"Historian's Notes" need to change!

[F. King Daniel]

Probably one of the most trivial complaints in TrekBBS history, but it's been a longtime annoyance…

Almost every Trek novel starts with an “Historian’s Note” telling us roughly where the novel fits in around the 700+ episodes of Star Trek.

Does anyone else think “Historian’s Note” sounds far too serious and lame? It makes me cringe every time I read it, and brings up unpleasant images of super-nerds from Trekkies. I can’t imagine it having a positive impact on a casual reader browsing a bookstore.

I don’t suppose there’s any chance of replacing “Historian’s Note” (which might as well read “For hardcore hardline scary fans only”) with something less nerdy, like “Where it fits in…” or something similarly benign?

 

[Thrawn]

People will really complain about anything, won't they?

 

[F. King Daniel]

Yes they will and they enjoy doing it ;-)

 

[Dayton Ward]

I think all Historian's Notes should reflect where the book takes place in relation to Articles of the Federation.





(C'mon....somebody was gonna do it.)

 

[Thrawn]

I mean, I guess I see your point, but it just seems really minor.

That said, I think they should do more to make each book easier to pick up and place; it feels to me like I have to do research sometimes just to figure out when a story is in relation to the rest of them. I think there should be a couple pages at the beginning of where it fits in, what's happened recently to those characters, etc; sort of an extended "previously on..." with some timeline detail as well.

But maybe that WOULD scare off potential customers; too much detail they wouldn't be familiar with? I dunno.

 

[Mysterion]

I think all Historian's Notes should reflect where the book takes place in relation to Articles of the Federation.





(C'mon....somebody was gonna do it.)

But what do we need to read before that?



(You knew somebody was gonna do that too...didn't you?)

 

[Dayton Ward]

Historian's Note: This post takes place immediately after Mysterion's.

 

[Strider]

Does anyone else think “Historian’s Note” sounds far too serious and lame? It makes me cringe every time I read it, and brings up unpleasant images of super-nerds from Trekkies. I can’t imagine it having a positive impact on a casual reader browsing a bookstore.

Casual Reader: "Cool, a book with a spaceship and William Shatner on the cover! HISTORIAN'S NOTE ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!"

 

[neogothboy74]

The "Historian's Note" has never bothered me. At all. I like that they have them; they're almost always very useful. And the name itself fits the bill. I don't understand the problem. Maybe because there isn't one.

 

[Christopher]

Isn't "Historian's Note" a fairly common usage in series fiction in general? I don't see how there'd be anything forbidding about it. It's just representing the conceit that what we're reading a "historical" chronicle of actual events. It's no more "lame" than all those works of fantasy/SF literature from the late 1800s and early 1900s that opened with prologues of the author saying "I was told this tale by its key participant" or "I found this manuscript and present it to you now." Or having the Sherlock Holmes stories narrated from Watson's perspective as though he's chronicling his real-life experiences with the names changed to protect the innocent. Or, for that matter, using "Captain's Log" entries to introduce ST episodes.

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

Historian's notes: Are you kidding, it's a TV show. It never really happened. It's not history.

Chronological notes perhaps?

EDIT: Or someone write a story about this fictional historian quickly, before I find more nits to pick.

 

[DGCatAniSiri]

See, I LIKE the Historian's Note. I try and read the books in chronological order, so it's much easier to place the books when I know where in the timeline they fall, what books take place before and after it... The Historian's Note is very helpful for me.

 

[Cobalt Frost]

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a fic timeline like the Star Wars fic has, usually in the back of the books IIRC.

 

[TheAlmanac]

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing a fic timeline like the Star Wars fic has, usually in the back of the books IIRC.

Actually, the Star Wars timelines tend to be at the front of the books...

They also occurred to me as the main alternative for providing chronological information in a different format...but would that be more or less intimidating/"hardcore" from the OP's perspective?

 

[Trent Roman]

The Star Wars books can get away with that timeline because they're situated to only reference each other and the films. Can't do that with the hours of TV shows, ten/eleven films and the huge back-catalogue of novels that Trek has. The Timeliners can probably tell us how daunting that would look on the page.

As for the rest of it, I like "Historian's Note" (I've often wondered what later generations, looking back on the latter 24th-century, would make of such events). They're concise ways of locating oneself in an eventful universe. I also appreciate it when the note makes reference to the season as well as the episode the novel is meant to take place before/after/in conjunction with, since I don't know the episode titles and their location in the series' chronology by heart.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Jbarney]

Does anyone else think “Historian’s Note” sounds far too serious and lame? It makes me cringe every time I read it, and brings up unpleasant images of super-nerds from Trekkies. I can’t imagine it having a positive impact on a casual reader browsing a bookstore.

I don’t suppose there’s any chance of replacing “Historian’s Note” (which might as well read “For hardcore hardline scary fans only”) with something less nerdy, like “Where it fits in…” or something similarly benign?

Being one of the super-nerds you reference, I guess any change to the language wouldn't really matter as long as it conveyed accurately where the books happen.

 

[ronny]

I wonder if maybe the historical notes give the impression to some readers they are supposed to have read the book listed in the historical note instead of just taking that as info as to where it fits in the timeline.

Maybe instead of saying "This book takes place after Before Dishonor" which might falsely give the impression the reader has to read BD first, it could say something like "This books takes place after Janeway has died".

 

[T'Ressa Dax]

I like the historian's notes as they are, and I do read them. If you don't like them, skip them. It's better than every book coming up with stardates in their first page or something. Not that I mind the stardates either.

 

[Stevil2001]

To be honest, I prefer stardates or other internal dating cues. That way, if someone cares they can figure it out, if not, you haven't created this dry information overload at the beginning. Also, I find the use of Earth dates bothersome, since they weren't used on the show anywhere near the frequency they've been used in recent fiction. (Of course, we used them ourselves in The Future Begins because it's an easy way of showing the passage of time, but I felt guilty, and we managed to avoid any sort of dating system altogether in our Myriad Universes story.)

 

[DGCatAniSiri]

The Star Wars books can get away with that timeline because they're situated to only reference each other and the films. Can't do that with the hours of TV shows, ten/eleven films and the huge back-catalogue of novels that Trek has. The Timeliners can probably tell us how daunting that would look on the page.

Likewise, the Star Wars books themselves are far fewer in number that Star Trek novels, and over a smaller section of time. Excluding the Darth Bane novels and the upcoming Nomi Sunrider novel, they've all taken place in the same period of about one hundred years, and there's a distinct focus on one particular family and their drama, while Star Trek novels take place over three different centuries, and focus on multiple ships and their crews.