enterprise : the romulan war

[Christopher]

I see that the Romulan War has both a trade paperback and a standard paperback. Did it come out first in the large format than in the smaller?

Yes. The TPB came out in October 2009, and the MMPB reprint just came out.

Was that always the plan or did the book just do well?

It's a routine practice in publishing for hardcover and trade paperback novels to get MMPB reprints a year or so later. It's very rare that it doesn't happen (at least with novels, as opposed to anthologies or omnibuses). Also, with book 2 of the series coming out later this year, it makes sense to get book 1 back on the shelves.

 

[Defcon]

FWIW To Brave the Storm won't be a Trade Paperback.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ "To Brave the Storm"? What's that?

I know were they wipped out in earth/romulan war . starfleet had a security detail these were maco's which were the descendant's of marines . which were no red shirts.

We don't know if the MACOS took part in the war (although if they did, they probably only faced up against Reman troops, as Romulans were never seen face to face), or what happened to them when the Federation was formed. As for Starfleet security redshirts, those are not combat troops. Only security officers on board ships or bases.

 

[Defcon]

^ "To Brave the Storm"? What's that?

The next Romulan War novel (formerly known as In Shariel's Jaws).

 

[BillJ]

^ "To Brave the Storm"? What's that?

They changed the name of the second Romulan war book.

EDIT: Defcon beat me to it.

 

[Janos]

Was that always the plan or did the book just do well?

It's a routine practice in publishing for hardcover and trade paperback novels to get MMPB reprints a year or so later. It's very rare that it doesn't happen (at least with novels, as opposed to anthologies or omnibuses). Also, with book 2 of the series coming out later this year, it makes sense to get book 1 back on the shelves.

Thanks. I did know that when there are ST HC or TPBs that mm paperbacks follow. It just seemed odd to me that ENT would get this kind of treatment when TNG seemingly doesn't.

 

[Christopher]

It just seemed odd to me that ENT would get this kind of treatment when TNG seemingly doesn't.

Well, there have been quite a few TNG novels that were originally published in hardcover and then got MMPB reprints the following year, the most recent one being Death in Winter. The only difference here is that the initial publication was in trade instead of HC, but that's because trade paperbacks are an increasingly popular format with book vendors these days.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ "To Brave the Storm"? What's that?

The next Romulan War novel (formerly known as In Shariel's Jaws).

Nice change. "In Shariel's Jaws" looked too much like an Animal Planet special.

 

[Janos]

It just seemed odd to me that ENT would get this kind of treatment when TNG seemingly doesn't.

Well, there have been quite a few TNG novels that were originally published in hardcover and then got MMPB reprints the following year, the most recent one being Death in Winter. The only difference here is that the initial publication was in trade instead of HC, but that's because trade paperbacks are an increasingly popular format with book vendors these days.

I have seen the shift to tpbs for sure from HCs. I guess I didn't think ENT was popular enough to do both a tpb and a mmpb. While I do think ENT can expand on historical references popularized in TOS/TNG a la its last TV season, I just wasn't sure if it was all that popular sales-wise. That's why I was making the comparison to TNG which seems to be able to sustain quite a few new products in a given year and also set the tone through event books like Destiny for the rest of the TNGnovelverse, e.g. TNG/DS9/Voy/Titan.

 

[Christopher]

I have seen the shift to tpbs for sure from HCs. I guess I didn't think ENT was popular enough to do both a tpb and a mmpb.

You're still not getting this. It is standard practice in the publishing industry for a novel that is originally published as a hardcover or trade paperback to be reprinted in MMPB format a year or so later. So the fact that it was done in both formats -- a year and a third apart, mind you -- isn't relevant here, because it isn't exceptional.

Now, if the question is whether ENT was popular enough to do a TPB, period, rather than strictly MMPB, I think the idea is that the Earth-Romulan War is something that Trek fans have been wondering about since it was first established in 1966. The fact that the Romulans fought a war with Earth a hundred years before TOS is literally the second thing we ever learned about the Romulans (the first being the existence of the Neutral Zone). So it follows that a book that finally depicts that conflict, after more than four decades of curiosity and conjecture, would have a broader appeal for Trek fans than a typical Enterprise novel.

