New Book about TOS: These Are The Voyages

[ZapBrannigan]

Are you sure that's where they got it? It could be true, but they could have also acquired it by other means.

That strikes me as improbable. As I understand it, the reels of audiotape were in Neil Norman's possession for about 25 years, and he jealously guarded them. Getting him to agree to any kind of release was one of the biggest challenges that LLL had to deal with.

The public got access to the previously unreleased music via the LLL CD set. This is not like workprint film trims that were mailed all over the country in the 1970s.

 

[GSchnitzer]

I know that page startrekhistory.com has been around for a while. In going to the Wayback Machine Internet Archive, the current version of the page seems to have been posted on line since October 10, 2011. If you go back to September 25, 2011 (which is the last time before October 10, 2011, that that particular "City on the Edge of Forever" page was archived), you'll see that the page doesn't have those sound clips. The sound clips do show up starting October 10, 2011. That is of course, a year before the LaLaLand set was released.

For what it's worth, Star Trek New Voyages has had the entire music collection from TOS for years. (It's not in flawless condition like the new LLL set is, but we've had it all for years--without dialogue and sound effects. If you check out our episodes, you'll hear the use of all kinds of musical cues that had not been publically available (even on all the various CDs that have been released over the years). Folks have been begging us for years: "Where did you get the fight music from 'Spock's Brain,' and how can I get it from you?"

If we've had all this not-publically-available music for years, I suspect that startrekhistory just got it from the same source.

Archived page is here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20111010221305/http://www.startrekhistory.com/DS6.html

Are you sure that's where they got it? It could be true, but they could have also acquired it by other means.

That strikes me as improbable. As I understand it, the reels of audiotape were in Neil Norman's possession for about 25 years, and he jealously guarded them. Getting him to agree to any kind of release was one of the biggest challenges that LLL had to deal with.

The public got access to the previously unreleased music via the LLL CD set. This is not like workprint film trims that were mailed all over the country in the 1970s.

 

[Indysolo]

I don't know if anyone else noticed this, but the startrekhistory site appears to be guilty itself of using something without giving proper credit.

In their section on deleted scenes, under "City on the Edge of Forever," the site presents an unused, never-aired music cue by Fred Steiner. They must have gotten it from La La Land's complete box set of Star Trek music.

The La La Land CD producers jumped through incredible hoops to get all the many stakeholders involved to agree to the project. Then LLL worked for like a year, going through tape reels and studio paperwork to meticulously identify and document each bit of music. And they had to make digital transfers of all the tape reels and perform restoration work on the resulting audio files.

Startrekhistory presents the "City" cue as if it was the site's own discovery. I don't see any credit or thanks given to La La Land Records or the individual producers.

Now that's funny!

 

[ZapBrannigan]

If we've had all this not-publically-available music for years, I suspect that startrekhistory just got it from the same source.

Whatever the source, the point is they boot-legged it. And now they're up in arms because a book ran some photos?

Startrekhistory and its partisans want to have it both ways.

 

[BillJ]

If we've had all this not-publically-available music for years, I suspect that startrekhistory just got it from the same source.

Whatever the source, the point is they boot-legged it. And now they're up in arms because a book ran some photos?

Startrekhistory and its partisans want to have it both ways.

You're making a claim without any real evidence to back it up.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

You're making a claim without any real evidence to back it up.

No, I'm stating facts. If startrekhistory can use materials without giving credit or showing established rights, then what's all the fuss about with These are the Voyages-- a book that gave credit in its bibliography?

 

[GSchnitzer]

Well, if true, I'm sure startrekhistory is more than willing to properly place credit where credit is due. I think that much of the metadata details regarding this clip (composer, musicians, recording dates, etc.) wasn't known or available to them even if the clip itself was. They may have just forgotten to double back and update their web page after the information became known when the LLL set was released. I see startrekhistory as more than willing to give credit where credit is due if and when a faux pas is discovered. They seem disinclined to simply dig in their heels and stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the work of others. (It also occurs to me, that the source that Star Trek New Voyages has for our TOS music has always wanted to remain anonymous/unrevealed for a variety of reasons. Such may be the case with startrekhistory's source.)

Another subtle point is that I think people might be a bit more forgiving about a slip-up in assigning proper credit if these clips are being made available to the public on their website free of charge. But if stuff like this were being released to make a buck (like the TATV book), I can see people being less sympathetic.

If we've had all this not-publically-available music for years, I suspect that startrekhistory just got it from the same source.

Whatever the source, the point is they boot-legged it. And now they're up in arms because a book ran some photos?

Startrekhistory and its partisans want to have it both ways.

 

[BillJ]

You're making a claim without any real evidence to back it up.

No, I'm stating facts. If startrekhistory can use materials without giving credit or showing established rights, then what's all the fuss about with These are the Voyages-- a book that gave credit in its bibliography?

There's a Hell of a difference in a non-profit fan site that puts up a music clip and a for-profit endeavor that is pilfering work of others to pad out their book.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Well, if true, I'm sure startrekhistory is more than willing to properly place credit where credit is due.

I'm sure they're great guys; I love startrekhistory. We're all friends here. But it's one thing to update a web page for some little mistake. A few keystrokes and you can do it for free.

It's something else when you've spent a year of your life breaking your back to write a book, put your personal resources into it, and it has gone to print, and now angry partisans coming out of nowhere want the book to disappear over a slight omission like this.

 

[BillJ]

Well, if true, I'm sure startrekhistory is more than willing to properly place credit where credit is due.

I'm sure they're great guys; I love startrekhistory. We're all friends here. But it's one thing to update a web page for some little mistake. A few keystrokes and you can do it for free.

