He would probably be about 19-20, since he was 22 in “Who Mourns For Adonais?”
It’s been 10 years since I read the book. But, still it comes down to was Chekov on the Enterprise prior to “Space Seed”?
Reading the litverse chronologically
- Thread starter n3aak
- Start date
It’s been 10 years since I read the book. But, still it comes down to was Chekov on the Enterprise prior to “Space Seed”?
By current chronological assumptions, yes, but McIntyre was using the chronology implied by The Making of Star Trek, which said that Kirk was 34 (as of the book's writing in the second season) and had commanded the Enterprise for over four years. Note that E:TFA explicitly said that Kirk was 29 going on 30, which makes it 4-5 years before season 2. Hence, Chekov is 17-18.
I believe E:TFA said he was there temporarily. After all, he still had years more of Academy training to complete. As for why he was there at all, remember that this was the 20th-anniversary novel, an event that would probably attract a lot of casual readers, who'd probably want to see the main TOS cast they were familiar with rather than less well-known characters like Mitchell, Kelso, and Alden.
I actually plan on re-reading some of my older Pocketbook novels from the 80s at some point (I'm working on finishing up my Bantam collection first). I was sort of inspired by another thread by Desert Kris about reading older novels. But yes, I agree, trying to make a firm timeline of original series novels is probably an exercise in futility. First of all there is far more stories then can possibly fit in the 5 year mission timeframe. And there are contradictory stories galore, esp. in the early years where they were far less likely to try to maintain any sort of continuity (though there were individual continuities like the Rihannsu novels). I thought Desert Kris had a pretty good way of trying to read some of those early novels, looking at those individual continuities and reading those books together as sort of a unit, such as Diane Duane's novels.
The spinoffs are much easier to read in a chronological timeframe. And even the original series novels over the last, say 15 to 20 years you probably could do the same.
TFA will actually probably be the first re-read I do when I'm done my Bantam reading. Might as well start from the beginning (well, at least from Captain Kirk's perspective). At the time I was pretty critical of the novel for not being a nice fit with being a pre-WNMHGB story, and I was a newbie fan at the time. I get the whole casual fan thing but at the time, thinking I was reading a pre-WNMHGB it really pulled me out of the story to not see characters where I thought they'd be (and even being there when they weren't supposed to be).
But all that being said I'll be curious to read it now in light of all the Star Trek history that has been filled in since then, including the Abramsverse movies and Enterprise. I don't expect it to fit in nicely with the current continuity or anything like that, but I'm interested to see what elements might still fit in regardless and if my views on it have changed.
The spinoffs are much easier to read in a chronological timeframe. And even the original series novels over the last, say 15 to 20 years you probably could do the same.
TFA will actually probably be the first re-read I do when I'm done my Bantam reading. Might as well start from the beginning (well, at least from Captain Kirk's perspective). At the time I was pretty critical of the novel for not being a nice fit with being a pre-WNMHGB story, and I was a newbie fan at the time. I get the whole casual fan thing but at the time, thinking I was reading a pre-WNMHGB it really pulled me out of the story to not see characters where I thought they'd be (and even being there when they weren't supposed to be).
But all that being said I'll be curious to read it now in light of all the Star Trek history that has been filled in since then, including the Abramsverse movies and Enterprise. I don't expect it to fit in nicely with the current continuity or anything like that, but I'm interested to see what elements might still fit in regardless and if my views on it have changed.
So far I was able to make a very definitive timeline for both 2267 and 2268 with a surprisingly small number of outright problems, even though I used stardate order as a basis for my timeline. (I did however not include the stories that I deemed part of the "80s Verse". Surprisingly that also included some recent Greg Cox novels
) There are some minor reference problems, like the previousloy mentioned Double, Double, but overall evereything works. The biggest problems appeared in 2268, with "The Paradise Syndrome", The Klingon Gambit and Mutiny on the Enterprise taking up like half a year if you combine them. I tried to honor all of those which led to a very... Busy September for the Enterprise, but I was rather surprised that the timeline wasn't completely full. 2267 did in fact work out beautifully and every story I placed in it fit perfectly. Also, for some reasons the actual stories in 2268 are worse than the ones on 2267. Except Vanguard.
So far I was able to make a very definitive timeline for both 2267 and 2268 with a surprisingly small number of outright problems, even though I used stardate order as a basis for my timeline. (I did however not include the stories that I deemed part of the "80s Verse". Surprisingly that also included some recent Greg Cox novels
I just found when it came to the original series there were far too many stories that could possibly ever fit in a single timeline, and some stories contradicted other stories. I found it easier when it comes to the original series during the 5 year mission to treat them as individual stories (maybe combining stories linked together by the same author). The movie era probably could work pretty well since there are less stories that take place during that timeframe and more space to work with.
