I think this is another of Titan’s hardcover versions of their specialty magazines. They did one last year, with their first Discovery special, and in 2016, with their Star Trek Beyond special.
2018 Releases
- Thread starter aventinelover
- Start date
- Status
An Unexpected Yesterday has an Arcadian in it.
More preview pages from the Star Trek Shipyards books, including size-comparison charts and a timeline: https://www.thetrekcollective.com/2018/07/more-previews-from-star-trek-shipyards.html
An observation (Maybe somebody else has made it already) about ST fiction:
From the first airing of "The Man Trap" in the Fall of 1967, through the Fall of 1977, a period of a little over a decade, there were 27 volumes of officially licensed and sanctioned Star Trek prose fiction published, the combined output of three publishers. 21 of those volumes were books of episode adaptations (TOS by Blish, TAS by ADF), one of which was an anthology consisting mostly or entirely of works that had already been published in fanzines, and one of which was a children's novel.
By the time the last Bantam and Ballantine ST books went out the door (including two more volumes of episode adaptations, one of which included an original novella, a movie novelization, and another mostly-fanfic anthology), there were 40 volumes of Star Trek prose fiction in existence.
At the peak of Pocket's Star Trek output, a time that coincided with a period when there was always at least one Star Trek series in first run on commercial television, and "Prime Universe" Star Trek feature films were being produced on a regular basis, the average annual Star Trek output of Pocket Books alone was at least as many volumes of ST prose fiction as existed in the fall of 1977. Much of this was horseshit, bad enough that, at least according to legend, Roddenberry read some of it, and sicced Richard Arnold on the world. And yet even the worst of the horseshit wasn't nearly as bad, either in terms of Roddenberry's vision or simply in terms of general literary merit, as the worst of the Bantam ST novels. And that period also produced such undisputed masterpieces as Diane Duane's Spock's World.
We have quite literally hundreds of extant volumes of Star Trek prose fiction to choose from, covering all the series that ever appeared on television, and series that exist entirely in print. Even if we leave the horseshit on the shelves, we could read two or three of them each week, for several years, and not run out.
And it's not like there isn't other fiction out there. Some of it is better than any Star Trek novel ever written, and some of it (like a certain novel about the Chinese attempting to discredit the Apollo Moon Landings, that somehow grew two sequels in spite of being so unspeakably bad that I will not sully this Board by invoking its title) makes even the three worst Star Trek novels ever published look good by comparison.
From the first airing of "The Man Trap" in the Fall of 1967, through the Fall of 1977, a period of a little over a decade, there were 27 volumes of officially licensed and sanctioned Star Trek prose fiction published, the combined output of three publishers. 21 of those volumes were books of episode adaptations (TOS by Blish, TAS by ADF), one of which was an anthology consisting mostly or entirely of works that had already been published in fanzines, and one of which was a children's novel.
By the time the last Bantam and Ballantine ST books went out the door (including two more volumes of episode adaptations, one of which included an original novella, a movie novelization, and another mostly-fanfic anthology), there were 40 volumes of Star Trek prose fiction in existence.
At the peak of Pocket's Star Trek output, a time that coincided with a period when there was always at least one Star Trek series in first run on commercial television, and "Prime Universe" Star Trek feature films were being produced on a regular basis, the average annual Star Trek output of Pocket Books alone was at least as many volumes of ST prose fiction as existed in the fall of 1977. Much of this was horseshit, bad enough that, at least according to legend, Roddenberry read some of it, and sicced Richard Arnold on the world. And yet even the worst of the horseshit wasn't nearly as bad, either in terms of Roddenberry's vision or simply in terms of general literary merit, as the worst of the Bantam ST novels. And that period also produced such undisputed masterpieces as Diane Duane's Spock's World.
We have quite literally hundreds of extant volumes of Star Trek prose fiction to choose from, covering all the series that ever appeared on television, and series that exist entirely in print. Even if we leave the horseshit on the shelves, we could read two or three of them each week, for several years, and not run out.
And it's not like there isn't other fiction out there. Some of it is better than any Star Trek novel ever written, and some of it (like a certain novel about the Chinese attempting to discredit the Apollo Moon Landings, that somehow grew two sequels in spite of being so unspeakably bad that I will not sully this Board by invoking its title) makes even the three worst Star Trek novels ever published look good by comparison.
