make sense of. (There's been some laudable attempts by others to render it comprehensible though.)

Ultimately, for me, if they do cover the supernova, then they need to avoid killing off Kamenor.

 

[SicOne]

I haven't read any recent (meaning events leading up to 2386) Trek lit since Indistinguishable From Magic. Have recent books mentioned that the Hobus star is flaring up and might supernova? IIRC from nuTrek, the Vulcans tried to get Hobus from supernova'ing and failed, and that's what set Nero off. But what I don't know is how long in advance of the supernova that they began trying to stave it off, and I don't know if the novelverse is to that point yet, or if anyone has addressed concerns about the Hobus star in the novelverse.

 

[Thrawn]

Nope, none of that at all.

 

[Leto_II]

This reminds me of how it's been pointed out that the Defiant set used in ENT - "In a Mirror, Darkly" has some minor cosmetic differences with the appearance of the Defiant in TOS - "The Tholian Web". Given that the interphasic rift could have theoretically connected more than just 2 quantum realities, it could be possible that more than 1 Defiant went through the rift. We could use this to justify having both ENT - "In a Mirror, Darkly" and SCE - Interphase in the novelverse. But I doubt the TV and movie producers would ever overtly use this. Cause then there would be no novelty in using the long-known by the audience Defiant as a plot point in ENT.

And also the Defiant as seen in "Raise the Defiant," from DC Comics Vol. 2, Special #2 (from Winter, 1994) set during the movie era, when the Enterprise-A rescues the starship from the interphase tear around 2288 or thereabouts.

It's entirely possible that this was yet another quantum replica of the Defiant, with one version emerging in 2155 (as seen on ENT), the NCC-1701-A rescuing another version of the ship in 2288, and the USS da Vinci encountering still a third replica in 2376 (there's also mention in The Lost Era: The Sundered of one being spotted by the Excelsior in 2298, from what I remember, which could've ended up later being the SCE-duplicate).

The Defiant getting pulled into the rift could've produced a potentially-infinite number of quantum duplicates, which then keep reemerging periodically from the rift throughout history.

 

[Enterprise1701]

^I don't go with that because a lot DC comics are incompatible with the novels; therefore I consider the DC comics to be a separate fictional offshoot of Star Trek from the modern novelverse. But YMMV.

 

[Relayer1]

This reminds me of how it's been pointed out that the Defiant set used in ENT - "In a Mirror, Darkly" has some minor cosmetic differences with the appearance of the Defiant in TOS - "The Tholian Web". Given that the interphasic rift could have theoretically connected more than just 2 quantum realities, it could be possible that more than 1 Defiant went through the rift. We could use this to justify having both ENT - "In a Mirror, Darkly" and SCE - Interphase in the novelverse. But I doubt the TV and movie producers would ever overtly use this. Cause then there would be no novelty in using the long-known by the audience Defiant as a plot point in ENT.

And also the Defiant as seen in "Raise the Defiant," from DC Comics Vol. 2, Special #2 (from Winter, 1994) set during the movie era, when the Enterprise-A rescues the starship from the interphase tear around 2288 or thereabouts.

It's entirely possible that this was yet another quantum replica of the Defiant, with one version emerging in 2155 (as seen on ENT), the NCC-1701-A rescuing another version of the ship in 2288, and the USS da Vinci encountering still a third replica in 2376 (there's also mention in The Lost Era: The Sundered of one being spotted by the Excelsior in 2298, from what I remember, which could've ended up later being the SCE-duplicate).

The Defiant getting pulled into the rift could've produced a potentially-infinite number of quantum duplicates, which then keep reemerging periodically from the rift throughout history.

'Tales of the Defiant Fleet', coming soon...

 

[Leto_II]

^I don't go with that because a lot DC comics are incompatible with the novels; therefore I consider the DC comics to be a separate fictional offshoot of Star Trek from the modern novelverse. But YMMV.

