paul simpson on star trek magazine

[Steve Roby]

This is an important distinction between Star Trek and Doctor Who or, really, other British SF series--in my entire lifetime, the longest gap in live-action Star Trek has been the one we just had, 2005-2009.

You young whippersnapper. I was around for the ten-year gap in live action Star Trek, though I didn't get into the show until a couple of years into that decade.

The differences between the two fandoms are interesting, and I've long wondered why the two fandoms are so vastly different. The conclusions I've come to:

1) Doctor Who has no Roddenberry-like figure.

Everything else in the post is gold, but basically, this is it in a nutshell: there's no mythical Creator of Doctor Who. There's no Authority. And that parallels what the shows are about. One's about a more or less military organization, part of a hierarchical structure with clear lines of authority; the other is about a guy who dislikes all that stuff and just wanders around.

Star Trek fandom seems predisposed to need authority (all those "Gene Roddenberry would never have allowed this to happen" posts from people who clearly don't know how little core Trek stuff was created by Roddenberry) and canon. Doctor Who fandom seems to manage nicely without it. An oversimplification, perhaps, but I think there's some truth to it.

 

[TheAlmanac]

^There have been plenty of Trek novels and comics filling in gaps between episodes and/or movies.

Of course there are, but Doctor Who squeezes them in everywhere--even taking televised stories which seem to lead directly into each other and interpreting them so that additional stories can still be shoved in between.

I don't think of Star Trek tie-ins as getting to that level of narrative insertion.

As for shoving stories in between canonical installments that were meant to lead directly into each other, I refer you to DC's first TOS comic and William Rotsler's Star Trek III Short Stories.

The TOS comic example is somewhat similar to what I was saying about Doctor Who stories, but Paul already explained why the magazine wouldn't be doing any sort of comics--and at best, all you could really say here is that the DC Comics approach of twenty years ago is sort of like the ongoing Doctor Who approach.

I don't think of the "existing episodes told from a different perspective" model as being the same thing, especially since plenty of long-running franchises do something like that eventually: Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina, anyone?

...and Crucible: Kirk, which inserts a whole novel's worth of events between the scene in Generations where Kirk and Picard leave the Nexus and the subsequent scene where they confront Soran.

This would be the closest to what I was talking about with Doctor Who novels/audios--but it was part of a standalone trilogy which was explicitly not part of the ongoing novel continuity. If there were a whole series of Star Trek novels like that, then the overall approach would be more similar.

Otherwise, Allyn did a very good job of outlining the differences between the two fandoms which bear upon this--particularly the lack of an auteur viewpoint on Doctor Who as a whole (genre fans seem to love looking at series that way), and how different official stances on canonicity affect fans' perceptions of ancillary materials.

 

[Christopher]

1) Doctor Who has no Roddenberry-like figure. Yes, Who fans can talk about different producers and different script editors, but Star Trek is, somewhat inaccurately, seen as Roddenberry's baby, and fandom has long assigned him credit for things he had little, if any, involvement in. Who fandom recognizes the differences between the Holmes/Hinchcliffe era and the Graham Williams era and would never assign the strengths and failures of one to the other, for instance, but many Star Trek fans are confused as to the extent of Roddenberry's involvement in the Animated Series and the films, and Roddenberry's own historical revisionism over the years muddied the waters.

The flip side of this is the way some fans blame Brannon Braga for things he had no participation in such as Insurrection and Nemesis. A Who fan wouldn't blame John Nathan-Turner for the faults of the 1996 TV movie.

3) Doctor Who fans start at an earlier age, so there's a childhood nostalgia factor attached to Doctor Who in the minds of many fans, which Star Trek, by and large, seems not to have.

I started watching ST at five and a half. It used to be more kid-friendly, with an animated series and lots of toys and activity books. There's not as much of that now, though that's starting to change with the new movie.

Oh, yeah. Like the fifth Doctor/Peri non-gap. If you take the novels and the audios, there's roughly ten years for the Doctor and Peri between "Planet of Fire" and "The Caves of Androzani."

Really? She sure doesn't look ten years older. Even has the same haircut. And isn't she in basically the same outfit in both?

I don't think of Star Trek tie-ins as getting to that level of narrative insertion.

I used to think that Prime Directive was a little problematic. That's probably the worst-case scenario, though.

"Mind-sifter" in Bantam's The New Voyages has Kirk lost in the past for more than a year, both from his own POV and that of the Enterprise crew. I think the gap in Prime Directive is more a matter of months.

The 34th Rule is tricky because it takes several months in DS9's late 4th season, which is pretty tight chronologically to begin with. And it can't overlap any full episodes since Quark is featured at least briefly in every episode in the relevant span. Even using every trick I can manage to fit it in, I still have to stretch out the 4th season to significantly over a year.

