I think The Gill-Man makes a point of forcing himself to read all of CLB's work.
Some of us have different expectations and love the books anyway.
Your LEAST favorite Star Trek Novel?
- Thread starter Rush Limborg
- Start date
I think The Gill-Man makes a point of forcing himself to read all of CLB's work.
Some of us have different expectations and love the books anyway.
I had a lot of trouble with all of the 'Genesis Wave' series of books.
Not a big fan of books where most of it takes place on Vulcan. I don't find the Vulcans' planet all that interesting, honestly.
I liked all of the New Earth books except the 'Gateways' one. I couldn't get very far into that before stopping.
'Captain's Blood' was a big letdown after I enjoyed Shatner's first two trilogies.
I agree with the sentiments about 'A Time to Be Born' and 'A Time to Die'. They were both very boring. I also thought that Starfleet was WAY too harsh on Picard, especially considering his track record.
Not a big fan of books where most of it takes place on Vulcan. I don't find the Vulcans' planet all that interesting, honestly.
I liked all of the New Earth books except the 'Gateways' one. I couldn't get very far into that before stopping.
'Captain's Blood' was a big letdown after I enjoyed Shatner's first two trilogies.
I agree with the sentiments about 'A Time to Be Born' and 'A Time to Die'. They were both very boring. I also thought that Starfleet was WAY too harsh on Picard, especially considering his track record.
Ancient Blood by Diane Carey. There's a big holodeck adventure in the middle involving seafaring vessels and whatnot. Ugh.
One Thing or Your Mother is the last of the Buffy books. At least that's what I was told.
My least favorite book was TNG #50 Dyson Sphere. If I remember correctly almost half the book was just technical information. Very dry.
I agree about the Shatnerverse books. I did like the first two trilogies but was frustrated by the Totality Trilogy (Captains: Peril, Blood, Glory).
I love Peter David's work he has a very tongue in cheek sense of humor and I think that fits very well into a corner of the Star Trek universe.
I agree about the Shatnerverse books. I did like the first two trilogies but was frustrated by the Totality Trilogy (Captains: Peril, Blood, Glory).
I love Peter David's work he has a very tongue in cheek sense of humor and I think that fits very well into a corner of the Star Trek universe.
You mean "Chainmail"? You stopped too soon. After page 80 it got amazing! a very gripping story, with an unfolding morality play that's as impossible to answer comfortably as was VOY's "Tuvix" episode.
But the horta bits really rocked!
I agree with Gill-Man on Orion's Hounds. I didn't like it all that well, as far as going to say that it ruined my childhood memories: I am a little more sturdier than that. I did like CLB's MU and Constellations' stories.
No.
I finished the first Titan book, and haven't read the second one yet. I'll get around to it eventually. I just got really bored with the book, really tired of "we're showing tolerance to everybody, look how diverse we are!" ... I have liked those authors in the past, but Titan book 1 didn't live up to the hype or to their previous works.
Of course I wouldn't normally read book 3 before book 2, but when you consider who wrote book 3, I think I can safely say it's not something I would go out of my way to read. I have repeatedly given CLB's work a chance, and every single time it's been a massive disappointment and, well, crap. It's not even good enough to qualify as "fan fiction" ... and when compared with some of the really good writers Trek has - and boy howdy do they have a lot of them - it just comes across even worse.
Ya know, I think it's even worse when a writer who can't write then goes around shoving his undeserved sense of superiority around the board. Posting with such an undeserved smugness drives people away from his work. That's just my opinion.
I think The Gill-Man makes a point of forcing himself to read all of CLB's work.
Majel knows I've tried.
... They're just so shitty. I've often said it's good to have differing opinions.
Gill-Man: I don't know what anybody else thinks, but I believe you have gone way over the line in your direct, personal attacks against Mr. Bennett. Had you stopped at your second paragraph, the worst I could have said about it is that you overstated your case but it was your right to hold that personal opinion about a style of writing that you do not care for.
But in that third paragraph, you crossed over the line into a personal dispute you appear to have with him that in my personal (non-mod) opinion ought to be taken up via PM directly with him and if that cannot occur civilly, then contact a moderator to help you two either work it out or keep it off the public board. For my part, I am interested in reading criticisms of writing styles, plot choices, characterization--substantive points--not about two posters' personality clash.
But in that third paragraph, you crossed over the line into a personal dispute you appear to have with him that in my personal (non-mod) opinion ought to be taken up via PM directly with him and if that cannot occur civilly, then contact a moderator to help you two either work it out or keep it off the public board. For my part, I am interested in reading criticisms of writing styles, plot choices, characterization--substantive points--not about two posters' personality clash.
I wasn't speaking just about fall 2008, but more generally. Although Buffyverse novels are not currently being published, I believe the line did continue for some time after the end of the shows. Also, I was discussing tie-ins of all sorts, comics as well as prose fiction. Both Buffy and Angel currently have ongoing comic-book continuations.