But that's just my take on it. As I re-read some of the older novels I might feel differently, we'll see.
Sure, that works too, especially since the vast majority of all TOS stories is very unconnected to the others. I think a good middle ground is what @ryan123450 is doing, where he lists all conencted stories on his website. I just wanted to point out that the overpopulation of stories in the 5YM is a slight overexeggeration. A slight one. (Unless you take comics into account, but I don't do that
)
I just wanted to point out that the overpopulation of stories in the 5YM is a slight overexeggeration. A slight one. (Unless you take comics into account, but I don't do that
The thing that needs to be taken account is the time between stories. Realistically, they wouldn't just be jumping nonstop from adventure to adventure. For one thing, it's a big galaxy, so there should be typically from one to several weeks of travel time between assignments, depending on how far they have to go. For another thing, it stands to reason that not every mission would involve life-threatening problems; there should be a fair number of routine, uneventful missions happening in between the ones exciting enough to dramatize. Then there's repair time, leave time, and so forth. Really, even having 24-28 episodes' worth of adventures in a single year is pushing it. Cramming in a few dozen more novels as well, so that the missions are almost back-to-back with no downtime or routine missions in between, makes it even more unlikely.
Such a readthrough (including tv episodes) was attempted: https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/the-great-chronological-run-through.250627/
I did take into account some of the time between stories; everytime a novel ends with "Now we finally have our two weeks of vacation on starbase 7" or "It would take a month for the Enterprise to return to the next starbase and anothertwo weeks for it to get repaired". Of course there are tons of stories that don't have such endings (or a similar beginning like "The Enterprise was on boring patrol for two weeks") and while it is extremely unrealistic that they go from one adventure to another in a span of days I just sort of accepted that. It does (mostly) work if one takes into account all information given in the novels and episodes, but it is unrealistic.
For example April 7-18, 2267 in my timeline include The Centre Cannot Hold, "Amok Time", Gemini, "This Side of Paradise". While I don't have specific day counts for The Centre Cannot Hold, "Amok Time and "This Side of Paradise" I noted Gemini taking place over a few days. Over the 12 days this time period harbours we have an average of four days per story. This technically works with the chronological information given in the stories, but ir does require some degree of suspension of disbelief because the Enterprise has to fly to like four planets that should realistically probably not in the same sector and of course there are the routine missions that never happen. Conversely December is much more relaxed; "I, Mudd" starts after the 13th of December and ends before the 18th and "Obsession" starts after the 22nd and ends before the 28th.
I had fun figuring it out, though, so it was worth it
I think it's been pretty well established that there are far, far more stories then can possibly fit into a 5 year mission, even if you just count the episodes of the TV series, animated series and novels...and nothing else. And some novels have taken place over more than just a week or two, some have taken place over a few months.
Now, that doesn't make the novels any less enjoyable. I certainly have enjoyed the various novels over the years, even though I realize there's too much for just a 5 year mission. The main thing I think it does is make it extraordinarily difficult to put together a realistic timeline that ALL the episodes and novels can take place in that doesn't put the Enterprise and/or the crew in 2 places (or even 3 or more places) at once at various times during the 5 year mission. It's one of the reasons I never really tried. I generally enjoy the original series novels as one off adventures and usually don't try to combine them with others, except in the cases of books that are actual sequels to other books, directly reference other books and books that are series (i.e. Errand of Vengeance, The Janus Gate, etc).
Now the spinoffs, yes, I think you probably could put together a fairly reasonable timeline. There's still probably too many missions at times, esp. when Pocketbooks was still doing numbered books, but there are far less books that take place during the series runs that a reasonable timeline can be done, and certainly the relaunches are the easiest to est. a timeline for because they already have one.
I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from reading original series novels in a chronological order however. It's an interesting exercise I might even try when I start re-reading some of my older novels. The main things to keep in mind I think would be that you would have overlapping missions and not to expect novels to flow nicely from one to another. There will be discrepancies and outright contradictions. But as long as someone keeps those things in mind, it can be fun to do.
Now, that doesn't make the novels any less enjoyable. I certainly have enjoyed the various novels over the years, even though I realize there's too much for just a 5 year mission. The main thing I think it does is make it extraordinarily difficult to put together a realistic timeline that ALL the episodes and novels can take place in that doesn't put the Enterprise and/or the crew in 2 places (or even 3 or more places) at once at various times during the 5 year mission. It's one of the reasons I never really tried. I generally enjoy the original series novels as one off adventures and usually don't try to combine them with others, except in the cases of books that are actual sequels to other books, directly reference other books and books that are series (i.e. Errand of Vengeance, The Janus Gate, etc).
Now the spinoffs, yes, I think you probably could put together a fairly reasonable timeline. There's still probably too many missions at times, esp. when Pocketbooks was still doing numbered books, but there are far less books that take place during the series runs that a reasonable timeline can be done, and certainly the relaunches are the easiest to est. a timeline for because they already have one.