True, but I was just realizing that, in this one particular case, there's actually something of a mechanism of sorts in place (in-universe) which could allow all of these seemingly-incompatible tales to co-exist (the interphase rift), regarding the different Defiant-appearances and rescues over the years.

If you're a Constitution-class starship enthusiast/collector, all you gotta do is wait a couple of decades, and the tear will spit out another one for you.

 

[Christopher]

^I don't go with that because a lot DC comics are incompatible with the novels; therefore I consider the DC comics to be a separate fictional offshoot of Star Trek from the modern novelverse. But YMMV.

I find that many of the DC comics are compatible with the novels. For instance, most of DC's TOS Vol. 2 is compatible, and is practically the only thing that covers the adventures of the Enterprise-A after TFF in any depth, so I count it, aside from a few stories here and there that don't fit (for instance, the "Timecrime" multiparter late in the run, which portrays ridged and smooth-headed Klingons coexisting centuries in the past, and whose temporal mechanics are kind of tough to reconcile).

So I prefer to approach it on a case-by-case basis rather than excluding whole series. After all, a lot of the comics don't have that much continuity with each other. Something like DC's first TOS volume or Marvel's Starfleet Academy has to be treated as a single piece because of its tight continuity, but a lot of the other Trek comics series, especially in the '90s, are pretty episodic. And then you've got something like the IDW comics, which are in several separate, sometimes conflicting continuities (including the novelverse in a few cases) and can't be treated as a whole.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I haven't read any recent (meaning events leading up to 2386) Trek lit since Indistinguishable From Magic. Have recent books mentioned that the Hobus star is flaring up and might supernova? IIRC from nuTrek, the Vulcans tried to get Hobus from supernova'ing and failed, and that's what set Nero off. But what I don't know is how long in advance of the supernova that they began trying to stave it off, and I don't know if the novelverse is to that point yet, or if anyone has addressed concerns about the Hobus star in the novelverse.

And of course, "Hobus" is from Countdown, not the movie itself. Since it's already been established that the novels do not have to be compatible with the comics, there's nothing that says the supernova in the novelverse needs to be Hobus at all.

 

[tomswift2002]

and the arguments against it not being destroyed in 2387 were all along the lines of "maybe Nero/Spock's timeline is an alternate timeline" or "maybe they were just wrong about it and something happened after they left 2387".

I was just watching the scene (at 1h 7 minutes into the movie). Nero says that he saw Romulus destroyed because he was out in space at the time, and it was only after that that he went after Spock. The whole argument was about whether Romulus was destroyed, and if the movie clearly established that Romulus was destroyed, when the movie did clearly establish that Romulus was destroyed.

 

[Greg Cox]

There's no ambiguity. Romulus has gone the way of Krypton . . . .

 

[JoeZhang]

Reviewing the script, actually very little is said onscreen beyond:

* The supernova happens
* Romulus is destroyed

It's not even clear how much farther the devastation goes given that Spock does create the black hole he intended to (although too late for Romulus).

 

[Relayer1]

There's no ambiguity. Romulus has gone the way of Krypton . . . .

Treklit obviously has to follow on screen canon, but accepting that Romulus must be destroyed, (and I'll avoid potential story ideas as well as I can manage), could the novels then come up with a way for things to be changed and for something else to have happened instead ?

It is sic-fi after all...

 

[Idran]

The point is, Relayer, that there's no reason to do that beyond just "I don't like that it happened". There are certainly ways that it could be written without violating on-screen canon, but I also don't think that Treklit authors are in the habit of rules-lawyering around major events in order to hold to the letter of those events while violating the spirit of them. Trip's death is the only time I can think of that happening, and that's only because I'm pretty sure Berman is the only person in Trek fandom that liked TATV. And even he might have turned by this point.

Basically, it's not "is there a plot that could do it" that's the issue, because of course there is; you could come up with a plot device for literally anything you wanted to. It's "is there a satisfying narrative that could do it without feeling like a massive cheat".

