Spoilers DSC: Desperate Hours by David Mack Review Thread

[Christopher]

I seem to recall that at some point, on some thread on TrekBBS, somebody speculated that the phase pistols and cannons of ENT were first-generation nadion technology, and that nadion-based and laser-based weapons "leapfrogged" each other for a time, before nadion technology won out, with The Cage happening during a period during which lasers were dominant.

I don't care for that explanation. The reason Roddenberry abandoned "laser" for "phaser" was because he realized it had been a mistake to use it in the first place, that actual lasers didn't work anything like what was shown, so it was a misnomer. If he himself had made more stories in the "Cage" era or before, I have no doubt that he would've changed "laser" to "phaser." Just like other things such as dilithium and the Federation have been retconned to exist earlier than they were introduced on the show. The word "laser" was only used two times in "The Cage" anyway, so it's easy enough to disregard.

Referring to something else I mentioned in passing, in my previous post: I think we all know the real-world explanation for the TOS-era female-only "skant" (yes, I know it's a TNG term) uniform from TOS is that the powers that be decided the women should wear miniskirts, but (at the risk of a small breach of the "story idea" taboo) has anybody published an in-universe explanation for it?

I think it was Grace Lee Whitney who wanted the miniskirt uniform. We see it as sexist today, but women at the time saw it as a liberating fashion statement.

And I believe the techical term for that dress design was mini-culottes -- basically a briefs cut with flaps to suggest a skirt.

 

[Stevil2001]

The expanded universe has definitely gone with skirts-vs.-pants as a choice: novels have given us TOS-era women in pants, while I remember Nurse Carlotti in Early Voyages wearing a miniskirt (complete with fishnet stockings*) even though we didn't see one on-screen on Pike's ship.

* One issue featured a letter from a teenage boy in praise of the fishnets as I recall!

 

[JD]

Referring to something else I mentioned in passing, in my previous post: I think we all know the real-world explanation for the TOS-era female-only "skant" (yes, I know it's a TNG term) uniform from TOS is that the powers that be decided the women should wear miniskirts, but (at the risk of a small breach of the "story idea" taboo) has anybody published an in-universe explanation for it?

Why does it need an explanation? I don't think we've ever gotten that kind of an explanation for why any of the other uniforms have looked the way they have, so I don't see why the miniskirts would need one.

 

[Ensign_Rowan_McGrath]

Anything on Keyla Detmer? What she doing, who she interact with?

 

[Charles Phipps]

Why does it need an explanation? I don't think we've ever gotten that kind of an explanation for why any of the other uniforms have looked the way they have, so I don't see why the miniskirts would need one.

We were the fandom which created ridiculous nitpicking and explanations for everything.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

And I believe the techical term for that dress design was mini-culottes -- basically a briefs cut with flaps to suggest a skirt.

Uh, no. Culottes are a "divided skirt," short pants cut very full, to look like a skirt. On at least one occasion during the run of Get Smart, Barbara Feldon (as 99) wore a mini culotte dress (the one I'm thinking of had red and yellow stripes). Shorts with extra flaps to resemble a skirt are a "skort" (at one point, the uniform for Disneyland's "Storybook Land Canal Boats" featured one). According to the patterns given in Franz Joseph Schnaubelt's Starfleet Technical Manual, the panty was matching, but separate (figure skating dresses often have an integral panty).

But this offhand sidebar about women's clothing has taken on a life of its own, and is "wagging the dog" with this thread, so I think I'll shut up about it now.

 

[khaosworks]

Very nicely done - like many others, my favourite parts were the Spock/Michael interaction and the insights into their lives as they were growing up. The impression I'm getting though, however, is although Michael is just 4 years older than Spock, they did not spend time together as kids in the same way foster siblings do. That somehow strikes me as a little odd, and something I'm not sure Amanda would want - surely, she would want the two to have a closer relationship, one being half-human and the other one human but educated as Vulcan? Or am I wrong about this?

 

[Starbreaker]

This was a good book. I was really loving it for a wholesale but it started to slump somewhere along the line. Probably about the time Spock and Burnham were at the Juggernaut.

Why does Captain Pike come across as kind of a dick in this book? His character was completely unlikeable to me for the first time.

 

[Idran]

We were the fandom which created ridiculous nitpicking and explanations for everything.

No, that was the Baker Street Irregulars.

