^ I think you're quoting the wrong person, Baerbel.
Sorry. I tried a few times to get it right but couldn`t figure out what to do. I think it is obvious where my posting starts and the other one ends. It is of course the part after "end quote".
Bad Review of ENT: Kobayashi Maru at Pink Raygun
- Thread starter thesadpanda
- Start date
Sorry. I tried a few times to get it right but couldn`t figure out what to do. I think it is obvious where my posting starts and the other one ends. It is of course the part after "end quote".
You assume that fans always make "sense" in their choices, or accidental discoveries. Many ST fans do not have the money to buy DVD boxed sets. Not too many DVD rental stores here in Australia have the ST series on DVD rental.
But, they might see "The Good That Men Do" in a bookshop, or read a review, or be lent it from a friend. I've often bought ST novelizations as gifts for friends I thought might enjoy a diversion to their regular, more restricted, ST reading.
People discover ST via thousands of ways, and many choose to "avoid" parts of the phenomenon, because it has become so vast.
And The Laughing Vulcan:
I have bought and read many tie-in novels for shows I don't watch, and comics I've never read. PAD's "Babylon 5", for one. All the "Alien Nation" novels. The whole set of Pocket Marvel novels (actually following only "The Fantastic Four" in comic form, and knowing the "Spider-man" movies). Quite a few movie novelizations, where I never got around to seeing the movie, but something made me curious about the book.
They are written for kids. Doctor Who has always been a family show. The original run of novelizations was definitely aimed at younger readers, with large print and fairly basic storytelling. The post-series (well, now inter-series) novels got away from that, becoming far more adult, but I always felt they took it too far and got away from what the series was meant to be.
Of course it was true decades ago. And still is.
And I met two people, only last night, at our ST Meetup. They have lived in Sydney all their lives, are avid fans, have managed to miss huge parts of the ST phenomenon, but were intimately familiar with other parts.
A third person - also an avid fan, but formerly of a more rural area - has wider tastes, but apologized that her knowledge of TOS was restricted to the old DC Comics run. Which she loved!
Because I've met them. The broad tapestry of tastes of eclectic ST fans has not become narrower over time. Not all of them proceed through the ST franchise in logical order. Nor are they all completists of any one series.
I have, and I do. As a school librarian since 1989, I can assure you that many children do, too.
M& M were describing Archer's surroundings. Surely this is permitted, even for avid viewers reading the book?
On the surface I wanted to agree with what Trent said, because (on the surface) it made more sense. But in practice even I have done this... with Trek even!
I still have only seen maybe 4 episodes of TOS (and have no intention of going back and watching that horribleness) but I've read some TOS books. It wasn't even until after I had read a couple of books that I decided to go watch the TOS movies (I had seen none of them until about two years ago), and that was only because I felt like I was missing important stuff by not having seen them.
I'd also read The Good That Men Do prior to actually seeing most of the ENT series (I think at the time I had only seen 7 episodes [one of which was These are the Voyages]). And, as with TOS, I actively avoided it due to the perceived terribleness of the show. (I've since seen all of the Enterprise episodes [thanks! Netflix] and find that while it was somewhat weak, it did get MUCH better as it went along.)
I still have only seen maybe 4 episodes of TOS (and have no intention of going back and watching that horribleness) but I've read some TOS books. It wasn't even until after I had read a couple of books that I decided to go watch the TOS movies (I had seen none of them until about two years ago), and that was only because I felt like I was missing important stuff by not having seen them.
I'd also read The Good That Men Do prior to actually seeing most of the ENT series (I think at the time I had only seen 7 episodes [one of which was These are the Voyages]). And, as with TOS, I actively avoided it due to the perceived terribleness of the show. (I've since seen all of the Enterprise episodes [thanks! Netflix] and find that while it was somewhat weak, it did get MUCH better as it went along.)
^ I think you're quoting the wrong person, Baerbel.
Sorry. I tried a few times to get it right but couldn`t figure out what to do. I think it is obvious where my posting starts and the other one ends. It is of course the part after "end quote".
no need to apologise, I was just really confused at first when I read the quote, because I was sure JD didn't say it.
and it's now fixed.
I've still got season 3 and 4's DVD boxset under their original wrap, and I don't know when I'm going to open them and watch the episodes. I'll probably read the books first.
