• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Did the books ever explore romance between the crew members?

Agenda

Fleet Captain
Fleet Captain
That weren't touched on in the TV shows? You know...Spock/Uhura...all that jazz...?
 
That weren't touched on in the TV shows? You know...Spock/Uhura...all that jazz...?

The Simon & Schuster Writers' Guide, for people intending to proprose their first ST novel, specifically mentions that no unrequited (or hitherto unknown) relationships are to happen between regular crewmembers, although experienced ST novelists could always try pitching something and see how far they get. But such relationships are hard to convey in a standalone novel and yet still "put all the toys back in the sandbox" at the end.

If the relationship is suggested in canon, then a stronger case could be made, eg the seeming flirtations between Uhura and Scotty in ST V, or tensions between Riker and Ro after their amnesiac encounter in a TNG episode. From TOS, the early eps with hints of a possible Spock/Uhura flirtation don't seem to have been followed up, although JJ's ST has chosen to do that one. Plus "Mirror Universe" and "Myriad Universe" anthologies, and "Dark Passions", have encouraged such stuff.
 
Of course, there are always the post-finale book series, which often include romantic connections among the crewmembers -- for instance, in the post-Nemesis TNG books, Picard and Crusher are now married and expecting a son.
 
In Voyager: Full Circle Chakotay and Janeway finally "show their feelings for one another" only to be tragically split up by the cruel hand of fate. You know...Peter David :devil:
 
^ Margaret Clark, actually. PAD had nothing to do with that decision.

I actually wasn't blaming PAD, just saying that he's the one who had to 'pull the trigger' on Margaret's decision. I bet the militant-Janeway people are happy now :evil:
 
I bet the militant-Janeway people are happy now :evil:

I would be VERY surprised if the majority of them took any pleasure from someone else's misfortune - that she be removed from the job, I'm sure they wanted, but not laid off...
 
I bet the militant-Janeway people are happy now :evil:

I would be VERY surprised if the majority of them took any pleasure from someone else's misfortune - that she be removed from the job, I'm sure they wanted, but not laid off...

I'd be surrprised too. The evil face was used to make it known that I was joking. Trek fans, at least those that i've met, are generally a kind and decent lot. Wishing someone ill is not really in our nature. I'd be surprised if even a minority of fans had wanted Margaret out of a job. As you say, at the most they'd have just wanted her out of the trek arena.
 
I reckon he enjoyed it though...

Why?

Well might just be my interpretation, but I always got the impression that PAD wasn't a big Voy fan...

So? I'm not a big VOY fan, but that doesn't mean I wanted to kill Janeway or enjoyed her death. I wanted those characters to be utilized more creatively, not destroyed because they weren't utilized creatively.

Having said that, I don't object to her death, either. Death is a part of life and works of art should portray it. But neither did I enjoy it.

I therefore see no reason to presume that Peter David therefore enjoyed killing Janeway just because he wasn't a VOY fan.
 
So? I'm not a big VOY fan, but that doesn't mean I wanted to kill Janeway or enjoyed her death.

Doesn't mean the same is true for everyone...all I'm saying.

And I don't know for certain, just when I read Before Dishonour and having read some of his other work, I just got the feeling that though it might not have been his idea, it wasn't a heart-wrenching thing for him to write.

But like I say that was just my impression, which I happily admit could be wrong.
 
Ok as one of the "militant Janeway fans" as we have been named I can tell you that I wouldn't wish anyone to be out of a job, especially during times like this. However I am not unhappy that she no longer has any say in "Trek Lit".

Death may be a part of life, but it's escapist stories and books that are selling now. Trek Lit could and still can fill that bill beautifully. But they are going to have to listen to the fans that might just put down a few dollars for a paperback book. It doesn't take rocket science to understand that a business doesn't cut back on something that is making them money.

And FYI it isn't just "Trek" but hard Science Fiction as a whole that is suffering this down turn. Dark doesn't sell right now. Romance however is selling and has managed to gain a little even in these hard economic times. You don't have to look any farther than authors like Linnea Sinclair, Susan Grant, Ann Aguirre, Susan Kearney and Sandra McDonald.

Right now even in this economy, romance publishers are asking for Science Fiction Romance submissions.

Brit
 
And FYI it isn't just "Trek" but hard Science Fiction as a whole that is suffering this down turn. Dark doesn't sell right now.

Okay, two questions:

1) Why are you equating Star Trek with hard SF?

2) Why are you equating hard SF with "dark"?

Those are both major non sequiturs. ST fiction is rarely hard SF, except when it's being written by someone like me, Jerry Oltion, or George Zebrowski, say. And hard SF isn't intrinsically dark; it just means SF that's strongly based in credible science.
 
Death may be a part of life, but it's escapist stories and books that are selling now. Trek Lit could and still can fill that bill beautifully. But they are going to have to listen to the fans that might just put down a few dollars for a paperback book.

Rather than insist that all ST fiction fill the same bill, why not the current situation, whereby some ST novels feature hard science, some farcical comedy, some standalones, some serials, some interconnected crossovers, some dark-themed stories, etc?

I've never got the impression that Pocket editors don't listen to fans, but there is no "the fans", since we are all individuals, with a myriad of opinions.
 
And FYI it isn't just "Trek" but hard Science Fiction as a whole that is suffering this down turn. Dark doesn't sell right now. Romance however is selling and has managed to gain a little even in these hard economic times. You don't have to look any farther than authors like Linnea Sinclair, Susan Grant, Ann Aguirre, Susan Kearney and Sandra McDonald.

Right now even in this economy, romance publishers are asking for Science Fiction Romance submissions.

Brit

That's a great argument for publishers commissioning more sci-fi romances; it's a shit argument for Trek creating a romance-only series.

I mean, urban fantasy sells brilliantly, but that's no reason to create a Trek crew of only vampires.
 
That's a great argument for publishers commissioning more sci-fi romances; it's a shit argument for Trek creating a romance-only series.

I mean, urban fantasy sells brilliantly, but that's no reason to create a Trek crew of only vampires.

I'm not sure if the argument is for that or for incorporating a bit more romance into existing Trek Lit. Brit?
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top