Except, there is no contradiction. Robert Orci is not JJ Abrams, and it should not be inferred that they are a two-headed beast speaking in a single voice, together comprising the entirety of the corporate entity that is Bad Robot.
Summer nuTrek novels pulled-TrekMovie.Com
- Thread starter Darth Duck
- Start date
It is a little ambiguous. Orci just said "Nothing to do with it," no explicit antecedent, but it was in response to a comment suggesting that the writer-producer team as a whole was responsible, so the context implies that he was speaking about the entire team, not just himself. Hard to be entirely certain, though.
^I don't know if he meant to imply it, but that is what most people have inferred.
My guess is that he made an ambiguous reply on purpose. Probably he wasn't involved and doesn't think anyone else in the writing crew was, but isn't entirely sure if someone higher up the food chain has done it without talking to him.
The way he phrased it, he can say "I was just talking about myself" if it is revealed someone on the Bad Robot staff has asked for the novels to be pulled.
The way he phrased it, he can say "I was just talking about myself" if it is revealed someone on the Bad Robot staff has asked for the novels to be pulled.
Pluasible deniability? I don't think so. That's just another form of a lie. I actually think he was referring to himself. In which case, we are back to combining the two statements and saying, like William Leisner, that there is no contradiction. And that comes out to mean that it really was someone at Bad Robot, not at Pocket Books, especially since Pocket could have made the decision one week earlier and never have put it into the catalog that went out to all the bookstores.
Or, someone at CBS Licensing.
Or, CBS Licensing marked up the first manuscript with so many things that might cause a problem of future compatibility to the next movie that someone realized that no one knew the answers yet.
Or, the new chief editor of Pocket's ST line noticed that the first manuscript had so many things that might cause a problem of future compatibility to the next movie.
There are probably others, too. Why are you only seeing this as a black/white problem. I can think of plenty of grey. It's really none of our business, and eventually more information may percolate down to us. Where do fans get this sense of entitlement? It's disappointing the books aren't coming yet, sure, but this over-analysis and wringing of hands is truly bizarre. It's a business decision, and sometimes business decisions are necessary. And none of our business.
I imagine if there were Internet bulletin boards in the early days of fandom, we'd see similar energy poured into the cancellation of "The War Virus" manuscript from "The Lost Years" saga, and attributing blame for why that novel failed so close to deadline. (Whatever happened to Irene Kress?) Or "Mr Spock's Guide to the Planet Vulcan" by Marshak & Culbreath, which was announced by them as "forthcoming" as a Bantam, then a Pocket publication.
You think it only takes a week to compile a catalogue, or to pull a page from a finished document?
Think of how often you see signs in stores that warn, "Due to circumstances beyond our control, item ____________ is not available as advertised in the recent catalogue..."
For the first item, I am trying to arrive at an explanation that makes sense if all parties are being honest. It would then mean that they decided to really allow JJ to develop his vision AND Roberto Orci had nothing to do with it. Your versions all seem (to me) to assume that seomeone is lying.
And speaking of which, I guess what we think we are entitled to is an explanation.
For the second item, I have 30 years experience. I could change that catalog in one hour and have a new camera-ready PDF, plus all source packaged per printer's instructions. I know what I'm talking about.
And speaking of which, I guess what we think we are entitled to is an explanation.
For the second item, I have 30 years experience. I could change that catalog in one hour and have a new camera-ready PDF, plus all source packaged per printer's instructions. I know what I'm talking about.
Or someone at Paramount Pictures. The film was produced by Paramount, Bad Robot, and Spyglass Entertainment (as a financial backer only) under license from CBS Studios, the copyright owners of Star Trek. The books are published by Pocket Books, a division of Simon & Schuster, also under license from CBS Studios. There are a lot of corporations involved here on some level, and a lot of desks this decision might've come from.
I don't think so. The notes I got from CBS Licensing had little to do with that sort of thing. The only note I got along those lines was to avoid naming Keenser's species. (I wanted to call him a Purba, after his portrayer Deep Roy, whose real name is Mohinder Purba.) If somebody had that kind of concern about compatibility, it must've come from outside Licensing.
And I still say that if this decision had anything to do with content, it's unlikely that it would've been applied to four separate books written with little cross-communication between authors. I think it would be a huge coincidence if we all independently did things that created compatibility questions or other problems. I don't think this was about what the books contained, but more generally about the whole concept of doing tie-ins at this time.
No. This wasn't Jaime Costas's doing. This just makes her job a lot harder. This comes from somewhere else.
I'm not sure I'd say it's none of your business, since you are affected by it. Since you guys buy the books, that makes it literally your business in a way. But it is true that all this speculation in the absence of information is going nowhere except farther and farther afield from a reasonable explanation. When you don't have actual knowledge, speculation is ultimately just a way of pretending you have something to talk about. Sometimes you just have to say "I don't know" and leave it at that, because sometimes "I don't know" is the only really truthful answer there is.
Why does asking for more information about a quirky decision imbue the questioner with "a sense of entitlement"? My attitude is, if you don't ask, you don't get. Sometimes you ask and still don't get, and I can live with that. But, if I don't ask, it's guaranteed I won't get.
