Time Heals All Trek...well, Kinda

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

IMHO... No series of Star Trek should be "detested" or hated. Granted there are episodes which can be referred to in that way, but I think each series has appreciable merits. It's hard to see that in the latest, DIS... DSC... or DIY? Always a struggle when in the thick of it. We'll have to give it time.

It's more I detest the humdrum, same-old-same-old way the writers approached VGR. I think I would have been happier if they'd even gone as far as to have a regular stable of recurring characters and if they'd had at least half arc-based storytelling. Voyager had a great premise and its characters had great promise. But more and more as the years went by it became TNG lite. The writers weren't sure what to do with Janeway so she became Picard with hair. They didn't know what to do with Kim so they didn't do anything with him. Seven years in and he's still an ensign and still just as trouble-prone as he was at the start. Paris supposedly grew but he's still the hotshot smug handsome guy who doesn't particularly like to follow orders. Torres was still just "the hothead". The Doctor grew somewhat, but only seemed to get more insufferable.

I wanted so much to like it. And I admit it has some great episodes. It's a part of the Trek mythos and you will never, ever hear me decry it, or any other Trek series or film as "not canon" or "not real Star Trek". It just left me utterly cold, especially after DS9 embraced arc-based storytelling and the sense of building to something, with characters that really did grow and change beyond what they had been.

Look at season seven Sisko, Kira, Odo, Bashir, even Quark. Especially Nog! Are there any that didn't grow and develop?

Now look at season seven Chakotay, Tuvok, Neelix, Kim, Torres. They're the same people they were in season one.

 

[Amaris]

It's more I detest the humdrum, same-old-same-old way the writers approached VGR. I think I would have been happier if they'd even gone as far as to have a regular stable of recurring characters and if they'd had at least half arc-based storytelling. Voyager had a great premise and its characters had great promise. But more and more as the years went by it became TNG lite. The writers weren't sure what to do with Janeway so she became Picard with hair. They didn't know what to do with Kim so they didn't do anything with him. Seven years in and he's still an ensign and still just as trouble-prone as he was at the start. Paris supposedly grew but he's still the hotshot smug handsome guy who doesn't particularly like to follow orders. Torres was still just "the hothead". The Doctor grew somewhat, but only seemed to get more insufferable.

I wanted so much to like it. And I admit it has some great episodes. It's a part of the Trek mythos and you will never, ever hear me decry it, or any other Trek series or film as "not canon" or "not real Star Trek". It just left me utterly cold, especially after DS9 embraced arc-based storytelling and the sense of building to something, with characters that really did grow and change beyond what they had been.

Look at season seven Sisko, Kira, Odo, Bashir, even Quark. Especially Nog! Are there any that didn't grow and develop?

Now look at season seven Chakotay, Tuvok, Neelix, Kim, Torres. They're the same people they were in season one.

I'm just here to comment on how much I love your username, and that I laughed for ten minutes.

Also, Niner for life.

 

[Timewalker]

It's threads like this that really convince me I watch Star Trek for a very different reason than most fans do. I love DS9's four final seasons and detest most of Voyager. Probably for the same reasons Timewalker hates DS9 and loves Voyager.

Let me clarify some things. I detest the Klingon Soap Opera storylines of TNG and DS9. And frankly, the Dominion War bores me to tears.

But I like Miles and Julian, and Rom's romance with Leeta was kinda sweet, once he understood that she wasn't going to behave like a typical Ferengi wife. Quark grew on me as the series progressed, and Garak is quite an enigma, both charming and deadly (and the subtext between Garak and Bashir has inspired many a slashfic). I loved the novel Andrew Robinson wrote about him. And Vic Fontaine was a treat, since I've been a James Darren fan ever since the old Time Tunnel series.

IMHO... No series of Star Trek should be "detested" or hated. Granted there are episodes which can be referred to in that way, but I think each series has appreciable merits. It's hard to see that in the latest, DIS... DSC... or DIY? Always a struggle when in the thick of it. We'll have to give it time.

