How we deal with death
- Thread starter Leaf
- Start date
[Henry Kissinger] What? What is funny? [/Henry Kissinger]
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Turns out putting Lynx on my ignore list was the right decision after all...
^
^^
^^^
^^
^^^
What a nice way to speak up and yet say absolutely nothing.
We know that she's in Full Circle - nobody's questioning that, but we also know that she dies in it, and that's the real issue for many of us and me in particular.
A dead Janeway means NO Full Circle for me, but at least my bank account will be happy.
AFAIC, killing off Janeway was the boldest and gutsiest move Pocket-Trek has ever made (the actual "execution" notwithstanding) and the story possibilities it opens are immense (and while I really don't have any real love for Janeway, I was never a hater, either). Sure, it closes a few as well, but who is too say that the possibilities that are closed are the better ones? Was it the route I would have taken? Probably not. But that doesn't make it in any way a bad decision.
I was completely done with Voyager after Spirit Walk because of the bland direction the books were going in. Now I'm actually looking forward to Full Circle. For the first time ever, I am looking forward Voyager. Because for the first time, I am sincerly curious as to what happens next with the Voyager crew and the direction they are taking.
Don't get me wrong. I do understand where you're coming from. I had similar feelings toward Marvel comics after Civil War and the death of Captain America. I completely stopped buying Marvel comics for a period (And, yes, my bank account was happy also). However, after a few months, I managed to get over myself and came to the realization the story being told over in Captain America was perhaps the best story currently being told in comics.
Now, Captain America is one of my few "must-buy" books despite the absence of Steve Rogers, the original Cap. Just because I didn't care for the decision to kill Cap didn't mean that it was a bad one or that any future stories wouldn't be worth reading. Quite the opposite. I suspect that the same will be true for Voyager.
I was completely done with Voyager after Spirit Walk because of the bland direction the books were going in. Now I'm actually looking forward to Full Circle. For the first time ever, I am looking forward Voyager. Because for the first time, I am sincerly curious as to what happens next with the Voyager crew and the direction they are taking.
Don't get me wrong. I do understand where you're coming from. I had similar feelings toward Marvel comics after Civil War and the death of Captain America. I completely stopped buying Marvel comics for a period (And, yes, my bank account was happy also). However, after a few months, I managed to get over myself and came to the realization the story being told over in Captain America was perhaps the best story currently being told in comics.
Now, Captain America is one of my few "must-buy" books despite the absence of Steve Rogers, the original Cap. Just because I didn't care for the decision to kill Cap didn't mean that it was a bad one or that any future stories wouldn't be worth reading. Quite the opposite. I suspect that the same will be true for Voyager.
I'm actually dissapointed. Not even an attempt to a constructive reply here.
Laughing at another poster's opinion is actually rude. There are a lot of things I find laughable as well but I do at least try to come up with constructive comments.
As for Star Trek, I stick to my opinion that Star trek should keep its original premise and don't sell out to current temporary trends. Otherwise it will lose everything it stands for and many loyal fans as well.
Why do I keep flashing on the "dead parrot" sketch in so many of these posts?
--Ted
--Ted
They were laughing at your slightly-edited cut-n-paste posting style.
So good you said them twice. At least.
Yeah, ST should still be commenting on black vs white ("Let This Be Your Last Battlefield"), the Vietnam War ("A Private Little War"), genetic manipulation ("Space Seed") and gender stereotyping ("Turnabout Intruder"). Forget all those current temporary trends.
[/quote]
Personally I find the news highly amusing, but then again I'm strange! And to think a few world leaders and economists will destroy the world. how fucking arrogant is that, maybe civilization as we know it will cease or it will change for the better, but destroying the whole wide world, nope, not at all
Ages ago I actually posted an edited form of the dead parrot sketch with Janeway as the dead parrot.
They were laughing at your slightly-edited cut-n-paste posting style.
So good you said them twice. At least.
