I'd like to see more Enterpise novels that takes place during the the tv series.Also Some more ds9 novels that take place during the tv series is what I'd like to see in Treklit.What I'd like to see is more character oriented stories Like Tos Inception that don't always have heavily action oriented scenes with lots of spacebattles with lots of people dying like in the Destiny books because of the borg attacks.
The State of Star Trek Literature
- Thread starter Sxottlan
- Start date
But haven't we already been getting the origins of Project Genesis in Vanguard?
Uh, huh.
So, I guess that whole "creating new star systems out of nothing" technology the Shedai possess and which Starfleet is investigating doesn't count as terraforming? 
Uh, huh.
So, I guess that whole "creating new star systems out of nothing" technology the Shedai possess and which Starfleet is investigating doesn't count as terraforming?
D'oh.
I just thought that so much of it did not seem like a setting in Star Trek. Little to no action is fine, but making a relatively quiet book suddenly a race against time against, what was it?, heavy dirt or something?, just does not work.
It was the uncontrolled spreading and altering of the regolith (or dirt, yeah) that would have caused a serious environmental problem on Mars.
I saw it differently than you did, in that I felt that the book was building up to something like that, with all of the side scenes with the leader of that environmental group and an oddly maintained sense of foreboding.
I sort of agree here. While I do enjoy (what I have read) of the "post-relaunch" novels, I'd also like to see novels set in the series timeframes. TOS has been doing this for years, why can't TNG and DS9? It's unlikely (not impossible, but unlikely) that we'll ever see those series onscreen again, other than on DVD, of course, so there's really no reason why novels can't focus on the seven year periods (in ENTERPRISE's case, four) of the respective shows.
While not answering all your questions (and the reason I am not replying to them specificly right now is because I have to give them some thought!), I did a recent blog about Trek books, and maybe people who have been reading them for a while can see how maybe even their least favorite books can have an impact.
If you interested, and can forgive my shamless self-promotional plug, go to www.bittertrolley.blogspot.com and see if you agree or disagree.
I know that there are some authors not mentioed in the blog, but I plan on writing about the Enterprise, Titan and Typhon Pact novels in upcoming editions.
If you decide to ream, thanks! And I hope you ride the Bitter Trolley often.
If you interested, and can forgive my shamless self-promotional plug, go to www.bittertrolley.blogspot.com and see if you agree or disagree.
I know that there are some authors not mentioed in the blog, but I plan on writing about the Enterprise, Titan and Typhon Pact novels in upcoming editions.
If you decide to ream, thanks! And I hope you ride the Bitter Trolley often.
See, I'm the total opposite and what's more, I think any attempt to live in the past would be very anti-Trek in spirit. Trek is always about going where no one's gone before. We've been there, done that within the series time frames. All 3 major series got a full 7 years to tell their stories within that time frame and I think they've been pretty thorough. I would much rather that the stories are all post-nemesis. I've had my fill of TNG/DS9/VOY in that era.......stories have been told and told well, it's time to move on now and focus on what comes next including new crews, characters, etc.
I'm not advocating abandoning the 'relaunch' novels, just balancing them with books that take place during the series runs as well. The TV series are how most of us got here to begin with.
I don't know. I'm inclined to think you need a balance. To my mind, there's nothing inherently "anti-Trek" about stories set during the original series. While it's cool to find out what happened after the tv shows wound up, there's something to be said for stories that are closer to the shows that we actually watched on tv. If I'm going to write a TNG book, I want to write a book that feels like the tv show--with Worf and Data and Geordi and all the usual suspects.
Plus, you don't want to completely disenfranchise readers who are more familiar with the tv episodes than the books. There's a danger involved in letting all the books "relaunch" too far from what people think of when then think of the tv shows. You need to write some books for the casual fan.
And, of course, as someone who grew up on TOS, I have to object to the idea that it's not one of the "3 major series" . . . .
