Re: Annotations
Ian, have you been out in the sun, because you are reading way too much into that.
Ian, have you been out in the sun, because you are reading way too much into that.
Help!!! (for my website) (P. S. Never mind!)
- Thread starter Christopher
- Start date
Re: Annotations
Still, I think he has a point -- namely, that annotations aren't meant to be necessary for understanding the story, but are instead meant for people who are curious about what went into the creative process, "behind the scenes." The same kind of people who'd ask questions about our writing at conventions, or who'd buy Voyages of the Imagination.
Still, I think he has a point -- namely, that annotations aren't meant to be necessary for understanding the story, but are instead meant for people who are curious about what went into the creative process, "behind the scenes." The same kind of people who'd ask questions about our writing at conventions, or who'd buy Voyages of the Imagination.
Re: Annotations
^ Exactly. Terri has a point, too. Any annotations, in whatever form they take, should strictly be supplemental material, to be referenced or ignored as the individual reader sees fit. Generally, I think us Trek doofs do a pretty good job of staying on this side of that line.
That's how I approach them if/when I decide to do them, and it's also why I pretty much always wait until after the book comes out before I even decide to write any. That way, I can let some time pass and have fun with recalling why I included this or that, rather than making it sound like something that maybe should have been included in the story in the first place.
^ Exactly. Terri has a point, too. Any annotations, in whatever form they take, should strictly be supplemental material, to be referenced or ignored as the individual reader sees fit. Generally, I think us Trek doofs do a pretty good job of staying on this side of that line.
That's how I approach them if/when I decide to do them, and it's also why I pretty much always wait until after the book comes out before I even decide to write any. That way, I can let some time pass and have fun with recalling why I included this or that, rather than making it sound like something that maybe should have been included in the story in the first place.
Re: Annotations
^^I see your "exactly" and raise a "soitanly." They're not meant to be necessary, they're meant to be fun little extras -- fun for me to compile as well as fun for people like me who enjoy reading that sort of thing.
And as I remarked above, when I found something in this latest set of annotations that I realized needed to be explained in the novel itself, I worked an explanation into the novel because that's where it belongs.
^^I see your "exactly" and raise a "soitanly." They're not meant to be necessary, they're meant to be fun little extras -- fun for me to compile as well as fun for people like me who enjoy reading that sort of thing.
And as I remarked above, when I found something in this latest set of annotations that I realized needed to be explained in the novel itself, I worked an explanation into the novel because that's where it belongs.
Re: Annotations
^ What they said. I enjoy reading others' annotations, and I enjoy compiling my own.
And, while Memory Beta may someday be a great resource for this kinda thing... well, checking the entry for Out of the Cocoon, it's pretty thin on actual information. (And I'm pretty sure at least two of the characters listed appear nowhere in my story.)
^ What they said. I enjoy reading others' annotations, and I enjoy compiling my own.
And, while Memory Beta may someday be a great resource for this kinda thing... well, checking the entry for Out of the Cocoon, it's pretty thin on actual information. (And I'm pretty sure at least two of the characters listed appear nowhere in my story.)
Re: Annotations
Memory Beta has a page that links to the various Authors Annotations.
The annotations have come in handy a few times at MB. A minor example (because it's the only one I remember off the top of my head), I remember there being discussion of whether or not the "DeathTongue" mentioned in Dayton Ward's "Almost... But Not Quite" was a deliberate homage to the fictional "Bloom County" band of the same name. Dayton's annotations cleared things right up. I always appreciate a good "Bloom County" reference (Hence, my avatar). :thumbsup:
Memory Beta has a page that links to the various Authors Annotations.
The annotations have come in handy a few times at MB. A minor example (because it's the only one I remember off the top of my head), I remember there being discussion of whether or not the "DeathTongue" mentioned in Dayton Ward's "Almost... But Not Quite" was a deliberate homage to the fictional "Bloom County" band of the same name. Dayton's annotations cleared things right up. I always appreciate a good "Bloom County" reference (Hence, my avatar). :thumbsup:
Re: Annotations
^ I remember seeing that and laughing my ass off because I thought it was cool. Glad to be of service :thumbsup:
^ I remember seeing that and laughing my ass off because I thought it was cool. Glad to be of service :thumbsup:
Re: Annotations
Admittedly, I don't bring much to the table when it comes to our annotations. (I said WHEN IT COMES TO OUR ANOTATIONS! Sheesh!)
Mine are pretty much:
(insert character name here) was named after a girl I wanted to date in high school.
