My problems with Kirstens Voyager Novels

[Gatekeeper]

Wasn't there some kind of problem with the crystals; weren't they going through them at some accelerated rate and risked being stranded without slipstream? How was that resolved, or was it?

You'll find the answers in Unworthy.

Also, I thought the Luna-class wasn't much wider than the Intrepid. I don't see why Lunas would have a problem with slipstream. And IIRC the Sovereign-class is the same width as the Vesta and basically the same shape so it shouldn't have problems with slipstream.

The Intrepid class is about 133 meters wide; the Luna is 203.9 meters wide, 1.5 times the width of the Intrepid. The Vesta is 195 m wide and the Sovereign 250 m.

True, the Vesta's beam is very close to the Luna, but it's somewhat a matter of proportions, not just absolute width. A compact, narrow design works better.

Anyway, the bottom line is that the Luna and Sovereign are harder to upgrade to slipstream because we want them to be. The decision was made editorially that slipstream should be limited to the Vesta ships and the Voyager fleet for now, and the rest is just trying to rationalize that creative choice.

If I were to make up a handwave for it, I'd say that it's easier to keep the conduit stable the more the ship's mass is concentrated toward the central axis. If there are some bits sticking out substantially closer to the "walls" of the conduit, their mass could induce instabilities or something, and it would be harder to sustain the conduit.

Also, while these technical problems could theoretically be surmountable for a Sovvie or Luna given sufficient work and refinement, benamite crystals are as yet rare enough that they're being saved for more suitable classes. It might be theoretically possible to equip those classes for it, but it's not really practical to make the effort at present. Especially when it might be safer to wait a few years until the technology is better understood and its limitations can be more effectively overcome.

One would think that the Nova-class would be ideal for it.

Quite possibly.

Finally, has it been ascertained whether or not a slipstream corridor is round, or oval in nature?

Looks like a circular cross-section to me.

Hmm. Perhaps my memory is a bit rusty, but isn't that a transwarp corridor from Voyager's series finale?

Gatekeeper

 

[Sandoval]

Hmm. Perhaps my memory is a bit rusty, but isn't that a transwarp corridor from Voyager's series finale?

I doubt it.

Voyager looks normal and doesn't have all the super-cool, kill everything that moves, obliterate the galaxy with a single torpedo future modifications from Endgame.

 

[ToddCam]

She explained her reasoning for each death or removal of the characters that had been previously introduced back in the Full Circle review thread. I don't have a link handy, but I do remember that her explanation for Kaz's death was essentially that the joined Trill had been done as characters already, explored from several angles, and, rather than reexplore a character from that species in the ongoing novels and wind up retreading territory already covered, she opted to instead introduce a character from another species who hadn't been explored and see what they're like.

I guess that means she will never introduce a human crewmember.

 

[Christopher]

Looks like a circular cross-section to me.

Hmm. Perhaps my memory is a bit rusty, but isn't that a transwarp corridor from Voyager's series finale?

No, it's a screencap from "Timeless." I linked to the image that accompanies Memory Alpha's article on quantum slipstream, but it's identical to TrekCore's screencap 232 for "Timeless."

However, the slipstream corridor effect from "Hope and Fear" and "Timeless" was recycled as the transwarp conduit effect in "Endgame."

 

[Gatekeeper]

Hmm. Perhaps my memory is a bit rusty, but isn't that a transwarp corridor from Voyager's series finale?

I doubt it.

Voyager looks normal and doesn't have all the super-cool, kill everything that moves, obliterate the galaxy with a single torpedo future modifications from Endgame.

Oh, yeah, now that you mention it, that's quite true. Personally, I thought the Batmobile armor was pretty snazzy.

Gatekeeper

 

[Gatekeeper]

Looks like a circular cross-section to me.

Hmm. Perhaps my memory is a bit rusty, but isn't that a transwarp corridor from Voyager's series finale?

No, it's a screencap from "Timeless." I linked to the image that accompanies Memory Alpha's article on quantum slipstream, but it's identical to TrekCore's screencap 232 for "Timeless."

