• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Your LEAST favorite Star Trek Novel?

That made Olympus Descending extremely jarring. I would've expected that of New Frontiers, not of the DS9 relaunch.

Well, just because one faith system turns out to have an empyrical basis doesn't mean all will (in fact, considering the exclusionary claims that often come with these belief systems, it would be impossible for all to be correct as writ). But to give Olympus Descending its due, it does reveal that the Founder's faith was not pure invention but based in reality, since their deity does, in fact, show up, much of the same way Sisko et al. have run into the deities of the Bajoran faith, and found that system to have a tangible basis in fact. Of course, whether you consider the death of the Progenitor to put the Founder's belief system to lie depends on one's conception of what it means to be a deity. Many human cultures had deities who were mortal, who could and were killed. The Norse gods are probably the most popular example, but there are many more examples of the God Who Died trope. Of course, many of these then have a rebirth (Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, Christ, etc.); and although not necessary to establish its divinity, for all we know the Progenitor is waiting to go all phoenix on us.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
 
The Mirror Universe book by Christopher Bennett. How can one person get everything he writes so wrong? Actually, I should just put everything by that "writer" in the same category. I've pretty much despised everything he's put out. "Bad fanfic" describes it pretty well.
Do you mean Myriad Universes? Because he hasn't done any Mirror Universe stuff.

Ah ... Greg Cox. I tend to lump Greg Cox and Chris Bennett in together with their writing, they're equally bad. I still cringe, just thinking of that moronic attempt at writing a Q "trilogy" ... stupid, stupid, stupid.
 
I've been rereading all the earlier novels and just got through all the Bantam stuff. Of the Bantam, my least favorite was Galactic Whirlpool . I know some people like it but it just got bogged down in so much descriptive details and explanations that it just seemed to aimlessly wander...and wander..and wander. I prefer a more streamlined narrative.

Of the newer novels, I particularly dislike the two separate story format like Spock's World, Exodus, Exiles, and Epiphany . Some of the storylines in these books were interesting but the format was just to much "interruptis." Or another variation is the follow a multitude of characters in separate storylines like "Home Is Hunter" or "Kobayashi Maru" where we follow each of Scotty, Sulu, and Chekov's separate adventures. Again, I just prefer the ONE streamlined narrative approach better.
 
Ghost Ship (Diane Carey) comes to mind. I think I probably didn't like it because it was written before TNG actually aired, so it didn't really "feel" right after having seen some of the show. For one thing, Data uses contractions throughout.

As much as I've dissed Ship of the Line and Red Sector I'm giving Carey a pass on this one. Yeah, I read it thinking "that's not Riker talking, that's not Picard talking, etc" but she had never seen an episode and I had no idea what source materials she had access too. Sure Peter David nailed DS9 in Emissary but I have no way to compare what material David had vs. Carey.
 
I really hated "Cloak". to paraphrase Ebert (his "North" review) hated hated hated hated hated hated hated hated Cloak.

Worst part is I really felt I would like it. Why?

I love TOS. And the Enterprise Incident is among my favorites. Second, I love the idea of Section 31, and the idea of "retconning" it into TOS, particularly episodes of TOS ..especially "TEI" which has the best possibility for S31 involvement, was splendid.

So, where I was expecting some spying, some sabotage, some role-playing some betrayal (and some fun) like I got in that episode, instead I plowed through page after page of some lame lame lame romance, a story line for Bones that was just awful and undignified (his being ill) and a super technobabble plot ...taken from the tenchobabble hell that is Voyager... with a device that can literally destroy the universe, and I started to realize that there is nothing interesting in this novel.

The only scenes I liked are the prologue and the epilogue, particularly the epilogue.
 
But last and most infamous (to me): the entire misfire that is New Frontier. I have no idea how Peter David ever got the clearance to launch an entire series on this anyway--it's like a parody of Trek, in my opinion.


Until the last comic set, I would have disagreed with you. NF was the only Trek I'd been reading for a while. However the 5 part comic series was ....I was always taught that if you can't say something nice, say nothing, and least said, soonest mended.... I'll leave it at that.
 
Okay, I noticed that some posters have been slamming the writers.

As I requested at the beginning, please don't. This is a book-hate topic, not an author-hate topic. Please refrain from making it personal. There's enough of that in The Neutral Zone. Okay?
 
As much as I've dissed Ship of the Line and Red Sector I'm giving Carey a pass on this one. Yeah, I read it thinking "that's not Riker talking, that's not Picard talking, etc" but she had never seen an episode and I had no idea what source materials she had access too. Sure Peter David nailed DS9 in Emissary but I have no way to compare what material David had vs. Carey.

As I understand it, PAD had the series bible and the scripts to the first five episodes to work from (and he referenced all of them in The Siege -- not Emissary, which was a novelization by J.M. Dillard), whereas Carey only had the series bible and the "Farpoint" script. Also, given all the producer turnaround and turmoil in early TNG, the series ended up being further removed from what was in its original bible than DS9 or VGR did.
 
Also, given all the producer turnaround and turmoil in early TNG, the series ended up being further removed from what was in its original bible than DS9 or VGR did.

Yeah...I seem to recall, in the "bible" excerpts in the TNG Companion, mentions of a friendship between Tasha and Wesley, Data having been contructed by an alien race (BTW, his name is supposed to rhyme with "that-a"), and Beverly having "the natural walk of a striptease queen".

As I recall, the last thing was supposed to be one of the main reasons Picard would willingly let her kid on the bridge.

And...apparently, Wesley was supposed to be a girl, named Leslie....
 
