Random Thought: Was Janeway Killed Because She was So Polarizing?

[Sci]

The reasons why people want to or don't want to read a book aren't always as simplistic as they may sound. For example, I know that Ole Yeller is considered a classic but I have no intention of reading the novel or watching the film. Call me crazy but reading about/watching a young boy's beloved dog get shot because of rabies is not my idea of a worthwhile way to spend my time.

And in what way is that not as simplistic as it sounds??

Taken out of context as you've done then yes it does sound simplistic. Go back and read the above quote within the context of the entire post and you may understand my point.

No, your motivations for not wanting to read or watch Old Yeller are pretty simplistic there. Now, that doesn't mean you don't have complex motivations for watching or reading other works of art, or that you are not a complex person in general. But when it comes to Old Yeller -- and, apparently, Star Trek -- your motivations are simplistic.

Now, I don't mean that as an insult. It's not. Simplistic motivations for enjoying a work of art are no less valid than complex reasons. I have very simplistic reasons for enjoying plenty of Disney movies, for instance, even as I have complex reasons for watching, say, The Last King of Scotland or The Queen or The History Boys. Nonetheless, simplistic motivations are not made complex simply because they exist alongside other motivations that are complex.

 

[William Leisner]

Taken out of context as you've done then yes it does sound simplistic. Go back and read the above quote within the context of the entire post and you may understand my point.

"Out of context"? You're fucking kidding, right? I mean... you do know "context" doesn't mean "every letter from the original post," right?

Tell ya what: you point out the addtional parts of the post that you believe put your Old Yeller example into a thoughtful, nuanced argument, and let's go from there.

 

[Brit]

It just strikes me as kind of simplistic to base your enjoyment of a story on such a black and white, "villains die and heroes always win" kind of paradigm. Trek seems like it should have room for more complicated shades of gray than that.

Why should it? Is it because, it's your preference for reading material?

Approximately half the books sold, belong to a genre that has one requirement - that is, the ending has to give the illusion of happily ever after. It's that important to a lot of people. The wrong is not in having a preference to read stories without Janeway. It's not even the denying people that want a living Janeway the pleasure of reading about her in Trek books. The wrong is denying those fans the pleasure of imagining a happily ever after for her.

Brit

 

[Thrawn]

^ Yeah, call me callous, but I don't have much sympathy for people who feel "wronged" by the death of a fictional character.

Especially since none of this is canon anyway, so you can happily imagine whatever kind of ending you want for her.

 

[Sci]

It just strikes me as kind of simplistic to base your enjoyment of a story on such a black and white, "villains die and heroes always win" kind of paradigm. Trek seems like it should have room for more complicated shades of gray than that.

Why should it? Is it because, it's your preference for reading material?

Approximately half the books sold, belong to a genre that has one requirement - that is, the ending has to give the illusion of happily ever after. It's that important to a lot of people. The wrong is not in having a preference to read stories without Janeway. It's not even the denying people that want a living Janeway the pleasure of reading about her in Trek books. The wrong is denying those fans the pleasure of imagining a happily ever after for her.

Brit

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting stories that end Happily Ever After. Those are perfectly valid stories to tell, and they make up an important part of our culture's storytelling tradition. I for one am very grateful for Happily Ever Afters, because they mean that I have stories that I can share with my nieces and nephews. And I don't mean that to be insulting at all -- I think that the stories we tell our children are very important, can help inform the values that our children develop as they grow up, and that Happily Ever Afters provide an invaluable service in helping to raise well-adjusted children into well-adjusted adults.

But there is also nothing wrong with stories that are much more complicated, ambiguous, confusing, biting, or even sad. And there is nothing wrong with telling stories that are dark, even if the reader wants a story that's happy.

Ultimately, you want something out of TrekLit that the creators of TrekLit aren't interesting in giving: You want Happily Ever Afters. That's fine. That just means that TrekLit is not for you.

But just like fans of TrekLit shouldn't make you feel bad for preferring Happily Ever Afters, you shouldn't try to make creators or fans of TrekLit feel bad for preferring something else.

 

[kimc]

And in what way is that not as simplistic as it sounds??

Taken out of context as you've done then yes it does sound simplistic. Go back and read the above quote within the context of the entire post and you may understand my point.

No, your motivations for not wanting to read or watch Old Yeller are pretty simplistic there. Now, that doesn't mean you don't have complex motivations for watching or reading other works of art, or that you are not a complex person in general. But when it comes to Old Yeller -- and, apparently, Star Trek -- your motivations are simplistic.

