The Future of "Novel-Only" Lines

[Greg Cox]

We never knew before that our books wouldn't be contradicted. That's always, always an occupational hazard for tie-in writers. And it's never stopped us before, because we have never pretended that any of this is guaranteed to be "real." We're just telling stories for entertainment purposes. Heck, all science fiction will eventually be contradicted by new science or by the passage of time. If we let fear of future contradiction paralyze us, there would be no science fiction, let alone any TV tie-in fiction. Of course we never know what the future holds. But that shouldn't stop us from living our lives.

The whole time I was writing my Q Trilogy I worried about a new Q episode throwing a spanner in the works. Once the books were safely published, however, I was free and clear. It was no skin off my nose if later TV episodes completely contradicted my books.

As Christopher said, it's an occupational hazard.

 

[David cgc]

It almost seemed like they wanted to leave the door open to covering the destruction of Romulus in the relaunches, but just never got the opportunity.

Not long before the contract renewal slowed down (never mind it coming out that the Kelvin prohibition was being lifted), Dayton said he'd started developing a concept for how to deal with Romulus so they could stop asymptotically approaching 2387, without using anything from ST09.

 

[Christopher]

Really, I think that if we want the novels to be an alternate timeline, it would have to be one where the supernova doesn't happen at all. After all, Picard established that there were years of advance warning, whereas in the novels there's still no hint of it as of 2386. So whatever set it off in canon must not have happened in the novelverse, or at least hasn't happened yet. So there's no consistent way it could happen in 2387 in the novels. Thus, I'm glad we never reached that point, because it makes more sense if it just doesn't happen there.

 

[Sci]

As I've said many times on this subject, the novel continuity was always going to end, for the simple fact that everything ends and nothing is permanent. IMO, we got the best case scenario that it ended because there's new onscreen material supplanting it rather than it ending because of low sales leading to S&S losing the license.

That is a very good point. Mind you -- I'm not coming at this from some "I hate the canon for nullifying Trek Lit" kind of way. I think Star Trek: Picard just may be one of the greatest Star Trek shows ever produced. And I don't really expect future novels to try to incorporate everything from the prior continuity. But it's a fun exercise for me to see how much I can salvage in my own headcannon, and, well, I wouldn't mind putting the bug in the authors' ears to see what they can salvage too.

 

[DEWLine]

There would have to be years - maybe centuries - of advance warning of a supernova in cases where it was going to occur naturally anyway...and I'm digressing.

I do like the idea of hiving the novelverse as we've come to know it off into its own corner of our larger Trek multiverse, allowing for the option to revisit its version of our protagonists and their peers in any medium that it suits future writers for TV, film, comics, novels, games to do. I'm prepared to let it go on those terms.

 

[Stevil2001]

That is a very good point. Mind you -- I'm not coming at this from some "I hate the canon for nullifying Trek Lit" kind of way. I think Star Trek: Picard just may be one of the greatest Star Trek shows ever produced. And I don't really expect future novels to try to incorporate everything from the prior continuity. But it's a fun exercise for me to see how much I can salvage in my own headcannon, and, well, I wouldn't mind putting the bug in the authors' ears to see what they can salvage too.

It's hard for me to see how you could think that Picard "one of the greatest Star Trek shows ever produced" and also want to imagine a tweak to its backstory that would make Picard's entire motivation a nonsense. Data and Lal are alive... but an in-mourning Picard goes charging off at the slimmest hope that there's a Data-descended android out there?

 

[Leathco]

I'm struggling to see how the construction of a ship could possibly make for an interesting story. I guess it was a really eventful time at the shipyards?

There was a great short story done in one of the compendium books about the construction of the Enterprise D. If done correctly, anything can be a good read.

 

[Sci]

It's hard for me to see how you could think that Picard "one of the greatest Star Trek shows ever produced" and also want to imagine a tweak to its backstory that would make Picard's entire motivation a nonsense. Data and Lal are alive... but an in-mourning Picard goes charging off at the slimmest hope that there's a Data-descended android out there?

Mostly it boils down to the fact that I do not and have never considered Data 2.0/Data Soong to be the same person as the Data who served under Picard. He is to Data as Tom Riker is to Will -- and like Tom, he's evolved into a very different person than his progenitor.