 

[Janos]

I have seen the shift to tpbs for sure from HCs. I guess I didn't think ENT was popular enough to do both a tpb and a mmpb.

You're still not getting this. It is standard practice in the publishing industry for a novel that is originally published as a hardcover or trade paperback to be reprinted in MMPB format a year or so later. So the fact that it was done in both formats -- a year and a third apart, mind you -- isn't relevant here, because it isn't exceptional.

Now, if the question is whether ENT was popular enough to do a TPB, period, rather than strictly MMPB, I think the idea is that the Earth-Romulan War is something that Trek fans have been wondering about since it was first established in 1966. The fact that the Romulans fought a war with Earth a hundred years before TOS is literally the second thing we ever learned about the Romulans (the first being the existence of the Neutral Zone). So it follows that a book that finally depicts that conflict, after more than four decades of curiosity and conjecture, would have a broader appeal for Trek fans than a typical Enterprise novel.

Ok Christopher. I do know that where a book is done first as a tpb or HC, then the standard process is to have a mmpb to follow later. So, I do "get that" as a long-time reader of Trek and other novels. My posts, perhaps not well atriculated it would seem, relate to your second point that I have underlined. That's what I was referring to in my last post.

Cheers!

 

[Daddy Todd]

if the question is whether ENT was popular enough to do a TPB, period, rather than strictly MMPB

Ok Christopher. I do know that where a book is done first as a tpb or HC, then the standard process is to have a mmpb to follow later. So, I do "get that" as a long-time reader of Trek and other novels. My posts, perhaps not well atriculated it would seem, relate to your second point that I have underlined. That's what I was referring to in my last post.

Cheers!

I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will jump in and correct me if I get this wrong, but my understanding is that the profit margin on a trade paperback is much higher than on a mass market title, so occasionally the number crunchers will deem it more profitable to publish a marginal title as a trade than as a mass market.

So, the appearance of the first Romulan War title as a trade may reflect the relatively poor sales of prior Enterprise titles, rather than strong sales.

It also gives the book a second the opportunity to sell: first, as a trade, then as a mass market. "Double dipping" is nothing new in publishing.

 

[Janos]

I'm no expert, but I can't imagine a series that doesn't sell would get a tpb and a mmpb (however, we don't know how the pre-RW ENT relaunch books have done sales wise). However, to Christopher's point many fans have been waiting since the 1960s for info/the story on the Romulan War. So, I imagine S&S is banking on this RW series being a broadly read book by TOS and/or TNG era fans whether folks watched Enterprise or not (that's why I asked how many folks reading RW actually watched ENT).

 

[Destructor]

I must admit, the Romulan War series is the only Enterprise books that have even slighty piqued my curiosity.

But I've still got a LOT of relaunch novels (TNG and TTN) to get through before I consider that, though.

 

[timothy]

I've been doing a reread of the series and don't bother with anything before
" last full measure " everything after this is great . GOD I hate having to wait till november for the next book . going to do a star trek the next gen relaunch read for the first time . first book articles of the federation.

 

[ChristopherPike]

^Technically, all that was established onscreen was that there was an admiral named Archer who had a beagle. They never mentioned the admiral's first name. It could've been Jonathan Archer's son/daughter/grandchild. Which is far more probable. Human lifespans in the 140s are credible in the TNG era, but it would be very unlikely for someone of Archer's generation.

Anyone who hadn't been exposed to a Augment/Klingon virus maybe. That might alter him slightly and we've already seen the likes of Kang, Koloth and Kor live for well over a century. Assuming they aren't already supposed to have that kind of lifespan, maybe there's a side effect of genetic engineering involved.

I believe there's a record of Roberto Orci saying it was supposed to be a tip of the hat to Enterprise's Archer himself. Over at TrekMovie.com, if I'm not mistaken. If the author's intent isn't canon enough, I don't know what is...

