Am I the only one who'd like to see a new novelization of TMP?

[ScottDS]

Confession: I have not read the novelization of Star Trek: TMP.

However, after I finished Christopher L. Bennett's most recent DTI novel which helps fill in some of the gaps of the period in between TOS and TMP (not to mention Ex Machina which does the same for post-TMP), I had a thought...

...wouldn't it be interesting to revist TMP armed with all the knowledge (canon and otherwise) that we have now? Character names, alien races, technology, and other elements that hadn't yet been developed in 1979. Obviously the plot would be the same but some of the background info would no doubt be a little different.

 

[Christopher]

I don't see any need for that. Roddenberry's TMP novelization is a very noteworthy work in its own right. It's a pretty faithful adaptation of the film but expands on it in interesting ways, and the fact that the added portions offer a different perspective from later canonical tales is what makes them intriguing. The fact that it's a product of its time is part of its value. Granted, its writing style is a little clunky, but it holds a special place as the only Trek novel written by Roddenberry himself, and I for one would have no desire to replace or compete with it.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I haven't read the TMP novelization either (bar Kirk's preface), but I really don't like the idea of rewriting something to better conform to today's version of Trek continuity.

If your Trek enjoyment is about ticking continuity boxes, you're watching/reading it wrong. It's the authors' unique intetpretations of the Trek universe that make the novels (especially the older ones, which extrapolated from much less canon) so much fun, IMO.

 

[ScottDS]

If your Trek enjoyment is about ticking continuity boxes, you're watching/reading it wrong. It's the authors' unique intetpretations of the Trek universe that make the novels (especially the older ones, which extrapolated from much less canon) so much fun, IMO.

No, I don't get my sole enjoyment out of continuity but I can't disagree with you. Again, it was just a thought.

I don't see any need for that. Roddenberry's TMP novelization is a very noteworthy work in its own right. It's a pretty faithful adaptation of the film but expands on it in interesting ways, and the fact that the added portions offer a different perspective from later canonical tales is what makes them intriguing. The fact that it's a product of its time is part of its value.

Thanks! Your comment was pretty much what I was expecting and as I mentioned above, I can't disagree. While I personally think it would be a fun exercise, at the same time, "re-doing" one novel would open a can of worms. After all, if you re-do one, why not more?

 

[Captaindemotion]

Personally, I'd be more interested in seeing a standalone 'Elseworlds' type novel that expanded on the background info that GR included in this book, but which was ultimately either ignored or contradicted by subsequent movies and series.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Personally, I'd be more interested in seeing a standalone 'Elseworlds' type novel that expanded on the background info that GR included in this book, but which was ultimately either ignored or contradicted by subsequent movies and series.

The "new human" movement was picked up in one of Marshak and Culbreath's thinly veiled K/S novels.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I haven't read the TMP novelization either (bar Kirk's preface), but I really don't like the idea of rewriting something to better conform to today's version of Trek continuity.

Read it! Read it! Read it!

This was my first ST novel(ization), read in December 1979 while trying to find someone who'd go see the movie with me. (I eventually went on my own.) I never intended to read more than about a third of it before seeing the movie - but I couldn't put it down. It moves at a very fast pace (ironically) and is a wild taste of where GR's mind was at when TMP (and "Phase II") were being developed.

After reading "Ex Machina", I mentioned to Marco that a "Signature Edition" trade PB, pairing Roddenberry's TMP with Christopher L Bennett's book would be a great, future addition to that series, but sales on the seven SEs - and indeed, on "Ex Machina", too - were below Pocket's expectations, so the SE experiment wasn't being continued.

http://therinofandor.blogspot.com.au/2008/04/star-trek-signature-editions-if-i-ever.html

Since then, though, I keep noticing new printings of "Ex Machina", so that must have been a "sleeper" hit.

IIRC, the reprintings of TMP made it one of the most successful movie novelizations of all time. It was still in print decades after the original movie had come out. I see nothing that requires chucking out.