^^Actually the 1964 document said Colt had "a strip-queen figure even a uniform cannot hide," according to the version in The Making of Star Trek -- although the first-draft version (which I have a copy of from Lincoln Enterprises) renders it as "a shape even a uniform could not hide."
 
Beverly having "the natural walk of a striptease queen".
Which is a word-for-word match for the description of Yeoman Colt in the early notes for Star Trek in 1964. :rolleyes:

I wonder if that's going to make it in TrekNation ;)

No - it seems GR spent time in strip clubs. Or he thought everyone did.
Anyway - seems that casting totally ignored strip queen, or at least cooler heads prevailed.

So let me get this straight - they were comissioning TNG books before TNG even started? Wasn't that... bound to fail, at least artistically? How could they sell books with no TV show ---who would buy them? I'm stunned - I never knew that happened.

LEAST favorite Trek novel, from what I've read, was probably the 2nd Shatnerverse book.

I also really liked Federation - but I felt that it jumped the shark when Data became the carrier for that 21st Century Tyrant's soul/memory/personality. It was really kind of a letdown for me when I thought it was getting good because of the Preserver monolith.
 
^ Books were commissioned so that they could be written and published in conjunction with as well as soon after the series premiered. In order to accomplish that, they had to be written before episodes were completed. For the authors working on the first few novels in each new series, they often only had the writer's guide, scripts, and maybe some headshots of the cast members to work from.
 
So let me get this straight - they were comissioning TNG books before TNG even started? Wasn't that... bound to fail, at least artistically? How could they sell books with no TV show ---who would buy them? I'm stunned - I never knew that happened.
You're confusing commissioning books with the release of the selfsame book, a process that takes many many months. Ghost Ship was released in July 1988, after TNG had been on the air a goodly amount of time, so plenty of people would buy it, but in order to be released in July 1988, it would have to have been written in the fall of 1987, when very little of TNG had aired.
 
So let me get this straight - they were comissioning TNG books before TNG even started? Wasn't that... bound to fail, at least artistically? How could they sell books with no TV show ---who would buy them? I'm stunned - I never knew that happened.
You're confusing commissioning books with the release of the selfsame book, a process that takes many many months. Ghost Ship was released in July 1988, after TNG had been on the air a goodly amount of time, so plenty of people would buy it, but in order to be released in July 1988, it would have to have been written in the fall of 1987, when very little of TNG had aired.

WOW.
I feel for those writers -- truly an impossible task =)
(I just can't believe there'd be demand for TNG books while TNG was just starting (hey, just watch it on TV! you don't need a book! we're making new shows!) - but I guess I had to be there! :techman:
 
Well, the only way to test demand for such books was to...you know...publish some. TNG books were released rather sporadically in the beginning, increasing in frequency as Pocket got into a groove of alternating TOS and TNG on a regular schedule.
 
WOW.
I feel for those writers -- truly an impossible task =)
Which they nonetheless accomplished, so... possible.
(I just can't believe there'd be demand for TNG books while TNG was just starting (hey, just watch it on TV! you don't need a book! we're making new shows!) - but I guess I had to be there! :techman:
You weren't there? What, you just dropped from the sky in 2005, after ENT was cancelled?
 
...Sure Peter David nailed DS9 in Emissary but I have no way to compare what material David had vs. Carey.

...(and he referenced all of them in The Siege -- not Emissary, which was a novelization by J.M. Dillard)...

You're right, I meant The Siege, not Emissary.

And I didn't realize how little Carey had to go on for her book. Thanks for the info.
 
That made Olympus Descending extremely jarring. I would've expected that of New Frontiers, not of the DS9 relaunch.

Well, just because one faith system turns out to have an empyrical basis doesn't mean all will (in fact, considering the exclusionary claims that often come with these belief systems, it would be impossible for all to be correct as writ). But to give Olympus Descending its due, it does reveal that the Founder's faith was not pure invention but based in reality, since their deity does, in fact, show up, much of the same way Sisko et al. have run into the deities of the Bajoran faith, and found that system to have a tangible basis in fact. Of course, whether you consider the death of the Progenitor to put the Founder's belief system to lie depends on one's conception of what it means to be a deity. Many human cultures had deities who were mortal, who could and were killed. The Norse gods are probably the most popular example, but there are many more examples of the God Who Died trope. Of course, many of these then have a rebirth (Osiris, Tammuz, Adonis, Christ, etc.); and although not necessary to establish its divinity, for all we know the Progenitor is waiting to go all phoenix on us.

Now that does add an interesting new perspective to it. I doubt I would ever get any fond feelings for the story, given that there is no indication any such resurrection is forthcoming, but that was an angle I hadn't considered before. For me, though, I find it very much lacking from my personal perspective as a reader, when stories make a nihilistic point. I have that same problem with other authors' works, too, in and out of sci-fi (Hemingway being one of the most infuriating examples...I had to read that for school and literally had to restrain myself several times from pitching the damn book across the room, it was getting on my nerves so bad).

Obviously this is a personal preference, and I know it. But the thread did ask for least favorite without saying why that book had to be disliked.

Trilliam: Going back to New Frontier, I'd just like to add one thing. While I do consider the entire NF series one massive misfire that just won't die, I don't think PAD's all bad. Ironically, I have fond childhood memories of the characters that later showed up in NF, from the "young adult" books.

I actually think that's my other HUGE problem with NF. PAD took some great childhood memories and totally, completely scarred my brain with what he did to them in that series. I honestly did NOT need the images of them doing and saying the things they did and said. He should've quit while he was ahead, if you ask me.
 
you really can't please all the fans. i've always enjoied the NF books. i haven't cared for the direction the last few books have taken, but i still enjoy them.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top