It's a pretty damn unfunny one. 
What do you do with Star Trek novels?
- Thread starter James Wright
- Start date
Dude, as long as people pay for the books before they burn them, I'm okay with it. Frankly, I was hoping some religious nut would get a bee in their bonnet about my original novel The Calling, bulk order 5,000 copies, and burn them somewhere in Mississippi. Sadly, that never happened, and I was deprived of useful press as a result.
Mr. Mack (I won't presume to address you as "dude", and please don't address me that way, since I'm female), I don't know how many of your books I own. I know it's not that many - maybe one or two at most, since I've been years behind in my Star Trek book hunting. I do know that I've never read anything of yours that was not Star Trek, so am unfamiliar with the one you reference.
There are not many things I consider "sinful" but willful destruction of books is one of them. It would be one thing if they were contaminated with plague or something equally hazardous to human health, but for publicity or financial gain?
I realize you have a living to make, and the outlook you have while you make your living is your own business. But that doesn't mean other people have to respect it, and I'm just making it clear that this is one outlook I cannot respect.
P.S. I just had a quick look at this book... angels, demons, etc.? Sorry, not my cup of tea. I suppose some people like that sort of story, though.
NOOOOO! You linked to TV TROPES!!! THIS ISN'T A GAME, STOP IT!!!
By series, and then by publication order. TV episode adaptations precede original novels but movie novelizations drop into the regular publication order (mainly because Pocket retro-numbered TMP, ST II and ST III). Hardcovers and trades are over on a different bookcase. I used to interfile, but it wasted space.
Chronological order entices madness. Author order breaks up too many mini-series.
Just as a complete and total aside, I never used "dude" with my female friends either, but my 12-year-old daughter and her female friends all use it with each other constantly. Go figure.
I'm pretty much the same way, except I include the movie novelizations first with the TV novelizations. Since I don't own every book there are a lot of holes anyway, so those three books numbers not being in numerical order doesn't make an impact for me.
MMPB reprints of hardcovers, giant novels or other "special" books go at the end of the series. Crossovers are on a case-by-case basis; For Gateways, the NF & DS9 installments are in chronological "reading" order, but all the others got put at the end of their respective series with the other "special" books.
The series themselves go in release order (ie, TOS, TNG, etc.) followed by TrekLit series in release order (NF, Stargazer, SCE, etc.)
Hardbacks and Trade Paperbacks are on a different shelf using the same system.
I have to admit, now that I'm switching over to eBooks, I don't like that I can't arrange them in any order I want. My choices are by title or by author, and in the case of Trek books the title can vary wildly. Star Trek: Starfleet Academy: The Edge shows up simply as "Edge", yet Star Trek: The Rings of Time shows up as "Star Trek: The Original Series: The Rings of Time."
I sold all my Trek books circa 2002 (I didn't have a massive collection anyway, mostly TNG). Come 2009 I find a huge haul of TNG/DS9/Voy novels at a carboot sale for a price that works out at about 5p each. I couldn't resist.
Anyway, now, I am only going to keep the TNG ones (my favourite series). Like an earlier poster, I'm not a big fan of the latest stuff (just sold the Destiny trilogy on ebay; I liked it, but can't see me reading it again) but the stuff produced during the show's run holds a special place in my heart. I'll hold on to 'em, but it will probably be in the loft. Just too many books in the house!
I was given a Kindle last year for my birthday, and I have to say, I love it! It certainly does for my standard book/novel needs (graphic novels and larger hardback/coffee table books etc don't count). I haven't got any Trek books for it yet, but will eventually.
It's an old story, but I do wish the electronic versions showed more of a price reduction on the standard paperback. I know the reasons why, but it would certainly motivate me to pick up older books and maybe even start replacing books I own to electronic format.
Anyway, now, I am only going to keep the TNG ones (my favourite series). Like an earlier poster, I'm not a big fan of the latest stuff (just sold the Destiny trilogy on ebay; I liked it, but can't see me reading it again) but the stuff produced during the show's run holds a special place in my heart. I'll hold on to 'em, but it will probably be in the loft. Just too many books in the house!
I was given a Kindle last year for my birthday, and I have to say, I love it! It certainly does for my standard book/novel needs (graphic novels and larger hardback/coffee table books etc don't count). I haven't got any Trek books for it yet, but will eventually.
It's an old story, but I do wish the electronic versions showed more of a price reduction on the standard paperback. I know the reasons why, but it would certainly motivate me to pick up older books and maybe even start replacing books I own to electronic format.