I did manage to find something I liked about Enterprise. Porthos was cute. As for Discovery... well, the costumes Michael and Georgiou wore in the desert scenes reminded me a bit of the Dune miniseries, so that was okay. I didn't like anything else about it, but oh well. I'm quite aware that there are series I love and other people don't, so to each their own.

It's more I detest the humdrum, same-old-same-old way the writers approached VGR. I think I would have been happier if they'd even gone as far as to have a regular stable of recurring characters and if they'd had at least half arc-based storytelling. Voyager had a great premise and its characters had great promise. But more and more as the years went by it became TNG lite. The writers weren't sure what to do with Janeway so she became Picard with hair. They didn't know what to do with Kim so they didn't do anything with him. Seven years in and he's still an ensign and still just as trouble-prone as he was at the start. Paris supposedly grew but he's still the hotshot smug handsome guy who doesn't particularly like to follow orders. Torres was still just "the hothead". The Doctor grew somewhat, but only seemed to get more insufferable.

I wanted so much to like it. And I admit it has some great episodes. It's a part of the Trek mythos and you will never, ever hear me decry it, or any other Trek series or film as "not canon" or "not real Star Trek". It just left me utterly cold, especially after DS9 embraced arc-based storytelling and the sense of building to something, with characters that really did grow and change beyond what they had been.

Look at season seven Sisko, Kira, Odo, Bashir, even Quark. Especially Nog! Are there any that didn't grow and develop?

Now look at season seven Chakotay, Tuvok, Neelix, Kim, Torres. They're the same people they were in season one.

No, they're not. Neelix decided to give up his roaming, going-nowhere lifestyle and settled down to make a family with the Talaxian woman he met and her son. Tuvok did change, albeit not for the better (developing a neurological disorder leads to change, sometimes a profound change - just ask anyone who has a loved one who develops dementia or Alzheimers). Tom and B'Elanna married and took on the responsibilities of parenthood, and B'Elanna took some steps to reconciling with her father. Seven became more human as the seasons progressed. FFS, even Q grew up a bit.

Kim was a case of one step forward, a step sideways, two steps back, do-si-do, another step forward, major screwup, and back to square one. At least he composed some music and learned some Vulcan disciplines and logic from Tuvok.

I'll grant you Chakotay. If there could be one scene above all that I wish they'd filmed, it would have been Chakotay either doing his "a-koo-chee-moy-a" chant or starting out rambling about "there is a legend among my people" and having the entire cast, including Naomi and the Borg baby, yelling at him, "Chakotay, SHUT THE FUCK UP!"

As for Janeway, she's a lot more like Kirk than she'd ever want to admit. And the difference is that she actually destroyed the ship more times than he did.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

Let me clarify some things. I detest the Klingon Soap Opera storylines of TNG and DS9. And frankly, the Dominion War bores me to tears.

But I like Miles and Julian, and Rom's romance with Leeta was kinda sweet, once he understood that she wasn't going to behave like a typical Ferengi wife. Quark grew on me as the series progressed, and Garak is quite an enigma, both charming and deadly (and the subtext between Garak and Bashir has inspired many a slashfic). I loved the novel Andrew Robinson wrote about him. And Vic Fontaine was a treat, since I've been a James Darren fan ever since the old Time Tunnel series.


I did manage to find something I liked about Enterprise. Porthos was cute. As for Discovery... well, the costumes Michael and Georgiou wore in the desert scenes reminded me a bit of the Dune miniseries, so that was okay. I didn't like anything else about it, but oh well. I'm quite aware that there are series I love and other people don't, so to each their own.


No, they're not. Neelix decided to give up his roaming, going-nowhere lifestyle and settled down to make a family with the Talaxian woman he met and her son. Tuvok did change, albeit not for the better (developing a neurological disorder leads to change, sometimes a profound change - just ask anyone who has a loved one who develops dementia or Alzheimers). Tom and B'Elanna married and took on the responsibilities of parenthood, and B'Elanna took some steps to reconciling with her father. Seven became more human as the seasons progressed. FFS, even Q grew up a bit.