I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from reading original series novels in a chronological order however. It's an interesting exercise I might even try when I start re-reading some of my older novels. The main things to keep in mind I think would be that you would have overlapping missions and not to expect novels to flow nicely from one to another. There will be discrepancies and outright contradictions. But as long as someone keeps those things in mind, it can be fun to do.
The story "Mind-Sifter" in Bantam's first The New Voyages anthology spanned something like two years. That story was one of the main things that convinced me to abandon my early "include everything in my chronology" policy.
I did take into account some of the time between stories; everytime a novel ends with "Now we finally have our two weeks of vacation on starbase 7" or "It would take a month for the Enterprise to return to the next starbase and anothertwo weeks for it to get repaired". Of course there are tons of stories that don't have such endings (or a similar beginning like "The Enterprise was on boring patrol for two weeks") and while it is extremely unrealistic that they go from one adventure to another in a span of days I just sort of accepted that. It does (mostly) work if one takes into account all information given in the novels and episodes, but it is unrealistic.
For example April 7-18, 2267 in my timeline include The Centre Cannot Hold, "Amok Time", Gemini, "This Side of Paradise". While I don't have specific day counts for The Centre Cannot Hold, "Amok Time and "This Side of Paradise" I noted Gemini taking place over a few days. Over the 12 days this time period harbours we have an average of four days per story. This technically works with the chronological information given in the stories, but ir does require some degree of suspension of disbelief because the Enterprise has to fly to like four planets that should realistically probably not in the same sector and of course there are the routine missions that never happen. Conversely December is much more relaxed; "I, Mudd" starts after the 13th of December and ends before the 18th and "Obsession" starts after the 22nd and ends before the 28th.
I had fun figuring it out, though, so it was worth it
Dude, the energy that comes across in your posts is pretty infectious, and the commitment is great! Looking forward to hashing some of this out.
Ha-ha. Yeah, her and Desert Kris' earlier thread about reading older novels are very enthusiastic. I'll be very interested to re-read some of those older novels considering all that has been added to the Star Trek story since they've been written. It will be interesting to see how Star Trek was viewed before there was a Next Generation and when it was just a TV series, an animated series and 1, 2 or 3 movies. My recent reading of "Killing Time" was interesting because they had to go back in time to just prior to the founding of the Federation, which was stated to involve 3 men coming up with the premise and it was apparently created before meeting any alien civilizations, obviously far different then First Contact, or even the history provided by Margaret Wander Bonanno in her Strangers From the Sky foreward (which came out a few years after KT).
Reading the older Bantam books is interesting for the same reason, and back then there weren't even any movies.
Last edited:
FYI Jinn is a man @Damian.
Are you sure? I checked her profile and Jinn is listed as female.
Wow that can was full of worms! 
Yep; for the record Damian is correct
So, more on topic, while I do read very chronologically I have some exceptions that mostly concern the German releases of books. I haven't read all of Rise of the Federation yet even though I'm way past it in the timeline because Cross Cult also publishes those novels and I buy them there. I also read the more current NovelVerse stuff and am currently reading Armageddon's Arrow. Also, I'm still three NF novels back despite already having them. Contrary to all that I buy and read the English Voyager novels as soon as they come out.
So, more on topic, while I do read very chronologically I have some exceptions that mostly concern the German releases of books. I haven't read all of Rise of the Federation yet even though I'm way past it in the timeline because Cross Cult also publishes those novels and I buy them there. I also read the more current NovelVerse stuff and am currently reading Armageddon's Arrow. Also, I'm still three NF novels back despite already having them. Contrary to all that I buy and read the English Voyager novels as soon as they come out.
Wow that can was full of worms!
Ha-ha, yeah, I've been known to have my own blushing moments sometimes.
And just to clarify I'm a guy. I know I'm wearing a pink suit in my picture but my tailor was a tad colorblind. I felt bad and didn't have the heart to tell him he made me a pink uniform.
Probably why my smile looks more like a grimace though
Weirdly enough, prior to WWII, pink was considered a masculine color, because it's light red and red is associated with blood and violence and all that supposedly manly stuff, while blue was considered feminine because it was a gentler color. But for some reason, after WWII, manufacturers of baby products arbitrarily reversed the color associations and heavily promoted the gendered color-coding in advertising, since they made more profit if they could brainwash people into believing they had to buy different products for boy and girl babies rather than reusing the same for both.
Although the "pink is girly" idea evidently didn't become absolute for several more decades. I remember seeing a '70s Rockford Files episode where Charles Napier played a mean, tough henchman and was wearing a hot pink shirt throughout.
Turns out Damien is a time traveller. Who knew (well, Damien, I suppose
)!Similar threads
- Poll
