Poll: Bring Janeway back?

[Therin of Andor]

I have a feeling that those who have read the manuscript for "Full Circle" are parts of the "fanclub" who are more fans of the writers than the different series.

Professional authors aren't capable of giving negative feedback to their own colleagues?

 

[Dark Gilligan]

Sorry to put a dampener on your little theory there, but Kes had a life span of NINE and not seven years.

No theory here; publicists talked about that very thing at the time as Therin stated. Indeed, a good number of Voyager's characters turned out differently than how they were originally conceived. Tuvok is the prime example. He was supposed to be an elderly engineer, advisor to Janeway and mentor to B'Elanna. Janeway herself had a name change. And Robert Picardo auditioned for Neelix, not the Doctor (who was not a hologram at all but a human who, because of a transporter accident, couldn't be re-materialized and was forced to exist in the holodeck.)

 

[Therin of Andor]

Most sci-fi readers I know get their books online, because sci-fi is a niche market, bookstores are not as likely to stock.

Exactly. I've had many discussions with bookshop managers over the decades. Impatient avid Star Trek fans were very early adopters of Internet shopping.

 

[ronny]

I must also add that I have a feeling that those who have read the manuscript for "Full Circle" are parts of the "fanclub" who are more fans of the writers than the different series.

At first I felt insulted by that comment but then I thought "Hey, he's right, I do like David Mack more than Voyager". And if that isn't damning Mack with faint praise I don't know what is.

 

[brcarthey]

4th least?? not wanting to start an argument, but that's not what i've seen.

Well, it's true. Repeats of TOS in early primetime received huge ratings in syndication in the 70s. TNG performed to unprecedented figures for first-run drama in syndication. For its last five years it was the top-rating one hour of syndicated drama. DS9's figures were much lower than TNG's. VOY was on the Paramount network and, although it was their top-rated one hour of drama, the figures were much smaller than DS9. ENT was also on the Paramount network, and its figures were even smaller than VOY's.

well, i'll have to take your word for the TOS re-run ratings. however, i think your comparisons b/t DS9 and VOY are a tad hyperbolic (see graph below).

but, using ratings to compare each of the franchises' successes and failures is not using the most sound data. i'm not trying to be an apologist for any of the non-TNG series, but reading the article at the treknation link below makes this argument a little circumspect...

http://www.treknation.com/articles/ratings_history.shtml


"

 

[Therin of Andor]

well, i'll have to take your word for the TOS re-run ratings. however, i think your comparisons b/t DS9 and VOY are a tad hyperbolic (see graph below).

I see a graph where the numbers continue on a downward trend to miniscule, and seem to indicate that VOY was, indeed, less popular than DS9, which is exactly what I said.

The Paramount Network wasn't even received in some parts of the US, so VOY's numbers were definitely lower than DS9, TNG and 70s syndicated TOS.

 

[Thrawn]

Yeah. DS9 pretty consistently beat VOY for its whole run, and VOY continued to decline after that. The difference on the graph is fairly small, but it was definitely true.

 

[brcarthey]

well, i'll have to take your word for the TOS re-run ratings. however, i think your comparisons b/t DS9 and VOY are a tad hyperbolic (see graph below).

I see a graph where the numbers continue on a downward trend to miniscule, and seem to indicate that VOY was, indeed, less popular than DS9, which is exactly what I said.

The Paramount Network wasn't even received in some parts of the US, so VOY's numbers were definitely lower than DS9, TNG and 70s syndicated TOS.

yes they were lower overall, but when i was referencing the "much" in your statement, which i guess the word "much" is open to interpretation. it depends on how much is "much."

 

[Thrawn]

IIRC, at some point, John Ordover mentioned that judging by sales, putting Picard on the cover caused the biggest bump...or something like that. Judging by sales, Picard is the most popular captain. And that's what they care about.

It may be that Janeway inspires more of her fans to come talk about how awesome she is on messageboards, but that's not the same thing.

 

[Therin of Andor]

IIRC, at some point, John Ordover mentioned that judging by sales, putting Picard on the cover caused the biggest bump...or something like that. Judging by sales, Picard is the most popular captain. And that's what they care about.

Yep. When Wil Wheaton was on TNG, he got the most fanmail, followed by Data, but Picard on ST novels was hard to beat.

 

[teya]

Besides that, some of them who might be angry over the death of a fictional character might even have had that fiction as a place and pastime to get away from real losses in real life as well.

That's even more true than you think. In the last 10 years, I lost five family members, two friends, and a colleague. I don't need to be taught the lesson of loss and death, I already experienced it more than I care for.
So Lynx is quite right in that regard. Writers should be writing books to entertain us, not to teach us lessons about death; real life is a much better teacher than they could ever hope to be.
And forgive me for saying so, but whatever explanation they come up with for killing off Janeway, we all know the primary reason is to sell books. Offing main characters is a cheap way to do that, and people are interested for the same reason they stop or slow down on the highway when they see there has been an accident : to see the blood and gore and be happy it's not them in the wrecked car.

You weaken your argument when you make such generalizations.

Not everyone reads to escape. People have all sorts of different reasons for reading.

Personally, I simply like to put myself in another person's shoes.

I'm interested in "Full Circle" because I want to see how an author handles the repercussions of a death.

And this is *not* (even though you do infer that) because I don't have a clue what it's like to lose loved ones--it's because I *do*.

Again, different strokes for different folks.

 

[Lynx]

I have a feeling that those who have read the manuscript for "Full Circle" are parts of the "fanclub" who are more fans of the writers than the different series.

Professional authors aren't capable of giving negative feedback to their own colleagues?

I must have misunderstood your comment because I thought that you referred to fans here who had read some excerpts from those manuscripts, therfore the comment about the "fanclub".

