Spoilers DS9: Enigma Tales by Una McCormack Review Thread
- Thread starter Defcon
- Start date
I raced through this yesterday, very hard to put down.
Not quite as good as The Crimson Shadow but certainly the best Trek book since.
Where it fell down slightly was the muddled motivations of the villain and the distrust of Garak by Pulaski got a little annoying after a while.
Other than that though it was a great read and I hope we get to Una continue their stories.
Not quite as good as The Crimson Shadow but certainly the best Trek book since.
Where it fell down slightly was the muddled motivations of the villain and the distrust of Garak by Pulaski got a little annoying after a while.
Other than that though it was a great read and I hope we get to Una continue their stories.
Finished it too, and loved it, although it wasn't quite as magnificent as The Crimson Shadow or The Never-Ending Sacrifice, for similar reasons as @VDCNI says. About the villain...
I liked how much it fundamentally continues with the worldbuilding she has established from the Lotus Flower onwards, and the foundation of Robinson's own text. I loved how during the novel two things were admitted or said:
I hope the historian's note is just revised in future editions, or rather than future people writing this pay heed to the actual years mentioned in text. Especially because
They reminded me of McCormack's Hollow Men, and Sisko's friend who was also ruined by spywork, as well as her Brinkmanship, which explored the same theme. Muddled motivations fit the opaque world of hidden and broken people engaged in spying and statecraft in her novels.
I liked how much it fundamentally continues with the worldbuilding she has established from the Lotus Flower onwards, and the foundation of Robinson's own text. I loved how during the novel two things were admitted or said:
Kelas Parmak brings Garak to admit he loved Bashir; and at another point the Federation ambassador is asked if Garak and Parmak are lovers, and she (an excellent Vulcan character) replies that no one knows! Quite meta 
But one thing I think that really mattered was that Garak's interrogation of the doctor is mentioned, addressed and shown as the one faultline in their relationship.
But one thing I think that really mattered was that Garak's interrogation of the doctor is mentioned, addressed and shown as the one faultline in their relationship.I hope the historian's note is just revised in future editions, or rather than future people writing this pay heed to the actual years mentioned in text. Especially because
Garak is looking for his successor, has an ideal candidate - but 2388 is much closer to a new election than 2386, and won't shortcut how others write about Castellan Garak or rush into Castellan Lang (if indeed she wins 
).
).
^ same here. So it is in fact, blatantly in the future? What will I enter in my spreadsheet?!
I was going to answer I had put it on Memory Beta as "2386 or 2388" in its infobox, but that got changed to "2380s decade", so not an easy spreadsheet answer 
(I think the section on dating I added there helps explain the ambiguity.)
Could you include it in two positions in the spreadsheet - late 2386 and then put it in another row in late 2388?
(I think the section on dating I added there helps explain the ambiguity.)Could you include it in two positions in the spreadsheet - late 2386 and then put it in another row in late 2388?
Somebody uploaded the Cardassia City map to Memory Beta. If somebody needs it handy:
http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/File:Robinson,_A.,_'A_Stitch_in_Time',_Cardassia_City_Map.jpg
http://memory-beta.wikia.com/wiki/File:Robinson,_A.,_'A_Stitch_in_Time',_Cardassia_City_Map.jpg
I was going to answer I had put it on Memory Beta as "2386 or 2388" in its infobox, but that got changed to "2380s decade", so not an easy spreadsheet answer
Could you include it in two positions in the spreadsheet - late 2386 and then put it in another row in late 2388?
Hm, to reconcile the Historian's Note discrepancy and maintain that the story takes place in 2388, I would personally enter it in as a range (2386-2388) and pretend to myself that the beginning of the story takes place in the former year and ends in the latter year. In my sheets I place it where the main story's 'present' time takes place, ie, if the story is in 2386 but there is a paragraph epilogue that takes place in 2390, I would still consider it 2386. In this case I would place (2386-2388) after (2387).
Assuming that is how the story ends up, I'm barely past the second chapter! I haven't had the time yet
It was rather easy to print screen & fix the version on the googlebooks preview of A Stitch in Time
Hm, to reconcile the Historian's Note discrepancy and maintain that the story takes place in 2388, I would personally enter it in as a range (2386-2388) and pretend to myself that the beginning of the story takes place in the former year and ends in the latter year. In my sheets I place it where the main story's 'present' time takes place, ie, if the story is in 2386 but there is a paragraph epilogue that takes place in 2390, I would still consider it 2386. In this case I would place (2386-2388) after (2387).
Assuming that is how the story ends up, I'm barely past the second chapter! I haven't had the time yet
The books takes place over a period of a few days a at most. Pulaski is visiting Cardassia for a ceremony.
Well...dammit.
Only a couple of chapters in, with with Pulaski and Garak the focus, I am not optimistic.
Sept 2385
Thank you. The book is in 2388 then.
Well, there is one way -- if Cardassian years are much shorter than Earth years. After all, every planet takes a different amount of time to circle its sun, so there should be many different ways of defining a "year." It amazes me how routinely that fact gets overlooked in Star Trek.
Except that probably doesn't work for the novelverse, because the Cardassian calendar I worked out for DTI: Watching the Clock set a Cardassian year equal to 1.063 Earth years. So exactly three Cardassian years would be a bit over 3 years, 2 months Earth time. I'm not sure how explicit I was about year length in Watching the Clock's actual text, though.
Yeah Pulaski's thinking 'He'd been in power for three years now - long enough to reestablish the Order's networks and their working methods. Who would stop him?'
That is very nice, and helps rationalise that Pulaski thinks of it as three years just as Cardassians do; although there are four seasons as presented in Enigma Tales, as Garak tells Bashir in a letter:
Maybe there used to be three - or as you said, perhaps only three where the calendar was composed.
That is very nice, and helps rationalise that Pulaski thinks of it as three years just as Cardassians do; although there are four seasons as presented in Enigma Tales, as Garak tells Bashir in a letter:
Maybe there used to be three - or as you said, perhaps only three where the calendar was composed.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
