Writing a Trek novel...

[Therin of Andor]

Why that? Was the novel you sold a disappointment so that no one wanted to deal with you?

There are any number of reasons why a piece of writing gets rejected - and only some of those have anything to do with the quality of the writing.

BTW:

On a related tangent, have you not heard of the "peeling the onion" phenomenon? Many writers mention how hard it is to write/sell their second novel. If the first novel required delving into one's inner thoughts and memories to get the characters sounding and acting like real people, one has to go even deeper into one's inner thoughts for the next novel - and so on, like peeling the layers of an onion.

 

[Lorraine Anderson]

I'm still trying to write my first novel so I can get all of my 1st novel mistakes done and over with!

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I'm still trying to write my first novel so I can get all of my 1st novel mistakes done and over with!

Keep us posted on its progress, Lorraine!

 

[BrotherBenny]

I wrote my first novel four years ago. It's taken me this long to get my head around writing another after the first was rejected. Got a nice pile of rejection slips though.

This second novel is a doozy, I'm just making all new mistakes this time.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I wrote my first novel four years ago. It's taken me this long to get my head around writing another after the first was rejected. Got a nice pile of rejection slips though.

This second novel is a doozy, I'm just making all new mistakes this time.

If you don't mind me asking:

You sold your first, and now you're working on another? Or you putting the first on hold, and working on a second novel?

 

[Christopher]

^Once you've finished one project, it's best to go right into the next project rather than waiting until you sell the first one, since you might not succeed in selling it, or at least it's likely to take a good deal of time to sell it.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I wrote my first novel four years ago. It's taken me this long to get my head around writing another after the first was rejected. Got a nice pile of rejection slips though.

This second novel is a doozy, I'm just making all new mistakes this time.

If you don't mind me asking:

You sold your first, and now you're working on another? Or you putting the first on hold, and working on a second novel?

Joel, reread my post carefully, (emphasis mine).

If you want to be a writer you keep writing. Novel after novel. Eventually, if you're any good, you'll get published.

 

[Ssosmcin]

But the part that's really going to impress an editor is the stuff you can't get from another writer -- it's your own unique voice and inspiration, the stuff that has to come from you. The polish is just the surface layer. It's what's beneath the polish that matters.

Yes, I agree 100%, that will come through on its own.

I wrote my first novel four years ago. It's taken me this long to get my head around writing another after the first was rejected. Got a nice pile of rejection slips though.

I hear ya, you really have to drag yourself back on that horse. That's the hardest part, starting when you don't "feel it." But once you get going, it's like crack.

This second novel is a doozy, I'm just making all new mistakes this time.

We're along the same path, although I paused to finish up a couple of short stories, but now I'm back on track. I love the new mistakes, just so long as I don't keep repeating the old ones. When I go back to revise, I can always tell at what points I was getting tired, or reusing to end a chapter as I find myself falling back on my own cliches. But damn, there's nothing like making something great out of the pedestrian first draft.

Good luck with it.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I wrote my first novel four years ago. It's taken me this long to get my head around writing another after the first was rejected. Got a nice pile of rejection slips though.

This second novel is a doozy, I'm just making all new mistakes this time.

If you don't mind me asking:

You sold your first, and now you're working on another? Or you putting the first on hold, and working on a second novel?

Joel, reread my post carefully, (emphasis mine).

If you want to be a writer you keep writing. Novel after novel. Eventually, if you're any good, you'll get published.

 

[Rush Limborg]

^That's just the way it works. Making a sale is no guarantee that the rejection letters will stop coming, because editors make that decision on a story-by-story basis. It's not like they'll buy anything from a writer just because that writer has sold something before. After my first two sales, I didn't sell anything else for years. And those first two sales were two years apart.

Rejections are just part of this business. You write something, you market it, it gets rejected, you try again. Heck, even tie-in authors get rejections. I've pitched ideas to Marco and Margaret that they just didn't like.

Yuppers.

After all, Tolkien struggled for an insane amount of time to get Lord of the Rings published.

And then there was Melville, and Moby Dick....

 

[Joel_Kirk]

^That's just the way it works. Making a sale is no guarantee that the rejection letters will stop coming, because editors make that decision on a story-by-story basis. It's not like they'll buy anything from a writer just because that writer has sold something before. After my first two sales, I didn't sell anything else for years. And those first two sales were two years apart.