Edited to add:

Side-note: Also, my attitude towards the Cold Equations version of Data's "resurrection" vs that of PIC's, is that I have never liked the idea of reviving Data in any form, even in the metaphorical "he's a copy but not the original" way. I think it's a better idea to say, dead is dead. But, having said that, I prefer Cold Equations's execution of that idea over PIC's (even as I really do love and respect PIC as a work of art as well).

 

[The Wormhole]

There was a great short story done in one of the compendium books about the construction of the Enterprise D.

There was? I remember a story in The Sky's the Limit anthology set during the Enterprise D's construction, but it wasn't really about the ship's construction. Is this what you meant? Something during the construction of La Sirena?

Even if we are still talking about the ship's construction, the construction of the Enterprise D can create all kinds of drama, being one of the Federation's most advanced ships of its time one can logically see how there would be draws from various villains such as alien spies or what not or even doing a story about the murder we learn about in Eye of the Beholder. La Sirena is a civilian ship with no indication its technology is state of the art or anything that alien spies would be drawn to. Unless you're going to reveal another murder went on when the ship was under construction and the corpses are buried within the ship's walls, I'm not sure what is so great about the ship's construction.

 

[Damian]

Really, I think that if we want the novels to be an alternate timeline, it would have to be one where the supernova doesn't happen at all. After all, Picard established that there were years of advance warning, whereas in the novels there's still no hint of it as of 2386. So whatever set it off in canon must not have happened in the novelverse, or at least hasn't happened yet. So there's no consistent way it could happen in 2387 in the novels. Thus, I'm glad we never reached that point, because it makes more sense if it just doesn't happen there.

I'm not sure I agree. Generations established that a missile can destroy a star instantaneously. Now it couldn't be a natural event. It'd have to be some attack on the star. But I could see a story being created where some group attacks a star that results in the destruction of Romulus that gives only minimal warning. To be consistent with Star Trek (2009) there'd have to be some warning since the Vulcans created red matter to try to stop it and lead to the events of the film. And it would lead to some drama--the loss of Romulus would have enormous repercussions for the Typhon Pact and the Khitomer powers.

It would definitely follow a different tract than the show. But then the show and the novels are already highly divergent by 2387.

 

[Christopher]

I'm not sure I agree. Generations established that a missile can destroy a star instantaneously. Now it couldn't be a natural event. It'd have to be some attack on the star.

In isolation, sure. But we're talking about the same event happening at the same time in two different timelines from completely different causes, and that's too huge a coincidence. It would be a forced contrivance that would undermine the credibility of the stories far too much. I would rather have no supernova at all in the novels' alternate timeline (if it can be such) than one that was forced through such contrived coincidence. Just because something can be done does not mean it should.

It would definitely follow a different tract than the show. But then the show and the novels are already highly divergent by 2387.

All the more reason why we don't need to have a supernova in a different timeline, if Picard has already dealt with it in the canon timeline. If they're divergent, let them be divergent. Don't force them to arbitrarily hit the same milestone through completely different paths.

 

[Damian]

In isolation, sure. But we're talking about the same event happening at the same time in two different timelines from completely different causes, and that's too huge a coincidence. It would be a forced contrivance that would undermine the credibility of the stories far too much. I would rather have no supernova at all in the novels' alternate timeline (if it can be such) than one that was forced through such contrived coincidence. Just because something can be done does not mean it should.




All the more reason why we don't need to have a supernova in a different timeline, if Picard has already dealt with it in the canon timeline. If they're divergent, let them be divergent. Don't force them to arbitrarily hit the same milestone through completely different paths.

I'm just presenting an argument for how it could happen in both timelines to make it consistent with what we saw in Star Trek (2009). Perhaps it's the same group responsible for both but in the novel-verse perhaps something like the Borg attack forced them to change tactics for some reason.

The primary reason I was interested in seeing that in the novel-verse is that we've seen the Romulans have a moderating influence on the Typhon Pact, preferring diplomacy when dealing with the Khitomer allies. What would happen if you take Romulus out of that? I'd think it likely the Breen, Tzenkethi and Tholians would try to fill the vacuum and in the books we've seen they'd prefer a more hostile stance. So I could see some dramatic future stories with Romulus being destroyed.

And the other thing is the Federation by 2387 is in a better place in the novels than in Picard. I'd be curious to see how that Federation deals with the disaster in comparison to Picard.