Kim was a case of one step forward, a step sideways, two steps back, do-si-do, another step forward, major screwup, and back to square one. At least he composed some music and learned some Vulcan disciplines and logic from Tuvok.

I'll grant you Chakotay. If there could be one scene above all that I wish they'd filmed, it would have been Chakotay either doing his "a-koo-chee-moy-a" chant or starting out rambling about "there is a legend among my people" and having the entire cast, including Naomi and the Borg baby, yelling at him, "Chakotay, SHUT THE FUCK UP!"

As for Janeway, she's a lot more like Kirk than she'd ever want to admit. And the difference is that she actually destroyed the ship more times than he did.

Suffice it to say there's chunks of this I absolutely agree with (the bit about Kim and Chakotay, and everything positive you had to say about DS9, and yes, Porthos was cute) but most of this makes it clear that you and I watch Star Trek for very different reasons.

I am a story and character man. Make those good, and you've got me. To me, long-form storytelling better serves both, as does the feeling that we're actually going somewhere with this, that there is a conclusion in mind. What's crazy is that Voyager is literally the only Trek series that started off with an end goal in mind and yet, to me, anyway, felt the most aimless. It was like "here's another one-hour plot that will wrap up neatly in 40 minutes, all to kill time until the last episode when we'll finally get home." Why wouldn't the entire last season be a long arc about finding a way home, it nearly not working, finally getting home only to discover that their troubles aren't over, and show us how Starfleet dealt with the mishmash crew, what they're going to do about the Maquis, Seven of Nine and the Doctor? It was just more meandering until finally the last episode finally reveals how they got home.

While I was watching Battlestar Galactica in the years after Trek was over, I kept thinking "This is it. This is what Voyager should have been. If they'd just had the balls to do this kind of storytelling it might have been my favorite Trek ever."

It seems to me that most of the irritation over new Trek series always stems from some weird desire to make sure Gene Roddenberry would posthumously approve (he didn't even approve of much of what was produced when he actually was alive, yet we still accept it) or strange devotion to making sure everything lines up, visually and otherwise, even though it is purely fiction and never has lined up perfectly. I do understand wanting to keep the spirit of Trek, because otherwise what have you got, but I absolutely do not think that translates into "all our heroes must be perfect all the time and there should never be a lasting conflict." I love the idea that it's always darkest just before dawn. Give us a "dark" story as long as there's hope at the end. Give us flawed characters as long as you acknowledge that this isn't how characters are supposed to behave. Don't give me perfect automatons and expect me to be engaged. TNG only got good once the writers were able to get around Roddenberry's little rules and plus they had great actors.

What I absolutely don't want to see is the same old thing with new characters, and simple forty-minute stories that are guaranteed to wrap up at the end of the allotted time. Sure, give us "breather" episodes or give us an episodic A-plot while keeping the B-, C- and D-plots serialized, but I'm beyond tired of the same old formula. I'm not 100% pleased with Discovery so far, but I still say it's had the strongest start of all the spin-offs and I love the long-form story that's showing us the crew forming gradually rather than already together from the pilot onward.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

I also love it when Trek episodes contribute to the larger franchise mythos and there's no doubt Discovery is doing that.

 

[Xhiandra]

"Real PLANET OF THE APES movies feature actors in make-up and costumes, not naked CGI monkeys!"

To be fair, the Planet of the Apes remake and its sequels are not widely considered good movies (for good reason), certainly not on par with Planet of the Apes 1968.
Then again, nor are the 4 sequels to the original, even though they have their moments. Especially "Battle".

 

[Timewalker]

Suffice it to say there's chunks of this I absolutely agree with (the bit about Kim and Chakotay, and everything positive you had to say about DS9, and yes, Porthos was cute) but most of this makes it clear that you and I watch Star Trek for very different reasons.

Yes, obviously. I like an adventure, but if you're going to make it a soap, make it a good one about characters I care about. Worf had a few moments, but overall I didn't like him. TNG wanted to have its cake and eat it too, with the Klingons being sometimes-friends, sometimes-enemies, and Worf sometimes being an utter barbarian and other times all he needed was a teddy bear to make the nausea complete.