Something to keep in mind: the BBC still views Doctor Who as a kids' show. Since it's the Beeb's own book division that publishes the books, the Who tie-ins are going to reflect that philosophy. OTOH, they do not view Torchwood as a kids' show.
Looking at TV listings, either paper or online, isn't exactly a strenous or intellectually challenging task. I think it's legetimate to expect a bare mininum of resourcefulness if people actually want something. Impulse buyers are another phenomena, of course.
"Missed" is not "avoid". Avoid means being aware of and deliberately not following a show, if not going out of their way to shun that aspect of the franchise. A poor choice of words, perhaps.
Well, in that case it makes sense; if you really can't get to the source, you make due with what's available. Like JD's exhausting of a long list of possibilities to get to Torchwood, sometimes the best efforts are frustrated by the regionalisms of broadcast or DVD distribution.
Well, consider my mind boggled. I cannot believe, however, that this is an overly common practice, at least not where source material is readily available... particularly since the audience for film/television products is so much greater than print media, by and large.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
You can add me to the list of non-Enterprise watchers that read 'The Good that Men Do'. Now granted, I didn't buy it... I saw it on the 'new' shelf at my library, and borrowed it because I liked other books by the authors. I saw the first two episodes of Enterprise, and it just didn't capture me. I wouldn't say I avoided it actively, or missed it because it was hard to get. I just didn't seek it out at all. That being said, I loved 'The Good that Men Do', and was very happy when detail was given on what characters looked like, or about the ship in general, because I knew next to nothing about it. I *did* really enjoy it though, and now that I'm buying Star Trek books, I plan on buying Kobayashi Maru when it comes out.
If I ever have friends that start up an Enterprise watching Marathon, I'd probably join in... but I'm not going to buy the DVD's. I don't own any Star Trek DVD's, and Deep Space Nine would come first. A lot of stuff would come first before buying Enterprise. It would take a lot to even get me to rent it. But I did enjoy the book, and am looking forward to reading more.
Maybe I'm an exception. Maybe there aren't many like me, but that's my relationship to the books. I'm still not super familiar with the characters or the ship or the time period, so I hope Kobayashi Maru will continue to be friendly for those of us that haven't watched the show.
Thinking about the why, though... Why am I interested in the Enterprise books, but not so much the Enterprise show... I haven't given it much thought till now. I don't have an interest in the previous books (By the Book, Surak's Soul, etc...) but will definitely buy those that come out in the future...
Part of it, I think, is enjoying Star Trek books more than Star Trek visual media in general... Part of it is author loyalty, maybe. After all, the reason I picked up 'TGTMD' was seeing Martin and Mengels on the cover. And part of it is knowing that these books will fill in previously unknown Star Trek history. It's not just about 'Enterprise', it's about the first steps towards the Romulan War. A key element of the Star Trek universe that we don't know all that much about. Maybe, as I connect more to the characters after reading Kobayashi Maru, I'll want to go to the show to find out more about them, but maybe not.
If I ever have friends that start up an Enterprise watching Marathon, I'd probably join in... but I'm not going to buy the DVD's. I don't own any Star Trek DVD's, and Deep Space Nine would come first. A lot of stuff would come first before buying Enterprise. It would take a lot to even get me to rent it. But I did enjoy the book, and am looking forward to reading more.
Maybe I'm an exception. Maybe there aren't many like me, but that's my relationship to the books. I'm still not super familiar with the characters or the ship or the time period, so I hope Kobayashi Maru will continue to be friendly for those of us that haven't watched the show.
Thinking about the why, though... Why am I interested in the Enterprise books, but not so much the Enterprise show... I haven't given it much thought till now. I don't have an interest in the previous books (By the Book, Surak's Soul, etc...) but will definitely buy those that come out in the future...
Part of it, I think, is enjoying Star Trek books more than Star Trek visual media in general... Part of it is author loyalty, maybe. After all, the reason I picked up 'TGTMD' was seeing Martin and Mengels on the cover. And part of it is knowing that these books will fill in previously unknown Star Trek history. It's not just about 'Enterprise', it's about the first steps towards the Romulan War. A key element of the Star Trek universe that we don't know all that much about. Maybe, as I connect more to the characters after reading Kobayashi Maru, I'll want to go to the show to find out more about them, but maybe not.
