Academy: Collision Course - I actually quite liked it (SPOILERS)

[Therin of Andor]

I've just finished "Star Trek: Academy: Collision Course", by William Shatner (with Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens). This hardcover received extremely mixed reviews when it came out last October, so I put it beneath several other novels.

While it is well known that Shatner's previous nine-part hardcover saga (of Kirk's return from death beyond "Star Trek: Generations"), the so-called "Shatnerverse", has always operated within its own, ummm, pocket universe, this new prequel-to-TOS novel doesn't necessarily quash anything canonical (ie. onscreen, live action material), although it certainly stretches a few "fanonical" friendships.

I usually enjoy Star Trek hardcovers very much, but I began this one with great trepidation. Not many people online seemed to like it. Essentially this novel ignores most previous ST novels, especially the ones about Kirk's father, and Kirk Sr's career on the Enterprise under Captain Robert April. But the premise is intriguing, if not requiring suspension of disbelief. We see both teenaged Jim Kirk and teenaged Spock consorting with criminals, being shunted of to Starfleet training without a fair court martial, not to mention seemingly numerous links to young Kirk's very traumatic experiences under Kodos the Executioner, long before the secret events of "The Conscience of the King" (TOS) are revealed.

As Vulcan Ambassador Sarek, and Eugene Mallory - son of a redshirt we already know will one day die under then-Captain Kirk's command - discover, a little logic can go a long way when solving a crime. Annoying though,

And deja vu!: despite my many misgivings about this hardcover, the action in "Collision Course" certainly comes thick and fast. A real collision course, actually. People may have slammed it for ignoring "Final Frontier" and "Best Destiny", two very strong George Kirk Sr stories by Diane Carey, but there's also lots to enjoy.

There'll be frustrations no matter what. Jim's Dad is called George Joseph "Joe" Kirk is this one! And, for those who disliked "Star Trek: Enterprise", the TV series prequel to TOS, you may well be tetchy about Academy buildings named for Archer, Tucker and Mayweather - and even a non-"name drop" for Hoshi Sato and her husband, via their little great grandson! (It pays to read the fine print!) For those of us who are fans of Enterprise, it's a nice bonus. I should note that Shatner's regular ST novel co-authors were staff writers on "Enterprise" during its fourth (and many say, best) season.

This is a novel with a new, but still valid, take on the Sarek/Spock relationship. And it's about an extremely troubled, very different Jimmy Kirk, one far removed from the Kirk we met in previous prequels to TOS, (and sure to be overruled by the upcoming ST XI) but after the Tarsus IV experiences related in "Collision Course", who can blame him?

If you can make it through the first four or five chapters, it's easy to keep reading! I went into the book expecting it to be horrid, based on all the negativity it seemed to garner, but I was surprised how involving it became.

 

[KRAD]

^ While it isn't an actual contradiction, there is a bit of a timeline issue with Kirk and Spock being at the Academy together.

According to "The Menagerie," Spock served as third-in-command of the Enterprise thirteen years prior to the episode (since the flashback material from "The Cage" is stated to have been thirteen years previous, and Spock was left in charge when Pike and Number One both beamed down). Kirk was 31 in "The Menagerie" (since the second-season episode "The Deadly Years" had him at 32 in that episode), which means he was 18 when Spock was serving under Pike. So the timelines don't quite mesh, though that didn't stop the writers of the TOS Academy YA books, either.

 

[ClayinCA]

Isn't Kirk thirty-four in "The Deadly Years"? I wouldn't swear to it; it's just that I was so sure....

 

[Christopher]

Yes, that's right, Kirk was 34 in "Deadly Years." Also, The Making of Star Trek, which was current as of the second season, gave Kirk's age as 34 in his bio. Moreover, Kirk's birth year is Okudachronically conjectured to be 2233, and "The Cage" is 2254, so Kirk would've been 20-21 at the time.

 

[EliyahuQeoni]

Therin - Thanks for the review! While I lost interest in the 24th Century Shatnerverse I've been curious about this one, since its dealing with largely uncharted waters, but was very put off by the many negative reviews.