I basically see Archer as having two fates:

Prime Universe - something connected to the launch of the NCC-1701 affects him and causes his death. Just being able to let go after giving the ship his blessing, I suppose. There's nothing more than a slightly romantic notion in that of course.

Alternate Universe - No Enterprise launch in 2245 (Damn you, Nero! *shakes fist*) and he lives on a good decade longer. Long enough to see Scotty dematerialise his dog forever at any rate and that's the straw which broke the camel's back. He promptly dies broken hearted instead!


---------------------


I notice there was some discussion earlier in the thread about "Minefield". Towards the end of the episode, more than one ship decloaked, didn't it?

At the point this episode was written, we'd been given a strong hint in "Shockwave, Part II" about Archer and the Romulans. Daniels knocking his hand away from reading a future book about the topic.

Now factor in the Temporal Cold War and I'd imagine the plan (prior to Season 4's "Storm Front") was to eventually have Romulans shown receiving a helping hand from the future. Just like the Suliban, the Xindi... even a bunch of Tholians seemed to be acting under instructions at one point.

Maybe "Future Guy" was trying to change the balance of power enough to give Romulans an advantage, using the Suliban as a third party. Destablising the Klingon Empire was his first attempt afterall. Although admittedly his efforts in "Cold Front" and "Shockwave" also required Archer to continue living in the 22nd Century, to witness whatever the end result would have been. It's a bit difficult to see how a character from the 29th Century could hold a grudge against Archer. The Federation as a whole. Certainly. Given the timescale, it would be as absurd as me wanting to prevent America declaring independence from Great Britain, just so I can see Benjamin Franklin or George Washington admit defeat!

Although maybe Archer is more like Thomas Jefferson, since he was at the declaration and later served as President.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

I notice there was some discussion earlier in the thread about "Minefield". Towards the end of the episode, more than one ship decloaked, didn't it?

AFAIK, no, we only see one ship actually decloak and cloak. Although even if both of them did, it's entirely possible that the other ship broke down and self destructed just like the first one (the Praetor Pontilus) because the cloak overloaded the power.

 

[Christopher]

If the author's intent isn't canon enough, I don't know what is...

What's onscreen is canon. What's offscreen is not. Authorial intent is always subject to revision, sometimes even by the same author in later installments. (For instance, Roddenberry intended Data to be the creation of mysterious aliens, but he abandoned that when the script for "Datalore" came along.) If it isn't onscreen, it isn't binding, regardless of whether it comes from a fan or a story editor or the series bible itself.

And as I've already pointed out, there are two conflicting bits of authorial intent here, Orci's claim and Sussman's bio. It's inconsistent to favor one and ignore the other. The only consistent thing to do is to recognize that both are equally non-binding conjectures. Neither is "proof" of anything.

I basically see Archer as having two fates:

Prime Universe - something connected to the launch of the NCC-1701 affects him and causes his death. Just being able to let go after giving the ship his blessing, I suppose. There's nothing more than a slightly romantic notion in that of course.

Alternate Universe - No Enterprise launch in 2245 (Damn you, Nero! *shakes fist*) and he lives on a good decade longer. Long enough to see Scotty dematerialise his dog forever at any rate and that's the straw which broke the camel's back. He promptly dies broken hearted instead!

Fine, if you want to believe that. Just call it a conjecture instead a fact.

Maybe "Future Guy" was trying to change the balance of power enough to give Romulans an advantage, using the Suliban as a third party. Destablising the Klingon Empire was his first attempt afterall.

No, just the first one we learned about. Remember, we learned later that season that the Suliban Cabal had already been targeting the Tandarans for seven years before NX-01 was even launched. And there's no telling when the Tholians first got involved with these matters. They already seemed to be pretty deeply embroiled in "Future Tense," and well ahead of Archer's crew in their understanding of what was going on.

Although admittedly his efforts in "Cold Front" and "Shockwave" also required Archer to continue living in the 22nd Century, to witness whatever the end result would have been. It's a bit difficult to see how a character from the 29th Century could hold a grudge against Archer. It would be a bit like me hating George Washington for declaring independence from Great Britain!