Now, I don't mean that as an insult. It's not. Simplistic motivations for enjoying a work of art are no less valid than complex reasons. I have very simplistic reasons for enjoying plenty of Disney movies, for instance, even as I have complex reasons for watching, say, The Last King of Scotland or The Queen or The History Boys. Nonetheless, simplistic motivations are not made complex simply because they exist alongside other motivations that are complex.

Now THIS is the way to refute a point. Well done.

I see what you mean by side-by-side comparisons. However, where I was going is that sometimes folks will say things like "He/she won't read the book because he/she can't handle death when that is not at all the case. Stories about death and dying can be told quite well. What I don't agree with is the whole "We thought Janeway had to die so the crew could move on" justification. Janeway was not their mother - she was their captain. You never hear anyone say "Picard had to die since he was the father figure to the crew". I find the whole idea that Janeway had to die to tell a good story repugnant. It does a disservice to the fans who have been waiting patiently for a DECENT story featuring her. For why I believe there have not been decent stories with her in them lately please refer to AuntKate's post above.

I also agree with you that simplistic reasons are no less valid. The point I was trying to make though is that just because there's a simple reason for not wanting to read one book doesn't mean that same reason applies across the board.

 

[Brit]

But just like fans of TrekLit shouldn't make you feel bad for preferring Happily Ever Afters, you shouldn't try to make creators or fans of TrekLit feel bad for preferring something else.

But there also isn't anything wrong with telling the creators that you don't like what they have done and to try to influence the next choice in direction either. Point is we also could be fans of Trek Lit, and frankly I think that everyone deserves consideration. And yes I also think that those that "have" ought to have a modicum of empathy for those that don't.

Brit

 

[kimc]

Point is we also could be fans of Trek Lit, and frankly I think that everyone deserves consideration.

That's a fair point. The Trek universe is large enough to tell a wide variety of stories without giving the shaft to a fairly decent-sized number of fans. Janeway does have a lot of fans. Those who don't like her have other options.

 

[Thrawn]

This is a really weird argument, this Janeway's death thing, because it keeps spiraling around two different strawmen over and over again.

1) I don't think anyone would tell you that you should buy books you don't want to read.

and:

2) I don't think anyone would tell you that killing off your favorite character is an invalid reason to stop reading.

But all the pro-Janeway people seem to me like they keep arguing against those two things, even though no one is saying them. "I have good reasons to not want to read the new books" - hell yes, you do. Clearly.

Similarly, I *hate*, *HATEHATEHATE*, the direction of the recent Star Wars novels, and I used to love them. I have totally 100% valid reasons for no longer reading them. And I can tell by the summaries that I wouldn't like them if I did. It happens, and it sucks. I invested hundreds of dollars into that franchise, possibly thousands. When anyone says "Janeway was my favorite character and I wanted to read more about her", I mentally reply that Jacen was mine, and what they did to him screwed Star Wars for me permanently.

But I really don't feel like it would be a very good use of my time to traipse over to TheForce.Net and tell everyone that loves these books that I'm wronged or that they're denying me a happy ending or whatever. Because they're loving the books. And who am I to say my opinion matters more than theirs?

THAT is the problem. Not "simplistic motivations", but this weird righteousness, the sense that Janeway being given a happy ending was The Right Thing To Do. And that's bullshit.

 

[Thrawn]

Point is we also could be fans of Trek Lit, and frankly I think that everyone deserves consideration.

That's a fair point. The Trek universe is large enough to tell a wide variety of stories without giving the shaft to a fairly decent-sized number of fans. Janeway does have a lot of fans. Those who don't like her have other options.

This is such a crap argument.

It's like if I tried to say we should keep her dead because non-Janeway Voyager has a lot of fans and those who like strong female leaders have other options.

That would clearly be stupid. Janeway isn't just a generic strong female character, she's a specific person you want to read about.

AND, in return, I say Beyer's Voyager books aren't just some generic non-Janeway stories. They're specific stories I love. And Janeway's death is an integral and inescapable component of them.

You're not in the market for any random strong female character, you're in the market for Janeway stories. I'm not in the market for any random book that doesn't star Janeway, I'm in the market for these books in particular, because I love the story. Unfortunately, it is impossible to please both of us.

 

[kimc]

1) I don't think anyone would tell you that you should buy books you don't want to read.

and:

2) I don't think anyone would tell you that killing off your favorite character is an invalid reason to stop reading.

Actually, I have been told those very things by folks on this forum.

If you choose not to post about the way you don't like the direction of the Star Wars franchise then that's your perogative. Personally, I think a discussion board should be open to all viewpoints or else it gets stale. Folks who flat-out don't like Voyager come post in the Voyager forum all the time and as long as they respect their fellow posters their viewpoints are welcome. Sure, it can create more work for me as a mod when discussions get overheated but thankfully that doesn't happen too often.