It's something else when you've spent a year of your life breaking your back to write a book, put your personal resources into it, and it has gone to print, and now angry partisans coming out of nowhere want the book to disappear over a slight omission like this.

I don't want it to disappear, I want it fixed. Which shouldn't be too much of an issue since its a print-on-demand book.

They shot themselves in the foot by sending someone in here to do a legal tap dance instead of simply fixing the issue.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Well, as I understand it, the author, "Collector," and publisher were all contacted multiple times well in advance of the book going to press regarding the uncredited/unauthorized harvesting of the images. I don't think it was an omission so much as intentionally done despite the matter being brought to their attention.

Well, if true, I'm sure startrekhistory is more than willing to properly place credit where credit is due.

I'm sure they're great guys; I love startrekhistory. We're all friends here. But it's one thing to update a web page for some little mistake. It's something else when you've spent a year of your life breaking your back to write a book, put your personal resources into it, and it has gone to print, and now angry partisans coming out of nowhere want the book to disappear over a slight omission like this.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

I don't want it to disappear, I want it fixed. Which shouldn't be too much of an issue since its a print-on-demand book.

If that's right then maybe a correction will appear at some point. Edit: no, GSchnitzer is saying (while I was writing this) that that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Also, in case anyone thinks I'm a plant: I don't know anyone connected with the book. I don't even have it because I'm a little too cost-conscious.

 

[BillJ]

I don't want it to disappear, I want it fixed. Which shouldn't be too much of an issue since its a print-on-demand book.

If that's right then maybe a correction will appear at some point. Edit: no, GSchnitzer is saying (while I was writing this) that that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Also, in case anyone thinks I'm a plant: I don't know anyone connected with the book. I don't even have it because I'm a little too cost-conscious.

No one thinks you're the spy.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Well, they were disinterested in changing gears in advance of going to press on the Season One book. But if this dust-up is impacting their anticipated sales, they might do something different for Seasons Two and Three. (I have no idea what their sales have been and what, if any, impact people's concerns might be having.) I suggested upthread that some nice artwork could be used--something like Bjo Trimble did with her Concordance. I think pretty much everyone understands the need to break up pages and pages of dry text with something that's a bit easier on the eye.

I don't want it to disappear, I want it fixed. Which shouldn't be too much of an issue since its a print-on-demand book.

If that's right then maybe a correction will appear at some point. Edit: no, GSchnitzer is saying (while I was writing this) that that doesn't seem to be in the cards.

Also, in case anyone thinks I'm a plant: I don't know anyone connected with the book. I don't even have it because I'm a little too cost-conscious.

 

[Maurice]

Frankly, from the samples, the writing isn't stellar, either. As I mentioned a while back, the author makes unsupported statements like that the Kirk-Finnegan fight "may very well have been the best-staged fight shot for TV." By what standard? In all of Television for the last 60 years? That's just silly.

 

[Harvey]

I finally finished reading the book today. I will compile all of my notes into a review in the near future.

I'd say the author has a good understanding of the production history of the original series, but a weak understanding of television and film history. This leads him to frequently make claims about the uniqueness or greatness of the series, like the 'Shore Leave' claim mentioned, which don't hold water.

It is telling that he keeps falling back on I Spy when in need of an example that isn't Star Trek; the author wrote a book about that series, too.

I'm also unconvinced by his ratings thesis (that the series was a hit, but NBC suppressed this fact because of their dislike of Roddenberry). It is an interesting notion, but the numbers hardly bear it out in the way the author suggests. Of course, this argument is unfinished -- the author ends the book with a bit of a cliffhanger on the topic to get people to buy the next volume -- but the evidence so far is shakey.

 

[trevanian]

I'd put up at least two-thirds of the fights on THE WILD WILD WEST against the Finnegan fight and make that claim look as silly as it sounds.

SHORE LEAVE's fight works primarily because of the character aspect and the music. Not saying it was shot poorly, but it isn't "in-ter-stellar!" as Grig the lizard-navigator from THE LAST STARFIGHTER might exclaim.

 

[trevanian]

I'm also unconvinced by his ratings thesis (that the series was a hit, but NBC suppressed this fact because of their dislike of Roddenberry). It is an interesting notion, but the numbers hardly bear it out in the way the author suggests. Of course, this argument is unfinished -- the author ends the book with a bit of a cliffhanger on the topic to get people to buy the next volume -- but the evidence so far is shakey.

Perhaps we should rename this thread The Smoking Phaser

So all the Nielsen families were in on this ratings coverup, too?
And people give ME shit about my views on JFK and 9/11!

 

[Melakon]

Star Trek was never a big hit in first run. No one in my high school talked about it, I may have been the only fan. People were aware of it, but Batman made a much greater impression.

Zap, you've been here too long to be a plant. The publishers don't seem to be that smart.

 

[Ssosmcin]

The author quotes the numbers and even reprints a full ratings sheet showing Star Trek outdrawing Batman, Lost in Space, The Invaders and The Fugitive. Obviously the series did not retain these numbers, but for the first season, the series was apparently well secure in the top 40. Unless he's intentionally lying, I find that to be pretty solid evidence the show initially hit bigger than people thought.

Star Trek was always a big hit with the older kids and college crowd, that has never been in question. Young people were the show's biggest and most vocal supporters, but that has nothing to do with the ratings if high school kids weren't part of any of the Neilsen "families."

As for why the series dropped, we'll find out, but there are hints in the book: the cost of the series was far more than Desilu or NBC wanted to spend; the episodes were always late and over budget; Gene was a pain in the ass - constantly belittling the network in public (calling them sexist and racist for example), having various affairs in plain sight, etc. All of this could have contributed to NBC putting Trek in worse time slots and eroding the audience, so cancellation at the end of the third season was unavoidable. Then Roddenberry would be out of their hair. But that's just a guess.