I am a story and character man. Make those good, and you've got me. To me, long-form storytelling better serves both, as does the feeling that we're actually going somewhere with this, that there is a conclusion in mind. What's crazy is that Voyager is literally the only Trek series that started off with an end goal in mind and yet, to me, anyway, felt the most aimless. It was like "here's another one-hour plot that will wrap up neatly in 40 minutes, all to kill time until the last episode when we'll finally get home." Why wouldn't the entire last season be a long arc about finding a way home, it nearly not working, finally getting home only to discover that their troubles aren't over, and show us how Starfleet dealt with the mishmash crew, what they're going to do about the Maquis, Seven of Nine and the Doctor? It was just more meandering until finally the last episode finally reveals how they got home.

I don't disagree that Voyager mishandled their long-term story planning. That's why I read so much Voyager fanfic, since there are a lot of fan authors who have either rewritten the series from the beginning, some place along the way, or they simply took up the plot post-Endgame (with a lot better stories than some of the pro novels, in some cases).

Right now I'm following a story in which Mezoti didn't leave the ship and was formally adopted by Seven. When they get to Earth, Seven and Naomi eventually move in with Chakotay, and the three of them learn how to balance work, school, being outcasts (one ex-Maquis and two ex-Borg), and learning what being a family is about. Of course there are various subplots, but the major focus is three very different people learning how to cope with the same kinds of relationships and basic situations that people have been dealing with for millennia.

And then there's another story series in which Tom and Harry remain with Starfleet, working their way up the ranks (seems Harry fares better having Riker for his captain than he did Janeway), and Tom eventually gets his own ship. This series is more adventure than family relationship, and delves more into Tom Paris' background and explores what might actually have happened in the so-called cushy prison in Auckland.

While I was watching Battlestar Galactica in the years after Trek was over, I kept thinking "This is it. This is what Voyager should have been. If they'd just had the balls to do this kind of storytelling it might have been my favorite Trek ever."

I assume you mean nuBSG? I couldn't even make it through the first two hours.

It seems to me that most of the irritation over new Trek series always stems from some weird desire to make sure Gene Roddenberry would posthumously approve (he didn't even approve of much of what was produced when he actually was alive, yet we still accept it) or strange devotion to making sure everything lines up, visually and otherwise, even though it is purely fiction and never has lined up perfectly. I do understand wanting to keep the spirit of Trek, because otherwise what have you got, but I absolutely do not think that translates into "all our heroes must be perfect all the time and there should never be a lasting conflict." I love the idea that it's always darkest just before dawn. Give us a "dark" story as long as there's hope at the end. Give us flawed characters as long as you acknowledge that this isn't how characters are supposed to behave. Don't give me perfect automatons and expect me to be engaged. TNG only got good once the writers were able to get around Roddenberry's little rules and plus they had great actors.

Don't mistake me for a "Gene's Vision" purist or someone who thinks Star Trek began in 1987. I got hooked back in 1975, and am one of the people who can recite whole scenes from "The Trouble With Tribbles" from memory (admittedly I'm not very good with the accents, though).

My version of Star Trek says that Starfleet is definitely military-oriented, the Federation does so use money (except in Picard's personal little bubble of perception), and the idea that 24th-century people are some sort of "evolved" beings is ridiculous. Take away the transporters and replicators and other high-tech gadgetry and then you'll find out how "evolved" people are. It's easy to claim superiority when you don't actually have to struggle for anything.

What I absolutely don't want to see is the same old thing with new characters, and simple forty-minute stories that are guaranteed to wrap up at the end of the allotted time. Sure, give us "breather" episodes or give us an episodic A-plot while keeping the B-, C- and D-plots serialized, but I'm beyond tired of the same old formula. I'm not 100% pleased with Discovery so far, but I still say it's had the strongest start of all the spin-offs and I love the long-form story that's showing us the crew forming gradually rather than already together from the pilot onward.