However, the slipstream corridor effect from "Hope and Fear" and "Timeless" was recycled as the transwarp conduit effect in "Endgame."

My bad, then. And, as a poster above noted, Voyager doesn't have the futuristic armor and galaxy-killing transphasic (?) torpedoes in that photo. Yikes. My Trek memory really is rusty!

Gatekeeper

 

[The Green Mushroom]

Well, let's face it, former Borg territory is pretty much going to be a wasteland. There's nobody living there now that the Borg are gone, the planets probably can't support life anymore -- it's just a huge desert. That's not very interesting. The only stories worth telling are on the periphery of Borg space, because that's the only place that anyone's left alive to tell stories about.

Now that's a way to undue any questions about the Borg being weakened. I would love to see a story told about a setting where every civilization that reaches a certain level of scientific development is simply assimilated and then is gone forever.

Now that I think about that, are there any stories like that? Outside of Star Trek even?

I can think of Childhood's End off the top of my head, but I think that humans were a one shot deal in that book that even the aliens considered special. Also, I didn't like that book. But that was just my opinion--I'm not saying it was a bad book, just that it didn't click with me.

 

[Relayer1]

Well, let's face it, former Borg territory is pretty much going to be a wasteland. There's nobody living there now that the Borg are gone, the planets probably can't support life anymore -- it's just a huge desert. That's not very interesting. The only stories worth telling are on the periphery of Borg space, because that's the only place that anyone's left alive to tell stories about.

Now that's a way to undue any questions about the Borg being weakened. I would love to see a story told about a setting where every civilization that reaches a certain level of scientific development is simply assimilated and then is gone forever.

Now that I think about that, are there any stories like that? Outside of Star Trek even?

I can think of Childhood's End off the top of my head, but I think that humans were a one shot deal in that book that even the aliens considered special. Also, I didn't like that book. But that was just my opinion--I'm not saying it was a bad book, just that it didn't click with me.

Alastair Reynolds Revelation Space series - leftover AI tech from the early days of the universe exterminates any newly emerging cultures once they reach a certain level of development.

 

[Sho]

Well, let's face it, former Borg territory is pretty much going to be a wasteland. There's nobody living there now that the Borg are gone, the planets probably can't support life anymore -- it's just a huge desert. That's not very interesting. The only stories worth telling are on the periphery of Borg space, because that's the only place that anyone's left alive to tell stories about.

Story idea: Poking around the ruins of an assimilated civilization on a dead Borg planet, finding some survivors who managed to hide ...

 

[Sci]

Well, let's face it, former Borg territory is pretty much going to be a wasteland. There's nobody living there now that the Borg are gone, the planets probably can't support life anymore -- it's just a huge desert. That's not very interesting. The only stories worth telling are on the periphery of Borg space, because that's the only place that anyone's left alive to tell stories about.

Story idea: Poking around the ruins of an assimilated civilization on a dead Borg planet, finding some survivors who managed to hide ...

1. You're not supposed to post story ideas on this board.

2. That idea is not plausible within the established creative conceits of how the Borg Collective functions and its level of technological prowess.

 

[Sho]

1. You're not supposed to post story ideas on this board.

Sorry, I was previously unaware. Found it in the FAQ thread now, but an addition to the board rules doc would be helpful, in the per-forum table near the end.

2. That idea is not plausible within the established creative conceits of how the Borg Collective functions and its level of technological prowess.

I'd say beating implausible odds through ingenuity and preserverence is a fairly common theme throughout Trek, and presenting something unlikely convincingly is one ticket to an interesting story.

 

[ATimson]

I would love to see a story told about a setting where every civilization that reaches a certain level of scientific development is simply assimilated and then is gone forever.

Now that I think about that, are there any stories like that? Outside of Star Trek even?

Alastair Reynolds Revelation Space series - leftover AI tech from the early days of the universe exterminates any newly emerging cultures once they reach a certain level of development.

Also Bioware's Mass Effect (much the same as Revelation Space), and the Galactica Marines saga by "Ian Douglas" aka William H. Keith Jr. (a successful species rather than AI does the pruning).

