STO: The Needs of the Many by M. A. Martin Review Thread (Spoilers!)

[Admiral James Kirk]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

If they ever do a remake of First Blood they should set it in Berkeley.

 

[Steve Roby]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

^ Actually, "Code Pink" is an activist group who protests in large part against the military. In recent years, they got some press by trying to oust a Marine Corps officer recruiting station out of Berkeley, California, and even managed to convince the city council to declare the Marines there "uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

Yeah, I thought that was bizarre at first, myself, but then I remembered...it's Berkeley.

Ah. I stand corrected. I thought it was the name of the gay pro-gun group. Turns out I was thinking of Pink Pistols. Mea culpa.

 

[Ferd Burfel]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

Heh...the Essentialists themselves were a bad caricature that had no intention of giving any kind of substance to those who disagreed with the official Trek line.

That's pretty disappointing that was picked up with the same shallowness.

I was waiting to hear from their media rep Limbaugh or Beck. This is without a doubt the most politicized book in trek lit maybe all of trek. its very disappointing, given IDIC is the underlying philosophy in trek, but this author has taken on the far left loon fringe to represent the Federation

The Federation has always been portrayed as being built on leftist/liberal values and rejecting the values of conservatives and the right wing in Star Trek.

Star Trek is and has always been a liberal, leftist program. Some creators have brought it further left, and some creators have brought it a bit closer to the center, but it has never been a centrist or right-wing franchise.

If you don't like that, I'd suggest you find another franchise.

I mean Trek is pure Pro-Starfleet and no matter what, Starfleet officers are Heroic, Honorable, and are the futuristic version of Knights, even when some of them are up to no good, they are still almost heroic villains.

Oh, nonsense. Star Trek has very clearly depicted Starfleet, throughout its entire history, as being an institution. And, like any institution, it has depicted Starfleet as being subject to the character flaws of its membership and its leadership. How many times do we have to run into Evil Admirals, or corrupt officers, before people get over this idea that Starfleet = Always Good?

I agree with about the tone of the book. I got that feel it was almost Anti-Starfleet, especially with Rene Picard's speech at the end of the book. I mean Trek is pure Pro-Starfleet and no matter what, Starfleet officers are Heroic, Honorable, and are the futuristic version of Knights, even when some of them are up to no good, they are still almost heroic villains. Yet, the book is laced with if it wasn't for Starfleet, the Undine War wouldn't have happen, or we are being punished for our sins. All you have to do is replace Undine with terrorist and you got a book about the sins of the US Military,.

I get so tired of this ridiculous argument in real life, and I'm PO'ed to see it applied to Star Trek, too.

Here's the thing:

Saying that the United States Armed Forces and/or the United States government have done bad things, and that those bad things have come back to bite us on the ass, is not the same thing as being anti-Armed Forces or anti-American.

It's acknowledging that bad things have been done and should not be done in the future. Period.

Let's say, for instance, that I acknowledge the fact that the United States government provided financial and material support to the military juntas that ruled Chile and Argentina in the 1970s and 1980s. The U.S. did this in the name of supporting anti-Communist allies in South America. These dictatorships murdered thousands of people -- some Communist terrorists, but many more innocent victims.

This was bad. I don't care what justification you can come up with; it was bad. It was morally wrong, it should not have been done. Period. There were better ways of fighting Communism in South America than supporting mass murderers, but the U.S. didn't take them.

Now, that does not mean that I'm anti-American. I love my country and everything it stands for. That's, in fact, what I hate about that policy of supporting the juntas -- that policy violated every principle that the United States is supposed to stand for.

Same thing here.

Now, I haven't read The Needs of the Many. I can't speak to exactly what you're saying.

But I can tell you this:

If the characters in The Needs of the Many are arguing that bad things that Starfleet has done has caused negative consequences for the Federation -- if, for instance, they are arguing that the U.S.S. Voyager should not have created an anti-Undine weapon during the "Scorpion" two-parter -- that does not make them anti-Starfleet. That makes them anti-that decision. That makes them anti-policy.

I hate the tendency people have to reduce any criticism of a state institution to "You're anti-whatever." It's dishonest and unfair.