Rejections are just part of this business. You write something, you market it, it gets rejected, you try again. Heck, even tie-in authors get rejections. I've pitched ideas to Marco and Margaret that they just didn't like.

Yuppers.

After all, Tolkien struggled for an insane amount of time to get Lord of the Rings published.

And then there was Melville, and Moby Dick....

Just on that same note:

I found it so interesting how the book business is similar to the film and television business. As someone who hates Hollywood (but wants to utilize it for my own purposes ) I definitely realize that 'rejection' is part of the media biz...especially if you want to set yourself apart from the crowd.

Btw, I'm thinking of putting the Lord of the Rings on my list of books of read. (I'm also intersted in reading The Silmarillion).

On another note:

I actually looked at the guidelines for the Trek proposals, and I realize that some have said the guidelines were too restrictive; I don't see it.

 

[JarodRussell]

You haven't read Lord of the Rings yet? It's a must read. Go get it as soon as you can!

It also should be the great ideal as to how a great novel should be crafted, and how detailed a universe should be created. Just once I'd like to see an author put as much effort into a Star Trek novel as Tolkien put into Lord of the Rings.

I actually looked at the guidelines for the Trek proposals, and I realize that some have said the guidelines were too restrictive; I don't see it.

I find they leave not much room for shaking things up a bit. Okay, they don't take the novel you're submitting there anyway, it's just a job interview, but I fail to see how they could recognize the full potential you really have when they only let you submit story ideas that have even less possibilities than a regular TV episode.

 

[Christopher]

I find they leave not much room for shaking things up a bit. Okay, they don't take the novel you're submitting there anyway, it's just a job interview, but I fail to see how they could recognize the potential you really have when they only let you submit story ideas that have even less possibilities than a regular TV episode.

Well, for one thing, by seeing what you can accomplish despite staying within the guidelines. At the risk of blowing my own horn, look at Ex Machina. It's set during an established time period within the TOS continuity, it focuses primarily on the main cast, it doesn't make any fundamental changes in the characters or the world beyond what we already saw onscreen -- I think that for the most part, it fits the letter of the guidelines pretty well. But it still manages to push its share of boundaries and tell an unconventional, significant story.

It's easy to see possibilities when there are no limits. The real creative challenge is finding the possibilities that exist when there are limits. This is why people write haikus and sonnets. It's about finding the ways you can be wildly creative even within a rigid set of boundaries.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I fail to see how they could recognize the full potential you really have when they only let you submit story ideas that have even less possibilities than a regular TV episode.

Who said the proposal will have "even less possibilities than a regular TV episode"?

You can come up with aliens that makeup and CGI couldn't ever accomplish, planets with intricate sets that can't be built in a soundstage, science that borders on the unbelievable, and a story that would blow the budget of any TV show.

But... you have to convey your writing skill, ability to follow instruction, and the scope of your story, in three economical chapters.

Sounds like enormous possibilities there!

 

[BrotherBenny]

I find they leave not much room for shaking things up a bit. Okay, they don't take the novel you're submitting there anyway, it's just a job interview, but I fail to see how they could recognize the potential you really have when they only let you submit story ideas that have even less possibilities than a regular TV episode.

Well, for one thing, by seeing what you can accomplish despite staying within the guidelines. At the risk of blowing my own horn, look at Ex Machina. It's set during an established time period within the TOS continuity, it focuses primarily on the main cast, it doesn't make any fundamental changes in the characters or the world beyond what we already saw onscreen -- I think that for the most part, it fits the letter of the guidelines pretty well. But it still manages to push its share of boundaries and tell an unconventional, significant story.

It's easy to see possibilities when there are no limits. The real creative challenge is finding the possibilities that exist when there are limits. This is why people write haikus and sonnets. It's about finding the ways you can be wildly creative even within a rigid set of boundaries.

But Ex Machina is seen as a sequel to both the Motion Picture and FTWIHAIHTTS, and IIRC "sequels" are not permitted within the guidelines.

Just being nitpicky here, since Ex Machina is one of my favourite novels and I'm still hoping you get to write what could easily be that second (and possibly third) five year mission under Kirk.