Meh. I don't get the channel it's on here in Canada, and have no intention of subscribing. I might later, just for a month to see if the newest Doctor is worth watching, but I walked away from Doctor Who prior to the last season and haven't missed it a bit.

If I do subscribe and if Discovery is on, I might try it out (providing it doesn't clash with something else I'm watching). But both shows would have to do a spectacular job of impressing me to be worth $9.50/month.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

Yes, obviously. I like an adventure, but if you're going to make it a soap, make it a good one about characters I care about. Worf had a few moments, but overall I didn't like him. TNG wanted to have its cake and eat it too, with the Klingons being sometimes-friends, sometimes-enemies, and Worf sometimes being an utter barbarian and other times all he needed was a teddy bear to make the nausea complete.

Yeah, see, Worf was one of my all-time favorite characters. Also I think you oversimplified the Klingons a bit. It wasn't that they were sometimes friends and sometimes enemies. It was that there was a treaty but not all Klingons were happy with it and few of them trusted the Federation. Worf, as I recall, was never portrayed as an utter barbarian at any point, with the possible exception of the first season of TNG where no one was written very well.

I don't disagree that Voyager mishandled their long-term story planning. That's why I read so much Voyager fanfic

And why I enjoy the novelverse.

I assume you mean nuBSG? I couldn't even make it through the first two hours.

I do. I know it's not for all tastes but to me, in terms of pure writing and characterization, it is the best spaceship-based space opera of our time. I won't say Star Trek should try to be like it, because they're apples and oranges, but I do appreciate that DSC has made use of shorter seasons (less filler) and long form story.

My version of Star Trek says that Starfleet is definitely military-oriented, the Federation does so use money (except in Picard's personal little bubble of perception), and the idea that 24th-century people are some sort of "evolved" beings is ridiculous. Take away the transporters and replicators and other high-tech gadgetry and then you'll find out how "evolved" people are. It's easy to claim superiority when you don't actually have to struggle for anything.

Based on that, you should adore DS9 and probably DSC. You almost quoted Sisko right there. The whole point of DS9 was "let's see how noble Starfleet officers are when you remove most of their creature comforts".

Meh. I don't get the channel it's on here in Canada, and have no intention of subscribing. I might later, just for a month to see if the newest Doctor is worth watching, but I walked away from Doctor Who prior to the last season and haven't missed it a bit.

If I do subscribe and if Discovery is on, I might try it out (providing it doesn't clash with something else I'm watching). But both shows would have to do a spectacular job of impressing me to be worth $9.50/month.

I'm in Canada, too, and I am a cable-cutter. I subscribed to CraveTV, which has a ton of HBO and Showtime programs on it, as well as a large number of older programs from the 80's and 90's (and earlier, I think), as well as every Trek series of the past (which doesn't really mean much to me because I also subscribe to NetFlix, which also has them) and DSC, as well as current sci-fi like The Expanse and all shows from the Arrow-verse which I'm watching with my son (he loves superheroes, and I'm also a fan). I weighed my options and figured spending 18-20 bucks a month for all these different shows and movies (between NetFlix and Crave) vs. adding over 80 bucks to my cable bill to resubscribe and get a bunch of channels I didn't want just to watch DSC, well, that's not even a choice.

I suggest subscribing to Crave, even if it's primarily for the other content you get (you can browse and search the content even before signing up), and you get a month free, so you can binge the current 6 episodes at absolutely no cost to yourself and then decide if Crave is worth paying for. If it's not, you can simply cancel your trial and you literally spent no extra money.

 

[Greg Cox]

Based on that, you should adore DS9 and probably DSC. You almost quoted Sisko right there. The whole point of DS9 was "let's see how noble Starfleet officers are when you remove most of their creature comforts".
.

"It's easy to be a saint in Paradise."--Ben Sisko

I've always kinda seen that as DS9's mission statement. And, yes, DISCO seems have a certain degree of DS9 in its DNA . . ..

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

"It's easy be a saint in Paradise."--Ben Sisko

I've always kinda seen that as DS9's mission statement. And, yes, DISCO seems have a certain degree of DS9 in its DNA . . ..