Or maybe it wasn't really about Archer and the Federation at all. Future Guy didn't really seem to have anything against Archer until Archer started interfering in his already-ongoing activities. And as you mention, he did take action to protect Archer on occasion, and warned him about the Xindi threat in "The Expanse."

Also, Future Guy was from the mid-28th century, according to Daniels. The 29th century was the home of the Temporal Integrity Commission and Starfleet timeships like the Relativity, as well as the home time of the Na'kuhl faction that screwed up history in "Storm Front."

 

[ChristopherPike]

And as I've already pointed out, there are two conflicting bits of authorial intent here, Orci's claim and Sussman's bio. It's inconsistent to favor one and ignore the other. The only consistent thing to do is to recognize that both are equally non-binding conjectures. Neither is "proof" of anything.

It's not a question of favouring one over the other anymore, since we're talking about different universes now. If we're talking about Trek literature, and sadly that's all we can be with regard to the Prime Universe... then I think Sussman's bio ought to become the definitive one. He outranks Pocket Books writers surely? Although I suppose that decision is ultimately down to Michael Martin, Andy Mangels or whoever writes subsequent ENT books.

Whatever happens there's no need to reconcile Archer's death into one single timeline event. There's nothing preventing him still being alive and well, in the Neroverse... if those writers so choose. And yet, as dead as door nail in the Prime one. The irony here of course, is that Silik knew the answer to all this. But then in his own words, "I suppose that's about to change." (Doesn't really sound as cool coming from me though, not without John Fleck and that temporal echo.)

Fine, if you want to believe that. Just call it a conjecture instead a fact.

Well, I did say that's what I see... it's not like you or I are the supreme authority on Enterprise or anything!

No, just the first one we learned about. Remember, we learned later that season that the Suliban Cabal had already been targeting the Tandarans for seven years before NX-01 was even launched.

You're right. I completely forgot about that. Is there any evidence Future Guy's agenda included the Tandarans though? Their government was certainly concerned about who gave the Cabal orders, but that doesn't necessarily mean much. Maybe that was the Suliban Cabal's agenda? He gave them genetic alterations in payment for doing his bidding, but perhaps getting back at the Tandarans was outside of all that? Just something personal, while they also ran errands to fulfil their part of a bargain.

Or maybe it wasn't really about Archer and the Federation at all. Future Guy didn't really seem to have anything against Archer until Archer started interfering in his already-ongoing activities. And as you mention, he did take action to protect Archer on occasion, and warned him about the Xindi threat in "The Expanse."

I suppose. I'm mixing some of my own fan-fic retcon in there, I guess. It always seemed poor writing to string along an audience, if there's going to be no payback in revealing a mysterious character. Or when you do, he's not terribly interesting or his backstory and the focus of the series characters, aren't even connected.

Also, Future Guy was from the mid-28th century, according to Daniels. The 29th century was the home of the Temporal Integrity Commission and Starfleet timeships like the Relativity, as well as the home time of the Na'kuhl faction that screwed up history in "Storm Front."

I was 50 years out. So I don't win a prize. That's not bad, considering it was just one line of dialogue in the first season and it requires me to count backwards from Daniels' century.

 

[Hartzilla2007]

And as I've already pointed out, there are two conflicting bits of authorial intent here, Orci's claim and Sussman's bio. It's inconsistent to favor one and ignore the other. The only consistent thing to do is to recognize that both are equally non-binding conjectures. Neither is "proof" of anything.

It's not a question of favouring one over the other anymore, since we're talking about different universes now. If we're talking about Trek literature, and sadly that's all we can be with regard to the Prime Universe... then I think Sussman's bio ought to become the definitive one. He outranks Pocket Books writers surely?

Yeah I doubt a bio THAT IS ONLY VISIBLE TO PEOPLE WITH HDTVS counts for that much unless again the 1000 person crewed Enterprise-D really only has one bathroom on the whole damned ship.