 

[Christopher]

But Ex Machina is seen as a sequel to both the Motion Picture and FTWIHAIHTTS, and IIRC "sequels" are not permitted within the guidelines.

Well, no analogy is perfect. I wasn't telling him to write Ex Machina. I was just using it to illustrate the point that it's possible to find degrees of creative freedom even within a framework that doesn't alter the status quo of the series.

Just being nitpicky here, since Ex Machina is one of my favourite novels and I'm still hoping you get to write what could easily be that second (and possibly third) five year mission under Kirk.

I established in Mere Anarchy: The Darkness Drops Again that there's no third 5YM. After the second 5YM, Kirk accepts promotion to Admiral but keeps the Enterprise as his personal flagship with Spock as its captain, periodically going on special missions under Kirk's command.

I've never bought the assumption that five-year missions were somehow a default assignment for Starfleet vessels. We only have evidence of one ship having one 5YM, and one example isn't evidence of a pattern. And logically starship missions would have many different profiles and durations; there's no sense in applying the same formula to every ship and every situation. The only reason I went with the idea of a second 5YM is because it's used in some of the books I chose to tie ExM into (primarily The Captain's Daughter). But with roughly 12 years between TMP and TWOK, that means the majority of that time would've followed the special-missions pattern I established in MA:TDDA. Which is something I'd certainly like to see explored more, whether by my hand or someone else's.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I was under the impression that the Connies were all sent on five year missions. Hell, the ship was actually 20 years old BEFORE Kirk took command. If Kirk took command in 2365, then the Enterprise was commissioned in 2345 under April. Why could the Excalibur, Lexington, etc not also have gone out under 5YMs and all completed them before moving on to more core-world patrol and exploratory missions once the Klingons started rattling their Bat'leths. That would explain why a few Connies were around at certain times (M5 incident for example).

 

[Christopher]

I was under the impression that the Connies were all sent on five year missions.

That's a widely held fan assumption, but in actual canon there's not a shred of evidence for it. There's never been any mention that any ship other than the Enterprise had a five-year mission, ever. And outside of the opening narration, there are no explicit references to the 5YM within TOS itself; the closest we come is in "The Mark of Gideon" where Kirk says the ship has enough provisions to feed a crew of 430 for five years.

The few explicit references are post-TOS. In ST:TMP, Kirk cites "My experience, five years out there dealing with unknowns like this." The only actual use of the phrase "five-year mission" in all of Trek outside of the TOS main titles is in VGR: "Q2," in which Icheb states "Finally, in the year 2270, Kirk completed his historic five-year mission and one of the greatest chapters in Starfleet history came to a close." (Maybe one could make a case for "Yesteryear," in which McCoy says that Thelin has been Kirk's first officer for five years, but that's inconclusive, since they could've served together before the tour of duty began, and it's an alternate timeline anyway.)

If anything, Icheb's line suggests that Kirk's five-year mission was something unusual -- not just a historic five-year mission, but his historic five-year mission, as though it were something particular to him. It also implies pretty strongly that the mission of 2266-70 was his only five-year mission.

Hell, the ship was actually 20 years old BEFORE Kirk took command.

We have no firm canonical information about exactly when the Enterprise was commissioned. The only canonical statement about its age, Morrow's "20 years old" line from TSFS, is clearly incorrect. We know the ship was launched before 2254 ("The Cage"), but beyond that, we only have conjecture. The Okudas' 2245 launch date was pure guesswork.

Why could the Excalibur, Lexington, etc not also have gone out under 5YMs and all completed them before moving on to more core-world patrol and exploratory missions once the Klingons started rattling their Bat'leths.

There's no reason they couldn't have, but there's no evidence that they did, and it's illogical to assume that every starship mission is five years long by default. One isolated example does not prove a universal pattern. It's possible that multiple ships have had five-year tours of service, but that's far more likely to be just one possible mission profile out of many.

 

[BrotherBenny]

I took Icheb's line to be that the Enterprise was the only one to actually complete the five year mission, which would make it historic, as the other ships which were launched later might have been called back for some reason or other.

I do however see your point. Was it Roddenberry's intention for a five year mission to be a standard operation or was he just making up something that sounded good for the opening narration.

 

[Dayton Ward]

^ He was projecting his wishful thinking for the series run on NBC