Has Treklit moved too far from it's roots?

[F. King Daniel]

Captain Janeway is dead, and Voyager is under the command of someone else. Assistant Counselor Ezri Dax is captain of Starfleet's most advanced ship. The Enterprise-E crew now features many unfamiliar faces. The Borg are gone and the Federation lies in ruins.

Has Treklit moved too far from it's TV/film roots? More has changed in the past few years of novels than during the various series' entire runs. With so many unfamilar crewmembers dominating the books, and the TV characters having moved on and changed, are they now just Voyager/TNG/etc in name only?

 

[Christopher]

As always, there's no single answer to that question, because it depends on the individual's tastes. Some people want to stick with the characters and situations that hit their nostalgia buttons, while others yearn to see the characters and their world evolve and change. Some people are loyal to a particular set of characters, while others are fans of the Star Trek universe and premise as a whole and are receptive to new characters and situations as long as they're true to the spirit of Star Trek.

 

[Lonemagpie]

There's some phrase here that's at the back of my mind... something about "boldly going"...

 

[Deranged Nasat]

I'm as happy with Trek lit now as I was when I started, back in 2002. That's hardly its "roots", of course, and within this limited span I've seen considerably less change to the nature of Trek lit than many, but so far nothing's thrown me as too unfamiliar. As a general rule, I love the changes and developments that've taken place; for every decision I've disliked, there have been half a dozen that have fascinated me, and I consider most of the new directions highly enjoyable. I'm all for creation of new characters and general expansion of the Trek universe, so long as care is taken with them, so long as they're written with skill. With a few notable exceptions (for me, "Before Dishonor" ranks high among them) this has indeed been the case. Ironically, the biggest annoyance for me in recent years was the canonical development of Romulus Existence Failure. But eventually I was eased around to the understanding that this will offer much potential for interesting stories when the novel line gets to it.

I personally wouldn't want the novels to retain the status quo of the series they're based on, particularly as my favourite of the series was Deep Space Nine, which offered some pretty big shake-ups. I suppose the crux of the problem is how "Trek-like" the novels are, and defining that strikes me as a little like Q attempting to explain "Q-ness". It's difficult to articulate effectively. On the whole, though, nothing so far has made me squint judgementally and think "this is Star Trek? Not my Trek!" (Well, nothing in the novel line anyway, and that issue's a whole other can of gagh, isn't it? )

I'm just grateful that I've gotten - and continue to get - so many tales from a fictional universe I'm fond of. We're quite, quite lucky. And from an entirely selfish viewpoint, I want to see change in these books, I want to see personal, political and situational development, characters moving on with their lives, characters dying and marrying and having children. I want to see consequences and continuity; all this makes the Trek universe seem more "real" for me, more meaningful. I enjoy having an evolving fictional history into which to immerse myself. So few fictional worlds have this scope - there's Star Wars obviously leading the pack, but that's never been my thing.

Basically, I don't want to go back to the roots, I want the plant to keep growing up, and branching out in many interesting directions as it goes . Which it is; we have Titan, Voyager, Vanguard, New Frontier, etc, and some people only follow some of those branches. Then there are completists like myself, who like the whole plant. And so far it's all still recognizable as the Trek I first encountered.

 

[Ktrek]

If you accept that the story those series told must move forward then the answer is no, they have not moved from their roots. It would be unrealistic to think that the Enterprise, Voyager or DS9 crews remained the same after those series ended their television runs. You have only three choices

1. limit stories to within the TV series time-frame
2. continue the stories with essentially no change of crew
3. move the stories of each series forward and introduce new and interesting main characters while still staying true to the original concept

Now of these number one has been done many times and there are hundreds of Trek books you can read set during the series runs.

Moving the story forward without any personnel change would be seriously limiting, in my opinion, because the crew could never be placed in any real danger and all must be resolved so the good ship lollipop goes on its merry little way again.

Choice number three, the direction that has been chosen by the editors and writers, is to take the stories forward but leaving enough elements in place that the Voyager stories are distinctly Voyager, the TNG stories are distinctly TNG and DS9 is DS9. Yes new crew members have come in. Some quite interesting and some not so much but I could say the same for the series themselves when they ran on TV.

I know that for some people they will miss the familiarity of the crews they saw on TV but for many of us we just see it as a natural evolution of where those series might have gone. Neither view is more right than the other and is just a matter of preference and taste. If sales were not strong enough to support the direction the books have taken I'm sure Pocket would be taking a close look at what changes could be made to recapture the interest of their audience.

Personally I enjoy the direction the post series books have gone. It's still Star Trek to me because Star Trek is more than just the familiar names of crew members. It's a universe and a philosophy of hope.

Kevin

 

[Angstromdweller]

I'm all for creation of new characters and general expansion of the Trek universe, so long as care is taken with them, so long as they're written with skill.

...

