If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinions?)

[darkwing_duck1]

Why can't the writers tell whatever stories they want to tell if the books don't matter? Let characters change, fall in love, get married, even DIE if that's part of the writer's story? Why not let empires rise and fall? Why does the rights holder demand a "reset switch" on fiction they don't regard as "historical" to their universe to begin with?

For that matter, why still so much focus on the "series" characters (whichever series). The "Vanguard" novels are some of the best I've read in a long time. Primarily BECAUSE they aren't "reset switched", IMO. Also because they're NOT "yet another Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Archer story...

 

[Dayton Ward]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Who says the books "don't matter?" What's been said is that the books "aren't canon," which for the 5 billionth time means that the people who create filmed Trek aren't obligated to take them into account when they write a new film or TV series. For everybody else, "canon" is a concept that takes up way too much energy and space on message boards like this one. Why any fan who reads Trek books or comics feels that they can't enjoy any of this material without the official sanction or blessing of some studio suit or hired hand will never make sense to me.

The books are required to be consistent with filmed canon because that's the way the people who own Star Trek want it. It's their property; we're just being allowed to play with it, and the people who've given that permission want their property treated a certain way. When it's all said and done, the books, like every other tie-in product ever made, are marketing tools and revenue streams for the property itself. Tie-in writers know this going in, so it's not as though it's something we find out about after we start writing.

That said, all of your examples ("Let characters change, fall in love, get married, even DIE if that's part of the writer's story? Why not let empires rise and fall?") have been happening in the books to one degree or another. Paramount (now CBS) has offered a great deal of latitude in recent years, which is why we have the different series not directly tied to a show, as well as character development in all sorts of new directions for characters/etc. from those lines which are spun out from one of the TV series (the DS9 line perhaps being the most prominent example).

For that matter, why still so much focus on the "series" characters (whichever series). The "Vanguard" novels are some of the best I've read in a long time. Primarily BECAUSE they aren't "reset switched", IMO. Also because they're NOT "yet another Kirk, Picard, Sisko, Janeway, Archer story...

Well, we have New Frontier, Titan, Vanguard, and Klingon Empire as ongoing series that focus as much if not more so on "original" characters than ones created for the filmed series. Further, older series like NextGen, DS9, and Voyager have all introduced new characters to take the place of familiar folk who've moved on in one fashion or another. Still, there's a significant segment of fandom who reads the books and who still wants good, old-fashioned "Kirk/5-year mission" stories or TNG, DS9, VGR, and ENT stories set during the runs of their respective television series. The trick is to try and find a balance of stories that appeals to as large a potential readership as possible.

 

[Defcon]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why does the rights holder demand a "reset switch" on fiction they don't regard as "historical" to their universe to begin with?

The idea behind it was, when the specific series were still running, to not alienate people who are only just beginning to read the books. If you're a fan of let's say TNG, and you pick up a book with TNG on the spine, you should get a book that is true what you see on screen, and not a book which is developing the series into a total different direction. But since there is no running series at the moment the point is moot anyway.

For that matter, why still so much focus on the "series" characters (whichever series).

If you count there are/have been roughly the same number of series not based on the TV series than series based on them. And in the Relaunches based on the TV series there are only parts of the original cast around anymore, so I don't really see what you're talking about.

 

[Marie1]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why can't the writers tell whatever stories they want to tell if the books don't matter? Let characters change, fall in love, get married, even DIE if that's part of the writer's story? Why not let empires rise and fall? (cut)
For that matter, why still so much focus on the "series" characters (whichever series).

Fanfiction can, but for published material associated with the companies that own the show... no.

That would drive me insane, continuity makes me happy, sometimes even if I don't like what happens. Can you imagine the chaos if the books that are published were just willy nilly? Taran'atar would die in every one!!

 

[Christopher]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why can't the writers tell whatever stories they want to tell if the books don't matter? Let characters change, fall in love, get married, even DIE if that's part of the writer's story? Why not let empires rise and fall? Why does the rights holder demand a "reset switch" on fiction they don't regard as "historical" to their universe to begin with?

Because the tie-in fiction is meant to support the show, to supplement it. It's supposed to be recognizable to the casual reader, to give readers the same feeling they get when watching the show. So as a rule, franchise owners prefer tie-in fiction not to diverge too much from what's happening on the show.

As others have pointed out, though, your question is anachronistic, since the kind of "reset button" restrictions you're referring to haven't been in place in Trek fiction for years. That's the way it was back when there were new shows and films in production, but these days, the books are given remarkable freedom to advance the storylines. Characters have changed, fallen in love, gotten married, and died. Empires have risen and fallen. All that and more has happened in the novels over the last eight years. Not because the books "don't matter," but because there's nothing onscreen to contradict them.

