^ Uhm, your list of three authors had eight names........
Brainfarts are fun, aren't they?
Thanks, corrected it.
Pick an author
- Thread starter Mistral
- Start date
Brainfarts are fun, aren't they?
Thanks, corrected it.I'm just going to focus on the 2 most important facets of Trek(-Lit):
deadpan/tongue-in-cheek humour - even risking boosting his ego further , that award goes to KRAD...
characterization - Well, I've never read a more touching character-piece in ST than "Crucible: McCoy". So, for that alone, I've to name David R. George III.
deadpan/tongue-in-cheek humour - even risking boosting his ego further
, that award goes to KRAD...characterization - Well, I've never read a more touching character-piece in ST than "Crucible: McCoy". So, for that alone, I've to name David R. George III.
I included S. D. Perry in part for similar reasons; Rising Son was one of the most moving and involving books I've ever read. I've omitted the particular spoiler which gets to me every time I think about the DS9 relaunch.
^ Uhm, your list of three authors had eight names........
Brainfarts are fun, aren't they?
Now Krad's post looks strange.
KRAD. No contest and no close second. he's the man.
Which means it looks like all my other posts (he says, hoping, likely in vain, to preempt like comments from Terri, Dayton, Dave, Bill, and/or Marco).^ Uhm, your list of three authors had eight names........
Brainfarts are fun, aren't they?
Now Krad's post looks strange.
David Mack
And sometimes, dignity says you have to walk away before the job destroys your sanity....
Well, there's no sport in it if you're just gonna stand there with your jugular exposed.
Lately, I've been favoring KRAD and Michael A Martin & Andy Mangels. David Mack as well, especially since I finished Gods of Night.
-cc
-cc
I actually disagree with a lot of people in the thread - I find KRAD's books extremely entertaining, but I feel like he only rarely actually nails the whole Star Trek atmosphere. When he does, like the climax of Q&A, it tends to be completely fantastic, but I think a large part of it is just that he's written so damn many books that people tend to forget the ones that don't really land (which, for me, is actually a lot of them; even Articles, which was just an awesome piece of writing, felt more like West Wing than Star Trek. It worked, but it was definitely an extension of the universe, not what I'd really call "getting" Star Trek.)
So if I had to pick one, I'd go with Bennett. Star Trek, at its core, has always been about the optimism of the future and the bettering of humanity. It's possible to take the Star Trek universe and tell completely different kinds of stories, mind you, and I enjoy those stories too, but if you're looking for the pure spirit, definitely Bennett. The sense of wonder, the repudiation of violence, and the constant reaffirmation that knowledge ultimately helps people rather than hurting them are, to me, exactly what Star Trek as a whole is and should be about.
So if I had to pick one, I'd go with Bennett. Star Trek, at its core, has always been about the optimism of the future and the bettering of humanity. It's possible to take the Star Trek universe and tell completely different kinds of stories, mind you, and I enjoy those stories too, but if you're looking for the pure spirit, definitely Bennett. The sense of wonder, the repudiation of violence, and the constant reaffirmation that knowledge ultimately helps people rather than hurting them are, to me, exactly what Star Trek as a whole is and should be about.
^^Wow, thanks... getting a little teary-eyed...
Wow, excellent comments.
I'm happy to just get an occasional "well, at least he spelled the names right and avoided using semi-colons."
--Ted