David Weber's Safehold novels might be an example too. (I don't think we've been given enough of the backstory yet to know if this is actually the modus operandi for the Gbaba or if humanity was a one-time special victim. Fortunately we'll be seeing more of the Gbaba in later books & so should find out then.)

 

[AuntKate]

1. She writes Voyager's characters extremely well and they seem to get the short end of the stick. They have to make room for new and improved versions of Dr. House and old grandma-like Farkas. I'm calling this the Vanguard Syndrome where major trek characters are starting to seem like cameos so that the authors can indulge themselves and not be stifled by established back stories.

I would suggest that it's a mistake to think of TV-originated characters and novel-originated characters as being in a separate category, or of some as being more or less important. They're all equal.

Actually, I think JonLuck has a point worth discussing. Why is it that recent writers (like Beyers) are determined to replace the on-screen characters with new, unfamiliar ones? No novel-generated character is ever going to gain the recognition and popularity of a character from television or movies, and to suggest that novel-generated characters are equal is a pipe dream. If the current writers are tired of writing about the familiar character and want to create new ones of their own, maybe it’s time for them to move on and write non-Trek books. And if the “march of time” in the current Destiny series means that these characters are too old to carry on, then bring the Destiny story line to a rapid close and roll back the clock.

It’s important to remember that the posters in this forum, who buy and read everything Trek, are the exception, not the rule. Many Trek fans don’t want to commit to the current novels with a plot line that stretches over a long list of books and focuses on unfamiliar ships and characters. They read a variety of things, not just Trekfic or even scifi, and want to be able to pick up a TNG, DS9, or VOY novel in the airport or bookstore and read about the familiar crew on the title ship (or station), interacting as they did on screen. They're unhappy to spend good money only to find those characters missing or glossed over and, because of that, are unlikely to buy another Trek book. There are few, if any novels that cater to that reader, and it’s past time for a change, imho.

 

[David Mack]

^ The sales numbers of the Destiny trilogy do not agree with your premise.

Just sayin'.

 

[captcalhoun]

i think the sales of New Frontier (outselling TNG novels in the earlier years) also refutes the notion that no novel-only series is going to be popular. i can't believe there are THAT many Shelby, Selar and Lefler fans!

 

[Sci]

No novel-generated character is ever going to gain the recognition and popularity of a character from television or movies,

Which is irrelevant, because no STAR TREK novel is ever going to gain the recognition and popularity of television or the movies--so why should they restrict themselves only to familiar characters? The best idea would be to mix it up.

And if the “march of time” in the current Destiny series means that these characters are too old to carry on, then bring the Destiny story line to a rapid close and roll back the clock.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

For one thing, STAR TREK: DESTINY is not an ongoing series. It was a trilogy of novels published three years ago; the last one was published in December 2008. The DESTINY storyline has been over for a long time.

There is no one "storyline" in the current STAR TREK novels. Each ongoing STAR TREK novel series has its own storyline. There's a TNG storyline going on right now; there's a TITAN storyline going on right now; there's a VANGUARD storyline going on right now (though VANGUARD will end with the next VANGUARD novel, to be published this year); ENTERPRISE just wrapped up its ongoing storyline with its most recent novel two months ago; DEEP SPACE NINE's ongoing storyline will be continued this year under the TYPHON PACT banner; and, of course, there's VOYAGER's ongoing storyline. Etc., etc., etc. All of these lines have featured a mixture of canonical and original characters.

And from what the authors have told us, sales have been strong.

And, frankly -- why SHOULDN'T the authors keep on with the progression of time, exploring these characters as they get older and introduce new ones? Why SHOULD they restrict themselves to the same old TV-style formulaic storytelling over and over again? The creative goal with the novels is to explore new aspects of the STAR TREK Universe, not to give us the same stuff we've had before.

