Poll: Bring Janeway back?

[Daikirai]

BSG could send their God over to ressurect Janeway.

 

[Dayton Ward]

^ It doesn't like to be called that.

 

[Trent Roman]

It should not be beholden to any requirement of enjoyability or nobility unless enjoyability is the primary goal of your story, which, IMO, makes for a boring story.

Well, I don't know about you, but for me Trek books are entertainment, a divertissement. I'm supposed to take pleasure from the activity. If I'm not enjoying myself, then why am I buying the books and taking the time to read them?

Stunt death. But as any resurrection would also be a stunt resurrection, IMO, it's six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Agreed. Janeway's characterization was off, the overall plot was riddled with holes and illogic, and Janeway's role in it was entirely incidental; because there are no internal reasons for this to have happened, it's pretty much an imposition on the material and a stunt death (as I have already alledged at the start of another one of these threads). Of course, at this point, any resurrection of Janeway would also be an imposition, a stunt resurrection--but since it follows a stunt death, I figure the two cancel each other out.

A question, though: since being dead essentially means that one has no character arc, wouldn't that make every resurrection a stunt resurrection? Except Dax, I suppose, who had resurrection built into her character.

BSG could send their God over to ressurect Janeway.

Oh, gag. Let the record show I would rather Janeway remain dead in perpetuity than have that kind of idiocy enter Trek. There are worse things than death.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Praetor]

1) In the real world, great people and unknowns die both noble and ignoble deaths alike. 2) Many people feel that in a fictional world, great people should only die noble deaths. I like to call it Kirk's Syndrome.

Let's face it: if strict realism is what one desires, then Star Trek--and speculatively fiction more generally--is the wrong product for you. Conceitless media are called 'documentaries', and even there, you're probably better off looking out the window to avoid editorial bias. This is, after all, a show about a better humanity, that has conquered prejudice and want and superstition, built massive starships capable of casually traveling at faster than light speeds to numberless habitable worlds with sentient species that look just like us except for a few bumps and who we can interbreed with and understand perfectly thanks to our universal translators, etc, etc. None of which is realistic, but one suspends disbelief because without it the product simply wouldn't be the same. Forsaking one of the most critical elements of that vision--the optimistic view of the future, without which Trek is just another space opera--in order to pointlessly butcher one of your leading characters... Well. My opinion on that is clear.

Understood and agreed to some extent. But is it too much to ask for a realistic portrayal of human beings (or relatively comparable human analogues?)

But as to this notion of noble deaths--I argued, previously in this thread, why I think heroic deaths are preferable. It occurred to me, thinking about it later, that I'm not really bothered by the idea of characters not dying heroically if it's beyond their timeframe. The 'suggestions', if you will, from IaMD, that Archer passes away of natural causes shortly after the inauguration of Kirk's Enterprise doesn't bother me at all, nor that Sato was one of Kodos' victims. It wouldn't bother me if McCoy keeled over in one of the current books, or if Picard were to die--many decades hence--from complications related to Irumodic Syndrome rather than in some blaze of glory (in fact, I think there might be something thematically appropriate about the most humane character succumbing to a common frailty like illness). A noble death is really if the story of a character's life ends premuturely--that there should be something meaningful there to make up for all the chapters that will go unwritten. Janeway was an interesting character whose journey, adventures, possibilities were pointlessly cut short. Really, when I get down to it, I don't think I'm believe unreasonable at all; my opposition is pretty specific to situations like this one, or Tucker in TatV.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

I agree with this.

It should not be beholden to any requirement of enjoyability or nobility unless enjoyability is the primary goal of your story, which, IMO, makes for a boring story.

Well, I don't know about you, but for me Trek books are entertainment, a divertissement. I'm supposed to take pleasure from the activity. If I'm not enjoying myself, then why am I buying the books and taking the time to read them?

I was speaking of the goal of the writer - the purpose for writing and telling the story. Not the purpose of the reader.

 

[Trent Roman]

Oh, I see--the author can't write trying to figure out what the audience will enjoy because there's no way to know, not that 'the audience' ever collectively agrees on what's enjoyable anyway. Yes.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Praetor]

Oh, I see--the author can't write trying to figure out what the audience will enjoy because there's no way to know, not that 'the audience' ever collectively agrees on what's enjoyable anyway. Yes.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

[Sheldon] Was that sarcasm? [/Sheldon]

Of course the author can write for the enjoyment of the audience while trying to actually tell a good story. But a writer would have many goals in mind in telling a story, and I see no reason why the author should, as you say, try to figure out what the ideal 'happy ending' is going to be, because everyone will never agree what a definitively ideal 'happy ending' is.

 

[hellsgate]

No more "Uber" characters that time-travel, defy The Borg & evade most difficult diseases & mortal wounds in combat Kirk-style.