Yeah, ST should still be commenting on black vs white ("Let This Be Your Last Battlefield"), the Vietnam War ("A Private Little War"), genetic manipulation ("Space Seed") and gender stereotyping ("Turnabout Intruder"). Forget all those current temporary trends.
My posts may have been similar but they weren't exactly cut-and-paste. Besides that, they were posted in different forums and meant for different readers (the TrekLit readers and the Voyager forum readers).
As fr the comments about "black vs white", "the Vietnam War" etc. I must admit that I did find those comments very exaggerated. I've noticed before that you have a brilliant capability to twist my comments into something totally different and more exteme than they were meant to be. I'm sure that yo actually know that I didn't mean that Trek should remain in the 60's but keep it's premise as a show about a better future for mankind and also keep good characters and good storytelling in the way it has done and not sell out to the "gloom and doom scenario" which some fans seem to like. After all, we do have BSG and similar series for those who like that sort of entertainment.
Dimesdan wrote:
Well, I don't think that those politicians and economists are doing much to prevent the ongoing destruction of the planet. Lot of talk but nothing more. They only seem to care about their own wallets and their own power. But that's a subject outside the TrekLit debates which could be brought up in another forum.
Well, it may not be the most welcoming of occasions, but it's nice to see you here, Margaret. I enjoyed talking to you at NYCC as well.
What a nice way to speak up and yet say absolutely nothing.
Well, to be fair, it's not like Margaret owes us any statement at all...
Let's take your comments from my perspective, just as a fun exercise.
In order to be a better future for you, it's necessary that no one ever die? That seems rather unrealistic to me.
This is basically like me saying "I wish Star Trek would stop publishing optimistic books; we have Stargate and similar series for those who like that sort of entertainment." It's a completely useless point. Star Trek shouldn't define itself by what other shows aren't doing any more than by what a vocal minority of fans wants.
So basically, your entire rant is spurious and hysterical. You don't like the stories, fine, but that's a personal preference. It has nothing to do with BSG, breaking tradition, or selling out.
Well, we're talking about novels here, so that doesn't count at all.
That future looks pretty good to me, really. Great technology, good ideals, a powerful force for good unable to be taken down by anything, strong enough to take on the universe and make it a better place. That's just about the best possible future I can imagine.
In order to be a better future for you, it's necessary that no one ever die? That seems rather unrealistic to me.
Check; check.
Why? Why must they continue to tell the same stories they already have? They already told those stories. Hell, were you upset when DS9 was announced, because it took place on a space station, and Star Trek hadn't ever told stories on a space station before? That wasn't doing things "in the way that it has [been] done" either.
Sell out - to give up artistic integrity for money; to let the fans dictate one's work. Seems to me like that's what you WANT them to do. What they DID was much more edgy and true to themselves.
Man, lemme tell you. Star Trek is not "doom and gloom scenario", and is absolutely nothing like BSG.
This is basically like me saying "I wish Star Trek would stop publishing optimistic books; we have Stargate and similar series for those who like that sort of entertainment." It's a completely useless point. Star Trek shouldn't define itself by what other shows aren't doing any more than by what a vocal minority of fans wants.
So basically, your entire rant is spurious and hysterical. You don't like the stories, fine, but that's a personal preference. It has nothing to do with BSG, breaking tradition, or selling out.
I whole heartedly agree that this is not the place to discuss such matters and that your opinion which would be like hitting a brick wall in trying to reason with.
So I'll make this brief. You use words like destruction to freely resulting in it being worthless when you actually use it in a suitable context.
As for the "destruction" of the planet, yes civilisation could well cease and yes the biosphere may be affected catastrophically, BUT, Earth has been around for some FOUR BILLION years and if it can withstand meteor impacts, super volcanoes and any number of other Extinction Level Events and still be here, I would think it can and will survive the Human Race, it's just a question if Humanity will survive.
Now if some numpty decided to build a space highway through the system or if Sol decided to explode, then I'd agree that Earth's destruction would occur, but it really wouldn't due to use.