I gotta say, I like the novelverse almost better, at times, than I do the series. I do hope there are plans to keep it going (the fact that we have no information about new novels for planned release in 2018 beyond the initial three is worrying) and I'd love to see at least elements of it (the Typhon Pact, The Fall and all that) canonized at some point. I know it probably won't happen, but I like to think of these books as canon for as long as possible.

It's probably my reading the novels that has helped me avoid this entire attitude I see from some fans that "X isn't real Star Trek" because this or that doesn't work or doesn't fit or "how can you explain" such and such. The novels often work as "fix fic" and helps a great deal of it to fit, and it's especially nice in the last decade that the novels are all fitting together (I have to ask, are there any novels from the past decade (aside from the Shatnerverse) that are explicitly not a part of the novelverse?).

It doesn't seem to me that any of the the modern novelists reject elements of Trek and deny that this or that should be acknowledged. All the series have been included in the novelverse at this point, and while quite a bit of it is attempts to make it better (and succeeding), at no point does it ever say "this part of the franchise didn't happen".

 

[Timewalker]

And why I enjoy the novelverse.

I'm not saying I don't like novels. I just don't care for the post-Endgame Voyager novels.

I've got a humongous collection of Star Trek novels, dating back to the Blish adaptations and even have the Mack Reynolds juvenile that was published in hard cover. But some years ago I had to make some tough decisions because I couldn't afford them all and was running out of space to put them (no suggestions about Kindle, please; I prefer physical books). Nowadays a Star Trek novel has to be either a replacement for an old one that got lost or damaged, completing an old subseries, or written by Greg Cox to make it onto my bookshelf. I gave the post-Endgame Voyager novels an honest try, and ultimately found them less and less appealing.

I do. I know it's not for all tastes but to me, in terms of pure writing and characterization, it is the best spaceship-based space opera of our time. I won't say Star Trek should try to be like it, because they're apples and oranges, but I do appreciate that DSC has made use of shorter seasons (less filler) and long form story.

Maybe it makes a difference that I was a huge fan of the original BSG series (yes, I recognize how badly dated it is now, and I'm no longer very patient with the "ancient alien gods" stuff as I was 40 years ago). But it's still a fun series, and some day I'll do something with that silly BSG/Bonanza crossover fanfic that's been running around in my head (since Lorne Greene was in both series).

Based on that, you should adore DS9 and probably DSC. You almost quoted Sisko right there. The whole point of DS9 was "let's see how noble Starfleet officers are when you remove most of their creature comforts".

True, Sisko did say something like that. I was actually thinking more about 23rd century Trek, and first-season TNG when I composed that post, though.

Saying that Starfleet really is military doesn't equate to liking military-based stories. A person can understand and acknowledge something without necessarily preferring it.

I'm in Canada, too, and I am a cable-cutter. I subscribed to CraveTV, which has a ton of HBO and Showtime programs on it, as well as a large number of older programs from the 80's and 90's (and earlier, I think), as well as every Trek series of the past (which doesn't really mean much to me because I also subscribe to NetFlix, which also has them) and DSC, as well as current sci-fi like The Expanse and all shows from the Arrow-verse which I'm watching with my son (he loves superheroes, and I'm also a fan). I weighed my options and figured spending 18-20 bucks a month for all these different shows and movies (between NetFlix and Crave) vs. adding over 80 bucks to my cable bill to resubscribe and get a bunch of channels I didn't want just to watch DSC, well, that's not even a choice.

I suggest subscribing to Crave, even if it's primarily for the other content you get (you can browse and search the content even before signing up), and you get a month free, so you can binge the current 6 episodes at absolutely no cost to yourself and then decide if Crave is worth paying for. If it's not, you can simply cancel your trial and you literally spent no extra money.

Which region of Canada? I'm in Alberta, and get my cable through TELUS. They were pushing Crave awhile back, but since I don't watch much TV, I didn't bother. Of course the online services are dependent on the user having a good computer and right now I'm limited to an XP that can barely play short YouTube videos.

