Spoilers Coda: Book 1: Moments Asunder by Dayton Ward Review Thread

[David cgc]

We could be looking at, "they live as other [Picard Universe] versions of themselves" as our heroes best-case-scenario. I doubt it's gonna end with EVERYONE dying but... who knows.

The way I see it, they know we know that at the end of the day, there are going to be no more stories in this continuity, so they wouldn't raise the possibility that the novelverse might have to die for the AA-verse to live at the end of the first of three books if that was just exactly what was going to happen with no reversals or subversions or surprises. You can't just tell us that the ending is going to be the most obvious thing to get us to parity with the real world that early on if you're actually going to do it. This isn't a normal book, we already know how this all shakes out. It seems to me the only reason to do the ending this way, where it looks like the novel storyline is being obliterated in favor of the new TV shows within the fiction as well as in the real world is to reframe the situation somehow.

 

[ryan123450]

This is bringing to my mind that point in LOST when (spoiler alert) they have decided that the best point forward is to erase their ever having come to the island from the timeline by all going out in a blaze of glory, because that way all they had suffered would be worth something, in leading to a better life in the next go around of the timeline. Only in that case it didn't even work, and in this case, if things play out that way like I expect, the rewritten timeline will be arguably worse off than the Lit-verse version, but at least the whole multiverse won't come to an end.

I'm picturing that moment at the end when Picard stands in for Juliet during the final moment before time is reset with that look on her face that instantly went from tearful hope to grimaced terror as they dropped the bomb down the tunnel not knowing if they would be successful.

 

[JoeZhang]

Also another way to look at it is that it gives them an opportunity to write a book which you normally don't get in tie-in fiction - what if they all have to die to win?

 

[captainmkb]

Conveniently, STO has given us a plethora of timeship classes from the 29th century to play with.

yeah, it would be cool if the authors could dig into those. i don't think they like STO however

 

[F. King Daniel]

yeah, it would be cool if the authors could dig into those. i don't think they like STO however

I spotted a Klingon ship class from STO in one of the Typhon Pact novels, and a few other small references here and there.

 

[captainmkb]

I spotted a Klingon ship class from STO in one of the Typhon Pact novels, and a few other small references here and there.

it's nice they're working together. in the past one of the novelists let me know they didn't appreciate the STO mirror universe content posted side-by-side with the Pocket/Gallery Books mirror universe content, on a website i contribute to.

 

[Ronald Held]

Maybe Wesley will save a few Litverse characters and send them to a different universe?

 

[Christopher]

it's nice they're working together. in the past one of the novelists let me know they didn't appreciate the STO mirror universe content posted side-by-side with the Pocket/Gallery Books mirror universe content, on a website i contribute to.

Nothing wrong with having them there, but the problem is Beta's tendency to try to blend incompatible continuities together as if they were a single whole, instead of listing alternative continuities in different sections of the article the way other media wikis usually do. It makes it hard to figure out what info comes from which source.

 

[Markonian]

With some of the mirror universe content, it is acknowledged by prefacing the content with "in one/another permutation of the mirror universe..."

Imho, we don't need to differentiate between continuities if they don't conflict. In an apropos example, the timeship USS Tempus appears in both STO and Moments Asunder.

Other topics, however... Years ago, the STO novel The Needs of the Many established that the STO continuity and post-Nemesis events in the novels are two different timelines but on MB we stick to one continuity.

Perhaps with the novelverse coming to an end in a few months, we can label contradictions stemming from the novels with the "Retro Continuity" banner, like we have in the Icheb article.

 

[captainmkb]

Nothing wrong with having them there, but the problem is Beta's tendency to try to blend incompatible continuities together as if they were a single whole, instead of listing alternative continuities in different sections of the article the way other media wikis usually do. It makes it hard to figure out what info comes from which source.

There was a plan in place to do that but the persons who suggested it objected to some minutiae, and decided to leave the wiki instead. Kind of sad, we could have built a great running reference alongside the novels if it hadnt been turned into a confrontation. Looking forward to build on it for the ongoing tie-ins.

With some of the mirror universe content, it is acknowledge by prefacing the content with "in one/another permutation of the mirror universe..."

Imho, we don't need to differentiate between continuities if they don't conflict. In an apropos example, the timeship USS Tempus appears in both STO and Moments Asunder.

Other topics, however... Years ago, the STO novel The Needs of the Many established that the STO continuity and post-Nemesis events in the novels are two different timelines but on MB we stick to one continuity.

Perhaps with the novelverse coming to an end in a few months, we can label contradictions stemming from the novels with the "Retro Continuity" banner, like we have in the Icheb article.

It's not a "perhaps" - that is the plan that is in place. i literally designed that graphic and tried to code it. The only reason it hasn't been enacted in a widespread manner is because of the attitudes of the clique of editors who made a big stink about it and left, and there hasn't been any new editing initiative to continue it.

 

[Christopher]

Imho, we don't need to differentiate between continuities if they don't conflict.

I disagree. The role of a reference work is to report information clearly and accurately, not to impose an editorial slant or attempt to create some kind of metafictional narrative of your own. Opinion has no place in a reference work; the goal is to be as objective and neutral as possible. If you're drawing information from multiple sources, you need to make it clear to the readers what source each piece of information comes from. Citing your sources is an intrinsic part of scholarship.

