Authors perception of the Pocket Universe

[Use of Time]

This thread is more of an open forum but I was curious about some of our members/authors opinions about a few things.

1. Have any of you actually read every single book in the Star Trek pocket universe?

2. Do any of you have a favorite author from the earlier days that you wish was still writing.

3. Any criticism or pet peeves that you have regarding your peers novels?

4. When writing part of a series with other authors do you ever get frustrated at the direction the story takes when it reaches another writer's hands.

This is open to the members as well.

 

[zarkon]

1) About 80% of them I guess. Haven't read any ENT and very few VOY (and no intentions of changing that in the near future), which skews things.

2) Diane Duane & A C Crispin are the ones I'd most like to see back.

More recently KRAD & Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens have been a few years since having a trek book now, and PAD's status seems up in the air.

 

[F. King Daniel]

3 & 4. Geordi's treatment in Plagues of Night, which basically undid all his growth in Indistinguishable From Magic.

"Gee whiz, I was sure dumb to think I could ever be more than an engineer."

 

[Greg Cox]

Regarding #4, I confess that is one reason I prefer writing TOS these days. I can just do my own thing and not have to worry too much about any complicated relaunch continuity.

On the other hand, I enjoyed collaborating with Dave Mack and Margaret Clarke when we plotted out the conclusion to the 4400 books . . . so I can work well with others when I have to!

 

[Use of Time]

I've always wondered how something like the "A Time To" series gets developed. Is it everybody in a room with a white board with the main idea for the story distributed for everyone to fill in their with section? Do they have to reach a concensus on who gets to lead off and who gets to bring it home and what is out of bounds for the story? Very curious about the production and planning that goes into something like that.

Let's say an author writes the first book. Would he get pissed if what he had in his head takes a left turn by some other writer further down the road.

I would imagine those meetings (if they even have them) could probably get heated if strong ideas clash.

 

[F. King Daniel]

That Trek Lit doesn't have an entry here is probably a good sign that author conflicts and disagreements don't become too big! I don't read Star Wars novels, but their entries here were a fascinating read: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DependingOnTheWriter

 

[Christopher]

I've always wondered how something like the "A Time To" series gets developed. Is it everybody in a room with a white board with the main idea for the story distributed for everyone to fill in their with section? Do they have to reach a concensus on who gets to lead off and who gets to bring it home and what is out of bounds for the story? Very curious about the production and planning that goes into something like that.

It's the editor's job to spearhead and coordinate the process. Sometimes the editor puts the writers in contact with each other and they all hash it out together; I was part of such collaborations on Mere Anarchy and the "Cleaning Up Mack's Mess" novels that followed Destiny, and it was a lot of fun. Particularly on Mere Anarchy, it did go kind of like you suggest, akin to a TV writers' room; we all had a hand in "breaking" the story, i.e. figuring out what it would be about and how it would proceed in broad strokes, and pretty much every installment incorporates characters and ideas from all of us, but we then went off and wrote our own installments individually, then sent them out to the group for comments and critiques, whereupon we revised our drafts and Keith DeCandido (our editor) did the final revisions. Also, most of us got to pick which of the timeframes we wanted to cover, except for Dayton & Kevin, who co-created the concept and thus got to lead it off, and myself, who was specifically invited to do the post-TMP installment "for obvious reasons." (I'm sure I could've gotten to do a different era if I'd wanted, though.)

Sometimes, though -- perhaps more often -- the editor just deals with the authors individually and handles the coordination him/herself. Although authors can choose to compare notes and coordinate at their own discretion.

 

[Use of Time]

Thanks Christopher. It sounds like the editor has a tough job by making sure several things happen. I would think he would have to make sure the books don't contradict each other while making sure the transitions from one book to the next are seamless. I would imagine he might also have to play referee from time to time. That is a big responsibility.

 

[Mage]

3 & 4. Geordi's treatment in Plagues of Night, which basically undid all his growth in Indistinguishable From Magic.

"Gee whiz, I was sure dumb to think I could ever be more than an engineer."