Last edited:
I don't know. I'm inclined to think you need a balance. To my mind, there's nothing inherently "anti-Trek" about stories set during the original series. While it's cool to find out what happened after the tv shows wound up, there's something to be said for stories that are closer to the shows that we actually watched on tv. If I'm going to write a TNG book, I want to write a book that feels like the tv show--with Worf and Data and Geordi and all the usual suspects.
Plus, you don't want to completely disenfranchise readers who are more familiar with the tv episodes than the books. There's a danger involved in letting all the books "relaunch" too far from what people think of when then think of the tv shows. You need to write some books for the casual fan.
And, of course, as someone who grew up on TOS, I have to object to the idea that it's not one of the "3 major series" . . . .
Greg said it much better than I did in my previous post.
Greg said it much better than I did in my previous post.
Well, I did edit my post three times to make sure it got the point across! And I definitely think there ought to be some "classic"-style TREK books . . .
(Says the guy who is about to write another standalone TOS book set during the original five-year mission!)
I can appreciate this perspective from a business point of view for sure. I understand wanting to pull the casual fan into purchasing a book or two every so often because it contains the familiar places and settings. And as a fan of Trek books, I can also appreciate that those type of "comfortable" novels are part of what allows the more forward looking novels to exist at all so I'm certainly not opposed to them. Heck, given the right story I might even be interested in one myself.
All that being said, I feel like with TOS, TNG and DS9, they all set out to create a new landscape and paint fresh pictures on it and while early TNG was very derivative of TOS, they all mostly succeeded. They each in their own way pushed to create new worlds and then flesh them out with years of storytelling and it was that fresh, forward looking approach that I think has made most Trek story telling so strong.
I feel like it will be far more difficult to keep the writing in Trek fresh (especially for the modern day incarnations as most had 7 full seasons) if we stay in our comfort zones with the familiar names and places. Personally, I feel that the rewards that may be realized by venturing forward with new places, faces and situations are what we - in Trek's best traditions - be striving for.
And, of course, as someone who grew up on TOS, I have to object to the idea that it's not one of the "3 major series" . . . .
Haha.
Sorry, I don't quite have the same objection with TOS for several reasons. It didn't have nearly as much opportunity to tell it's tales during it's much shorter run. The movies jumped the story ahead quite a ways down the path as it was leaving lots of holes for people to explore in the past. Plus, the TOS crew has a rather timeless feel to it where change isn't really needed to avoid stagnation like it is with the other series.
^Well, the thing is, the books aren't intended to appeal to only one reader's tastes. There's never going to be universal agreement on whether it's better for the books to move forward or to stick with the familiar. So the best approach for the novel line as a whole is to offer a mix of both approaches, something for every taste. There are a lot of books and a lot of writers, so there's plenty of room to do both. Having some books that are set in the familiar, series-era settings doesn't prevent other books from pushing forward past the series and breaking new ground.
Thats all well and good, but how long ago were books published that were based in the series run?
Apart from TOS, a fair few years ago.
Regardless of how you spin it Chris, the book line has been focusing on the whole on post finale adventures for a while now and this isn't the first, nor the last time that a request for books based during a series run has been asked for and nor is it the first time for you to give that almost tired excuse for the lack of them.
Last edited:
Agreed, and I said as much in my post. I understand that the entire staff of Star Trek writers aren't all focused on writing books that I specifically enjoy, though I certainly wouldn't mind that.
I'm fine with some books pushing the boundaries and going where we haven't gone before while other books explore more familiar settings/crews. I get that there's an audience for both types of book, I was just conveying what I felt was the more satisfying of the two approaches were for me, at least.
In a perfect world, I'd love to see a group of writers that co-ordinate and work together like the staff of TNG or DS9 the series did and put together a Season 8, 9, etc, etc.......that's just my preference though. I understand the need for both.
You know I hadn't thought of that. I guess they should, but personally I would rather have one big ol' novel based in that time line than lots of smaller little stories in an anthology.