 

[LightningStorm]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why does the rights holder demand a "reset switch" on fiction they don't regard as "historical" to their universe to begin with?

It's a common misconception. "Canon" does not mean "continuity." Canon doesn't have anything to do with in-universe "history".

Fanfiction can, but for published material associated with the companies that own the show... no.

Published material has too.

I'll point folks to the following books which do at least one of all of the aforementioned "why nots".

Death in Winter - Love occurs
Before Dishonor - Death occurs
Greater Than the Sum - Marriage occurs (er occurred just before it)
The Titan books - An Empire Rises/Falls

Spoiler: What I'm talking about with Titan

The split of the Romulan Star Empire into two governments.

The Vanguard Books - Pretty much all new characters.
The New Frontier Books - Pretty much all new characters.
The DS9 Relaunch - A lot of new characters, a marriage, and the state of a Federation Planet changes.
The Destiny Trilogy - A major change to the galaxy at large.

 

[Christopher]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

It's a common misconception. "Canon" does not mean "continuity." Canon doesn't have anything to do with in-universe "history".

That's true, but it's not really what darkwing_duck1 was asking. The question wasn't truly about canon, so let's set that aside. He's actually asking a question I used to wonder about myself. It does seem paradoxical: given that the books aren't considered binding on the show's continuity, why should there be any limits on what happens in the books? So it's really a question about continuity, and deserves to be addressed in those terms.

The answer is that continuity isn't the sole factor behind the decision. This is a business, and tie-in literature is a product meant to appeal to the audience of the franchise. So having the "look and feel" of the series it ties into is what matters. That's why franchise holders prefer their tie-in literature to hew close to onscreen events rather than charting their own course. It's only when there is no new onscreen material that tie-in literature is set free to advance the story in its own way, as we see with things like Trek fiction, the Buffyverse comics, and the upcoming pair of The 4400 novels that continue beyond the end of the series.

 

[Greg Cox]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

[It's only when there is no new onscreen material that tie-in literature is set free to advance the story in its own way, as we see with things like Trek fiction, the Buffyverse comics, and the upcoming pair of The 4400 novels that continue beyond the end of the series.

Exactly. We went through four rounds of revisions on my first 4400 outline, commissioned when the tv series was still a going concern. Now that there are no future tv episodes to worry about, I had a much freer hand with the new book.

That's just how it works.

So maybe the OP should seek out books based on cancelled series!

 

[LightningStorm]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

So maybe the OP should seek out books based on cancelled series!

*Still mad about there not being a series of books based on Jericho.**

*grumbles*

 

[Steve Roby]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why can't the writers tell whatever stories they want to tell if the books don't matter?

Your answer is implicit in your question. The writers could do whatever they wanted if the books didn't matter. Since they can't, obviously the books do matter. Paula Block wouldn't be earning a salary at CBS Licensing if stuff like the books didn't matter.

You're working from a false premise (not canon = doesn't matter) and the rest of your post suggests you don't know what's happening in the books these days.

 

[William Leisner]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why can't the writers tell whatever stories they want to tell if the books don't matter?

Just curious: which writers have you ever had walk up to you and say, "Hey, y'know darkwing_duck1, canon really burns my britches, 'cuz now I can't tell the stories I wanna tell"? Presumably, you have dozens lodging this common complaint with you, for you to start a whole thread about it.

 

[JD]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

For that matter, why still so much focus on the "series" characters (whichever series).

If you count there are/have been roughly the same number of series not based on the TV series than series based on them. And in the Relaunches based on the TV series there are only parts of the original cast around anymore, so I don't really see what you're talking about.

Actually there have been more:
New Frontier The Original Series
SCE/Corps of Engineers The Animated Series
IKS Gorkon The Next Generation
Vanguard Deep Space Nine
Titan Voyager
Stargazer Enterprise
Challenger
These last 3 are questionable but I think an argument could be made that they aren't based on a specific series:
The Lost Era
Mirror Universe
Myriad Universes
Then could add in the comics:
Stafleet Academy
Early Voyages
Assignment: Earth
Ok those last two are also sort of based on a series.

 

[Geoff Thorne]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Wait. We can't do whatever we want?

 

[TerriO]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

So maybe the OP should seek out books based on cancelled series!

*Still mad about there not being a series of books based on Jericho.**

*grumbles*

Hey, I'm doing my best on that one, but you try talking to the human equivalent of brick walls sometime.