I agree and disagree with this.
I loved Geordi becoming a captain in IFM. However, it all went a bit fast and was almost undone by itself at the end of IFM, when Geordi decided to keep his old job, but with a new title. I would have prefered if he had made that call at the end of IFM, deciding that yes, becoming a captain of a starship is something he wants. But that he also has more to learn.
I mean, he wasn't even first officer on the Challenger, but was her captain in a heartbeat. So yeah, I think it makes sense that he didn't accept command of the Musgrave and become the second officer on the E-E instead. That way, he can learn more about command, becoming first officer on some ship first before taking on a command of his own again.

 

[Greg Cox]

It's probably worth noting that there's no "writer's room" as such. That's a TV thing, where you have a full-time staff on salary. In the case of Trek novels, you're dealing with a passel of far-flung freelancers scattered all over the world, so any coordination is done mostly by phone or email, aside from the occasional informal get-together in a hotel bar somewhere.

I don't think I've set foot in the Pocket Book offices for years now . . .

 

[Christopher]

^Oh, of course. I've actually never been to the Pocket offices, even though I've been in New York at least once a year from 2006 on. I was referring to the similarities to the process of a writers' room rather than a literal, physical room. In both cases where I was involved in something resembling a "writers' room" arrangement, the whole thing was over e-mail.

 

[Sho]

Sorry to take a tangent, but I've actually been wondering about that: Given the sort of decentralized operation a publisher and its cadre of editors and authors form, has the internet become a part of the process for you to a significant degree, or is it still mostly a speedier substitute for snail mail?

Over in the software world where large, decentralized teams are quite normal we've developed a variety of tools to ease working together while not sharing the same physical space - web applications to conduct code audits and reviews, for example. It seems to me a lot of them would also apply to use cases like publishers and authors giving each other notes and keeping track of modifications to a manuscript while it's still in progress, so I'm wondering if that's already being done.

 

[Greg Cox]

Sorry to take a tangent, but I've actually been wondering about that: Given the sort of decentralized operation a publisher and its cadre of editors and authors form, has the internet become a part of the process for you to a significant degree, or is it still mostly a speedier substitute for snail mail?

Over in the software world where large, decentralized teams are quite normal we've developed a variety of tools to ease working together while not sharing the same physical space - web applications to conduct code audits and reviews, for example. It seems to me a lot of them would also apply to use cases like publishers and authors giving each other notes and keeping track of modifications to a manuscript while it's still in progress, so I'm wondering if that's already being done.

Probably not that sophisticated, but, yeah, 90% of it is mostly done by email, with authors and editors trading outlines and manuscripts as email attachments.

Back in the old days, when I started out, a shocking amount of tie-in business was done at this Greek diner on 23rd Street, but nowadays it's all by email. Hell, I've written two novels for Titan Books in London, all from my office in rural Pennsylvania . . . thanks to the internet.

 

[Christopher]

Sorry to take a tangent, but I've actually been wondering about that: Given the sort of decentralized operation a publisher and its cadre of editors and authors form, has the internet become a part of the process for you to a significant degree, or is it still mostly a speedier substitute for snail mail?

It's because of the Internet -- specifically this BBS -- that I became a Trek author in the first place, since Keith and Marco got to know me through my posts here and that led to them inviting me to pitch. Other than that, though, it's mostly just e-mail, like Greg says. Maybe the occasional Facebook PM exchange, but that's kind of the same thing.

 

[Sho]

I should clarify a bit what I mean .

Writing and programming are somewhat similar in the sense that the product of both activities is usually a big hunk of text. In the case of software it's commonly written in a human-friendly programming language and called "source code" (which is later translated to machine-friendly instructions via a variety of means). The difference is that unlike most prose texts, source code tends to constitute a living document, i.e. the text will get revised over and over again to fix mistakes, add new features, fix mistakes in the new features, and so on.