I came here to say exactly this.

One can be a patriot and a critic. I tend to think to be a true patriot your must be a critic.

Starfleet has never been portrayed as perfect. Trek is mostly built upon a belief that humanity is mostly evolved and much better than now. But that doesn't mean that individuals don't mess up. Criticizing the military (Starfleet) doesn't make you a bad person, especially if you have cause. Unlike the state of Texas, you can't simply re-write the book and pretend the bad things never happened and skip over things. One of my favorite quotes is "experience brings success, but failure brings experience". Many of the good things that people and nations do come as a result of fixing mistakes or knowing better because of mistakes. Irnoring them makes you ignorant, embracing them and using them to inspire and bring about change is patriotic.

As for the military stuff, I merely think that "stereotype" was done to show the juxtaposition. The character was set up as a stereotypical soldier, but by the end of the interview (if you actually read it all) the reader (and Jake) realize he is a much more complicated and haunted character. Also, living in a city with a military base I have met TONS of soldiers who have talked or acted like this. But as is the case with everyone, when you break it down and talk to them that outer layer peels away and reveals much more complicated people. It's easy to accuse the author of "stereotyping", but not ready the book or simply dismissing everything else used to describe the character is no better. In other words, you are classifying every gruff soldier who speaks with bravado as some kind of negative. That is a stereotype. The irony is thick.

Overall i thought a few interviews were weird and surreal, but many others were excellent. Overall i graded it as "average".

My apologies for any typos or other things, this was the first thing of length i typed on my iPad.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

I'm not going to get into a debate about the politics of the game or the book because I didn't read it because of that aspect. I can understand why so many people are disappointed with this book. The presentation and format of the novel isn't what I was expecting. I was expecting this to be a series of stories chronicling the events of pre-Star Trek Online not interviews Jake conducts with various figures on their views of a war against Species 8472. Is there going to be another Star Trek Online book that deals with the events in the game? Or is this it? I mainly got it for a friend since he has the game and I wanted to finish reading the time line which I found interesting. Some of the fanwank stuff I'm not sure about...I'm glad this is just game material and not Trek Lit canon.

 

[KingstonTrekker]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

I have scanned this thread and found very little actually discussing the book....I am going to avoid the whole military debate because I could honestly care less...

I thought this was a terrific book. I couldn't put it down and really hope that a sequel is written. It depicted an interesting post-Nemesis timeline which I found to be engaging and creative.

 

[Ferd Burfel]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

So I remembered that one of the main volleys being heaved at the author of this was his portrayal of the soldier in one of the "interviews". Many of the people who slammed him said that he should read "Band of Brothers" and other works by that author to see some quality writing about soldiers.

Well I just got done reading an article that states that the author of BoB might have made up stuff for one of his books, possibly many. Now this doesn't mean that he made stuff up for BoB, but is interesting to note that the guy a couple of you slammed TNOTM's author for not emulating might have made stuff up.

 

[Christopher]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

I was flipping through this book. Not sure if I will buy it. I find the style a bit unorthodox. I was curious about the name Undine. Does anyone know who came up with that and why? It seemed like Species 8472 would have a more alien sounding name, probably one of those Timothy Zahn Chiss names from the Star Wars Expanded Universe.

An undine (or ondine) is a female water spirit or water elemental in European folklore and the writings of the Renaissance alchemist Paracelsus. I assume that some human in the Federation named them that as an acknowledgment of the fact that they come from a fluidic universe.

Species 8472 surely wouldn't have a pronounceable name for themselves, since they don't have mouths and communicate telepathically. So any name for them is going to have to be something from human language that's applied to them descriptively. (In Places of Exile, I called them Groundskeepers.)

But I think the funny part about "Undine" is how close it is to "Indign", the alien of the week from Unworthy. (Or at least how I pronounced it in my head. Maybe it's pronounced totally differently.)

Undine is pronounced "un-deen" (as with "Nadine" or "Carradine"). Indign is pronounced "in-dine" (as with "sign" or "align").

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

But I think the funny part about "Undine" is how close it is to "Indign", the alien of the week from Unworthy. (Or at least how I pronounced it in my head. Maybe it's pronounced totally differently.)