Years ago, the STO novel The Needs of the Many established that the STO continuity and post-Nemesis events in the novels are two different timelines but on MB we stick to one continuity.

You really don't see what's wrong with this statement? Reference sources report the facts. They don't change them. If the two works are in different continuities, then as a reference source, your obligation is to represent that fact truthfully and clearly.

 

[Tuskin38]

One problem with M-B and STO is treating the ship customization/vanity equipment as in-universe, when it isn't, it's just a gameplay thing for players to do.

I spotted a Klingon ship class from STO in one of the Typhon Pact novels, and a few other small references here and there.

Which one was that? I don't remember it.

 

[Charles Phipps]

Because they save the real timeline - rogue one is still a great film even though they all die.

My only ask is they die in increasingly odd ways -

"As Worf fell into the wood chipper he thought that today was a terrible day to die".

I am hoping for a full resurrection of everyone via time travel shenanigans at the end.

 

[captainmkb]

One problem with M-B and STO is treating the ship customization/vanity equipment as in-universe, when it isn't, it's just a gameplay thing for players to do.

That's something i've noticed too, we started a discussion last year that went nowhere, but i think it should be addressed. "Legendary" is hardly a ship stat that a believable 'in-universe' agency would use.

(yes, the discussion went off track hijacked by more nutjobs that insist we rebuild the site from the ground up to cater to obscure continuity divisions)

 

[captainmkb]

I disagree. The role of a reference work is to report information clearly and accurately, not to impose an editorial slant or attempt to create some kind of metafictional narrative of your own. Opinion has no place in a reference work; the goal is to be as objective and neutral as possible. If you're drawing information from multiple sources, you need to make it clear to the readers what source each piece of information comes from. Citing your sources is an intrinsic part of scholarship.

You really don't see what's wrong with this statement? Reference sources report the facts. They don't change them. If the two works are in different continuities, then as a reference source, your obligation is to represent that fact truthfully and clearly.

I think Markonian misspoke a bit - they're two divergent timelines in one continuity. it's kind of the explanation for what we're actually seeing in Coda now. we do separate those. Everyone here on TrekBBS seems content to parrot the argument from 2011, where they haven't visited or tried an edit on Memory Beta in years but can somehow still verify its disjointed and wrong. Schrodinger's wiki. we discussed how to fix up the Mirror Universe articles and then no one followed up because of all the enmity (i'm only here back on TrekBBS to monitor the personal attacks made against, i don't really like it here)

regardless, we're waiting for the end of Coda for the concrete details of how to document the novel universe collapse (if indeed that's a good way to describe what happens, we're hanging on) so we can properly describe how the novel universe was an alternate timeline AND an alternate continuity -- completely sidetracked and divergent from canon and other non canon sources

up until now, the naysayers have been arguing the opposite (that the novel universe was the primary continuity and that our other comic and game sources should be moved to the margins to make way for this complex continuity as the site's prime focus). now that we're seeing the resurgence of a strong canon timeline, it will be a lot easier to create a margin to tuck away the novel stuff that is now admittedly divergent

 

[Christopher]

up until now, the naysayers have been arguing the opposite (that the novel universe was the primary continuity and that our other comic and game sources should be moved to the margins to make way for this complex continuity as the site's prime focus). now that we're seeing the resurgence of a strong canon timeline, it will be a lot easier to create a margin to tuck away the novel stuff that is now admittedly divergent

Nothing should be "tucked away." It's inappropriate editorializing to rank different imaginary continuities on some kind of hierarchy of importance. Star Trek tie-ins have always, always had a multiplicity of continuities, and an accurate, honest reference source for the tie-ins should report that fact without bias. There has never been a "primary" tie-in continuity in Star Trek; there are just the tie-ins, some of which have sometimes formed "local" continuities not shared by other works (e.g. the very loose '80s novel continuity, the DC comics, the Marvel comics, etc.), many others of which have simply stood alone.

So yes, differentiate the distinct continuities from one another rather than mashing them together. That's accurate and honest cataloging. But don't marginalize or devalue any of them. A reference source should be as unbiased and comprehensive as possible.

 

[ryan123450]

up until now, the naysayers have been arguing the opposite (that the novel universe was the primary continuity and that our other comic and game sources should be moved to the margins to make way for this complex continuity as the site's prime focus).

Imagine being one of the power players on MB and thinking the Litverse shouldn’t be the site’s predominate focus.

 

[captainmkb]

Imagine being one of the power players on MB and thinking the Litverse shouldn’t be the site’s predominate focus.

i don't have to imagine

imagine being misguided and thinking that a divergent continuity of several dozen novels that take place in an alternate reality from the rest of Star Trek should take the focus from hundreds of other comics, RPGs and video games that greatly outnumber them (taking 55 years of Star Trek history and cutting a cake slice out of 13-17years of it and saying "this" and then calling people names when they point out the illogic of that)

 

[ryan123450]

You think the Litverse consists of several dozen novels over the last 13 years?

 

[Charles Phipps]

Imagine being one of the power players on MB and thinking the Litverse shouldn’t be the site’s predominate focus.

I'm pretty sure the shows are.