(insert character name here) was named and subsequently killed off after this guy at work who is a maximum-strength douche.
(insert character name here) was named after a character in a Kevin Smith movie.
Don't believe me? In the A Time to ... books, Dr. Tropp was named after the obstetrician who delivered me. In Summon the Thunder, Colleen Cook was named after this hot writer babe we know. In Interphase and Foundations, Dr. Jane Hamilton is named after this hot writer babe we know.
Get the idea?
Bubba D.
Admittedly, I don't bring much to the table when it comes to our annotations. (I said WHEN IT COMES TO OUR ANOTATIONS! Sheesh!)
Mine are pretty much:
(insert character name here) was named after a girl I wanted to date in high school.
(insert character name here) was named and subsequently killed off after this guy at work who is a maximum-strength douche.
(insert character name here) was named after a character in a Kevin Smith movie.
Don't believe me? In the A Time to ... books, Dr. Tropp was named after the obstetrician who delivered me. In Summon the Thunder, Colleen Cook was named after this hot writer babe we know. In Interphase and Foundations, Dr. Jane Hamilton is named after this hot writer babe we know.
Get the idea?
Bubba D.
Re: Annotations
You were delivered by a Denobulan? Mmmm, explains a lot.
You were delivered by a Denobulan? Mmmm, explains a lot.
Re: Annotations
Ian, do yourself a favor and consider the person you're talking to before you start hurling insulting commentary like that.
For cripes sakes. How many boards am I on? How many people have my e-mail address? It's not like I've ever been averse to answering a question when I can. You might have a leg to stand on if that were the case. If someone wants to know something, they're more than welcome to ask. For me to put together annotations is a) something I personally consider a waste of my writing time since I'm not writing Trek fiction anymore, and b) impossible for me to anticipate each and every question that will be asked. It's just that simple.
I'm sorry if the fact that I see the readers as more capable and not needing to be spoon fed any of the cutesy side stories about how such-and-such came to be is a problem for you. If the information is necessary to the story, I'll put it in the story. Information that's not necessary to the story is extraneous and useless to me. This is the approach I've always taken. It's not like this is a shocker for anyone, especially someone who's been around here as long as you have.
See? You asked a question, I answered it.
And in no way, shape, or form, would that have belonged in any annotation for any story I've ever written.
Ultimately, I'm one of those "if you have a question, ask it" people, and it's not like I'm not available.
Ian, do yourself a favor and consider the person you're talking to before you start hurling insulting commentary like that.
For cripes sakes. How many boards am I on? How many people have my e-mail address? It's not like I've ever been averse to answering a question when I can. You might have a leg to stand on if that were the case. If someone wants to know something, they're more than welcome to ask. For me to put together annotations is a) something I personally consider a waste of my writing time since I'm not writing Trek fiction anymore, and b) impossible for me to anticipate each and every question that will be asked. It's just that simple.
I'm sorry if the fact that I see the readers as more capable and not needing to be spoon fed any of the cutesy side stories about how such-and-such came to be is a problem for you. If the information is necessary to the story, I'll put it in the story. Information that's not necessary to the story is extraneous and useless to me. This is the approach I've always taken. It's not like this is a shocker for anyone, especially someone who's been around here as long as you have.
See? You asked a question, I answered it.
And in no way, shape, or form, would that have belonged in any annotation for any story I've ever written.
Ultimately, I'm one of those "if you have a question, ask it" people, and it's not like I'm not available.
Re: Annotations
And you're still completely missing the point. It is not, has never been, about "need." It's not utilitarian. It's a bonus for people who enjoy behind-the-scenes material. It's got nothing to do with disrespect for their intelligence. On the contrary -- intelligent people tend to be curious, and want to know more about the things they read, whether they "need" to or not. That's definitely true of Star Trek fans, given that they buy such books as The Making of Star Trek, the various series companions, and Voyages of the Imagination. So it's hardly meant as an insult to their intelligence if we choose to offer bonus information. On the contrary, it's meant as an acknowledgment of their inquisitive nature, their desire to learn more.
That doesn't mean it's wrong for you not to do annotations, of course; they're purely optional for us to make and for the audience to read. I mean, come on, that's always been the point of annotations and footnotes and appendices -- they're optional material, deliberately kept separate from the text so that readers can choose to read or ignore them as they wish. The whole point is that they don't have to be there. So there's nothing wrong with doing them, nothing wrong with not doing them, nothing wrong with reading them, nothing wrong with not reading them. There's nothing here to argue about.