Personally, I have no issues with the book not taking the Diane Carey novels into account. While I greatly enjoyed those books, Final Frontier moreso than Best Destiny, I find the notion that George Kirk was not only a friend of Robert Aprils, served on the Enterprise with him, but also named the ship to be a little much to swallow (And that says nothing of Best Destiny having Kirk himself voyage on the Enterprise as a boy!). It wasn't enough to prevent me from enjoying the book, which is otherwise one of my favorite Trek novels, but I'm open to other interpretations of Kirk's family and past.

Is this book out in paperback yet?

Christopher: "Okudachronically" is my new favorite word!

 

[Christopher]

^^Thanks! Strictly speaking, it should probably be "Okudachronologically," but that's too long.

 

[JAG]

Is this book out in paperback yet?

Not yet

 

[Steve Roby]

As I blogged a few months back, I found the book unsatisfying on its own merits:

When you have a resurrected superhero version of James T. Kirk running around the 24th century and showing Jean-Luc Picard how to save the galaxy, preposterous is pretty much the starting point. Going back to the young Jim Kirk seems to offer the chance for a more realistic and believable kind of story. Something that could appeal to readers who find the 24th century Kirk stories just too hard to believe. Or you could just get a preposterous story in which the Kirk who saves the day and shows everyone how it's done happens to be a teenager.

Unfortunately, we get the latter.

Okay, maybe it doesn't strain credibility too much to have Kirk and Spock meet as teenagers before either joins Starfleet; canon doesn't give us any detail on how long they've known each other or when they first met. And canon doesn't say much about Kirk's brother, so maybe he was a drug addict involved in an alien crime ring before he ended up on Deneva with Aurelan and the kids.

Spoiler: a lot of story and character elements

But the idea that Kirk is a genius engineer and hacker, estranged from his father, just doesn't quite feel right to me. The idea that, even before joining Starfleet, he manages to steal the Enterprise from Spacedock and fight the bad guys and blow open an Orion conspiracy... well, that's where we go from "I'm not sure I buy that" to "this is utterly preposterous." James T. Kirk is not just some guy, sure, but making him so much of an overachiever so early takes away from the Hornblowerish self-questioning and self-doubt we see in some TOS episodes.

The portrayal of Spock as a somewhat insecure teenager still not fully in control of his emotions is solid and believable. He's handled pretty well in the story, but I'm not sure the Vulcan artefact smuggling that he stumbles across is really thought through. The bad guys are knowingly buying supposedly stolen forged Vulcan artefacts with tech that fools sensors into showing them as authentic in order to get the tect to use it for another purpose. But how did the process start? Did the bad guys think, hey, let's try to steal Vulcan artefacts, so they'll create fakes with the kind of tech we need? Did the Vulcans think, it is logical to assume that our artefacts may be stolen, and therefore they should all be replaced with forgeries equipped with technology that will enable them to deceive the thieves and their sensors? Maybe that was addressed somewhere and I missed it, but it felt like Braga/Menosky TNG/Voyager plotting: come up with a mystery, add a twist to the mystery, add a surprising explanation to the mystery, but don't look at it chronologically to see if it would actually make sense.

I did like the way the story dealt with the backstory from "The Conscience of the King." It explains why a farm kid from Iowa was on Tarsus IV, it explains why only a small number of survivors could identify Kodos (instead of everyone who wasn't killed during the incident), and it gives the young Jim Kirk some somewhat surprising but plausible characterization.

So... overall, an occasionally fun romp that's ultimately as preposterous as the 24th century Kirk novels. For me, that's disappointing.

 

[CaptJimboJones]

And, for those who disliked "Star Trek: Enterprise", the TV series prequel to TOS, you may well be tetchy about Academy buildings named for Archer, Tucker and Mayweather - and even a non-"name drop" for Hoshi Sato and her husband, via their little great grandson! (It pays to read the fine print!)

On the flip side, for those of us who are fans of Enterprise, it's a nice little bonus. And it should be noted that Shatner's co-authors were staff writers for Enterprise during its fourth season, which many fans (including me) thought was the show's strongest, creatively.

