Star Trek Into Darkness by Alan Dean Foster
- Thread starter JD
- Start date
Gallery books, NOT Pocket books. It looks like Bad Robot are still keeping the Pocket branch of Simon and Schuster in the cold after whatever-it-was that led to the cancellation of the nuTrek novels in 2010. I wonder what happened?
That's a false distinction. All Trek trade paperbacks have been under the Gallery Books imprint since Seven Deadly Sins (the two most recent Corps of Engineers trades also bear that imprint). It's because of a bit of streamlining within the company; Pocket's trade paperback/hardcover division was merged with the Simon Spotlight Entertainment imprint and renamed Gallery. So everything in trade or hardcover that would've had the Pocket label (or the SSE label) before 2009 would have the Gallery label now, that's all. It's just a slight organizational/branding change. Different imprints don't necessarily represent a meaningful difference in who's handling or editing the books; for instance, my Marvel novels were published under the Pocket Star imprint rather than Pocket, but Marco Palmieri still edited them.
^Understood. My mistake, and thank you.
I wasn't terribly impressed with the first movie novel, so... eh.
Ditto at Tom Doherty Associates, where the same staff and editors put out books under the Tor, Forge, Orb, and Starscape imprints. What colophon goes on the spine is often just a matter of marketing.
Tor is sf and fantasy. Forge is mainstream thrillers, historical novels, mysteries, and such. Orb is trade paperback reprints of backlist titles. Starscape is aimed at the young-adult market. I've edited books under all four imprints . . .
True story: Forge was invented simply because bookstore clerks were automatically shelving all Tor titles in the SF section regardless of content. And newspapers were handing off Tor books to the SF reviewers, even if if they were actually spy thrillers or historical romances. Tor had become so associated with SF/fantasy that we realized we needed to put another name on the spines of our mainstream books just so they wouldn't be mistaken for SF.
And "Forge" was born.
But it was still the same people working in the same offices.
So he's not holding a grudge about his original ST novel, based on the events of the last movie, still being on hold.
Nope. My only regret is that fans haven't (yet, he said hopefully) been able to read it.
No, since the last restructure at Pocket, all the hardcovers and trades come out under the Gallery imprint, the MMPBs are Pocket and the YA lines are Simon Spotlight. Nothing sinister there.
Similarly, it seems like the ST YA line lessens the cover/spine/title page credit for each author to encourage bookshops to shelve them under "S" for "Star Trek: Starfleet Academy" rather than each author's surname, since some bookshops now have very large sections devoted to Teen Horror/Romance and these are often alphabetical by author.
Another example: the ALIAS novels only had "Abrams" on the spine in the hopes that the books would be shelved together.
That's not so much an issue with adult Trek, where bookstores have well-established Trek shelves, but if you're launching a new tie-in series, you don't want them scattered all over the shelves, alphabetical by author . . . .
I wish!
Would I be correct in thinking that Alan Dean Foster himself has joined the conversation?Nope. My only regret is that fans haven't (yet, he said hopefully) been able to read it.
So he's not holding a grudge about his original ST novel, based on the events of the last movie, still being on hold.
So he's not holding a grudge about his original ST novel, based on the events of the last movie, still being on hold.
Nope. My only regret is that fans haven't (yet, he said hopefully) been able to read it.
It's our regret also! It upsets me whenever I think about the several planned and finished novels sitting there and not being enjoyed by us fans. I think it stinks that Pocket was made to comply even if I do understand Abrams reasons.
Kevin
Would I be correct in thinking that Alan Dean Foster himself has joined the conversation?
Hahaha!
Never noticed that. Yes, if you look at the only other comment by thranx, October 26 2009, 04:27 PM, it's his comment to me about saving "Bem" and "The Slaver Weapon" till last, for novelizing as "Star Trek Logs", because they were episodes written by SF writers!
Welcome back ADF (aka thranx) and well spotted Timewalker!
A different large group would say exactly the same if the books came out and were overruled by the next movie.
Drago-Kazov
Fleet Captain
He will probably have more time write this.
Hahaha!Would I be correct in thinking that Alan Dean Foster himself has joined the conversation?
Never noticed that. Yes, if you look at the only other comment by thranx, October 26 2009, 04:27 PM, it's his comment to me about saving "Bem" and "The Slaver Weapon" till last, for novelizing as "Star Trek Logs", because they were episodes written by SF writers!
Welcome back ADF (aka thranx) and well spotted Timewalker!
A different large group would say exactly the same if the books came out and were overruled by the next movie.
I got such a kick out of the "Slaver Weapon" book - there are parts that still give me giggles, even though it's been many years since I've had the pleasure of reading it (part of my book collection is packed away and I haven't found it yet).
IDW announced the movie prequel comic, Countdown to Darkness at New York Comic-Con this weekend. Roberto Orci and Mike Johnson, with David Messina on the artwork.
Exciting! I plan to avoid it like plague until after I've seen the movie, as I did with Countdown
Similar threads
