• 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!

"Essential Legends" of Trek?

The only thing I could maybe see changing would be the cover art for some of the earlier books where it doesn't actually show the correct era. That honestly bugs me even more than the content becoming inconsistent with later canon. I know they say don't judge a book by it's cover, but it would be nice of the cover was at least an accurate reflection of the book's contents.
 
The NF novelette (first four) covers pretty famously pre-release had the crew in the TNG series uniforms rather than the First Contact/movie uniforms.
 
The only thing I could maybe see changing would be the cover art for some of the earlier books where it doesn't actually show the correct era. That honestly bugs me even more than the content becoming inconsistent with later canon. I know they say don't judge a book by it's cover, but it would be nice of the cover was at least an accurate reflection of the book's contents.

For what it's worth, changing the covers doesn't bother me. The covers are just marketing; they're not the books.

Moreover, putting new covers on old books is standard practice in publishing and always has been, and not just where tie-in fiction is involved. Putting a new cover on a new edition, to freshen up the look or possibly attract a different generation or demographic, is incredibly common. Indeed, it was (and possibly still is) expected that the hardcover edition and the mass-market paperback edition of any given book would have very different covers. (Hardcover: classy, upscale look. Paperback: pulpier, more commercial art.)

And the older the book is, the more covers it's likely to get slapped on it over the years. Lord only knows how any different covers THE LORD OF RINGS or I AM LEGEND or the original Bond novels have boasted over the decades, let alone public-domain classics like DRACULA or LITTLE WOMEN or THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES.

Covers can also vary from territory to territory, depending on what audience you trying to sell the book to. When Tor did a big historical novel about the War of 1812 decades ago, we put different covers on the American and Canadian paperbacks: a patriotic, red-white-and-blue cover for the American market and more a neutral cover -- featuring an antique map -- for the Canadian market. :)

Point being, again, the cover is just advertising. It's not the book.
 
Last edited:
Covers can also vary from territory to territory, depending on what audience you trying to sell the book to. When Tor did a big historical novel about the War of 1812 decades ago, we put different covers on the American and Canadian paperbacks: a patriotic, red-white-and-blue cover for the American market and more a neutral cover -- featuring an antique map -- for the Canadian market. :)
I know the book you're talking about. David Nevin, 1812. It's on my bookshelf, next to a bunch of Harry Turtledove.
 
For what it's worth, changing the covers doesn't bother me.

I've probably complained about this before, but... while I have no issue with covers getting updated in general, I don't like that the ebook version always uses whatever the latest cover is, because it often ends up replacing a cover I do like with a cover I don't like.

At least with the physical version, you know that the cover at the time of purchases is going to stay the cover.
 
I've probably complained about this before, but... while I have no issue with covers getting updated in general, I don't like that the ebook version always uses whatever the latest cover is, because it often ends up replacing a cover I do like with a cover I don't like.
I think I'm on my third cover (and back to the first title, after a period where it had the movie title) to the ebook of Vonda McIntyre's The Moon and the Sun. (I had it in hardcover back in the day, but I downsized it some years ago.) I was grumpy when it changed to The King's Daughter.
 
Let's take Sherlock Holmes for a moment. Writers after Doyle have invented a number of family members that aren't in the Canon. There's the much older brother Sherringford (from William S. Baring- Gould), a much younger sister Enola (from Nancy Springer), a completely different younger sister Violet (from Andy Lane), plus his son Raffles (from John Kendrick Bangs), and his daughter Lucy (from Charles Vesey and Anne Elliott). None of these go together, or were ever intended to go together, yet I like imagining that they can and do fit together in various combinations. Just for myself, and only for fun. Enola and Raffles together would be hilarious. :)
There's also another Holmes relative that William S. Baring-Gould proposed: Nero Wolfe, who he speculated was the child of Sherlock Holmes and Irene Adler. (Wolfe shares a number of traits in common with Mycroft Holmes, so there was a certain logic behind it.)