 

[Therin of Andor]

On the flip side, for those of us who are fans of Enterprise, it's a nice little bonus. And it should be noted that Shatner's co-authors were staff writers for Enterprise during its fourth season, which many fans (including me) thought was the show's strongest, creatively.

Of course. I didn't think it was necessarily to spell that out around here.

I went into the book expecting it to be horrid, based on all the negativity it seemed to garner, but I was surprised how involving it became.

 

[Therin of Andor]

... but was very put off by the many negative reviews.

I don't usually let negative Internet reviews bother me too much, especially after I've paid so much for an airfreighted hardcover on its day of release, but this one took some resolve to start reading it. I'm glad I was able to get as much out of it as I did.

 

[RandyS]

I've just finished "Star Trek: Academy: And, for those who disliked "Star Trek: Enterprise", the TV series prequel to TOS, you may well be tetchy about Academy buildings named for Archer, Tucker and Mayweather - and even a non-"name drop" for Hoshi Sato and her husband, via their little great grandson! (It pays to read the fine print!) For those of us who are fans of Enterprise, it's a nice bonus.t became.

I am a well know ENTERPRISE hater, and these little touches didn't bother me at all.

The thing about George Joseph Kirk was annoying, but forgivable. Shatner is on record as not being a Trek fan and this shows he clearly didn't bother to check his facts, and remember Jim's brother being named Sam, but, like I said, a small, forgivable error.

Overall, I thought the book was an enjoyable read, but I agree a suspension of disbelief is reqiured.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The thing about George Joseph Kirk was annoying, but forgivable. Shatner is on record as not being a Trek fan and this shows he clearly didn't bother to check his facts, and remember Jim's brother being named Sam, but, like I said, a small, forgivable error.

The Reeves-Stevens are the "fact checkers" on Shatner's books. So would be the Pocket editor and Paula Block.

However, canon never said that Kirk's father had to have the same full name as Sam. The Jr and Sr thing was from previous novels, which Shatner had already chosen to ignore when he overlooked events of "Final Frontier" and "Best Destiny".

However, I liked how Pike was said to be taking over the Enterprise in its sixth year of operation, leaving room for April without actually mentioning him.

 

[Ronald Held]

I am uncertain how to evaluate the novel, with the timeline problems/contraditions and the unusual relationships and petrosnlaities of Kirk and Spock. Maybe the sequel will help?

 

[Christopher]

Therin's right -- "George Joseph Kirk" isn't an error, because canonically George Samuel Kirk was only established as the name of Kirk's brother. It was Vonda McIntyre in Enterprise: The First Adventure who asserted it as their father's name as well. Based on online reports, the upcoming J. J. Abrams movie is going to canonize McIntyre's names for Kirk's parents (George Samuel and Winona), so it will be a contradiction then, but as of the time the book was written, Shatner was fully entitled to choose a different name for Kirk's father. No doubt he chose Joseph to tie into the name of Kirk's future son in the other Shatnerverse books.

 

[JD]

Huh, so I wonder the names of Kirk's parents could confirm which books the movie's BTS team were referring to when they said they'd read and enjoyed Trek books?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Huh, so I wonder the names of Kirk's parents could confirm which books the movie's BTS team were referring to when they said they'd read and enjoyed Trek books?

Well, apart from "Academy: Collision Course", most novels to mention Kirk's Dad have gone with George Samuel Sr, and most that mention the mother go with Winona.

People have been guessing "First Frontier", "Best Destiny" and "Enterprise: The First Adventure", but who knows?

http://startrek.wikia.com/wiki/Winona_Kirk

 

[RonG]

I just finished Collision Course, and although the Shatnerverse lost me with the abysmal Totality books, I really liked this leatest (last?) offering.

I remember reading *about* the book and deciding to skip it altogether. However, a mixup with an online bookstore left me with a used HC copy, and I started it..

Long stoy short and two days later, I can honestly say it was a refreshing take on young Kirk and Spock, with enough of the characters we know (they'll become) visible and identifyable.

Though the story is quite complete IMO, it's still makes me wonder if Trial Run will ever be out...