So in my case it's more about the repercussions on the novel-verse, not the event so much itself.

And come on. Star Trek loves contrivances ---it would not be the first....or last time. There's nothing to say Romulus isn't destroyed in a number of timelines--and perhaps not destroyed in a number of others. I'm not even sure I'd agree that's a contrivance when considering numerous timelines. I can easily imagine scenarios where Romulus is destroyed by multiple different methods in different timelines, some where maybe the perpetrators are stopped before they commit their act, and even some where it never happens at all.

 

[Stevil2001]

Mostly it boils down to the fact that I do not and have never considered Data 2.0/Data Soong to be the same person as the Data who served under Picard. He is to Data as Tom Riker is to Will -- and like Tom, he's evolved into a very different person than his progenitor.

I mean, sure, but the whole tenor of Picard's (and Riker's) approach to the entire situation indicates a level of amazement and investment that makes literally no sense if there's another android out there who, even if not Data, is much more like Data than Dahj/Soji. And no one ever even mentions either of them?

I'm all for contrived intellectual exercises (I once spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to reconcile the Daniel Craig Bond films with the older ones), but I don't get this one at all.

There was a great short story done in one of the compendium books about the construction of the Enterprise D. If done correctly, anything can be a good read.

I co-wrote this story, so thank you!

 

[Christopher]

I'm just presenting an argument for how it could happen in both timelines to make it consistent with what we saw in Star Trek (2009).

Obviously that's what you're doing. The point is that we no longer need to. If the novels have to be seen as an alternate timeline anyway, then that means it's no longer a requirement for them to converge with the events established in the movie. And my point is that it would make more sense now if they didn't, given the new information Picard has established.

The primary reason I was interested in seeing that in the novel-verse is that we've seen the Romulans have a moderating influence on the Typhon Pact, preferring diplomacy when dealing with the Khitomer allies. What would happen if you take Romulus out of that? I'd think it likely the Breen, Tzenkethi and Tholians would try to fill the vacuum and in the books we've seen they'd prefer a more hostile stance. So I could see some dramatic future stories with Romulus being destroyed.

I think Picard has already addressed the consequences of the Romulan Star Empire's removal from the galactic stage. Doing it in the Typhon Pact continuity would differ in detail, but in broad strokes that story has already been taken up by the show. So maybe it would be more interesting to explore the alternative path history might've taken without the supernova, without the fall of Romulus.

And the other thing is the Federation by 2387 is in a better place in the novels than in Picard. I'd be curious to see how that Federation deals with the disaster in comparison to Picard.

Is it? It's still recovering from a cataclysmic Borg invasion that the canonical universe was spared. If anything, it's a lot worse off, a lot more depleted in resources. In Picard, it's the evacuation effort itself that's eaten up so many of Starfleet's resources by the time of the Utopia Planitia attack in 2386. But all the UFP's worlds are still intact, there aren't billions of refugees already within Federation space, etc. I'd say that from a material and logistical standpoint, as well as a psychological standpoint, the novels' UFP is far worse off, far more beaten down by catastrophe after catastrophe (the Genesis Wave, two or three Borg invasions, a presidential assassination, etc.), than the canonical UFP.

So really, having the supernova happen in the Pact continuity seems redundant. Both continuities have their own vast cataclysms and immense refugee crises starting c. 2381, one caused by the Borg, the other by the impending supernova. Don't forget, the Typhon Pact arose as a direct result of the Borg invasion. The TP narrative is already about how Alpha/Beta Quadrant civilization is changed in the aftermath of a transformative cataclysm.

And come on. Star Trek loves contrivances ---it would not be the first....or last time.

The fact that a bad idea has already been used multiple times is an argument against doing it again, not in favor.

 

[Damian]

Is it? It's still recovering from a cataclysmic Borg invasion that the canonical universe was spared. If anything, it's a lot worse off, a lot more depleted in resources.

I was speaking from a more philosophical perspective. Sure, the Federation has a cataclysm with the Borg invasion, not to mention the Section 31 crisis, the formation of the Typhon Pact, the assassination of President Bacco. But by 2387 the Federation seemed to be entering a more enlightened age. Their new President was a positive force, as was Admiral Akaar. The Federation in the novels was moving in a positive direction and things were starting to look up.

On the other hand in Picard the Federation is much more reactionary and insular in 2387, entering a dark period in it's history.