While I personally think it would be a fun exercise, at the same time, "re-doing" one novel would open a can of worms. After all, if you re-do one, why not more?

Of course, Marco did do some tweaking on Vonda McIntyre's ST II/III/IV novelizations when they were reprinted as a Signature Edition, but it was mainly things like spelling corrections to McGiver(s)' surname, and Sulu's rank changes.

Mind you, the UK and Australian publications by Futura already do have a few extra sentences and paragraphs giving us a little more information on Kirk's wife in the TMP novelization.

 

[Dantheman]

This is the kind of thing Star Wars EU fans often talk about in regards to the OT movie novelizations, to take things like the prequel trilogy and such into account, but it often comes down to "it's probably better to leave them alone".

Which is for the best, because the ANH novelization is where we got stuff like the Journal of the Whills, and it pretty much describes the prequel trilogy in a few paragraphs already.

 

[Christopher]

Since then, though, I keep noticing new printings of "Ex Machina", so that must have been a "sleeper" hit.

Not that I'm aware, it isn't. It's one of my lowest-selling Trek novels despite having been out the longest.

 

[toughlittleship]

I'd love to see novelizations of episodes that never received the treatment back in the day - "The Best of Both Worlds", "Chain of Command", "The Maquis" etc

 

[Therin of Andor]

Not that I'm aware, it isn't. It's one of my lowest-selling Trek novels despite having been out the longest.

Mmmm. Well, I've definitely seen first, second and third printings around town.

 

[BillJ]

We can even expand on V'ger's link to the Borg!

 

[Greg Cox]

Of course, Marco did do some tweaking on Vonda McIntyre's ST II/III/IV novelizations when they were reprinted as a Signature Edition, but it was mainly things like spelling corrections to McGiver(s)' surname, and Sulu's rank changes..

As I recall, I made a few small tweaks to the Signature edition of The Q Continuum. I know I changed a couple of references to "the original Enterprise" to "Kirk's Enterprise" to avoid confusion with Archer's ship since Enterprise was on the air then.

 

[Therin of Andor]

As I recall, I made a few small tweaks to the Signature edition of The Q Continuum. I know I changed a couple of references to "the original Enterprise" to "Kirk's Enterprise" to avoid confusion with Archer's ship since Enterprise was on the air then.

And, from my blog post of yore:

"Cox took the chance to make several stardate error corrections."

 

[DonIago]

I might be interested to see a MyrU take on the events of TMP (

Spoiler: Spoiler-tagged in case "What if...?" questions are too specific for authors

"What if Spock had embraced Kolinahr and the transporter accident hadn't happened?" "What if Matt Decker had never had a son?"

), but an actual rewrite of the novel holds little appeal to me.

 

[Greg Cox]

As I recall, I made a few small tweaks to the Signature edition of The Q Continuum. I know I changed a couple of references to "the original Enterprise" to "Kirk's Enterprise" to avoid confusion with Archer's ship since Enterprise was on the air then.

And, from my blog post of yore:

"Cox took the chance to make several stardate error corrections."

Thanks! I knew there was something else, but I couldn't remember what.

 

[sojourner]

Ironically, I enjoy movies/TV that update classic books, but hate the idea of rewriting an original work. John Scalzi did a "modernized" rewrite of H. Beam Piper's Little Fuzzy that really makes me see red.

 

[WarsTrek1993]

I read it again a few days ago, and I can't say I support a rewrite. It was an interesting take on the script with some of Gene's additions.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Read it! Read it! Read it!

I'll put it on my read pile! I must admit, Gene Rodenberry writing a Trek novel is a fascinating prospect.

 

[Christopher]

^Just be aware that it's a novel by someone who had never written in prose before, so there's a certain awkwardness to its narrative style. (Which is part of why the myth that Alan Dean Foster ghostwrote the book just doesn't hold up to scrutiny.)