I'm just grateful that I've gotten - and continue to get - so many tales from a fictional universe I'm fond of. We're quite, quite lucky. And from an entirely selfish viewpoint, I want to see change in these books, I want to see personal, political and situational development, characters moving on with their lives, characters dying and marrying and having children. I want to see consequences and continuity; all this makes the Trek universe seem more "real" for me, more meaningful. I enjoy having an evolving fictional history into which to immerse myself.

I agree with the comments above.

I can't say that Treklit has strayed too far from it's "roots", which I assume refers the tv-shows, since I consider it the true continuation of the universe, now part of the roots.

 

[Chris McCarver]

I kind of come from two different schools of thought on this. On one hand, I love Star Trek, particularly the 24th century stuff, and on the other, I'm a big fan of fiction where you're never 100% sure where things will turn out from point A to B. Treklit has fulfilled both sides of my brain in that sense.

Also, I'm not the biggest fan of reboots or prequels (which isn't to say I didn't enjoy AbramsTrek and at least some of Enterprise) inasmuch as I am serialized fiction that moves forward rather than backward. Ostrander and Duursema's Star Wars: Legacy comic series scratched that similar itch.

I guess the question isn't so much whether the novels have strayed from their roots, so much as how much we mind if they do and how far they should or shouldn't go. As it stands at present, I'm personally very much in my comfort zone.

 

[neogothboy74]

If you accept that the story those series told must move forward then the answer is no, they have not moved from their roots. It would be unrealistic to think that the Enterprise, Voyager or DS9 crews remained the same after those series ended their television runs. You have only three choices

1. limit stories to within the TV series time-frame
2. continue the stories with essentially no change of crew
3. move the stories of each series forward and introduce new and interesting main characters while still staying true to the original concept

Now of these number one has been done many times and there are hundreds of Trek books you can read set during the series runs.

Moving the story forward without any personnel change would be seriously limiting, in my opinion, because the crew could never be placed in any real danger and all must be resolved so the good ship lollipop goes on its merry little way again.

Choice number three, the direction that has been chosen by the editors and writers, is to take the stories forward but leaving enough elements in place that the Voyager stories are distinctly Voyager, the TNG stories are distinctly TNG and DS9 is DS9. Yes new crew members have come in. Some quite interesting and some not so much but I could say the same for the series themselves when they ran on TV.

I know that for some people they will miss the familiarity of the crews they saw on TV but for many of us we just see it as a natural evolution of where those series might have gone. Neither view is more right than the other and is just a matter of preference and taste. If sales were not strong enough to support the direction the books have taken I'm sure Pocket would be taking a close look at what changes could be made to recapture the interest of their audience.

Personally I enjoy the direction the post series books have gone. It's still Star Trek to me because Star Trek is more than just the familiar names of crew members. It's a universe and a philosophy of hope.

Kevin

Agreed.

If the novels stayed exactly the same I wouldn't be reading them. I might not always be happy where they take me, but then they go somewhere else. Of the examples named, I don't mind that Janeway is dead (it's not like I wanted her to die...but people die) and though someone else is in command of Voyager - that was true in "Star Trek: Nemesis", so that wasn't something the books came up with. I love Ezri in command. I have mixed feelings about the Enterprise crew but there's still time for them to pull through. I notice you didn't mention that there's also a mostly new crew in the DS9 Relaunch - but I'd like to point out that there is, and that I love all the new characters introduced there and would have been very disappointed if, in the first book, they'd brought all the old characters back to their old jobs. I like that characters in the books move on or die or change; I'd dislike it if that weren't the case.

 

[Christopher]

I have to wonder, just how does one define ST's "roots?" Canonically, ST by now consists of:

* The adventures of a starship crew in the 23rd century.
* The adventures of an entirely different starship crew a century after that.
* The adventures of a space station crew whose situation goes through many changes.
* The adventures of yet another entirely different starship crew in a totally different region of the galaxy.
* The adventures of yet another different starship crew over a century before the first crew.
* The adventures of an alternate-timeline version of the first crew.

It doesn't sound to me like those "roots" are incompatible with the idea of change, growth, or the introduction of new characters and situations.

 

[Angstromdweller]

I have mixed feelings about the Enterprise crew but there's still time for them to pull through.

I am not sure why, but I really like the new characters. Some of them hasn't really had much of a prominent role yet though, so it's more of a gut feeling.

 

[Steve Roby]

Has TrekTV/film moved too far from its roots? Kirk is dead, Spock has jumped decades back into an alternate timeline, Sulu left the Enterprise and became captain of the Excelsior, Scotty retired and found himself in the 24th century, the Enterprise got a refit and then went down in flames. Tasha Yar died, Laforge got rid of his visor, the Enterprise was destroyed, Riker and Troi got married, Riker got the Titan, Data died. Worf moved to DS9, Jadzia was killed, Sisko joined the Prophets, Worf, Odo, and the O'Briens left DS9. Voyager was lost in space far from home -- and then suddenly they were home, having picked up and then lost Kes and Neelix and picked up Seven.