I just thought it'd be interesting to see how each universe handles it.

The fact that a bad idea has already been used multiple times is an argument against doing it again, not in favor.

Honestly, I'm not even sure it'd be a contrivance. How many parallel universes are there? I think it's very possible that there are multiple universes where Romulus is destroyed, perhaps by different methods, and as I noted, some universes where it is stopped, and some where there is never a threat. Our 'prime' timeline could be one where it is destroyed but perhaps by a different method and under different circumstances. I mean, already Picard has gone in a much different direction than the novels. I'd be curious as to what differences there are between the two.

But, I guess it's a moot point. It's not going to happen. Destruction or not I don't imagine we'll get the chance to find out.

 

[The Wormhole]

On the other hand in Picard the Federation is much more reactionary and insular in 2387, entering a dark period in it's history.

The main reason the Federation seems so dark in the show is because we're seeing it from Picard's perspective, and he has a dark opinion of what the Federation has turned into. Likewise the other characters, from their own personal perspectives, hold a grim view of the Federation due to their own personal problems from their own lives that are either a symptom or a cause of the Federation's current state.

However to the average citizen of the Federation, things are certainly a lot more positive for them in the show than in the novel continuity. In the show, there's only the destruction of Utopia Planitia casting its shadow over things. A tragedy for sure with repercussions for years and decades afterwards, but the subsequent ban on synthetics has likely provided Federation citizens with a sense of security that something like this won't happen again. In the novels, it's basically one disaster and crisis after another, and if anything I imagine most Federation citizens of the 2380s are living in a state of constant fear and anxiety about the next incident and how it will turn their lives upside down. I know which reality I'd want to live in, and it ain't the novel continuity.

 

[Christopher]

Honestly, I'm not even sure it'd be a contrivance. How many parallel universes are there? I think it's very possible that there are multiple universes where Romulus is destroyed, perhaps by different methods, and as I noted, some universes where it is stopped, and some where there is never a threat.

I've said before that invoking the "anything can happen in an infinite multiverse" argument is flawed, because we're talking about a finite number of alternates. If the timelines only diverged 6-7 years before the supernova, that's not enough time for an infinite number of divergent realities to branch off after that point. Whatever circumstances exist in distinct timelines after that point were exactly the same prior to the point of divergence, so that's just not enough time for too much drastic change, and therefore it can't plausibly be used as an excuse to justify any random, improbable change you want to assert. Whatever happens would have to be a logical outgrowth of circumstances not enormously different from those in the other timeline. Using alternate timelines as an excuse to say any random nonsense is equally likely is an abuse of the concept. That's just not how causality works.

 

[Damian]

I've said before that invoking the "anything can happen in an infinite multiverse" argument is flawed, because we're talking about a finite number of alternates. If the timelines only diverged 6-7 years before the supernova, that's not enough time for an infinite number of divergent realities to branch off after that point. Whatever circumstances exist in distinct timelines after that point were exactly the same prior to the point of divergence, so that's just not enough time for too much drastic change, and therefore it can't plausibly be used as an excuse to justify any random, improbable change you want to assert. Whatever happens would have to be a logical outgrowth of circumstances not enormously different from those in the other timeline. Using alternate timelines as an excuse to say any random nonsense is equally likely is an abuse of the concept. That's just not how causality works.

Maybe the divergence happened earlier, say right after Nemesis (since both the novels and Picard include Nemesis as a common historical event that'd probably the earliest the two can diverge from each other). That adds several more years and maybe a few more possibilities.

It's not really necessary to have even numerous parallel timelines. Perhaps 4 or 5. Say 2 or 3 where Romulus is destroyed, one where it is stopped, and maybe one where the events never arise.

 

[The Wormhole]

Maybe the divergence happened earlier, say right after Nemesis (since both the novels and Picard include Nemesis as a common historical event that'd probably the earliest the two can diverge from each other). That adds several more years and maybe a few more possibilities.

Nemesis is still close enough to the 6-7 year range Christopher mentioned in his post, since it's 8 years prior to the supernova.

 

[Damian]

Nemesis is still close enough to the 6-7 year range Christopher mentioned in his post, since it's 8 years prior to the supernova.

Yeah, sorry my bad. For some reason I was thinking Nemesis was 2370, I don't know why. I believe it's actually 2379. Oops.