I think that you have misunderstood some of my points.
The books are actually based on the TV series so I guess that the premises for the series are the same for the books.
Yes, I do have some doubts about humanitys ability to survive and develope. Just look at the current crisis which is a result of sheer stupidity and greed.
No, I have never stated that people shouldn't die in the real future. What I've reacted against is unnecessary character destruction in the Star Trek TV episodes, movies and books.
No, I didn't react against DS9 taking place on a space station, I thought it was an interesting concept. I'm not against changes as long as Star Trek keep its premise.
The fine art of changing is to change within given parameters. That's what many great rock bands are doing and certain writers, TV series and movies too.
As for selling out, there is a difference between changing style in order to attract new fans just for the sake of it and to simply keep a finger in the air to figure out what the loyal fans want. I'm sure that killing off Janeway will alienate many loyal fans of Star Trek and I'm not sure if such a move will attract fans outside the Star Trek fanbase or the Voyager fanbase or how loyal those new fans will be.
What I see as a possible sell out is the attempts to turn Trek into something more "dark" in order to attract fans outside the Star Trek fanbase, thus more and less abandoning the original premise for Star Trek which might cause a loss of longtime loyal fans. That is not a good scenario.
Finally I agree with you that Star Trek is not "doom and gloom scenario" and I hope that it won't become that either.
Well, in a serialized narrative universe like Star Trek or comic books, I think that character deaths are more about the reactions of other character than the readers' reactions. Since the "fake death", "stunt death" deal was done more than once, serial readers are desensitized to that: when a main character dies, no one is going to buy it. But it doesn't mean that those stories are not worth to be written: we may think that Janeway (or Data, ect) may be back somewhere in the future, but the other characters do not. Exploring their reactions, and the stories that unfold from that event, can be highly interesting and entertaining.
I must say, I'm glad Weyoun is back. The idea that killing a clone in the AQ would be the end of them forever wasn't quite right. He existed for several incarnations in the GQ. I think the Founder assumed the the Dominion would be destroyed the Feds/Klingons/Romulans/Cardassians- that after the victory in the AQ, they'd go to the GQ and finish the job.
I was satisfied with the explanation.
Some DS9 series spoilers in here...
As for death- I feel sad/bad when characters I like die, or ones I'm neutral about die in a sad way- Ghemor, Marritza, Remata'klan, Ikat'ika for instance. But that shows that they were written well enough so that we did care. And they didn't die for nothing.
Ghemor was free of Dukat, Marritza taught Kira a lesson, Remata'klan... just...
and Ikat'ika showed Jem'Hadar have honourable feelings they're willing to disobey and die for.
I wish Solarin was stunned- more should have come of that death. But it didn't... I can deal. I feel sad, and regret over it- but as the viewer, I got the point of what he said, even if Kira denied it.
That last Cardassian leader-guy under the Dominion- good riddance.
For that matter, in DS9PF- the whole New Bejing thing- horribly sad.
I was satisfied with the explanation.
Some DS9 series spoilers in here...
As for death- I feel sad/bad when characters I like die, or ones I'm neutral about die in a sad way- Ghemor, Marritza, Remata'klan, Ikat'ika for instance. But that shows that they were written well enough so that we did care. And they didn't die for nothing.
Ghemor was free of Dukat, Marritza taught Kira a lesson, Remata'klan... just...
and Ikat'ika showed Jem'Hadar have honourable feelings they're willing to disobey and die for.I wish Solarin was stunned- more should have come of that death. But it didn't... I can deal. I feel sad, and regret over it- but as the viewer, I got the point of what he said, even if Kira denied it.
That last Cardassian leader-guy under the Dominion- good riddance.
For that matter, in DS9PF- the whole New Bejing thing- horribly sad.
"...is at least as important as how we deal with life, wouldn't you say, Lieutenant?"
Very well said, Trent. I tend to agree.
Very well said, Trent. I tend to agree.
Similar threads