And you're still completely missing the point. It is not, has never been, about "need." It's not utilitarian. It's a bonus for people who enjoy behind-the-scenes material. It's got nothing to do with disrespect for their intelligence. On the contrary -- intelligent people tend to be curious, and want to know more about the things they read, whether they "need" to or not. That's definitely true of Star Trek fans, given that they buy such books as The Making of Star Trek, the various series companions, and Voyages of the Imagination. So it's hardly meant as an insult to their intelligence if we choose to offer bonus information. On the contrary, it's meant as an acknowledgment of their inquisitive nature, their desire to learn more.
That doesn't mean it's wrong for you not to do annotations, of course; they're purely optional for us to make and for the audience to read. I mean, come on, that's always been the point of annotations and footnotes and appendices -- they're optional material, deliberately kept separate from the text so that readers can choose to read or ignore them as they wish. The whole point is that they don't have to be there. So there's nothing wrong with doing them, nothing wrong with not doing them, nothing wrong with reading them, nothing wrong with not reading them. There's nothing here to argue about.
Re: Annotations
Only if I've left VH-1 on as background noise and the show came on. But then it's still background noise.
Folks, I'm not saying any way is the right way to do things, just the reason why I do things differently than everyone else. I'm also not a fan of the notion that it's starting to feel like these things are being expected of the authors. Just about every time I see a new book out, I start seeing posts wondering about the annotations and where we can find them.
I will never do annotations for my Trek work, as I believe in the notion that the story comes first. Telling the readers how the story came to be? That's something that's just not at the top of my priority list. If someone wants to ask? Fine. I'll be happy to answer the question. (And no, Ian, it doesn't have to be in person. We do live in a global information age, let's not forget.) I just warn you that the answer might be really boring. I mean, who wants to know that I gave Sarjenka a pet iguana-like lizard because of the planet's climate? That's...really boring information that is absolutely unnecessary to the story being told.
I admit that I may end up doing a Wiki on my website for the work I'm doing in my own universe, just to keep all of the characters and their evolutions straight for me as the writer, but that's still a far cry down the road from here, and won't in any way, shape or form include things like "How this character got their name". To me, those details are truly incidental, and not relevant to understanding the universe or the stories within it.
To those who want to do the extra work? Great, more power to you. I just really don't see a need to explain every little incidental detail about a story.
foravalon said:
TerriO said:
Now, see, for me, there shouldn't be any other motivation for the author than what's best for the story, and if that isn't evident on the page, the author fell down on the job. For me, spelling everything out for the reader in a separate document is something I actually find insulting to the reader. If I have to do that, then I didn't do the story correctly, did I? The readers are smart enough to keep track of things. I don't need to do that for them.
Seriously, I don't see any need for annotations. If it's not in the story, IMO, it's not there for a reason. If there's something that needs an annotation to explain it, then it wasn't done right in the story to begin with. The story comes first. If that isn't done right in one of my stories, then it's nobody's fault but my own.
I mean, hell, if I did annotations for the novel I'm in the middle of writing, they'd be longer than the book, which is already clearing 200 pgs.
c'mon terri, tell the truth, you never watched an episode of pop-up-video?
Only if I've left VH-1 on as background noise and the show came on. But then it's still background noise.
Folks, I'm not saying any way is the right way to do things, just the reason why I do things differently than everyone else. I'm also not a fan of the notion that it's starting to feel like these things are being expected of the authors. Just about every time I see a new book out, I start seeing posts wondering about the annotations and where we can find them.
I will never do annotations for my Trek work, as I believe in the notion that the story comes first. Telling the readers how the story came to be? That's something that's just not at the top of my priority list. If someone wants to ask? Fine. I'll be happy to answer the question. (And no, Ian, it doesn't have to be in person. We do live in a global information age, let's not forget.) I just warn you that the answer might be really boring. I mean, who wants to know that I gave Sarjenka a pet iguana-like lizard because of the planet's climate? That's...really boring information that is absolutely unnecessary to the story being told.
I admit that I may end up doing a Wiki on my website for the work I'm doing in my own universe, just to keep all of the characters and their evolutions straight for me as the writer, but that's still a far cry down the road from here, and won't in any way, shape or form include things like "How this character got their name". To me, those details are truly incidental, and not relevant to understanding the universe or the stories within it.
To those who want to do the extra work? Great, more power to you. I just really don't see a need to explain every little incidental detail about a story.
Re: Annotations
I've always enjoyed them. As for how behind you were, I just figured you were busy.
I've always enjoyed them. As for how behind you were, I just figured you were busy.