Am I somehow being "uppity" by asking a question? That seems like an imperious attitude. Therin, if you're tired of discussing this issue, you're free to stop replying. It feels like you're telling us to shut up because you don't have an answer to give us, and you're trying to make that OUR fault for daring to ask the question.
None of us know anything right now, but perhaps someone with access to accurate information will happen along and be able to enlighten us. Probably not, but hope is free, so let us go on hoping.
I've tried repeatedly over the years to track down Irene Kress and see if she'd let me read her rejected manuscript (other Trek writers have allowed me to do so in the past.) So far, no success. I wonder if that's a pen name for a writer better known under another name?
I'm curious about "lost" books, and relish the opportunity to read them and see if it's clear from the manuscript why a given project was killed. Sometimes it is, other times (such as The Music of the Spheres) it's completely baffling.
I don't think that means I have a sense of entitlement, any more than fans of Nabokov who read the recently-published notes for his never-written final novel, which he ordered destroyed upon his death -- but which his son preserved and had published. "Lost" artworks can be intriguing, and searching them out is a harmless caprice.
^There is a science fiction writer, female, with the same last name, you know...
There is a better known Nancy Kress - I wonder whether the "Irene" part is actually an error that's never needed to be corrected because the book never came out.
Especially considering the blurb here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Crucible-Nancy-Kress/dp/0765306883 which makes me wonder if a certain Trek idea might have been reused, cos it's a helluva coincidence that this book includes as part of the plot a virus designed by one race to remove aggression from their rivals in a war...
Any chance this might have something to do with the division of Star Trek's rights between CBS/Paramount and Paramount Pictures, with some eager beaver from the legal department trying to exploit some arcane bit of legalese?
Between marketing chimps and lawyers, anything's possible. Especially if we're talking about marketing chimps who are lawyers..
Between marketing chimps and lawyers, anything's possible. Especially if we're talking about marketing chimps who are lawyers..
I don't see why. The copyright for the Star Trek: Titan series, for instance, is shared between CBS and Paramount because it's based on both Star Trek (owned by CBS) and upon the specific film Star Trek: Nemesis (whose copyright is owned by Paramount).
Legally, a tie-in based on ST09 should have the same setup. Star Trek in generally having its copyright owned by CBS, and the specific film Star Trek (2009) having its copyright owned by Paramount (just like with NEM). So if it works for TTN, I can't imagine it wouldn't work for ST09 tie-ins.
But that's just my guess. I could be completely off.
Gee, thanks for telling me a paperback reprint of a story of mine that a lot of non e-book folks have told me they've been waiting on is a "waste", JWolf.
Don't get me wrong. I get what you're trying to convey, that it's not a new story being told. However, in this case, it's not a new story to you. That's the critical point. There are slots every year that folks are going to think are a waste, and those are for the brand-spanking new, never been read elsewhere books. Nothing against the guys, but I'm willing to lay money there are people who'd rather read a trade S.C.E. reprint over a JJTrek book, just like there are people who'd rather read a TOS book over a DS9 book or a VOY book over a TNG book. Personally, I'll take the tradeoff in numbers. And, for all we know, the lack of JJTrek may bring the readers who were coming in through JJTrek to the other branches of the line, including S.C.E.
Yes, I can see I said it wrongly. I am glad you got my meaning though. I don 't think SCE/CoE is a waste.
Yes, I can see that it is better to have something in place instead of nothing. I'm wondering if someone high up wants to make use the JJVerse books are consistent with what we see on screen. That would make sense for the pulling of the books.
How well do the reprints sell? Given sales of the paper editions & readers, will that help to maybe bring back the series?
If we take a look at this year's CES, we'd see lots of new readers. Some call it a glut. And this December a lot of readers were given as gifts. I do think if CoE was to be restarted, I think it would sell pretty well especially since more people have now read some of the stories.
This is really supremely stupid marketing on the side of Pocket Books. My main worry though, is for the customers who pre-ordered these books... will they be getting refunds of any kind? I mean, why pay for a good that you won't receive?
Which is precisely why, as has been pointed out many times in this thread, there's no reason to believe this was Pocket's decision.
I believe the way preorders work (at least on Amazon.com) is that they don't deduct the money from your credit card until the item actually ships. So people who preordered the books and paid by credit (or debit) card won't actually have spent any money yet. Otherwise, I'd imagine there would have to be refunds, yes.
I worked in professional publishing for 4.5 years and we would never have been able to get those sort of alterations approved in an hour, or even a week. Everything had to climb up a long ladder of command and back down again.
From an interview I did with Bob Greenberger, in 1992, Irene Kress was a colleague of his. Robert helped brainstorm "The Lost Years" story arc with the Pocket editor of the day, but Irene's novel wasn't accepted at final draft stage and Bob's own "Orion's Belt" died at proposal stage, IIRC.
Onviously you've never pre-ordered from Amazon.
Last edited:
Man, I go away for a few months and all literary hell breaks loose.
Other than the book postponements, how's everybody been?
--Ted
Other than the book postponements, how's everybody been?
--Ted
Similar threads