 

[Thrawn]

I doubt it.

 

[kimc]

I doubt it.

Doubt what, specifically?

 

[Thrawn]

I doubt it.

Doubt what, specifically?

Sorry; that probably should have been clearer.

I doubt that people on the boards have told you that you are wrong about what constitutes your own definition of "worth reading".

Now, the other thing.

If you choose not to post about the way you don't like the direction of the Star Wars franchise then that's your perogative. Personally, I think a discussion board should be open to all viewpoints or else it gets stale. Folks who flat-out don't like Voyager come post in the Voyager forum all the time and as long as they respect their fellow posters their viewpoints are welcome. Sure, it can create more work for me as a mod when discussions get overheated but thankfully that doesn't happen too often.

Here's this stuff getting conflated and confused again.

It should go like this:

"I don't like Janeway's death; here's why."
"I do, here's why."

(which is what happens on the Voyager board that you refer to)

Instead, it goes like this.

"I don't like Janeway's death, and so of course everyone should be angry about it."
"A lot of us aren't, a lot of people like it."
"But you can read plenty of other stuff! Why did you kill off my favorite character? You must hate her! And not care about anyone that likes her!"
Authors: "No, we just thought it was a good story."
"I CAN THINK IT'S A BAD STORY IF I WANT TO!"
"...of course you can. That's not what we objected to."

And the whole process starts again. I feel like a lot of Janeway fans HAVE disrespected me, but it keeps being phrased like I'm the one doing the disrespecting just because I like a story that they don't.

 

[LightningStorm]

But I really don't feel like it would be a very good use of my time to traipse over to TheForce.Net and tell everyone that loves these books that I'm wronged or that they're denying me a happy ending or whatever. Because they're loving the books.

I agree with everything you said except this part.

Some people (a lot actually) tend to want to give voice to their concerns when people in power make decisions they don't like. Be them important decisions (like the healthcare stuff going on here in the US) or non-important decisions like giving voice to a concern of over a favorite book series. You don't see a need to do that, some do. I don't know about TheForce.net but if they have SW editors and authors posting there I think it'd be perfectly fine for one to voice their concerns or disagreements with their decisions there. If it was 100% purely fans then sure, I agree it'd be a pointless exercise. Here, however we have authors and previously editors who actively post and participate, it makes sense that they might come here to voice some of that disagreement.

 

[Thrawn]

Honestly, if an author based ANY decisions on what a couple dozen people on a messageboard thought, I'd lose a fairly hefty amount of respect for them.

That's why there are all these policies against posting story ideas, after all. The authors and editors aren't here for input or guidance. They're here for the same reason anyone else is - they love talking about this stuff.

As KRAD says, never mistake the bitching of a few fans on the internet for any kind of trend. And if the author is saying that right at you, why do you think you can change their mind if you're just a little bit louder?

 

[LightningStorm]

Honestly, if an author based ANY decisions on what a couple dozen people on a messageboard thought, I'd lose a fairly hefty amount of respect for them.

Indeed, but that's not the point. Hypothetical: Lets say Wal-Mart reorganized their stores such that it is really difficult for a small group of people to maneuver around their stores. By this logic they shouldn't complain to Wal-Mart about it because they are in the minority, most other people like it, and Wal-Mart shouldn't run their stores based on what a couple dozen people said on the internet.

Even if Wal-Mart doesn't change their layout and thinks it is OK, that doesn't change the fact that those people have a right to voice their opinion of the "bad" layout to the folks in charge at Wal-Mart.

 

[Thrawn]

Here we go again.

Voice your opinion all you want. Yet again, for the thousandth time, I love reading dissenting opinions. Some of my favorite posts in my time here were in those giant Janeway threads, posters explaining why her death was so problematic to them.

But "I don't like Janeway's death" is NOT the same thing as "Janeway's death is an injustice that should be righted."

I do not object to the disagreement. I object to the righteousness. Giving Janeway a happy ending was not The Right Thing To Do, and killing her off is not worth outrage.

 

[LightningStorm]

Now who's conflating issues? At no point did I say any of that.

 

[Sci]

Now who's conflating issues? At no point did I say any of that.

You equated the decision to kill Janeway to the physical reorganization of a store to make it difficult for a minority of customers to get around.

That's a false comparison. One is a subjective creative decision, and one is an overt act of discrimination.

The better comparison would be, "One day, Wal-Mart starts selling products that are not to the tastes of some of its customers."