 

[PaulSimpson]

The flip side of this is the way some fans blame Brannon Braga for things he had no participation in such as Insurrection and Nemesis. A Who fan wouldn't blame John Nathan-Turner for the faults of the 1996 TV movie..

Wanna bet? Those who blamed him for Sylvester's casting might well do so..!!

 

[ChristopherPike]

As a side note to diagrams, cut-away and illustrations... (since I've never much for sitting down, shutting up and letting issues important to me go. )

What happened back in the days of Star Trek Fact Files or the US ST Magazine (not Communicator), when Rick Sternbach, Doug Drexler et all used to contribute new material? Did that publication have to fork out most of their budget to get everything provided, approved? Or was it somehow easier 5-10 years ago, when those artists were working away inside the Studio? There's no way it was all part of an archive of material, much of it seems to have been created just for that partwork... (I do actually recall seeing ENT features toward the end of their run... an NX bridge cutaway for instance.)

 

[PaulSimpson]

As a side note to diagrams, cut-away and illustrations... (since I've never much for sitting down, shutting up and letting issues important to me go. )

What happened back in the days of Star Trek Fact Files or the US ST Magazine (not Communicator), when Rick Sternbach, Doug Drexler et all used to contribute new material? Did that publication have to fork out most of their budget to get everything provided, approved? Or was it somehow easier 5-10 years ago, when those artists were working away inside the Studio? There's no way it was all part of an archive of material, much of it seems to have been created just for that partwork... (I do actually recall seeing ENT features toward the end of their run... an NX bridge cutaway for instance.)

I think you've hit the key point here.

As far as I know, the whole point is that they were working inside the studio,and the material was provided as part of their work with the studio. I'm not saying that as a fact, just my understanding of the situation.

I checked back with the last survey (albeit of the British edition, as it was back then) and blueprints weren't a high priority - but of course at that stage, the Fact Files were still running...

 

[Rick Sternbach]

As a side note to diagrams, cut-away and illustrations... (since I've never much for sitting down, shutting up and letting issues important to me go. )

What happened back in the days of Star Trek Fact Files or the US ST Magazine (not Communicator), when Rick Sternbach, Doug Drexler et all used to contribute new material? Did that publication have to fork out most of their budget to get everything provided, approved? Or was it somehow easier 5-10 years ago, when those artists were working away inside the Studio? There's no way it was all part of an archive of material, much of it seems to have been created just for that partwork... (I do actually recall seeing ENT features toward the end of their run... an NX bridge cutaway for instance.)

I think you've hit the key point here.

As far as I know, the whole point is that they were working inside the studio,and the material was provided as part of their work with the studio. I'm not saying that as a fact, just my understanding of the situation.

I checked back with the last survey (albeit of the British edition, as it was back then) and blueprints weren't a high priority - but of course at that stage, the Fact Files were still running...

While most of the articles I worked on for pubs like Star Trek The Magazine benefited from material available during the various productions, a good fraction of it was created especially for the articles by myself and folks like set designer Tim Earls. True, we had the resources of the base material we had already created for the shows, and not many people outside of the studio could do that today. If asked, we can still create new articles and visuals. I'm game for TNG/DS9/Voy stuff, and I'm sure Tim would be as well.

Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com

 

[PaulSimpson]

As a side note to diagrams, cut-away and illustrations... (since I've never much for sitting down, shutting up and letting issues important to me go. )

What happened back in the days of Star Trek Fact Files or the US ST Magazine (not Communicator), when Rick Sternbach, Doug Drexler et all used to contribute new material? Did that publication have to fork out most of their budget to get everything provided, approved? Or was it somehow easier 5-10 years ago, when those artists were working away inside the Studio? There's no way it was all part of an archive of material, much of it seems to have been created just for that partwork... (I do actually recall seeing ENT features toward the end of their run... an NX bridge cutaway for instance.)

I think you've hit the key point here.

As far as I know, the whole point is that they were working inside the studio,and the material was provided as part of their work with the studio. I'm not saying that as a fact, just my understanding of the situation.

I checked back with the last survey (albeit of the British edition, as it was back then) and blueprints weren't a high priority - but of course at that stage, the Fact Files were still running...

While most of the articles I worked on for pubs like Star Trek The Magazine benefited from material available during the various productions, a good fraction of it was created especially for the articles by myself and folks like set designer Tim Earls. True, we had the resources of the base material we had already created for the shows, and not many people outside of the studio could do that today. If asked, we can still create new articles and visuals. I'm game for TNG/DS9/Voy stuff, and I'm sure Tim would be as well.

Rick
www.spacemodelsystems.com

Rick, can you drop me a PM please - let's talk!

Paul

 

[seigezunt]

I've read the magazine a few times, but it never held me. I think it just looks a little too official for my taste. And glossy. But that's just me, and I understand you have an audience to satisfy.

 

[PaulSimpson]

I've read the magazine a few times, but it never held me. I think it just looks a little too official for my taste. And glossy. But that's just me, and I understand you have an audience to satisfy.

