2018 Releases

[Christopher]

I remember reading comments from Bob Orci on another site that he was disappointed they were pulled. Since he was part of the Abrams team, if Bad Robot had blocked them somehow he wouldn't have been disappointed.

He wasn't the one in charge, though. Just because they were all working together, that doesn't mean they couldn't have disagreements. For instance, we know that on STID, Orci and Damon Lindelof argued over whether to make the villain Khan, and Orci lost. So he didn't always get his way.

 

[David Weller]

Has David Mack specifically stated that he is not contacted to write more Star Trek novels or not just said that he is?

If the latter I would assume that authors can’t say they are working on something until it is announced by the publisher. That’s probably the reason why Dayton Ward’s blog has so many items tagged as ‘unannounced tie-in project’ (or words to that effect).

If he is concentrating on his new trilogy that’s OK. I’ve already pre-ordered the first and am looking forward to it.

 

[Damian]

Oh, absolutely. The gist I got from Orci was that it wasn't their (Bad Robot's) call to cancel the books. I figure if it was, he would have known about it and probably not said anything. I always got the impression it was Paramount that wanted them pulled. Plus it makes sense that Pocketbooks wasn't the ones interfering with their release. After all, the Abrams movies were hugely popular and Pocketbooks stood to make a lot of money from novels based on those movies. They ended up pulling 4 new books that year and had to replace them with reprints. I'm sure that's not what they had in mind. I know I was disappointed.
As an aside, if Orci hadn't wanted Khan in STID, I wish he would have prevailed. There were a lot of things I liked about STID, but recycling Khan was a miss IMHO. I would have been happy had Cumberbatch just been John Harrison. He's a great actor in his own right, he would have been great as an original character.

 

[Damian]

It seems from Mack's comments that he has no Star Trek books planned, at least officially. Maybe as you say he can't say anything until they are announced. But it was one of the things I noticed that got me worrying that maybe S&S was not interested in producing Star Trek novels anymore. He is one of the more prolific Star Trek writers these days and I thought, if he didn't have any Star Trek books in the pipeline then maybe it's over. Thankfully, reading some of the other writers' comments here it seems I have nothing to fear.

 

[Dayton Ward]

At last report, the deal was being finalized. There was a change in leadership at S&S/Gallery Books a short while back, at a level above the in-house editor, and that likely interrupted whatever discussions were in process, for Trek as well as any number of other things. The new person in charge gets to weigh in, etc.

If the latter I would assume that authors can’t say they are working on something until it is announced by the publisher. That’s probably the reason why Dayton Ward’s blog has so many items tagged as ‘unannounced tie-in project’ (or words to that effect).

None of the "unannounced tie-ins" on that list are for Pocket, though a few are Star Trek projects.

 

[Damian]

I for one hope that they continue what they have been doing. There has been a good mix of Star Trek books lately and I like all the current authors. I look forward to each new novel and I have come to enjoy the new characters created in the various series to go along with the established characters. Each of the authors have done a good job fleshing out characters we have never seen before and working together to make sure their characteristics stay consistent as the stories continue. I imagine there is a good amount of freedom for the relaunches since we'll likely never see them on screen again. And of course the original series books are always good.

 

[David Weller]

None of the "unannounced tie-ins" on that list are for Pocket, though a few are Star Trek projects.

I find it a bit worrying if you and David Mack, as has been suggested, have no new Star Trek novels in the works.

Over the last few years you, David Mack, David R George, Christopher L Bennett and Kirsten Beyer have been the backbone of the Star Trek range.

 

[Christopher]

I find it a bit worrying if you and David Mack, as has been suggested, have no new Star Trek novels in the works.

As Dayton said, the contract renewal was delayed. Freelance writers have to find work where we can, and if one source of income is on hold, we have to look elsewhere. Folks like Dave and Dayton have managed to find other projects in the interim, and I've tried to find some of my own with less success, but it doesn't mean we won't come back to Trek in the future.

 

[David Weller]

As Dayton said, the contract renewal was delayed. Freelance writers have to find work where we can, and if one source of income is on hold, we have to look elsewhere. Folks like Dave and Dayton have managed to find other projects in the interim, and I've tried to find some of my own with less success, but it doesn't mean we won't come back to Trek in the future.

I understand that as freelancers you have to go where the work is.

For purely selfish reasons I’m afraid that when the novels resume the authors we’ve come to know and love over the last decade will not be represented.

 

[Christopher]

For purely selfish reasons I’m afraid that when the novels resume the authors we’ve come to know and love over the last decade will not be represented.

Well, it's not like every novelist was able to do a book every single year before this. A couple of people may take longer than others to show up on the Trek roster again, but just because they're busy now, that doesn't mean they'll never come back.

And even if a Trek author did move on to other projects, you could still follow their work in those other projects. Trek isn't the only game in town.

 

[Greg Cox]

For what it's worth, writing other stuff and writing Trek is not incompatible. I've been juggling multiple franchises and genres for decades now. Indeed, as a freelancer, I've always been very careful not to keep all my eggs in one basket, just as a matter of prudence.