Many Trek fans don’t want to commit to the current novels with a plot line that stretches over a long list of books

Which is no doubt why each novel is written so that you don't need to read the others in the series to know what's going on.

and focuses on unfamiliar ships and characters. They read a variety of things, not just Trekfic or even scifi, and want to be able to pick up a TNG, DS9, or VOY novel in the airport or bookstore and read about the familiar crew on the title ship (or station), interacting as they did on screen. They're unhappy to spend good money only to find those characters missing or glossed over and, because of that, are unlikely to buy another Trek book.

Well, if it's not to your liking, then that's completely subjective and there's nothing to be done there. (Personally, I can't imagine wanting the same kinds of TV-style stories with the same old characters in the same old settings all the time. Boring and uncreative.)

But the distinction you're making between novel characters and canonical characters is just not a relevant distinction in terms of how these novels are written or what those authors' creative goals are. They're all STAR TREK characters in the STAR TREK Universe, and the creative goals of these novels do not make a relevant distinction. Within the narrative, they are all equal, even if some fans don't see them as equals.

There are few, if any novels that cater to that reader, and it’s past time for a change, imho.

Novels published in the last few years, focusing on canonical characters and/or canonical-style plots:

STAR TREK by Alan Dean Foster (HB 2009 film adaptation, May 2009)

TROUBLESOME MINDS by Dave Galanter (June 2009)

INCEPTION by S.D. Perry & Britta Dennison (February 2010)

UNSPOKEN TRUTH by Margaret Wander Bonanno (March 2010)

THE CHILDREN OF KINGS by Dave Stern (May 2010)

STAR TREK (2009 film adaptation) by Alan Dean Foster (MMPB reprint, September 2010)

NIGHTSHADE by Laurell K. Hamilton (reprint of 1992 novel, October 2010)

A CHOICE OF CATASTROPHES by Steve Mollmann and Michael Schuster (September 2011)

And we know of two more upcoming:

THE RINGS OF TIME by Greg Cox (February 2012)

THAT WHICH DIVIDES by Dayton Ward and Kevin Dilmore (March 2012)

 

[SicOne]

^ Annnnd, that's game, set, and match to Sci!

(clapping all around)

 

[Christopher]

But the distinction you're making between novel characters and canonical characters is just not a relevant distinction in terms of how these novels are written or what those authors' creative goals are. They're all STAR TREK characters in the STAR TREK Universe, and the creative goals of these novels do not make a relevant distinction. Within the narrative, they are all equal, even if some fans don't see them as equals.

When TNG was proposed, a lot of people had doubts that audiences would be as interested in new, unfamiliar characters as they were in the original cast everyone had been following for 20 years. Even today, there are plenty of people who see the characters of one Trek TV series as less important than those of another. But the canonical franchise was successful at getting audiences interested in multiple casts of characters, in creating a fanbase for the universe as a whole rather than any single group of people. What the books do is simply a further extension of the precedent the shows established.

Novels published in the last few years, focusing on canonical characters and/or canonical-style plots:

STAR TREK by Alan Dean Foster (HB 2009 film adaptation, May 2009)

TROUBLESOME MINDS by Dave Galanter (June 2009)

INCEPTION by S.D. Perry & Britta Dennison (February 2010)

UNSPOKEN TRUTH by Margaret Wander Bonanno (March 2010)

THE CHILDREN OF KINGS by Dave Stern (May 2010)

STAR TREK (2009 film adaptation) by Alan Dean Foster (MMPB reprint, September 2010)

NIGHTSHADE by Laurell K. Hamilton (reprint of 1992 novel, October 2010)

A CHOICE OF CATASTROPHES by Steve Mollmann and Michael Schuster (September 2011)

And we know of two more upcoming:

THE RINGS OF TIME by Greg Cox (February 2012)

THAT WHICH DIVIDES by Dayton Ward and Kevin Dilmore (March 2012)

And Department of Temporal Investigations: Forgotten History (May 2012), which despite its title is primarily a TOS novel.

 

[Relayer1]

No novel-generated character is ever going to gain the recognition and popularity of a character from television or movies,

Which is irrelevant, because no STAR TREK novel is ever going to gain the recognition and popularity of television or the movies--so why should they restrict themselves only to familiar characters? The best idea would be to mix it up.