There have been multiple people in this thread who have said that people they know -- or they themselves -- have IN ACTUAL FACT engaged in the very behavior we're talking about here. So why are you still trying to argue that it doesn't happen? Especially in terms that insult the intelligence of the people who do it?
I can't understand why you find this so hard to believe. Not everyone places TV and movies above books in their hierarchy of entertainment choices. There are plenty of people whose reading is more eclectic than their viewing. Heck, growing up, I routinely read movie novelizations before I saw the movies, because my family simply didn't go out to many movies.
And you're making a lot of narrow assumptions about what's "readily available." I pointed out that not everyone could see the shows and you made snide, condescending remarks about how they should be able to get the videos -- forgetting that DVDs are costly, more so than books. Also, Trek novelizations are easier to find at libraries than Trek DVDs, so people on tight budgets are likely to find the books more accessible than the videos. There are also time budgets to consider: not everyone has the luxury to spend a lot of time watching TV or videos. The only time they may have for recreation is on the bus or train commuting to and from work, and although it's possible today for people to bring video players along on a commute, I'm sure it's still more common for them to bring books.
So there are all sorts of reasons why people would read books based on shows they don't follow. You're just not trying to think of any. On the contrary, you're devoting all your energy to denying the possibilities rather than seeking them. And I just don't understand the point of thinking that way.
No-one here said anything like that. They either didn't want to watch the show or it wasn't available in their market. Anyway, it doesn't matter: I've realized, through this discussion, what a potentially lucrative and untapped market there is in finding television shows for people whose hectic lifestyles simply don't permit that luxury. For a competitive fee, I'll tell them exactly when and on what channels their chosen television series will be broadcast. For an extra fee, I'll even go to to their homes and program their Betamax/VRC/Tivo/DVD-R/Whatever to record said episodes. 50% refund if it turns out the series in question is not available in their markets (because charging full for essentially nothing would be piratical, of course, although I still need to be renumerated for all those hard minutes of flipping pages and clicking hyperlinks).
On analysis on my position, here's the underlying assumption I find I've been working from: 'things are better in the original format'. There are exceptions, but by and large, I've always had an attitude that it's better to look to experience something in the form it was originally meant to be experienced. So I suppose I've always preferred reading the book above watching the movie (not that the movie might not also be good), watching the movie above reading the book, widescreen better than not for films (and I'm speaking in the ideal here, before you jump down my throat about how many people don't have players with widescreen as an option), experiencing a piece of art in the original language where I'm capable of understanding said language, subbing preferrable to dubbing, etc. I suppose I'm concerned about what gets lost in the conversion/translation process. For instance: a Shakespeare play. Made into a film, or even a television miniseries, there's almost always something that gets cut out, or changed to better fit the expectations of the audience. Theatrical productions are better, but even there you often lose content if due to nothing else than time concerns. It's best to read the play itself, and best to read it in the original language to get the full experience (and avoid the limitations of an editor's choices). But, ultimately, what I'd really want to see would be one of the original, contemporary performances - to see the range of expressions of actors advised by the man himself, the décor they're actually interacting with, what subtleties of motion might not have translated to the page, and whether or not there really was a bear. The hierarchy I'm imposing (and I do realize that this is my particular set of values at work here), is not TV is better than books but that, generally speaking, the closest one gets to the original intention of an artwork, the more rewarding the experience will be.
Star Trek books have really come into their own as literature, but it took them a while to do so, to capitalize on the advantages offered by this particular medium instead of meekly seeking to reproduce the experience of a television program. If you'd asked me ten years ago the recently discussed question of whether I preferred Trek in book or televised form, I'd have answered televised, because it was the purest expression of the concept. Since then, the books have really made the concept their own, and I'd be hard pressed to say whether I'd prefer a new episode or a new novel (well, okay - probably the new episode, but only because it would be a novelty at this point, whereas the book line is much more reliable).