Each series gets its own shelf-space, which is chronological (with novelizations and comics slotted in appropriately). Stand-alone stuff (Brave & the Bold, Best & the Brightest, Articles of the Federation, etc) gets its own shelf, shared with SCE and the Klingon Empire books (since they're shorter series). Destiny and ASD fit in with TNG, just since it's the "mainstream" 24th-century narrative.
I haven't gotten around to shelving the Typhon Pact books yet, but I'll probably count them as parts of series (given that they relate to the series more than to each other).
My Star Wars shelves are the same way; starting on one end with Tales of the Jedi (5000 years ago), moving forward to Legacy (500 years hence).
non-continuity TOS
TOS
Vanguard
New Frontier
DS9
SCE
pre-NEM TNG
IKS Gorkon
A Time To
Articles
post-NEM TNG
Titan
Destiny
ASD
VGR relaunch
TyPac
DTI WTC
MU
Shatner's MU trilogy
TOS
Vanguard
New Frontier
DS9
SCE
pre-NEM TNG
IKS Gorkon
A Time To
Articles
post-NEM TNG
Titan
Destiny
ASD
VGR relaunch
TyPac
DTI WTC
MU
Shatner's MU trilogy
I save as many as possible. I sold almost all my Next Gen relaunch books, and the Destiny trilogy plus a lot of other newer ones a few old ones they took at Ukazoo Books in towson, md. This was during my girlfriends heavy drug usage and she needed to stay well to finsish her last semester at school. Selling these books was very hard for me. I sold alot of things i wish i hadn't because of her addiction, since then we have seperated obivously after her constant replases after going to numerous progams it became too much stress for me to keep her in my life. I wish i hadn't sold them. I rarely re read them sometimes i do, but i like them. I am not a possevive person. I would be just as happy with no material possessions, but i do collect things. I mean a Star Trek book or seeing someone i love suffer, that decsion was easy.
Chronologically within the context of the Star Trek Universe. Starfleet Year One is actually the first book on my shelf, with the novelization of Star Trek XI the last. While they generally go in the order of each series, I do mix up TNG, DS9, and VOY with TTN, Destiny, and Typhon Pact according to when their stories take place.
Thank you for helping me to decide which Star Trek books NOT to keep. I got rid of my John Varley books too, after he was a jerk to me at a convention.
Way to piss off your paying public.
Slang comes and goes and sometimes crosses the sexes. But I'm in my late 40s and was raised by my grandmother, so I'm a bit more old-fashioned than most. On other forums when I've asked somebody not to call me "dude", they've just said sorry, won't happen again.
Just as a complete and total aside, I never used "dude" with my female friends either, but my 12-year-old daughter and her female friends all use it with each other constantly. Go figure.
I guess that's beyond the reach of some individuals, though...
Is that supposed to make me grovel for your forgiveness? You come into a thread, lecture and berate me over what was obviously a comment made in jest, and then you accuse me of being a jerk? Learn to take a joke.Thank you for helping me to decide which Star Trek books NOT to keep. I got rid of my John Varley books too, after he was a jerk to me at a convention.
Way to piss off your paying public.
Oh, and newsflash: YOU ALONE ≠ MY "PAYING PUBLIC"
Are you kidding me? Did you seriously expect an apology over that? Life's hard; wear a helmet.
Next time, if your aim is to receive civility, try not opening the conversation with a humorless rant. When you start with an unwarranted verbal harangue, you shouldn't be surprised to receive a less-than-cordial response.
Thank you for helping me to decide which Star Trek books NOT to keep. I got rid of my John Varley books too, after he was a jerk to me at a convention.
Way to piss off your paying public.
I don't think Mr. Mack was being a jerk to you.
Going back to the roots of the argument you two are having, it seems to come down to differing takes on humor, which is a common enough misunderstanding that it ought to be easy to recognize and deal with it without this sort of escalation.
I agree with your view on books and on book burning: I was raised to treat books as something special, and find the notion of burning them to be appalling. But why do we find book burning so appalling? Because of what book burning is usually meant to accomplish: Suppressing ideas, witholding knowledge, expunging the information people require to help themselves and others. Now, nothing in the exchange you two had indicates that Mr. Mack promotes any of this; in fact, the specific scenario he and others discussed doesn't even do so in jest. On the contrary, being an author himself there are compelling reasons to believe that he would not promote them. I don't think you have grounds to assume otherwise, in any case, since they were clearly joking.