 

[BillJ]

No more "Uber" characters that time-travel, defy The Borg & evade most difficult diseases & mortal wounds in combat Kirk-style.

Why? I find those characters intriguing, especially when all their 'daring do' finally catches up to them.

 

[Lynx]

Saito S wrote:

Ok. So what, then, makes "the Janeway case" different or special? Is it just cause it was Janeway, and she was a personal favorite? If so (and some have indicated that yes, it was as simple as that), that's perfectly fine. For me personally, the death of one main - even a favorite - wouldn't be enough to drive me away like that, but that's just me.
The reason I asked this is to try and get a sense of why you seem to feel that Janeway's death was wrong. A mistake that needs correcting, as I put it before. Weather you realize it or not, Lynx, your posts have frequently gone way beyond just trying to get across your opinion; you seem to lack the ability to process the notion that for some people, Janeway's death is fine, that accepting said death doesn't mean we want Trek to suddenly spiral into this dark pit of despair and destruction. I'm just trying to figure out why you can't accept that there are perfectly valid reasons to be ok with Janeway's death.

I admit that Janeway is a favorite of mine, not my no.1 favorite but one of many favorites and I just can't imagine to continue to read "Voyager" books which are built on the premise that the character is dead. I refuse to do that.

The reason for me to start reading Voyager books in the first place was to read about the characters from the TV series and how can I do that if they are constantly killed off, ruined or shatered for the wind? I have no intention to read about a bogus Voyager crew led by Captain Sharak, Liutenant Whoknowswhat and other third-rate replacements where the one and two remaining main characters from the series are walloping in grief over Janeway's death. That's not what I want to read about in a Voyager book.

And yes, I see the killing off of Janeway as a stupid mistake, both when it comes to tell good stories and when it comes to attracting Voyager fans to buy the books. I see no reason at all to kill off the character, there are thousands of other ways to tell a good story. I remember reading "The Black Shore" by Greg Cox from the first page to the last without pause because I found the story so incredible exciting. And that without any main characters killed off and without any walloping in grief and sorrow.

Not to mention the fact that they actually lose a great character on which they could have written a lot of great stories about.

If they wanted to write about a ship with other characters than the characters from the TV series and if they want a book series where main characters are killed off and where we have periods of grief and sorrow, then why not create a new series with all that. But don't kill off the main characters from the TV series.

What they have done is making lots of fans angry and upset and yes, they must have been aware of that when they planned that move.

Yes, I consider killing off Janeway a mistake which should be corrected.

And yes, I find it hard to understand those who think that killing off Janeway was a good move. They look at things from a different perspective, a perspective which I simply can't understand. I get the impression that many of my "opponents" in this case aren't Voyager fans or Janeway fans, they are fans of the authors and TrekLit as such. For them, Janeway (or other main characters as well) are only casual characters who can be killed off just to make a good effect. They also want the stories to be as "real" and close to "real life" as possible, but in that case, there are books and series which are "real", "dark", "gritty" and all that. Why impose that on Trek? OK, I like exciting stories which can be as close to "real life" as possible but without killing of main Trek characters. The clashes of opinion we have here are because we see things from such different angles that it's hard to find a compromise or middle way.

The difference between them and me are that if Janeway hadn't been killed off, they would have continued to read the books with great pleasure while Janeway's death was the end of the road for me since I simply can't accept it and won't continue to read books built on that scenario (and yes, I'm still p***ed off with the fact that Kes is absent in the books as well, for me the "Janeway incident" is "Fury" repeated again with another favorite character).

Not really. If a character is killed off, then of course the actor cannot continue on the show. But the reverse is not true. An actor leaving does not mean that the character NEEDS to die. When a character does die, it's cause the producers decided to take advantage of the fact that the actor left to try and tell a story revolving around that character's death, which is obviously something they don't get to do very often (Tasha, Jadzia). But just cause an actor is taking off, doesn't mean the character must be killed (Kes, Dr. Crusher after season 1).

You're right about that. I must state that I do find some of the deaths of main characters because the actor wanted to leave somewhat unecessary as well. But at least there might be that reason for such a move. In the Janeway case it wasn't.

 

[BillJ]

And yes, I find it hard to understand those who think that killing off Janeway was a good move. They look at things from a different perspective, a perspective which I simply can't understand.

It's because you don't want to see it from any other perspective. At least that is what I've gotten from the thoughts you've posted.

 

[joyofvgr]

BSG could send their God over to ressurect Janeway.

Will she get her own viper too?

 

[Paris]

BSG could send their God over to ressurect Janeway.

Will she get her own viper too?