 

[20fridge]

The point is, Relayer, that there's no reason to do that beyond just "I don't like that it happened". There are certainly ways that it could be written without violating on-screen canon, but I also don't think that Treklit authors are in the habit of rules-lawyering around major events in order to hold to the letter of those events while violating the spirit of them. Trip's death is the only time I can think of that happening, and that's only because I'm pretty sure Berman is the only person in Trek fandom that liked TATV. And even he might have turned by this point.

Call me crazy but I actually like TATV. That said, I like TGTMD and what came after it better.

 

[The Wormhole]

The point is, Relayer, that there's no reason to do that beyond just "I don't like that it happened". There are certainly ways that it could be written without violating on-screen canon, but I also don't think that Treklit authors are in the habit of rules-lawyering around major events in order to hold to the letter of those events while violating the spirit of them. Trip's death is the only time I can think of that happening, and that's only because I'm pretty sure Berman is the only person in Trek fandom that liked TATV. And even he might have turned by this point.

Basically, it's not "is there a plot that could do it" that's the issue, because of course there is; you could come up with a plot device for literally anything you wanted to. It's "is there a satisfying narrative that could do it without feeling like a massive cheat".

Yeah, Pocket got away with re-writing TATV because it's the most hated episode in all Trek and no one is going to defend it, and the story itself in the episode is presented as a holodeck program thereby creating openings for authors to say the program is inaccurate and go on to tell the "real" story.

Trek XI meanwhile was a popular movie which brought in millions at the box office. You won't find the same enthusiasm to re-write that. And, within the story, the destruction of Romulus is a bit harder to say "no, didn't really happen that way" given we actually see Spock's memories of it in the movie.

 

[Relayer1]

Oh, I get that. There may not be a good reason to save Romulus (although it'll have an effect on future Typhoon Pact stories), it was more of a 'could they' than a 'should they'.

 

[Idran]

Oh, I get that. There may not be a good reason to save Romulus (although it'll have an effect on future Typhoon Pact stories), it was more of a 'could they' than a 'should they'.

Keep in mind: so long as the Q Continuum exists, the answer to literally any "could they X" question is "yes".

It would be an awful story, but Pocket Books could publish literally anything happening if a Q did it. (Well, anything legal; they couldn't have Q make everyone start singing the full lyrics to every song on the White Album or something. )

 

[The Wormhole]

I'm not sure how it could be saved, we see Spock's memory of the destruction of Romulus. That's pretty hard to interpret any other way.

But even if Romulus were somehow saved, it's basically undoing Nero's whole character arc in Trek XI. Remember, Nero wasn't always an evil guy, he was just an honest hardworking average Joe until the destruction of his home and death of his family drove him into a murderous rage thereby resulting in him destroying key Federation worlds. What an embarrassment it would be to find out Romulus was saved and he was killing billions of people for nothing.

Hmm, that could make for a good scene.

Nero: "IT HAPPENED! I SAW IT HAPPEN! I KNOW IT HAPPENED! DON'T TELL ME IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!"
TARDIS noise is heard as TARDIS appears behind Nero. Matt Smith Doctor walks out.
Doctor: "Hello, Nero, I have news. It turns out you are wrong, the destruction of Romulus didn't in fact happen. Myself and my other incarnations flew around Romulus just before the supernova hit and shifted the planet into a pocket universe. It's safe, your people and family are all okay."
Tom Baker Curator steps out of TARDIS.
Curator: "Romulus falls No More!"
Doctor: "Exactly. So, all of this, destroying Vulcan, killing its population and the crews of those Starfleet rescue ships, torturing that poor fella there, is kind of all for nothing."
Nero stares at the Doctor, wide eyed and full of confused regret. Nero then turns to Captain Pike, strapped to the table with a Ceti eel wriggling around his ear.
Nero: "...Sorry...?"