We can print some pictures badly if you want !

 

[William Leisner]

^ Yes, please, enough competence and professionalism.

 

[seigezunt]

^ Yes, please, enough competence and professionalism.

I'm sorry what I wrote came off badly. It's really a lovely magazine, but I've always enjoyed the unofficial stuff better, which isn't tied to approval from TPTB. I don't know, it's like I don't enjoy the NuWho writing in DWM either, all RTD about how glorious it is.

But I'll give it another shot perhaps. Can I get a coupon?

 

[PaulSimpson]

^ No offense was taken! And Mr Leisner, please don't use words that make me go to a dictionary!

Seriously, I think that accusation was fairer during the time when the TV shows were in production; if you look at our Voyager issue (16), there's a lot of constructive criticism of the show, both by our writers, and also from the interviewees. My rule (and mainly it's not led to problems) is that you can criticise things that we've seen, as long as you make a good argument. Just saying "Ewwww! Enterprise stinks!" or whatever isn't going to make it; saying that "Year of Hell" might have made the good basis for a season of Voyager, and explaining why, will...
The Powers That Be on NuTrek take their cue from JJ, who is very self-deprecating at times, which does mean that the sort of interview that goes "Tell me again how wonderful you are?" doesn't usually happen - and to my pleasant surprise, when I've interviewed them, they've engaged in debate rather than just saying "This is it. Take it or leave it."
Have a look at the upcoming Villains issue - I think you may be surprised.

Paul

 

[William Leisner]

^ And Mr Leisner, please don't use words that make me go to a dictionary!

Me am sorry.

 

[PaulSimpson]

^ And Mr Leisner, please don't use words that make me go to a dictionary!

Me am sorry.

I'll let you off as you're still reveling in the Unreality-SF review of Losing the Peace...

 

[ChristopherPike]

Is it worth considering doing a reader's survey sometime soon? I guess that usually entails voting for the best magazine feature, (maybe a tick box list of what readers would like to see in future), favourite recent novel, best issue of the magazine that year, fan rating of Star Trek 2009, among other questions.

I see DWM are currently making a big deal out of it's all-time favourite story poll. What if that was done across every series, leading to not just the Top 10 within TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT... how episodes (and films) regardless of generation, stack up against each other? Which episodes are more popular than The Wrath of Khan? Where does the latest film rate in all this? Work out by percentage the most popular seasons in all of Trek? Although maybe an idea best kept in reserve for 2011 and the 45th Anniversary?

 

[PaulSimpson]

Is it worth considering doing a reader's survey sometime soon? I guess that usually entails voting for the best magazine feature, (maybe a tick box list of what readers would like to see in future), favourite recent novel, best issue of the magazine that year, fan rating of Star Trek 2009, among other questions.

I see DWM are currently making a big deal out of it's all-time favourite story poll. What if that was done across every series, leading to not just the Top 10 within TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT... how episodes (and films) regardless of generation, stack up against each other? Which episodes are more popular than The Wrath of Khan? Where does the latest film rate in all this? Work out by percentage the most popular seasons in all of Trek? Although maybe an idea best kept in reserve for 2011 and the 45th Anniversary?

Although I can see the attraction, I'm sure working out 200 ratings was pretty difficult - 3 and a half times that for all the different stories would be a nightmare... Volunteering to coordinate it?

 

[William Leisner]

I'll let you off as you're still reveling in the Unreality-SF review of Losing the Peace...

... which was just as revel-worthy as the highly complimentary review the book received in Star Trek Magazine!

 

[ChristopherPike]

I see DWM are currently making a big deal out of it's all-time favourite story poll. What if that was done across every series, leading to not just the Top 10 within TOS/TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT... how episodes (and films) regardless of generation, stack up against each other? Which episodes are more popular than The Wrath of Khan? Where does the latest film rate in all this? Work out by percentage the most popular seasons in all of Trek? Although maybe an idea best kept in reserve for 2011 and the 45th Anniversary?

Although I can see the attraction, I'm sure working out 200 ratings was pretty difficult - 3 and a half times that for all the different stories would be a nightmare... Volunteering to coordinate it?

What's the going rate?

I take your point. That would be a nightmare with 726 episodes and 10 films. Do you count 2 and 3-parters as one story? In which case that's down to 664 (down even less if you look deeper at consecutive arcs like DS9 in the hands of the Dominion). Worse yet, we're probably looking an embarrassing outcome for half-way decent stories which just aren't remembered as they probably deserve. I mean I can imagine 'Threshold' justifiably getting 0% of the vote but I guess I don't particularly have utter confidence in the wisdom of crowds when it comes to the later years of Trek.

 

[PaulSimpson]

That would be a nightmare with 726 episodes and 10 films. .

11!! My reference to 10 was regarding the period before the JJ movie...