 

[Marie1]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

Why does the rights holder demand a "reset switch" on fiction they don't regard as "historical" to their universe to begin with?

It's a common misconception. "Canon" does not mean "continuity." Canon doesn't have anything to do with in-universe "history".

Fanfiction can, but for published material associated with the companies that own the show... no.

Published material has too.

I'll point folks to the following books which do at least one of all of the aforementioned "why nots".

Death in Winter - Love occurs
Before Dishonor - Death occurs
Greater Than the Sum - Marriage occurs (er occurred just before it)
The Titan books - An Empire Rises/Falls

Spoiler: What I'm talking about with Titan

The split of the Romulan Star Empire into two governments.

The Vanguard Books - Pretty much all new characters.
The New Frontier Books - Pretty much all new characters.
The DS9 Relaunch - A lot of new characters, a marriage, and the state of a Federation Planet changes.
The Destiny Trilogy - A major change to the galaxy at large.

I meant "no" as in... isn't/ would complicate things/ isn't desirable/shouldn't be etc., not so much "is not." I should have probably been more specific... but now I have your awesome list!! Which is correct, has done all those things! So this falls out better than I could devise...

So maybe the OP should seek out books based on cancelled series!

*Still mad about there not being a series of books based on Jericho.**

*grumbles*

Hey, I'm doing my best on that one, but you try talking to the human equivalent of brick walls sometime.

I will...
There are worse things that brick walls, and brick walls can theoretically dismantled or destroyed... its just a lot of work and drudgery and stress and frustration...

 

[BryanSorensen]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

it seems to me this discussion comes out every so often...perhaps a redirect to previous threads would solve all the issues, that way all the points that have been made, dont have to get rehashed again. The people who give the opinions on the "canon" discussion are mostly (imo) annoyed at having to re hash this every couple of months..perhaps a sticky thread on this subject would be helpful, that way we can all just refer those ppl to that thread...rather than start it all over again?

 

[Christopher]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

But like I said, this isn't really a question about canon. It's not asking if the books are canon or if they should be canon; it's just asking, given that the books aren't in continuity, why can't they do whatever they want? And that's a fair question, an attempt to understand what seems like a contradictory idea. And the answer to that question really has nothing to do with how canon is defined.

 

[LightningStorm]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

it seems to me this discussion comes out every so often...perhaps a redirect to previous threads would solve all the issues, that way all the points that have been made, dont have to get rehashed again. The people who give the opinions on the "canon" discussion are mostly (imo) annoyed at having to re hash this every couple of months..perhaps a sticky thread on this subject would be helpful, that way we can all just refer those ppl to that thread...rather than start it all over again?

The problem with that is that the nature of things like this are that we'd have about 100 sticky treads answering all of the questions questions that get rehashed. We do, however have a FAQ that answers most of the common questions/discussions that come up. However most people don't seem to read that.

I don't have a problem with the repeated threads coming up, so long as they remain civil... on both the new-comer and the old-timer ends of the discussion. New comers need to remain civil and not demanding of whatever it is they are asking (they are asking afterall) and the regulars should remain patient with someone who simply may not know, and not fly off the handle because they just answered the same question last month.

 

[TerriO]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

*Still mad about there not being a series of books based on Jericho.**

*grumbles*

Hey, I'm doing my best on that one, but you try talking to the human equivalent of brick walls sometime.

I will...
There are worse things that brick walls, and brick walls can theoretically dismantled or destroyed... its just a lot of work and drudgery and stress and frustration...

And in one sentence, you sum up the first few years of my writing career so adeptly. Nicely done.

The biggest brick wall is sales. It's really difficult, if not damn near impossible, to launch a book line for a canceled series, but I threw my name in and started doing the Donkey from SHREK "Pick me! Pick me!" impression back when the show was canceled the first time and they were trying to figure out possible ways to conclude the story (before the nuts campaign really got going). I'm still jumping as high as I can on that one, even with the campaign on Universal HD going as I type.

 

[LightningStorm]

Re: If books aren't canon, why all the restrictions? (writers' opinion

I really think that serialized TV shows should be contracted like this: They get the same treatment they currently get with the x number of initial episodes and if the show is canceled before 20 episodes or is canceled "suddenly" then they automatically get the ability to contract out at least ONE book to finish up their story -- and then only if the creator wants the book(s). So at least creators of a show have an automatic availability for an outlet to please their fans if they want to.

Yes, I'm dreaming I know.

Too many shows get canceled in a very bad way these days... Traveller is another such show that comes to mind.