But it does make me a bit dissapointed that there seem to be such a support for the current direction (Janeway'¨s death) and such among the proffesional authors. It would have been gret if anyone had come up with objections.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I must have misunderstood your comment because I thought that you referred to fans here who had read some excerpts from those manuscripts, therfore the comment about the "fanclub".

I'm not talking about fan reactions to online excepts. I'm saying that those who've read all of "Full Circle", in advance copies, seem to be giving it high praise. They are judging it as a work of fiction, and find it of excellent quality.

It would have been gret if anyone had come up with objections.

Maybe they don't care for Janeway's death, but they do like what Kirsten Beyer has done with it.

 

[Thrawn]

And this is *not* (even though you do infer that) because I don't have a clue what it's like to lose loved ones--it's because I *do*.

Absolutely.

Buffy The Vampire Slayer had an amazing episode that featured the unexpected death of a major character, and it helped me get over an immense loss I had at the time.

People have different reactions to tragedy. My reaction is not to read stories that are completely different, it's to read stories that are emotionally the same but in different contexts, so I can find other points of view on my tragedy.

And what better different context than science fiction, guaranteed to prompt new thoughts...and what better science fiction than Star Trek, guaranteed to always end up on an optimistic message?

 

[teya]

And this is *not* (even though you do infer that) because I don't have a clue what it's like to lose loved ones--it's because I *do*.

Absolutely.

Buffy The Vampire Slayer had an amazing episode that featured the unexpected death of a major character, and it helped me get over an immense loss I had at the time.

People have different reactions to tragedy. My reaction is not to read stories that are completely different, it's to read stories that are emotionally the same but in different contexts, so I can find other points of view on my tragedy.

And what better different context than science fiction, guaranteed to prompt new thoughts...and what better science fiction than Star Trek, guaranteed to always end up on an optimistic message?

The only redeeming scene for me in the finale of "Enterprise" was when T'Pol was cleaning out Trip's quarters. There were so many things in Jolene's movements that just hit me as absolutely true--and they were things I might not have picked up on had I not been widowed young.

 

[Gorf]

I respond to any new aspects of the debate, or attempt to clarify things, or provide new evidence, if I think comments seem to be unclear or misguided.

Ahh - I guess I just didn't think there were many new aspects.

When did I say I was tired of you? I'm a bit amazed that there are people who don't read the novels, but still feel a need to demand that the novels go more in a direction they'd prefer, even though they say they'd be unlikely to read them anyway.

You didn't - not me specifically, but I have heard plenty of complaining about these threads running as long as they have. I can't for the life of me remember if you've used that exact phrase, but...

Anyway I still just find it funny that so many come in here and tell us to move on, to let it go, etc. and often just to complain that we're still arguing this.

To those I say - move on. I choose to reply when I want to - most I simply ignore.

And to be fair I think people have said the exact opposite of what you say above. It's true that I haven't read a Star Trek book in many years, but it's not true that I've said that I couldn't ever be persuaded to buy another IF said book lived up to a few specifications - one being that Janeway was brought back to life and the editor/publisher decided to invest time and money in a good story - something the Voyager line has lacked for years. They simply haven't invested the time and energy it required, or so it seems to me.

AND you can tell me any number of times that I misunderstand or that they simply decided to stick with CG and...blah blah blah... It will prove nothing. If they really wanted the Voyager line to thrive then they should have been a bit more attentive.

Potential buyers don't remain potential forever unless they're fed regularly.

I do remember the early 80s...

I couldn't care less about the 80's, 70's, 60's or even the 90's. I care about now.

 

[Lynx]

I must have misunderstood your comment because I thought that you referred to fans here who had read some excerpts from those manuscripts, therfore the comment about the "fanclub".

I'm not talking about fan reactions to online excepts. I'm saying that those who've read all of "Full Circle", in advance copies, seem to be giving it high praise. They are judging it as a work of fiction, and find it of excellent quality.

It would have been gret if anyone had come up with objections.

Maybe they don't care for Janeway's death, but they do like what Kirsten Beyer has done with it.

Well, it may be well-written but it doesn't change anything for me. I've had enough of character destruction.

 

[Gorf]

Writers of fiction write primarily for themselves. If their readers like what they've written, then that's a bonus.

Writers may write because they enjoy it, but I think it's a bit too simplistic to say that they do so entirely for themselves, and that readers are just a bonus because without an audience, without readers they will be out of a job pretty quickly.

No books sold = no contract = no income.

It's true that readers don't dictate the contents of a book, but a writer can't survive without his or her readers.

I've got a job and most of the time I enjoy it, but lets face it - I'm in it for the money. If I wasnt, I'd be doing it for free and obviously I'm not cause I've got rent to pay like everybody else.

Just like these writers.

 

[Thrawn]

Gorf - that's almost, but not quite, true. In fact, it's more like the writers do write for themselves, and then the jobs of editors and licensing people in this case are to reign in any impulses the writers have that seem off-brand or unmarketable. (Or, more accurately, commission on-brand, marketable stories in the first place.)

And in this case, those EDITORS initially decided to kill Janeway, and the Paramount/CBS office approved. They feel as though this is a decision befitting Star Trek as a whole. And they're the ones with the legal right to decide.

So no, a writer can't survive without his or her readers, and yes, they're in it for the money...but even the people whose job it is to design these things so they appeal to the target audience (more or less) and stay true to themselves decided this was a good call.

 

[Gorf]

Sorry to put a dampener on your little theory there, but Kes had a life span of NINE and not seven years.

No theory here; publicists talked about that very thing at the time as Therin stated. Indeed, a good number of Voyager's characters turned out differently than how they were originally conceived.

But why on earth do you choose to focus on details that might have been part of a draft at some point, but were never carried out on the show? It seems pointless to me.

Drafts are just that - drafts.