Engines of Destiny: That bad?

[Sho]

That's right - you can like something for how interesting it is to disagree with, too. For example, I think a lot of the decisions made by Janeway on Voyager were incredibly stupid and self-righteous while being sold as her doing the right thing, but the debates with friends I would have over them were certainly on a higher level than most other TV shows could hope to inspire.

 

[Therin of Andor]

And for some reason, EVERYBODY gets in a negative comment about Star Trek now, no matter what the discussion is. All you have to do is look around this forum.

I watched "The People vs George Lucas" documentary last night, and there was a segment in which several fans were talking about how they "now love/hate George Lucas" and "really love/hate 'The Phantom Menace'..." It was hilarious to hear that term being used in interviews, rather than just reading it in someone's bbs rant.

 

[SicOne]

I'm really glad. It's the sort of thing I would've wanted when I started reading TrekLit again a few years ago, I'm glad it's helping other people.

Holy crap, that flowchart rocks!

 

[Thrawn]

Thanks

 

[DimesDan]

So I've not long finished Engines of Destiny, I personally enjoyed it and thought it was a fun little romp of a story and didn't completely take itself too seriously.

Making the E-D give off a holographic appearance of Borg Cube and not just the normal sensor appearance was a good idea, although I was expecting Scotty to cloak the ship to get to the "Vortex."

I also liked the Borg in the story aswell and the inner thoughts of the Queen, the same Queen from Best of Both Worlds and First Contact was a nice touch.

 

[tomswift2002]

It was a fun story, and a nice come back story for DeWeese after having not had a new Trek book in 10 years ("Into The Nebula" had been his last novel in 1995, and it was an okay story; unfortunately it was also his last before his death in 2012).

 

[ClayinCA]

I did not know Gene DeWeese had died. Very sorry to hear that.

 

[MNM]

I may be mis-remembering as it's been a while since I read it (and that was a library copy so cant go back and check off hand) but wasnt there a line or two in this book that implied the author thought multiple Borg Queens were around at the same time?

Something like the one who conquered Earth gettng away from the others who crtiicised her or something...?

 

[DimesDan]

I may be mis-remembering as it's been a while since I read it (and that was a library copy so cant go back and check off hand) but wasnt there a line or two in this book that implied the author thought multiple Borg Queens were around at the same time?

Something like the one who conquered Earth gettng away from the others who crtiicised her or something...?

Yes, you're remembering correctly. I also thought that was the case since First Contact.

 

[Paul Weaver]

Just finished reading t, it was a fun romp, contradicted a bit by what we found out later in trek (especially the great watching the clock), but some nice thoughts about timelines, and nice to be back on the D.

The Kirk bit was a "off" with the dialog, but he wasn't too major a character. The D crew were rather marginalised too, aside form Picard and Guinan.

I like the idea of the holo-emitter borg deflector. Was that a tie in to SCE and Destiny, and the "troyious hiding" incident?

 

[Technobuilder]

I wouldn't say bad.... The worst Star Trek: Novel I've ever read was TNG: Before Dishonor and I wish I could forget it.

Engines of Destiny wasn't all that memorable but I don't remember disliking it. It's not an outstanding read or anything, that much is certain.

 

[tomswift2002]

Worst Trek novel by far is "The Laertian Gamble". "Before Dishonor" is way better than LG.

 

[Mage]

There's always Ship Of The Line...... *shudders*

I haven't read Engines Of Destiny, doubt I ever will, unless I can pick it up cheap one day.

 

[Technobuilder]

Worst Trek novel by far is "The Laertian Gamble". "Before Dishonor" is way better than LG.

I've never read The Laertian Gamble. (No reason to run out and do so now though if it makes Before Dishonor look good in any possible way though.

There's always Ship Of The Line...... *shudders*

I haven't read Engines Of Destiny, doubt I ever will, unless I can pick it up cheap one day.

Ship of the Line was a book I read before I really got into modern Trek Lit's cohesive universe. I never thought it terrible honestly, but that's more because I enjoyed the ships of Star Trek so much. I don't even remember the plot, but I remember things about the Sovereign Design Project lol.

FYI, not really looking to go out and reread this one either.

 

[Idran]

Worst Trek novel by far is "The Laertian Gamble". "Before Dishonor" is way better than LG.

At least The Laertian Gamble is still Star Trek. For pretty much every other published Star Trek novel, at least you can't deny that they are science fiction novels featuring the characters, settings, set pieces, and/or themes of the Star Trek universe to some relevant degree. The worst Trek novel I've ever read has to be Shadow Lord, because it had nothing at all to do with Star Trek in any way that mattered narratively or thematically. After the set up, Sulu and Spock were there, but barely relevant. It wasn't even science fiction. It was all just historical fantasy set on an alien world that happened to have a couple of TOS characters in the background.

Also its cover has one of the worst representations of Sulu I've ever seen.

 

[Mage]

Worst Trek novel by far is "The Laertian Gamble". "Before Dishonor" is way better than LG.

I've never read The Laertian Gamble. (No reason to run out and do so now though if it makes Before Dishonor look good in any possible way though.

There's always Ship Of The Line...... *shudders*

I haven't read Engines Of Destiny, doubt I ever will, unless I can pick it up cheap one day.

Ship of the Line was a book I read before I really got into modern Trek Lit's cohesive universe. I never thought it terrible honestly, but that's more because I enjoyed the ships of Star Trek so much. I don't even remember the plot, but I remember things about the Sovereign Design Project lol.

FYI, not really looking to go out and reread this one either.

I tried. Rereading it, that is. Nope. Just.....no.

 

[tomswift2002]

Worst Trek novel by far is "The Laertian Gamble". "Before Dishonor" is way better than LG.