Point being: none of the series has a single status quo, so limiting them to a particular timeframe isn't the answer. People have complained that too many Voyager novels don't have Kes. (Well, at least one person.) Some people want more TOS novels, as long as they're set during the TV series; others want more TOS novels, as long as they're set in the movie era.

Continuing with no change in crew isn't much of an option, certainly not for TNG, DS9, or Voyager. Nemesis, What You Leave Behind, and Homecoming all made major changes that have to be addressed somehow.

3. move the stories of each series forward and introduce new and interesting main characters while still staying true to the original concept

That pretty much is the original concept.

 

[sulfur]

I like a bit of a mix of things. The paths that the TNG/VOY/etc books are taking, I've been enjoying (enjoying the VOY books far more than I ever enjoyed the TV series). I'm well behind on the DS9 relaunch, despite it being my favourite series on TV (go figure).

I must admit, I do like it when the stories move things forward, but it's also nice when there are stories that take place during the course of the TV series too (ie "string theory" for example). The mix is what I like.

 

[JD]

I really like where the books have been going lately. Yeah, they have changed alot of stuff, but I think those changes have just allowed the books to tell some very interesting stories that we never got on TV. I also feel that if the 24th century Trek had continued it probably would have done something like this eventually.
As for the new characters, I've actually been pretty happy with all of the new characters that have been brought in. With the way the different series ended I think bringing new people is really the best way to go. It would have just gotten ridiculous if they had tried to come up with some way to get all of the characters back where they were in the series. It has also allowed the series to explore both new and old races, and give us new relationships.
I know alot of people have been unhappy with the new TNG characters, but I'm not. I found most of them very interesting and likeable, although I wouldn't mind seeing more of Elfiki and Faur. What we've seen of them seems pretty cool, but they've never really played a big role in any of the stories yet.

 

[F. King Daniel]

My concerns are that these ongoing changes will serve to deter newbies. Can anyone picture a TOS novel with Captain Jenkins, first officer Sulu and Uhura pregnant with Scotty's child? You'd go "That's not TOS!", but that's pretty much how far removed Voyager is from it's TV counterpart.

I'm loving Unworthy, but it feels to me more like a new Trek featuring some familiar faces than it does Star Trek: Voyager.

 

[BillJ]

Can anyone picture a TOS novel with Captain Jenkins, first officer Sulu and Uhura pregnant with Scotty's child? You'd go "That's not TOS!", but that's pretty much how far removed Voyager is from it's TV counterpart.

All the books based on the series have moved at least that far away.

I wouldn't mind so much if we got books set in the series' time frames every now and then.

 

[shanejayell]

While I wouldn't mind the occassional flashback to TV canon, with the limited number of books being published I'd prefer the new material.

Having said that, a 'What has gone before' summary in some of the books might be a good idea for new readers. Or a cast listing at the back of the books.

 

[Christopher]

My concerns are that these ongoing changes will serve to deter newbies. Can anyone picture a TOS novel with Captain Jenkins, first officer Sulu and Uhura pregnant with Scotty's child? You'd go "That's not TOS!", but that's pretty much how far removed Voyager is from it's TV counterpart.

I'm loving Unworthy, but it feels to me more like a new Trek featuring some familiar faces than it does Star Trek: Voyager.

Well, that's something of an exaggeration, isn't it? Aside from Janeway, Tuvok, and Neelix (and Kes, of course), essentially all the main Voyager crew has been reunited as of the end of Unworthy; they're actually more united than they were in the Golden post-finale novels. And Neelix did have a supporting role in Unworthy, so that's (as it happens) seven of nine main characters participating in the novel, and at least six of the nine expected to play regular roles. Compare that to DS9, where only five regulars and a supporting player or two remain in the post-finale cast, and TNG, where only four series regulars are part of the current crew in the novels.

 

[RandyS]

Some people want to stick with the characters and situations that hit their nostalgia buttons, while others yearn to see the characters and their world evolve and change.

And then there are people like me, who enjoy both in equal measure.

 

[RandyS]

I like a bit of a mix of things. The paths that the TNG/VOY/etc books are taking, I've been enjoying (enjoying the VOY books far more than I ever enjoyed the TV series). I'm well behind on the DS9 relaunch, despite it being my favourite series on TV (go figure).

I must admit, I do like it when the stories move things forward, but it's also nice when there are stories that take place during the course of the TV series too (ie "string theory" for example). The mix is what I like.

Okay, this is the point I was trying to make. Sulfur did a MUCH better job.

I have no problem whatsoever with what the novels are doing now, but I would definately like to see the various series do an occasional book (or duology, or trilogy, whatever) set within the time frame of their respective series. With the exception of TOS, we do not get enough of this, and that's disapointing.

 

[Starbreaker]

I've really been enjoying the novels. The status quo is only entertaining for so long.