I think you meant to type 1966. The first Blish adaptation came out in January 1967.
That had little to do with the quality of the work, and more to do with Richard Arnold's own perception of it. At Shore Leave the other day, I heard the opinion expressed that, while licensors like Paula Block and John Van Citters work with the tie-in creators as partners to make the works as good as they can be, Arnold's approach to the tie-ins was more adversarial -- to him, they were knockoffs that threatened the integrity and reputation of Gene's Creation and needed to be kept tightly reined in to minimize the damage. It wasn't about whether they were good or bad -- indeed, the better they were and the more acclaim they got, the more Arnold probably saw them as rivals and threats to the real thing. Some of that was likely Roddenberry's own pride and ego, wanting Trek to be his and not anyone else's, but Arnold was extremely aggressive in enforcing that.
I never said that Richard Arnold's actions during his regime had anything to do with quality; I have little doubt that he quashed masterpieces and horseshit without distinction (and I know from experience that he certainly let at least as much horseshit through as he did masterpieces), measuring a work's worthiness, as you say, according to his own perception of whether they constituted a threat.
And as to 1967 vs. 1966, I stand corrected. I was four years old at the time, and it would be a year or two before I even first heard of Star Trek, and years after that before I actually saw an episode ("The Devil in the Dark") all the way through. The point is that the peak annual output of Pocket met or exceeded the first decade of licensed, sanctioned, ST prose fiction, including episode adaptations, from three separate publishers, by volume count alone.
And as to 1967 vs. 1966, I stand corrected. I was four years old at the time, and it would be a year or two before I even first heard of Star Trek, and years after that before I actually saw an episode ("The Devil in the Dark") all the way through. The point is that the peak annual output of Pocket met or exceeded the first decade of licensed, sanctioned, ST prose fiction, including episode adaptations, from three separate publishers, by volume count alone.
Susan Sackett vetted licensed tie-in manuscripts on behalf of GR up until Richard Arnold took over that role (seemingly halfway through Vonda McIntyre's novelising of ST IV, according to a caustic essay Vonda used to have on her website). Roddenberry had a positive quote on the cover text of Vonda's "Star Trek: The First Adventure", Pocket's first "giant" MMPB, celebrating the 20th anniversary.
The sticking points had been the "Star Trek Technical Manual", which was contracted in such a way that Franz Joseph was permitted to approve the use of his material by "Star Fleet Battles" and Heritage metal miniatures without having to let these tie-ins go through Roddenberry/Paramount for approvals. Then a fan convention flier called their guest-of-honor, author Diane Duane, "the creator of the Rihannsu" [Romulans]. Then FASA RPG managed to publish an error-filled "Next Generation" manual at the end of Season One without Roddenberry/Arnold getting to see that they had made use of the initial memos. (They hadn't!)
Richard Arnold's vetting finished with Roddenberry's death in September 1991, but many of his restrictions took months/years to loosen.
Last edited:
Damn straight.
Yes, details in the 2019 thread.
Sounds like typical Trek BBS to me.
Finally, the Caitian is officially out of the bag.
You should see the Axanar threads over in fan-films. At least this one wasn't a full-time job to keep up with.
Yep. RA was an annual guest an Australian convention during and after this period and, while I loved the opportunity to see and hear his slideshow presentations on TNG, ST V, DS9, ST VI and VGR over the years, it was uncomfortable hearing him slam some of the authors and plots of the licensed tie-ins which I had been enjoying so much, and to know he had helped eliminate Naraht, Bearclaw, Arex and M'Ress from the post-ST V comics and Chris Claremont's much-delayed "Debt of Honor" graphic novel.
I remember RA's story about a (well-intentioned) convention committee sending Roddenberry's office their promotional flier, where they had advertised GoH Diane Duane as "Creator of the Rihannsu".
The Wrath of Roddenberry!
So should we let this thread die now? 
So should we let this thread die now?
Aye, that's a fair suggestion.
So - new books? yes, 2018? no. Let's all move our hopes, dreams and discussions into the 2019 thread.
So - new books? yes, 2018? no. Let's all move our hopes, dreams and discussions into the 2019 thread.
- Status