 

[Enterprise1701]

Doing a double-check while I'm compiling my own list of Starfleet vessels in the Discovery franchise. The only "U.S.S." Starfleet ships to appear or be mentioned in this novel are the Shenzhou, Enterprise, Tereshkova, Intrepid, and Persepolis, correct? And the Tereshkova and Persepolis have never been given registry numbers.

 

[Tuvix5675]

This was a good book. I was really loving it for a wholesale but it started to slump somewhere along the line. Probably about the time Spock and Burnham were at the Juggernaut.

Why does Captain Pike come across as kind of a dick in this book? His character was completely unlikeable to me for the first time.

His character was sacrificed to make Georgiou appear as the level headed, humane Captain. I personally like David Mack's Star Trek books, but not this one. Lots of things don't make sense including Captain Pike's behavior, also the Amanda/Burnham relationship as closer than the Spock/Amanda relationship. This book also borrowed from DS9's episode "Run Along Home" and TNG's episode "The Arsenal of Freedom", so parts of the story are derivative.

 

[Tuskin38]

also the Amanda/Burnham relationship as closer than the Spock/Amanda relationship.

Which makes sense and is explained by the book.

 

[Tuvix5675]

Very nicely done - like many others, my favourite parts were the Spock/Michael interaction and the insights into their lives as they were growing up. The impression I'm getting though, however, is although Michael is just 4 years older than Spock, they did not spend time together as kids in the same way foster siblings do. That somehow strikes me as a little odd, and something I'm not sure Amanda would want - surely, she would want the two to have a closer relationship, one being half-human and the other one human but educated as Vulcan? Or am I wrong about this?

I found that odd too. Where the book says that Spock was like a stranger to her. Why would he be if they grew up in the same home, unless the educational system of Vulcan takes over parenting as well once the children reach a certain age.

 

[The Wormhole]

I found that odd too. Where the book says that Spock was like a stranger to her. Why would he be if they grew up in the same home, unless the educational system of Vulcan takes over parenting as well once the children reach a certain age.

There was an age difference between them, plus I get the impression Spock was a bit of a loner child, probably secluding himself in his bedroom reading or something in his free time. The again, Michael was pushing herself to make it through the Vulcan education system that her free time was likely devoted to intense studying.

 

[Enterprise1701]

I can think of many real people and fictional characters who are not close to their siblings.

 

[Reanok]

I finished reading this book a few days ago I thought the story arc with Micheal Burnham and Spock was really intriguing. I also really liked Captain Georgiou's story arc and Saru was dealt with in this book.

 

[thribs]

I liked how this book explained most of the annoying things STD has. Except the holographic “Star Wars” communications. I think they just say that they use a lot of power and that was it.
Bring on more Pike adventures.

 

[Jinn]

I liked how this book explained most of the annoying things STD has. Except the holographic “Star Wars” communications. I think they just say that they use a lot of power and that was it.
Bring on more Pike adventures.

I subscribe to the theory that the holo-communicator's transmissions were more easily hackable, so Starfleet abandoned them.

 

[thribs]

It’s possible. To me that’s the biggest continuity blunder STD has done. i don’t know why they couldn’t have just used a screen.

 

[The Wormhole]

It’s possible. To me that’s the biggest continuity blunder STD has done. i don’t know why they couldn’t have just used a screen.

From a production point of view, it is easier to film these conversations having the actor on set. The way typical "comm screen" conversations are usually filmed, the person on the screen is filmed separately from everyone else, and the two actors conversing never have direct interaction with each other. Indeed, this was said to be a great challenge for William Shatner and Ricardo Montalban filming TWOK as all their interaction is via the view screen, they never get any direct interaction with each other and don't really get to play off each other. Montalban especially found it difficult delivering his lines emoting the way he did, and then having Kirk's lines read to him by a "very disinterested stagehand."

With holographic communicators you get the benefit of not having the two people having conversation cut off from each other, they're on set together and can play off each other to better enhance their performance, which was the main argument which allowed the holographic communicator to be used on DS9 when Sisko was hunting Eddington, Avery Brooks and Kenneth Marshall were able to enhance their performances by playing off each other.

Although Discovery stupidly negates these benefits by having the hologram be shimmery and transparent, meaning a visual effect is used on it and extra money is being spent, so they're not really getting ahead anyway.