You're right that the Angel books weren't strong sellers, and in fact, Christopher was half wrong, in that the Angel books didn't continue after the series ended.
The Buffy books did, though, and there have been A LOT more than three books published since June 2005 -- I know, because I wrote two of them.
The following Buffy books were published by Simon Spotlight after the series went off the air:
Chaos Bleeds by James A. Moore (August 2003)
Mortal Fear by Scott Ciencin (September 2003)
Cursed by Mel Odom (November 2003)
Monster Island by Christopher Golden (January 2004)
Apocalypse Memories by Laura J. Burns & Melinda Metz (March 2004)
The Wicked Willow trilogy (The Darkening, Shattered, and Broken Sunrise) by Yvonne Navarro (May, June, and August 2004)
Heat by Nancy Holder (July 2004)
Queen of the Slayers by Nancy Holder (May 2005)
Spark and Burn by Diana G. Gallagher (August 2005)
After Image by Pierce Askegren (January 2006)
Carnival of Souls by Nancy Holder (April 2006)
Go Ask Malice: A Slayer's Diary by Robert Joseph Levy (June 2006)
Blackout by Keith R.A. DeCandido (September 2006)
Portal Through Time by Alice Henderson (November 2006)
Bad Bargain by Diana G. Gallagher (January 2007)
The Deathless by Keith R.A. DeCandido (May 2007)
Dark Congress by Christopher Golden (September 2007)
One Thing or Your Mother by Kirsten Beyer (December 2007)
Plus there were four "Stake Your Destiny" choose-your-own-adventure books:
The Suicide King by Robert Joseph Levy (March 2005)
Keep Me in Mind by Nancy Holder (April 2005)
Colony by Melinda Metz & Laura J. Burns (September 2005)
Night Terrors by Alice Henderson (November 2005)
So yeah, a pretty strong list of post-finale books, there.
And, as Christopher said, there are quite successful post-finale comics for Buffy and Angel.
OmahaStar's vendetta against Christopher is well-known around these parts. Just take the high road and ignore him.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
I loved that. If Carey started writing nautical fiction regularly, I would so be there.
As we've mentioned before, the reader's state of mind when reading a particular ST novel can have lingering effects as to the gut reaction to said book.
I read "The Wounded Sky" while plane hopping all over USA on my first solo holiday overseas, and those memories flood back when I discuss the book. Others have complained that found the tech discussions dry. Coincidentally, the ship in the book was hopping all over the universe with the experimental star drive.
I was reading "TNG: Imbalance" during a ST convention when all the committee were at each others' throats, and it made the aggro Jaradans harder to stomach.
I can imagine that ST novels with a darker tone may not be appealing to someone already in a dark mood of their own. Someone in the mood for some serious battles and tech might be appalled by "How Much for Just the Planet?", particularly if they were anticipating a direct sequel to "The Final Reflection". Etc.
I read "The Wounded Sky" while plane hopping all over USA on my first solo holiday overseas, and those memories flood back when I discuss the book. Others have complained that found the tech discussions dry. Coincidentally, the ship in the book was hopping all over the universe with the experimental star drive.
I was reading "TNG: Imbalance" during a ST convention when all the committee were at each others' throats, and it made the aggro Jaradans harder to stomach.
I can imagine that ST novels with a darker tone may not be appealing to someone already in a dark mood of their own. Someone in the mood for some serious battles and tech might be appalled by "How Much for Just the Planet?", particularly if they were anticipating a direct sequel to "The Final Reflection". Etc.
I can certainly concede that point. Almost all of my reading is done on a train to and from work - work which involves hearing some pretty horrible things. The last thing I need is a particularly dark and violent Trek book to bring me down even further, and I will resent any book that does that.
Honestly, I don't understand that kind of reaction when someone posts he doesn't like an authors work.
Every author/book will have a group of people who don't like it/the author's style, but your comment suggests that only because you liked a certain book everybody has to like it. That's bullshit, and I 'm saying that as someone who happens to agree with your assessment of Orion's Hounds.
ETA: That's just my two cents on your comment, not any kind of endorsement of Omahastar's/The Gill Man's opinions/posts.
Yeah, the "really" was in the vein of Seinfeld, more in humor than dissing his post. I don't think he's wrong in feeling how he does; more trying to draw to attention to a book that he may have not read and IMHO may change his opinion. If not, I don't begrudge him that. The Internet just lacks a way to convey certain nuances.
I loved that. If Carey started writing nautical fiction regularly, I would so be there.
Ditto - TBH I started getting less interested when the Trek stuff came into that one, and think it's probably my favourite of Carey's books!
But then I'm an Alexander Kent & Patrick O'Brien reader, so...
Similar threads