As such, the unit of work a programmer deals in is actually a revision, called a "patch" or a "diff". Source code text is kept in a special sort of database called "version control software" that lets you view past revisions of the source code, hone in on and visualize the difference (hence "diff") between revisions, and read the accompanying description/justification for the change written by the responsible programmer. Having the revision history of the source code available this way is really important - if a newer revision introduces a mistake it is vital to have the previous revision available to revert to, for example.

So when programmers interact as they collaborate on a program, aside from having higher-level design discussions, they do it mostly by exchanging and commenting on proposed diffs. (Here's a practical example of a small diff, from the version control for my TrekLit poll table code: http://www.eikehein.com/repositorie...ff&h=1c818fdf9ef68ed2b4089578808958d83145bcfb)

Now programmers use a variety of means to interact with these tools and exchange diffs, but the one I had in mind for the purpose of this discussion is the website-based incarnation. Imagine a website that lets you sign in, pour over a book's text, add notes to specific lines or paragraphs, comment on other notes, propose a change, apply a proposed change, and so on. In software we couldn't do without because the nature of the work is a prolonged, perhaps infinite series of revisions. Novels undergo only a limited period of revision, but maybe it would still be more elegant than basic email?


(To prattle on a bit more: The other similarity between writing and programming is that it's mostly a solitary activity. Programming requires achieving high levels of concentration in order to juggle a large mental working set of variables and code paths and outcomes, and human brains need a certain amount of time to achieve concentration, so programming is best done undisturbed for longer periods. So since the ideal working environment for most programmers is their own office room with a closed door anyway, and we have all these sophisticated tools for digital collaboration, and are dealing with products that are often poorly engaged with verbally anyway - programming languages are not easily spoken aloud - it begs the question whether you need office space at all. And so today you have lots of big software projects and many software companies that function largely virtually.)

 

[Greg Cox]

Things are moving that way in publishing. I remember when copyedits involved red pencils, annotations scribbled in the margins of actual paper manuscripts, and plenty of post-it notes. You still see that occasionally, but, more and more, publishers want to handle copyedits electronically, using something called Track Changes--which, I confess, I find a little intimidating.

I'm old-school enough that I still prefer paper and pencils, but I know I'm fighting a losing battle here.

 

[cml898]

Regarding the fourth question of the topic, I've often wondered how authors feel about what other authors do with character's they've created. The most prominent thing for me is what happened in "Before Dishonor." I always felt certain characters introduced in the two preceding novels were misused and their potential wasted so they could be used merely to carry out actions we wouldn't want to see our "regular" characters taking and I always wondered how the authors of the other two novels felt about that.

 

[zarkon]

That was more of an editorial thing - Peter David wasn't given a copy of Q & A before writing Before Dishonour, which is why all the character development from that book was ignored.

 

[rfmcdpei]

Regarding #4, I confess that is one reason I prefer writing TOS these days. I can just do my own thing and not have to worry too much about any complicated relaunch continuity.

On the other hand, I enjoyed collaborating with Dave Mack and Margaret Clarke when we plotted out the conclusion to the 4400 books . . . so I can work well with others when I have to!

I completely understand where you're coming from, but I've just finished re-reading the first two volumes of your Eugenics War trilogy. If there are any Star Trek books that are dense with continuity connections and complications, it's those two.

(I just realized the significance of your mention of Gary's acquaintance McCall, the "equalizer". Heh.)

 

[James Swallow]

1. According to a rough estimate, I've read around 400 Star Trek novels over the years. I used to get paid for it, too; back before I started writing for the ST franchise, I reviewed the books for the official UK ST magazine.

2. I'd love to have seen more ST fiction by the late John M. Ford. It'd be cool to have Diane Duane come back, and also convince her husband Peter Morwood to write another...

3. The only peeve I can say about the work of my peers is that they sometimes get to work on cool stuff I wish I could have done...

4. It can be disappointing when another writer takes something in a direction you don't agree with, but that's just something we have to accept as participants in a franchise-based ongoing series with multiple authors. Generally, writers communicate to make sure that sort of thing happens less often.