Meanwhile, The Seven Percent Solution by Nicholas Meyer revealed (or implied) that Sherlock's mother had an affair with his math tutor, one James Moriarty, who was not, in fact, the evil mastermind of Holmes' cocaine-fueled paranoia.

Or so I recall. It's been decades since I read that novel.
I just reread the book this summer, and you're more or less or correct. In the movie, Moriarty is the man that Holmes' mother had an affair with. In the book,
Holmes developed a hatred of Moriarty because he was the person who informed young Sherlock that his father had killed his mother. Sigmund Freud started to ask a hypnotized Holmes who his mother's lover was, but Watson convinces Freud that there's no point in undercovering who it was. So it could've been Moriarty, but Moriarty might've just been the innocent messenger.

Nicholas Meyer changed a fair amount of the plot of his book when he adapted it into the 1976 movie version. While the villain has the same name, he's significantly older in the movie. Certain incidents still occur (the tennis match, the train chase), but the villain's scheme is different than it was in the book, and the reasons certain things happen are altered. The plot of the movie is stronger, IMO.

Was Eurus in Sherlock finale from the Doyle stories or another new family member?
No. That finale had pretty much nothing to do with anything Doyle ever wrote.

And the older the book is, the more covers it's likely to get slapped on it over the years. Lord only knows how any different covers THE LORD OF RINGS or I AM LEGEND or the original Bond novels have boasted over the decades, let alone public-domain classics like DRACULA or LITTLE WOMEN or THE HOUND OF THE BASKERVILLES.
I'm currently in the midst of trying to reacquire my book collection after losing most of it in 2023, and in most cases I'm trying to largely get the exact same editions I had before, so I'm after editions mostly published from the 1970s to the 2020s. Library Thing has been a great help in cataloguing exactly which editions I'm trying to get.

I think I'm on my third cover (and back to the first title, after a period where it had the movie title) to the ebook of Vonda McIntyre's The Moon and the Sun. (I had it in hardcover back in the day, but I downsized it some years ago.) I was grumpy when it changed to The King's Daughter.
Carole Nelson Douglas retitled several of her earlier Irene Adler novels for reasons I've never understood, After the first book, Good Night, Mr. Holmes, Book 2, Good Morning, Irene, became The Adventuress, Book 3 went from Irene at Large to A Soul of Steel, and Book 4, Irene's Last Waltz, became Another Scandal in Bohemia.

In each case, I find the new title to be rather blah.
 
If they wanted it to be consistent, they really needed a page-one rewrite rather than cleaning up some rough edges.
Page-one rewrites. Hmm. I make no secret here of the fact that I grew up on Stratemeyer's The Bobbsey Twins series, and there are two notable "page-one rewrites," namely "Baby May" and "Cherry Corners." The original version of The Bobbsey Twins and Baby May had the Bobbsey family taking in a foundling, and the titular children (two sets of twins, for the uninitiated) locating the mother. Something that would be more than a little bit implausible by the time the books were revised in the 1960, so what did they do? What any book packaging company would do: replace it with The Bobbsey Twins' Adventures with Baby May, in which "Baby May" is now a baby elephant. A baseball-playing baby elephant. Likewise, The Bobbsey Twins at Cherry Corners was a direct sequel to the original "Baby May" book, so obviously they needed a new one, that took almost nothing but the title from the original.

And The Case of the Colonist's Corpse.
Just a relatively unremarkable TPB. Just a retro-looking detective fiction cover, and retro dyed page edges. What I meant about the USS Cerritos crew Handbook binding being "a thing of beauty" is what I noted elsewhere: they went to the expense of Smyth-sewing the damn thing, and they used a limp cover, like you might find on, say, a locomotive owner's manual -- or a Bible.
 
on the topic of the SNW covers, while it's is clever how the put they number of the book on the cover for 8-10, I could see it confusing to people who don't know it's an on going collection.

Covers for 1-7 were a lot more obvious.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top