It can show up as unblemished as Voyager was

 

[neogothboy74]

I'm content with Janeway's passing. I didn't jump up and down with glee when she died. I mourned her. But I don't view it as a mistake. People die. Janeway died well. And not everyone can. I mean, people die choking on their own vomit and they don't get do-overs. But Janeway resisted the Borg and saved countless lives. All this talk about bringing her back...I understand missing her... And if she comes back I'll continue to read the books, though I'll maybe respect them less. But it just means she'll die again. How many times does she have to die before we can let her go?

 

[joyofvgr]

BSG could send their God over to ressurect Janeway.

Will she get her own viper too?

It can show up as unblemished as Voyager was

 

[JD]

The reason for me to start reading Voyager books in the first place was to read about the characters from the TV series and how can I do that if they are constantly killed off, ruined or shatered for the wind? I have no intention to read about a bogus Voyager crew led by Captain Sharak, Liutenant Whoknowswhat and other third-rate replacements where the one and two remaining main characters from the series are walloping in grief over Janeway's death. That's not what I want to read about in a Voyager book.

Do you even read what other people post? Because if you did, you would know that pretty much everything you just said is not at all true.

 

[JB2005]

I can't remember if it's been said, but Voyager is a show about a bogus crew. The First Officer, Pilot, CMO and Chief Engineer were all killed in the pilot. The people crewing the ship aren't the people who should have been...

Just out of curiosity. How would people react if in a few years we had the Mulgrewverse? (ie Shatnerverse...)

 

[Praetor]

JB2005, I sense you may have just opened two gigantic cans of worms.

 

[JB2005]

If you're going to open cans of worms, aim big

 

[Lynx]

The reason for me to start reading Voyager books in the first place was to read about the characters from the TV series and how can I do that if they are constantly killed off, ruined or shatered for the wind? I have no intention to read about a bogus Voyager crew led by Captain Sharak, Liutenant Whoknowswhat and other third-rate replacements where the one and two remaining main characters from the series are walloping in grief over Janeway's death. That's not what I want to read about in a Voyager book.

Do you even read what other people post? Because if you did, you would know that pretty much everything you just said is not at all true.

Yes, I do read what other people post.

Yes, I know that there will be some more characters from the TV series who will appear. But I also know that 4, maybe 5 main characters will be missing.

And I still don't want to read about Captain Sharak's Voyager where the remaining characters from the series are walloping in grief over Janeway's death.

 

[Thrawn]

The reason for me to start reading Voyager books in the first place was to read about the characters from the TV series and how can I do that if they are constantly killed off, ruined or shatered for the wind? I have no intention to read about a bogus Voyager crew led by Captain Sharak, Liutenant Whoknowswhat and other third-rate replacements where the one and two remaining main characters from the series are walloping in grief over Janeway's death. That's not what I want to read about in a Voyager book.

Do you even read what other people post? Because if you did, you would know that pretty much everything you just said is not at all true.

Yes, I do read what other people post.

Yes, I know that there will be some more characters from the TV series who will appear. But I also know that 4, maybe 5 main characters will be missing.

And I still don't want to read about Captain Sharak's Voyager where the remaining characters from the series are walloping in grief over Janeway's death.

No, actually ALL the main characters that made it back to the alpha quadrant except Tuvok and Janeway are present and have vitally important character arcs going into Unworthy.

Also, by the end, no one is "walloping in grief" over anything, and the fact that another captain is in command is a much more complicated and interesting situation than you think; it's not like all the characters just say "well, she's just like Janeway!" and things move on.

And her name isn't Sharak, either.


ETA: Instead of making another post, I'll just put this here.

I know you won't like this book, Lynx, because you've stated over and over again that what appeals to you is not the characters themselves, but rather the specific dynamic between them. You view them as a band. And that's a totally understandable opinion. The dynamic by the end of Full Circle is totally different than it was on the show, so I think you won't like it.

But if you're fans of the characters themselves, I think that you couldn't get a better gift than Full Circle (with the obvious exception of Janeway) and Tuvok's role on Titan. Tuvok is so much more developed than he was on Voyager, and Full Circle gives our characters such fantastic moments of awesome that it's a dream come true for fans of most of the characters. Chakotay has the best Chakotay moment ever, in a positive way. Seven goes places that they never explored on the show, but are fascinating. Kim shows actual signs of maturity and growth. Etc, etc. Each *character* is treated, on their own terms, as a unique and human individual that undergoes a deep and compelling arc (believe it or not, including Janeway, before she dies). But the *group dynamic* is altered completely.

I'd appreciate it if you made that distinction too, though, because you really are in the habit of just totally making shit up that just is not true at all. There is no "character destruction" in this book, and no one is grief-stricken and unable to function by the end of the novel. It's not what you think AT ALL, so stop telling everyone it is.

The one thing you have correct is that, indeed, Janeway dies, and indeed, that means the crew is a very different dynamic. And that's enough to turn you away. Leave it at that, and stop pretending you know anything else, because you don't.