Undine is pronounced "un-deen" (as with "Nadine" or "Carradine"). Indign is pronounced "in-dine" (as with "sign" or "align").

I too fiund the name a little coincifdental with Indign until I realized thanks to the name "deano" that it was prpnopunced unDEEN, I must admit to ign orance of the actual name "undine" in mytholtogy.

PS: Please excuse me, I'm drubnk tonight. I'll be my usual self tomorrow, so please jjust put up with this for tonight. I'll be quite apologetoc tomorrow, I'm sure

 

[Dayton Ward]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

^ I'm not noticing anything amiss.....

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

^ I'm not noticing anything amiss.....

We're all entitled to one drunken evening of posting here; io'm sure it's in the forum rules somewherwe!

 

[F. King Daniel]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

A drunk Nasat. What an interesting idea...

Would it be an angry drunk and start a fight, attempting to clout people with it's little cillia while yelling incoherently?

Would it curl into a ball and roll around giggling, eventually falling asleep after getting stuck under a desk or in a corner?

And how many drinks does it take to put a Nasat under the table?

Would alchohol even have an effect on an alien insect? I'm sure they'd have some local intoxicant with equivelent effects. Would they have a synthehol?

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

A drunk Nasat. What an interesting idea...

Would it be an angry drunk and start a fight, attempting to clout people with it's little cillia while yelling incoherently?

Would it curl into a ball and roll around giggling, eventually falling asleep after getting stuck under a desk or in a corner?

And how many drinks does it take to put a Nasat under the table?

Would alchohol even have an effect on an alien insect? I'm sure they'd have some local intoxicant with equivelent effects. Would they have a synthehol?

 

[Dayton Ward]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

Well, there's nothing wrong with drinking and posting....you just have to know how to do it and not let on that you're doing it

 

[Thrawn]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

^ In fact, Dayton has never posted sober...

 

[Dayton Ward]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

^ How else do you think I avoid going off on some of the stuff posted around here?

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

So I remembered that one of the main volleys being heaved at the author of this was his portrayal of the soldier in one of the "interviews". Many of the people who slammed him said that he should read "Band of Brothers" and other works by that author to see some quality writing about soldiers.

Well I just got done reading an article that states that the author of BoB might have made up stuff for one of his books, possibly many. Now this doesn't mean that he made stuff up for BoB, but is interesting to note that the guy a couple of you slammed TNOTM's author for not emulating might have made stuff up.

With the movie series, it is quite obvious artistic license has to be taken, for the parts that actually portray the action "as it is occurring." However, what it would be extremely foolish to deny would be the interviews given by the people who were actually involved in those events--specifically, the documentary We Stand Alone Together. If you want to argue with primary-source material, if you want to suggest all of those men are shamming and that "real soldiers" couldn't be as levelheaded and humble as those men were...trust me on this--it won't go well.

 

[MNM]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

Undine is pronounced "un-deen" (as with "Nadine" or "Carradine"). Indign is pronounced "in-dine" (as with "sign" or "align").

So I'm the only one who pronounced it "In-Dige-iN" as in indiginous?

 

[Admiral_Young]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

Does anyone know if we'll get another Star Trek Online book? I seem to remember reading an article when this was announced saying that there would be a follow up (I'm guessing next year).

 

[ATimson]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

Does anyone know if we'll get another Star Trek Online book? I seem to remember reading an article when this was announced saying that there would be a follow up (I'm guessing next year).

An interview with Michael A. Martin, around the time of release, indicated that he did have an idea for a future volume, but that any more STO books would be contingent on sales of the first.

 

[Christopher]

Re: Star Trek: Online: The Needs of the Many - Discussion (Spoilers)

So I'm the only one who pronounced it "In-Dige-iN" as in indiginous?

I should hope so, because that's not how it's spelled. It's indign, a real (if archaic) word meaning "unworthy" (hence the title of the book), and it's related to the words "indignant" and "indignity," not "indigenous." (And "indigenous" is pronounced with a short i in the second syllable, like "smidgen.")

Dictionaries: they're not just for propping up table legs.