It's probably my reading the novels that has helped me avoid this entire attitude I see from some fans that "X isn't real Star Trek" because this or that doesn't work or doesn't fit or "how can you explain" such and such. The novels often work as "fix fic" and helps a great deal of it to fit, and it's especially nice in the last decade that the novels are all fitting together (I have to ask, are there any novels from the past decade (aside from the Shatnerverse) that are explicitly not a part of the novelverse?).

But if you haven't read such-and-such a novel there's an information gap. It's like trying to figure out the Matt Smith era of Doctor Who. It's a mess. A series, whether on TV or in novel form, should NOT require a flow chart to understand it!

That said, there are some novels that are in my own personal continuity. I much prefer Diane Duane's Romulans over the TNG-and-later ones. Ditto the Reeves-Stevens' novel Federation.

 

[Greg Cox]

It doesn't seem to me that any of the the modern novelists reject elements of Trek and deny that this or that should be acknowledged. All the series have been included in the novelverse at this point, and while quite a bit of it is attempts to make it better (and succeeding), at no point does it ever say "this part of the franchise didn't happen".

True story: When my Q trilogy was reprinted several years ago, I took advantage of the opportunity to change a couple of references to "the original Enterprise" to "Kirk's Enterprise" since ENTERPRISE (the tv series) had come along since I first wrote those books and Archer was now part of the canon . ...

Probably too late to add Burnham to my Spock novel, though.

 

[Ensign Ogahd Ahmganadai]

I'm not saying I don't like novels. I just don't care for the post-Endgame Voyager novels.

I've got a humongous collection of Star Trek novels, dating back to the Blish adaptations and even have the Mack Reynolds juvenile that was published in hard cover. But some years ago I had to make some tough decisions because I couldn't afford them all and was running out of space to put them (no suggestions about Kindle, please; I prefer physical books). Nowadays a Star Trek novel has to be either a replacement for an old one that got lost or damaged, completing an old subseries, or written by Greg Cox to make it onto my bookshelf. I gave the post-Endgame Voyager novels an honest try, and ultimately found them less and less appealing.

I wasn't trying to say you don't like the novels. I just like that characters the VGR writers refused to make interesting got a second life in the novels.

Which region of Canada? I'm in Alberta, and get my cable through TELUS. They were pushing Crave awhile back, but since I don't watch much TV, I didn't bother. Of course the online services are dependent on the user having a good computer and right now I'm limited to an XP that can barely play short YouTube videos.

Alberta as well, with Shaw. But if your computer is not able to process streaming very well, I suppose it's a moot point. I didn't think there was much special about my computer, but it's exclusively how I watch TV now.

But if you haven't read such-and-such a novel there's an information gap. It's like trying to figure out the Matt Smith era of Doctor Who. It's a mess. A series, whether on TV or in novel form, should NOT require a flow chart to understand it!

Oh, I agree. That's on the VGR and ENT writers (which is really where the writing began to utterly break down, though there were signs of it on later TNG and early DS9 before Ira Behr was allowed to run the whole show himself). The chief thing that bothers me is when people say "X isn't Star Trek" because of this nitpicky reason or because they think this series or that one is of lower quality. I just say "if the official stance of the owners of the IP call it Star Trek, it's Star Trek, and my personal opinion of it doesn't matter." But I do like it when the novels try to explain things better.

That said, there are some novels that are in my own personal continuity. I much prefer Diane Duane's Romulans over the TNG-and-later ones. Ditto the Reeves-Stevens' novel Federation.

That's the danger when one tries to include the novels in their personal head-canon. It's also why there was a good decade plus gap that I quit reading them. I was tired of the series ignoring them and over-writing them with stuff I thought of as lower in quality. For that matter, I was tired of the novels contradicting each other. One would say Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet. Another would have a Vulcan Admiral show up who was one of Spock's instructors at the Academy, or something.