At least The Laertian Gamble is still Star Trek. For pretty much every other published Star Trek novel, at least you can't deny that they are science fiction novels featuring the characters, settings, set pieces, and/or themes of the Star Trek universe to some relevant degree. The worst Trek novel I've ever read has to be Shadow Lord, because it had nothing at all to do with Star Trek in any way that mattered narratively or thematically.
Also its cover has one of the worst representations of Sulu I've ever seen.

Laertian Gamble took plot line of the episode Rivals, dealing with the good luck/bad luck neutrino machine changer, and just turned it into a really odd and stupid thing (as I recall in the end of LG, the characters were even adding a kitchen sink to the device they were trying to make). At least with Rivals it was confined to the station, and seemed to have had some thought put into the device. Laertian Gambit went from being science-fiction to a pure fantasy novel at the end.

Not to mention, but with 72 Chapters within a 280-300 page book, the chapters barely managed to get anything going. Some chapters were only half-a-page in length! It would be like:

Chapter 20
Odo stepped out of the turbolift and started walking down the corridor.

Chapter 21

Some deputies were struggling with one of the merchants.

Chapter 22

"What's going on here", Odo asked.


The editing of the book was really terrible, and really needed a lot more work.

As far as Shadow Lord goes, I've never read it. As far as characters on covers, I always thought that the artist of Chrysalis did a fairly poor job of Harry Kim's face.

 

[Idran]

Worst Trek novel by far is "The Laertian Gamble". "Before Dishonor" is way better than LG.

At least The Laertian Gamble is still Star Trek. For pretty much every other published Star Trek novel, at least you can't deny that they are science fiction novels featuring the characters, settings, set pieces, and/or themes of the Star Trek universe to some relevant degree. The worst Trek novel I've ever read has to be Shadow Lord, because it had nothing at all to do with Star Trek in any way that mattered narratively or thematically.
Also its cover has one of the worst representations of Sulu I've ever seen.

Laertian Gamble took plot line of the episode Rivals, dealing with the good luck/bad luck neutrino machine changer, and just turned it into a really odd and stupid thing (as I recall in the end of LG, the characters were even adding a kitchen sink to the device they were trying to make). At least with Rivals it was confined to the station, and seemed to have had some thought put into the device. Laertian Gambit went from being science-fiction to a pure fantasy novel at the end.

Not to mention, but with 72 Chapters within a 280-300 page book, the chapters barely managed to get anything going. Some chapters were only half-a-page in length! It would be like:

Chapter 20
Odo stepped out of the turbolift and started walking down the corridor.

Chapter 21

Some deputies were struggling with one of the merchants.

Chapter 22

"What's going on here", Odo asked.


The editing of the book was really terrible, and really needed a lot more work.

As far as Shadow Lord goes, I've never read it. As far as characters on covers, I always thought that the artist of Chrysalis did a fairly poor job of Harry Kim's face.

Oh yeah, I've read Laertian Gambit, and I don't have much good to say about it. But Shadow Lord just felt like it didn't even try to be Star Trek, and it was mediocre and boring on top of that.

Like, even if Laertian Gambit was a worse novel (which I'll admit it might edge out ahead in that respect), I'd still say that Shadow Lord is a worse Trek novel. If that makes any sense.

Edit: haha, we'd both been getting the title wrong this whole time, and didn't even realize. Not a great sign for it right there, I'd say.

 

[Christopher]

The thing about The Laertian Gamble is that it's more a Robert Sheckley novel than a DS9 novel. Sheckley was one of the legends of the science fiction field, known mainly for his quirky, comical, satirical stories. He was, in fact, the main influence on Douglas Adams's writing style in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I think the problem is that people don't expect their Trek novels to be written in that vein, so it was offputting in the context of DS9. And maybe it just wasn't a good fit of style to subject, and maybe it was too eccentric an interpretation of the universe to sit right with Trek fans. But given Sheckley's enormous experience in the field -- really, he's probably the most accomplished author ever to pen a Trek novel (though James Blish may surpass him if you count essays as well as fiction) -- I hesitate to call it badly written. I'd be curious to know what a Sheckley fan unfamiliar with DS9 would think of the book.

 

[Idran]

The thing about The Laertian Gamble is that it's more a Robert Sheckley novel than a DS9 novel. Sheckley was one of the legends of the science fiction field, known mainly for his quirky, comical, satirical stories. He was, in fact, the main influence on Douglas Adams's writing style in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I think the problem is that people don't expect their Trek novels to be written in that vein, so it was offputting in the context of DS9. And maybe it just wasn't a good fit of style to subject, and maybe it was too eccentric an interpretation of the universe to sit right with Trek fans. But given Sheckley's enormous experience in the field -- really, he's probably the most accomplished author ever to pen a Trek novel (though James Blish may surpass him if you count essays as well as fiction) -- I hesitate to call it badly written. I'd be curious to know what a Sheckley fan unfamiliar with DS9 would think of the book.

I honestly had never heard of Sheckley outside this context - I definitely had no idea that he was one of Adams' inspirations - so I'll admit that yeah, it could be in my case completely just a tonal mismatch. (I'll admit that I don't really have the love for How Much For Just The Planet? that a lot of people do for the same reason; I know that TOS had its share of goofy episodes, but that book was just leaps and bounds beyond them. ) I might check out his other works and see what I think of them, just to give him a fair shot.

Since you've got a fairly deep knowledge of Treklit, Christopher, would you happen to know if it was the same deal with Laurence Yap? I wouldn't be surprised at all if Shadow Lord was the same situation, and I know it's the only Trek book he ever wrote.