Re: Annotations
I was giving you my honest reaction to your comments. Your earlier comments didn't have a veiled insult within them? Then my sincere apologies.
I wasn't placing any demand upon you to write online annotations to your work. You had seemed to infer that authors who do write them, and/or those fans who enjoy reading online annotations, are somehow lacking, or wasting their time, or are diminishing their contracted published work.
Perhaps I was reading too much into your comments? (I'm a fan. That's my job. We fans read too much into everything. I should have been getting ready to go to work that morning. Or working on my own writing.) But now, it seems to me, you read too much into my comments; I wasn't deliberately hurling insults. I was telling you what ran through my brain when I read your comments. I thought you'd appreciate an honest answer.
At no time did I say that you should join the ranks of authors who write annotations. You've already said you're done with writing more Star Trek anyway. Neither would I expect you to do extensive, private-emailed, personal responses to every now-and-future fan that ever has a set of questions about your ST work, for the rest of your life.
I was giving you my honest reaction to your comments. Your earlier comments didn't have a veiled insult within them? Then my sincere apologies.
I wasn't placing any demand upon you to write online annotations to your work. You had seemed to infer that authors who do write them, and/or those fans who enjoy reading online annotations, are somehow lacking, or wasting their time, or are diminishing their contracted published work.
Perhaps I was reading too much into your comments? (I'm a fan. That's my job. We fans read too much into everything. I should have been getting ready to go to work that morning. Or working on my own writing.) But now, it seems to me, you read too much into my comments; I wasn't deliberately hurling insults. I was telling you what ran through my brain when I read your comments. I thought you'd appreciate an honest answer.
At no time did I say that you should join the ranks of authors who write annotations. You've already said you're done with writing more Star Trek anyway. Neither would I expect you to do extensive, private-emailed, personal responses to every now-and-future fan that ever has a set of questions about your ST work, for the rest of your life.
Re: Annotations
Dammit, Terri, I want you to post movies of your Trek stories acted out with action figures and I expect onscreen annotations. And I want you to come to my house and make popcorn for me while I sit and watch them.
Is that so much to ask?
Scott
Dammit, Terri, I want you to post movies of your Trek stories acted out with action figures and I expect onscreen annotations. And I want you to come to my house and make popcorn for me while I sit and watch them.
Is that so much to ask?
Scott
Re: Annotations
I can supply the Dr Selar for "Q'uandary", but I need some more K'Ehleyrs to make Ms Q and Tarah.
Re: Annotations
I always thought that annotations were "a nice to have" and never mandatory for any author.
I always thought that annotations were "a nice to have" and never mandatory for any author.
Re: Annotations
When these things started popping up on authors' websites, I went "Ohhh, a new toy" ... and within about a minute, was so farking bored I couldn't stand it.
It was all "page 17, line 3, referencing tng ep 58, 34m17s, Picard to Riker..." and similar things.
I sat there trying to understand the point of it. I couldn't think of one.
They're fine for others, I guess, but I get nothing out of them. Seems to me the authors would be better served actually writing new material than doing these annotations. But that's just my opinion, take it as such.
When these things started popping up on authors' websites, I went "Ohhh, a new toy" ... and within about a minute, was so farking bored I couldn't stand it.
It was all "page 17, line 3, referencing tng ep 58, 34m17s, Picard to Riker..." and similar things.
I sat there trying to understand the point of it. I couldn't think of one.
They're fine for others, I guess, but I get nothing out of them. Seems to me the authors would be better served actually writing new material than doing these annotations. But that's just my opinion, take it as such.
Re: Annotations
I simply use my browser's "Edit: Find in This Page" function and search terms such as "TAS", "horta" and "Andor".
I simply use my browser's "Edit: Find in This Page" function and search terms such as "TAS", "horta" and "Andor".
Re: Annotations
Well, I always enjoy the hell out of annotations, and am grateful to the authors who take the time to provide them. They are informative, interesting, and sometimes even entertaining. Just like a creator commentary, deleted scenes or the text commentary that the Okuda's provide on Trek DVD's.
Of course, I also understand why some authors don't provide annotations, and don't hold it against. To each, their own.
Well, I always enjoy the hell out of annotations, and am grateful to the authors who take the time to provide them. They are informative, interesting, and sometimes even entertaining. Just like a creator commentary, deleted scenes or the text commentary that the Okuda's provide on Trek DVD's.
Of course, I also understand why some authors don't provide annotations, and don't hold it against. To each, their own.
Similar threads