And if the “march of time” in the current Destiny series means that these characters are too old to carry on, then bring the Destiny story line to a rapid close and roll back the clock.

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

For one thing, STAR TREK: DESTINY is not an ongoing series. It was a trilogy of novels published three years ago; the last one was published in December 2008. The DESTINY storyline has been over for a long time.

There is no one "storyline" in the current STAR TREK novels. Each ongoing STAR TREK novel series has its own storyline. There's a TNG storyline going on right now; there's a TITAN storyline going on right now; there's a VANGUARD storyline going on right now (though VANGUARD will end with the next VANGUARD novel, to be published this year); ENTERPRISE just wrapped up its ongoing storyline with its most recent novel two months ago; DEEP SPACE NINE's ongoing storyline will be continued this year under the TYPHON PACT banner; and, of course, there's VOYAGER's ongoing storyline. Etc., etc., etc. All of these lines have featured a mixture of canonical and original characters.

And from what the authors have told us, sales have been strong.

And, frankly -- why SHOULDN'T the authors keep on with the progression of time, exploring these characters as they get older and introduce new ones? Why SHOULD they restrict themselves to the same old TV-style formulaic storytelling over and over again? The creative goal with the novels is to explore new aspects of the STAR TREK Universe, not to give us the same stuff we've had before.

Which is no doubt why each novel is written so that you don't need to read the others in the series to know what's going on.

and focuses on unfamiliar ships and characters. They read a variety of things, not just Trekfic or even scifi, and want to be able to pick up a TNG, DS9, or VOY novel in the airport or bookstore and read about the familiar crew on the title ship (or station), interacting as they did on screen. They're unhappy to spend good money only to find those characters missing or glossed over and, because of that, are unlikely to buy another Trek book.

Well, if it's not to your liking, then that's completely subjective and there's nothing to be done there. (Personally, I can't imagine wanting the same kinds of TV-style stories with the same old characters in the same old settings all the time. Boring and uncreative.)

But the distinction you're making between novel characters and canonical characters is just not a relevant distinction in terms of how these novels are written or what those authors' creative goals are. They're all STAR TREK characters in the STAR TREK Universe, and the creative goals of these novels do not make a relevant distinction. Within the narrative, they are all equal, even if some fans don't see them as equals.

There are few, if any novels that cater to that reader, and it’s past time for a change, imho.

Novels published in the last few years, focusing on canonical characters and/or canonical-style plots:

STAR TREK by Alan Dean Foster (HB 2009 film adaptation, May 2009)

TROUBLESOME MINDS by Dave Galanter (June 2009)

INCEPTION by S.D. Perry & Britta Dennison (February 2010)

UNSPOKEN TRUTH by Margaret Wander Bonanno (March 2010)

THE CHILDREN OF KINGS by Dave Stern (May 2010)

STAR TREK (2009 film adaptation) by Alan Dean Foster (MMPB reprint, September 2010)

NIGHTSHADE by Laurell K. Hamilton (reprint of 1992 novel, October 2010)

A CHOICE OF CATASTROPHES by Steve Mollmann and Michael Schuster (September 2011)

And we know of two more upcoming:

THE RINGS OF TIME by Greg Cox (February 2012)

THAT WHICH DIVIDES by Dayton Ward and Kevin Dilmore (March 2012)

^ Thanks Sci - that's just saved me 20 mins of my life, and probably said it better than I would have. It would be insulting to the readership to try and portray a universe with no change, development, growth, birth, death, or just simple moving on.

I would add that if I wanted to read more going nowhere, everything back in the toybox at the end stories, there are still a load of old 'numbered', novels out there that I occasionally pick up. I doubt many people have read them all (?) and some of them are actually OK...

 

[Therin of Andor]

Why is it that recent writers (like Beyers) are determined to replace the on-screen characters with new, unfamiliar ones?

Who else from the canon has she replaced, other than Janeway, who was already dead before Kirsten got to her?