Plus, honestly, I like the variety. As much as I genuinely enjoy writing Trek, it's good to mix things up and write other kinds of stuff as well, just to keep from getting in a rut and to stretch some different muscles on occasion. So I write science fiction, and horror, and fantasy, and murder mysteries, and spy thrillers, etc. Heck, I even wrote a historical romance once. (No westerns yet, but that's probably only a matter of time.)

And then, after I've been "away" for a few books, I start getting itchy to do STAR TREK again . . ..

 

[David Weller]

Well, it's not like every novelist was able to do a book every single year before this. A couple of people may take longer than others to show up on the Trek roster again, but just because they're busy now, that doesn't mean they'll never come back.

And even if a Trek author did move on to other projects, you could still follow their work in those other projects. Trek isn't the only game in town.

I do follow Trek authors when they work on non-Trek projects.

I have on my TBR pile the 24 novels written by David, Dayton and James Swallow.

I’ve also been reading Pocket’s Marvel and Alien Nation series which were mainly written by Trek authors.

It’s just that the 24th century Trek novelverse is so joined up that, IMO, it makes for a more rewarding reading experience long term.

 

[Christopher]

It’s just that the 24th century Trek novelverse is so joined up that, IMO, it makes for a more rewarding reading experience long term.

Exactly. "Long term." A Trek author being too busy for 2018 doesn't mean they won't have a book in 2019 or 2020.

 

[Damian]

I'm glad to see the various authors here are confident about the future of Star Trek novels. I figure other than the publishers themselves they would know better than any of us what the future should hold. It's still disappointing that at least for the short term there won't be much out there, but I got significantly behind my Star Trek reading dating to my college years when I didn't have much time to read anything for enjoyment. This was at a time when they were releasing 2 books a month sometimes more. I've kept up with the current books but I have a backlog of books from the 1990's that I've been catching up on so maybe this will give me a chance to read some of those.

It's good that the novel writers have other projects as well. I'm sure it helps to be well rounded when they do write Star Trek books and helps them write a better novel. Plus I know for myself, while Star Trek is my favorite form of entertainment, it's certainly not my only one. The same obviously goes for anyone involved with Star Trek, and in some cases Star Trek may not even be their favorite, but just one of many.

 

[Dayton Ward]

Pocket has my number. They know where to find me when they're ready.

 

[seigezunt]

My one pet peeve is incredibly petty. I hope whoever ends up with the novel line continues publishing them as mass-market paperbacks. I kinda can't stand trade paperbacks. They don't fit in the pocket or bag easily, and they tend to fall apart with any kind of strenuous reading. Petty, I know. But my copy of the Discovery novel already looks like a dog has been at it.

 

[David Weller]

Pocket has my number. They know where to find me when they're ready.

Ed, call Dayton. Please.

 

[JD]

Pocket/Gallery is still going to be doing the books, Dayton just said few posts back that the deal is being finalized.

two different things I heard. I should have been more clear. I had heard at the time that it was Paramount who wanted them pulled, and then I read your comments about your book probably a year or so after they were already pulled. The main point I wanted to make was that I had heard Paramount was the main stumbling block, not Bad Robot, or even Pocketbooks. I remember reading comments from Bob Orci on another site that he was disappointed they were pulled. Since he was part of the Abrams team, if Bad Robot had blocked them somehow he wouldn't have been disappointed.

I'm not entirely sure how much say Paramount would have since they are just another liscence. If they do have a say then Paramount has the rights to all of the movies, and the books have still been using tons of content from the other movies pretty regularly since the Kelvinverse stuff started and there don't appear to have been any problems.

Has David Mack specifically stated that he is not contacted to write more Star Trek novels or not just said that he is?

I believe he chose not do any more Trek books so he could focus on his Dark Arts series.

I understand that as freelancers you have to go where the work is.

For purely selfish reasons I’m afraid that when the novels resume the authors we’ve come to know and love over the last decade will not be represented.

I don't see why they wouldn't, all of the authors are still active, and it appears to still be all the same editors in charge. They probably aren't doing any new author contracts right now because they're waiting until all of the "t"s are crossed and all of the "i"s are dotted on the new licensing contract.

 

[Dayton Ward]

^ Exactly. When someone says they’re “not contracted to write any more Star Trek novels,” that’s precisely what it means. As freelancers, we get hired one, two, or sometimes three books at a time. Most, in fact, are done as one contract/one book, and no working writer is going to work on a Star Trek (or any other tie-in) novel without a contract, because that’s just insane.

 

[Damian]

The way I read it is Paramount wanted the Abramsverse novels pulled. From what I understand while CBS owns Star Trek, Paramount still owns the rights to the films. Not sure about now but I got the feeling there was some acrimony between the two at the time. Not sure if that played a role in them being pulled. Some people at the time speculated it may have been because they weren't sure where they were going yet with STID and maybe didn't want novels to contradict what they were going to do with STID. Much later Bennett had noted his comments about his book (I thought I saw that one of the other authors said their book would have been affected by STID as well). But I'm not sure that's why it was pulled by the powers that be or is it just coincidence.

Since CBS owns Star Trek, if for some reason they didn't want a Star Trek book published I would think Pocketbooks would have to respect that. Now does Paramount have the same say-so over Abramsverse novels?