And yet your reaction essentially speaks to the idea that you consider their jesting to somehow make light or even support those ill contexts book burning is usually found in. Anyone who thinks you could or ought to do better in recognizing their humor and separating it from actual intent would feel frustrated and/or cornered at that, and so telling you to "lighten up" may not be as arrogant as you make it out to be, but simply a defensive reaction at feeling bullied. It's reminiscent of "Did you stop beating your wife, Mr. Mack?"
Now, as mentioned, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your anger at book burning to be genuine. But you should equally give Mr. Mack the benefit of the doubt and try to be a little more flexible when it comes to insolent humor, and recognize that it isn't ill-meaning. I'm sure you remember the odd lesson on communication from our favorite franchise that applies here.
^ Precisely. The reason I'm able to joke about the notion of being happy that someone might burn a bunch of my books is that, in a digital age, the idea that the work would be permanently lost as a result is highly implausible.
In fact, in this age of eBooks, print-on-demand, and easy reprinting from digital pre-press files, the notion that book-burning would serve to suppress a book from public attention is absurd; doing so would in fact boost public awareness of the title in question, likely spurring a new wave of sales.
Part of my jest was the idea of inviting my critics to attack me with outdated tactics that would actually redound to my benefit; it was akin to Br'er Rabbit shouting, "Please don't throw me in the Briar Patch!"
By contrast, I would never advocate the burning of anyone else's titles, and especially not rare, out-of-print, or singular works, nor works whose destruction would be construed as a hate crime. I was only talking about my own works, and only because I know it would do me more benefit than harm.
In fact, in this age of eBooks, print-on-demand, and easy reprinting from digital pre-press files, the notion that book-burning would serve to suppress a book from public attention is absurd; doing so would in fact boost public awareness of the title in question, likely spurring a new wave of sales.
Part of my jest was the idea of inviting my critics to attack me with outdated tactics that would actually redound to my benefit; it was akin to Br'er Rabbit shouting, "Please don't throw me in the Briar Patch!"
By contrast, I would never advocate the burning of anyone else's titles, and especially not rare, out-of-print, or singular works, nor works whose destruction would be construed as a hate crime. I was only talking about my own works, and only because I know it would do me more benefit than harm.
Did I ask you to grovel? No. Were you a jerk? In my opinion, yes. A joke to you is not necessarily a joke to me, and vice-versa. When you do say something funny, I'll laugh, okay?Is that supposed to make me grovel for your forgiveness? You come into a thread, lecture and berate me over what was obviously a comment made in jest, and then you accuse me of being a jerk? Learn to take a joke.Thank you for helping me to decide which Star Trek books NOT to keep. I got rid of my John Varley books too, after he was a jerk to me at a convention.
Way to piss off your paying public.
Oh, and newsflash: YOU ALONE ≠ MY "PAYING PUBLIC"
Of course I'm not ALL of your paying public - at least not all of them, or even a significant portion of a tiny percentage. But I *have* purchased words written by you, and that makes me part of your paying public.
It's called manners. Kinda like saying "excuse me" when you bump into somebody.
Unlike you, I was not attempting to be funny. I was completely serious. It does disappoint me when an author - ANY author - would advocate burning or any other sort of destruction of books/written material. Your fiction may not be as important to human history as the works of the ancient libraries that were destroyed, but they are still books.
Perception is in the eye of the beholder. Ours differ, and that's fine.I don't think Mr. Mack was being a jerk to you.Thank you for helping me to decide which Star Trek books NOT to keep. I got rid of my John Varley books too, after he was a jerk to me at a convention.
Way to piss off your paying public.
You are right in that I feel very strongly that book burning (or any other method of destroying them) is wrong. It's mostly for the reason you cite - suppressing information, destroying knowledge, etc. However, there's another part of it that gets to me: Trees died so we can have paper books, magazines, and everything else written on paper. To destroy those items for anything less than survival (as in you're completely snowed in with no electricity, no gas, and there's nothing to keep you from freezing to death except burning books) is simply wrong. That's what my conscience tells me. Obviously there are other people who don't feel this way, and think it's funny to joke about burning books to make money.
I just expressed my disappointment and gave my views on this. Yes, I was (and am) serious about this. I do have a sense of humor, but destroying books is one of the things that I have *no* sense of humor about.
I find it hard to believe that Mr. Mack could feel "bullied" by a single reader on an internet forum. I'm not the one telling people to "lighten up."
As I said, my anger at book burning is genuine. I might have been more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt if he hadn't resorted to sarcasm and childish nastiness. I've never expected ANYBODY to "grovel for forgiveness." All I ask is for basic manners. Saying "sorry, my mistake" isn't groveling. It's being courteous.
Similar threads