Nope. I made a snide, condescending remark about people who can't figure out how to find a TV show they want, not the real-world obstacles like price or unavailability that might frustrate them once they've actually made the effort. You're the one who choose to expand that remark to other behaviours. And I forget nothing: I'm well aware of the costs of television shows on DVD; I myself own very few, and then only what I've received as gifts, due to that very expense. But buying DVDs aren't the only option; you could look towards renting them, as most video stores carry TV series as well as films. That's not particularly given either, but there's no rush; even if it takes a number of years to find the time and money to view an entire TV series, you loose nothing for the wait. If you've got neither local broadcast, first run or syndication, or the series in local stores, nor access to electronic means of viewing the series, then you're well and truly humped and can say you couldn't see the show. But you have to make the effort first. Otherwise you're just whining.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Last edited:
According to some of the writers, the guidelines for the New Series Adventures are almost exactly the same as the guidelines for past novels. In theory, at least. I have found that several of the new Who novels read considerably less adult than the New Adventures and Eighth Doctor Adventures. But I think a fair amount of that is due to the new books being completely standalone, whereas the NAs and EDAs had a lot of continuity from book to book. That change alone lends a different feel to the new books.
I think the EDAs climbed a bit too far up their own backside with certain arc developments, but in general I think the post-Target, pre-new series Doctor Who novels were pretty damn good. New Adventures, Missing Adventures, Eighth Doctor Adventures, Past Doctor Adventures, Decalogs and Short Trips, Telos novellas, Bernice Summerfield, Faction Paradox, Time Hunter.... that's an amazing run of books, and one that I'm glad I finally got into. Even though, when I bought The Taking of Planet 5 in 2001, the only Doctor Who I'd seen in 15 years or more was the TV movie, and before that I was only a very casual viewer. (Yes, I was interested in the books without having seen most of the TV series.)
I didn't say they weren't good, just that they seemed to be excluding a large segment of the Whovian audience base by being so adult-oriented. Though personally I wasn't fond of the gritty cyberpunk turn the NAs took for a while, and I felt the continuity got way too involved and cross-referential (to coin a term) to keep up with.
I hate to say it, but I think I prefer the re-written passage, at least based on what I assume is not even a complete scene to begin with. The focus of the actual scene could be something else entirely, but in this case, if the point was to show Archer's resignation to his duties, that's what I want to be reading about, not adding in actions not particularly relevant to that, such as feeding Porthos.
Again, just based on the little snippet.
Reading into the blogger's tone, I'm reminded of a quote on Jim Emerson's blog:
"There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear."
--Daniel Dennett
Again, just based on the little snippet.
Reading into the blogger's tone, I'm reminded of a quote on Jim Emerson's blog:
"There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear."
--Daniel Dennett
No, I chose "avoid" in my original post on purpose. Because that is what some people do. They avoid getting emotionally attached to, or committed to more weekly viewing for, what they perceive is an intruder on their nice brain package that is a certain aspect of the ST phenomenon. I ran a club of 1000 people at one point. They were never monolithic in the attitude to ST, but many of them "avoided" parts of ST they felt they didn't want to overload themselves. Novels, fanzines, action figures, comics, RPGs sometimes turned them around. And yes, many of them were often whiny, wanting all their ST entertainment for free: watching episodes only on TV, movies only at publicity-making free sneak previews, and books only from public and club libraries. And many adults I've met do not know how to program a VCR.
Or you "avoid" it because it's too expensive, or you resent having to pay for something you feel should be free to air. the tie-ins have never been free, so the same people can be willing to buy them, but not VHS tapes or DVDs.
In schools, I have known hundreds of kids who borrow and read tie-in materials for TV shows and movies they've never seen; things that went off the air before they were born!
I know lots of adults who've read and enjoyed all of the TAS adaptations by Alan Dean Foster, but steadfastly refused to watch "a kids' cartoon", even after the DVD set came out.
Last edited:
The impression I've had is that, in the years after the show went off the air, the writers and readers of the Doctor Who books were what was left of the audience base, a bit older and wanting something more mature and advanced than the TV series because they themselves were older now. The show was off the air and not attracting young new viewers, and the hardcore fans who still cared about the show were getting older. They wanted the magic of Doctor Who but they also wanted something more grown-up. At least, that seems to be the creation myth of the New Adventures. It's ironic, though, that the writer of one of the more mature and grim New Adventures is the guy running the current family-friendly Doctor Who TV series.
Which demonstrates one of Davies's strengths as a writer-- knowing his audience and knowing how to write for it.
Hmmm...last time I checked I didn't moderate the Doctor Who forum and there wasn't a Kobayashi Maru novel set in that universe, but I've been wrong before.
You get the picture. That forum is a few floors down.
You get the picture. That forum is a few floors down.