It wasn't until I realized the novelverse was a thing that I got back into reading them. This is actually somewhat recent. I read my first novelverse book in 2008, but I eventually stopped again because I was of the mind that eventually all this will be obliterated by whatever TV series or movie comes next. I decided the novels were little more than "licensed fanfic", but I think what changed my mind was realizing that the novelverse was as close as we were ever going to get to anything like a post-Nemesis follow-up, for any of it. The TNG movies were over (and on a sour note), we would never see Riker's Titan years, or a film for DS9 or VGR, and definitely not ENT, so what to do? Read the novels.

 

[F. King Daniel]

^Even if they are eventually all "obliterated" (err, again) does it retroactively take away the enjoyment you got from reading them at the time?

 

[Mattadd]

I am a story and character man. Make those good, and you've got me. To me, long-form storytelling better serves both, as does the feeling that we're actually going somewhere with this, that there is a conclusion in mind. What's crazy is that Voyager is literally the only Trek series that started off with an end goal in mind and yet, to me, anyway, felt the most aimless. It was like "here's another one-hour plot that will wrap up neatly in 40 minutes, all to kill time until the last episode when we'll finally get home." Why wouldn't the entire last season be a long arc about finding a way home, it nearly not working, finally getting home only to discover that their troubles aren't over, and show us how Starfleet dealt with the mishmash crew, what they're going to do about the Maquis, Seven of Nine and the Doctor? It was just more meandering until finally the last episode finally reveals how they got home.

That would have been an awesome series. I would have loved to see them get home sometime in the middle of the series (and avoided all that garbage borg bullshit). Maybe toward the end of the Dominion War. I'd love to see Janeway get home and realize all those high-minded Starfleet ideals she's been sticking to in the DQ have already been abandoned by the real Starfleet.

But in response to your original post, as much as I dislike Voyager, I hate Discovery. I don't begrudge other Star Trek fans that like it, but it's not for me, I stopped watching after episode 5.

 

[Mattadd]

Which region of Canada? I'm in Alberta, and get my cable through TELUS. They were pushing Crave awhile back, but since I don't watch much TV, I didn't bother. Of course the online services are dependent on the user having a good computer and right now I'm limited to an XP that can barely play short YouTube videos.

Get CraveTV, seriously. You don't need a computer, you can watch it right on your TV, one of Telus' channels is dedicated to CraveTV so you can just turn it on there, you don't need a smart TV or anything. They do have Discovery, but since Discovery is awful I'm not recommending it for that, it just has a ton of great shows. I've been subscribed to them pretty much ever since it came out.

 

[Greg Cox]

^Even if they are eventually all "obliterated" (err, again) does it retroactively take away the enjoyment you got from reading them at the time?

Yeah, I've never really understood that reasoning, which you see in comic-book fandom, too. Even if an old story gets "erased" from the current continuity, how does that "ruin" or "spoil" the experience you had reading it before. Heck, does a good story suddenly become less enjoyable just because it's not "officially" part of the continuity anymore?

 

[1001001]

Yeah, I've never really understood that reasoning, which you see in comic-book fandom, too. Even if an old story gets "erased" from the current continuity, how does that "ruin" or "spoil" the experience you had reading it before. Heck, does a good story suddenly become less enjoyable just because it's not "officially" part of the continuity anymore?

I feel the same way about "Reset Button" complaints.

It doesn't matter to me whether the crew remembers the Year of Hell or not.

I remember it.

 

[BillJ]

Yeah, I've never really understood that reasoning, which you see in comic-book fandom, too. Even if an old story gets "erased" from the current continuity, how does that "ruin" or "spoil" the experience you had reading it before. Heck, does a good story suddenly become less enjoyable just because it's not "officially" part of the continuity anymore?

I'm still waiting for JJ Abrams to break into my house in the middle of the night to steal my TOS Blu-ray's.

 

[BillJ]

For that matter, I was tired of the novels contradicting each other.

One of the things I used to love about the novels were that they were able to do their own thing, even contradicting canon while telling a story.

One would say Spock was the first Vulcan in Starfleet. Another would have a Vulcan Admiral show up who was one of Spock's instructors at the Academy, or something.

Not sure what the big deal is? But, the Intrepid would seem to point to Spock not being the first Vulcan in Starfleet. At best, he was the first Vulcan-Human hybrid.