Just finished Before Dishonor...

[Rosalind]

[mod hat on]

We just had a 700+ post thread on the topic of Janeway's Dead, let not drag this on there as well, ok?

Thank you

 

[Thrawn]

And then, there's Before Dishonour itself, which--to this reader, at least--had a distinct sense of glee about it...

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

(meta-discussion note) This part of Trent's post is criticism of the novel itself, and I will respond to it as such; I hope this is not considered dragging the thread into a discussion of Janeway's death / Janeway fans / etc. If so, let me know.

I only recently watched Voyager, and found myself enjoying Janeway's character much more than I expected to, because in my opinion (and I realize others disagree sharply), I found her to be an intriguingly morally ambiguous character. I thought her headstrong nature was fascinating, precisely because it at times powered through difficult situations, but at times also may have made them worse (I can certainly imagine other ways to handle the Kazon, for instance, that might have turned out better). And this is what I ask of all good characters - that they be distinctive, powerful, and open to interpretation. A character that creates conversation, and makes fascinating choices. To me Janeway was easily the high point of the show, to a surprising degree.

And my first thought upon finishing Before Dishonor was that PAD, despite not liking her, had actually nailed the character entirely, and I was pleased that she'd been given such a respectful sendoff. I thought it was easily the best element of the story. I came on here and was just blown away by the number of people, like Trent, criticizing the book's treatment of her, not the death itself but the characterization. I found it absolutely spot-on.

After posting about it, and I think maybe even Trent himself describing the horrible characterization he had seen, I actually went back and read the parts at the beginning of the book with her in them to try and see that point of view, and I found I simply couldn't. It read exactly like her, to me.

So, just for the record, even upon this particular point there is disagreement, and I certainly felt no authorial "glee" at killing her off.

 

[Semah]

And then, there's Before Dishonour itself, which--to this reader, at least--had a distinct sense of glee about it...

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

(meta-discussion note) This part of Trent's post is criticism of the novel itself, and I will respond to it as such; I hope this is not considered dragging the thread into a discussion of Janeway's death / Janeway fans / etc. If so, let me know.

I only recently watched Voyager, and found myself enjoying Janeway's character much more than I expected to, because in my opinion (and I realize others disagree sharply), I found her to be an intriguingly morally ambiguous character. I thought her headstrong nature was fascinating, precisely because it at times powered through difficult situations, but at times also may have made them worse (I can certainly imagine other ways to handle the Kazon, for instance, that might have turned out better). And this is what I ask of all good characters - that they be distinctive, powerful, and open to interpretation. A character that creates conversation, and makes fascinating choices. To me Janeway was easily the high point of the show, to a surprising degree.

And my first thought upon finishing Before Dishonor was that PAD, despite not liking her, had actually nailed the character entirely, and I was pleased that she'd been given such a respectful sendoff. I thought it was easily the best element of the story. I came on here and was just blown away by the number of people, like Trent, criticizing the book's treatment of her, not the death itself but the characterization. I found it absolutely spot-on.

After posting about it, and I think maybe even Trent himself describing the horrible characterization he had seen, I actually went back and read the parts at the beginning of the book with her in them to try and see that point of view, and I found I simply couldn't. It read exactly like her, to me.

So, just for the record, even upon this particular point there is disagreement, and I certainly felt no authorial "glee" at killing her off.

And this dovetails with my opinions pretty much exactly.


I thought that Janeway was an interesting character for the reasons you mentioned, but she was criminally badly written throughout Voyager. By the end of it, she came across as either mentally ill, or just hyper-aware of her own plot immunity. But as a core, character, I had no problems with her.

And PAD nailed the character, I thought. Unlike Picard, Worf, and the mutineers, all of which had at least one moment where I said, "They wouldn't do that," both Seven of Nine and Janeway acted true to character the entire time. I thought it was among the best they had been written.

 

[KRAD]

^ Minor point: Picard and Worf were the mutineers, along with La Forge. Kadohata, T'Lana, and Leybenzon were the ones actually following lawful orders....

 

[Thrawn]

I thought that Janeway was an interesting character for the reasons you mentioned, but she was criminally badly written throughout Voyager. By the end of it, she came across as either mentally ill, or just hyper-aware of her own plot immunity. But as a core, character, I had no problems with her.

I didn't even think she was badly written; I thought she was consistently the same person throughout the show's run, and reacted the way I'd have expected the way events transpired. I did think that the show occasionally shirked away from showing what some of the obvious downsides to her command style would be, but in enough cases those consequences did show up to make me mostly satisfied.

 

[Semah]

^ Minor point: Picard and Worf were the mutineers, along with La Forge. Kadohata, T'Lana, and Leybenzon were the ones actually following lawful orders....

Well, in Picard's mind T'Lana et al were, and I think he even referred to them as such a couple of times. Course by then, I was convinced that Picard had been replaced by a changeling or something.

 

[Christopher]

And my first thought upon finishing Before Dishonor was that PAD, despite not liking her, had actually nailed the character entirely, and I was pleased that she'd been given such a respectful sendoff. I thought it was easily the best element of the story. I came on here and was just blown away by the number of people, like Trent, criticizing the book's treatment of her, not the death itself but the characterization. I found it absolutely spot-on.

I agree -- I felt Janeway's characterization in BD was authentic and handled well.

 

[kimc]

I don't think anyone gangs up on "Janeway fans." I'm a Janeway fan, and I've never felt ganged up on for that. But there's a small group of what I'd have to call militant Janeway fans, a very small number of people who choose to be aggressive and confrontational about their preferences and get hostile toward other posters, authors, and editors when Janeway isn't treated exactly the way they want. And their aggressive behavior and extreme positions naturally provoke objections and counterarguments. That's got nothing to do with fondness for Janeway. It's a response to the provocative, confrontational posting style of these few people. People who are in no way representative of Janeway fans or Voyager fans as a whole and who have no right to speak on behalf of all Janeway fans, despite their persistent tendency to pretend they do.

Okay, now I'm genuinely puzzled. I've been around the board for a while and while I've seen fans get very passionate about Janeway as well as other characters the term "militant" seems a bit strong. Hostile, aggressive behavior simply should not be encouraged on the board (Neutral Zone being an exception) - whether it's from someone who is pro or anti Janeway. Do you have any examples of these "personal" attacks?

Unfortunately, some TrekLit posters have been taking criticism of "Before Dishonor" as personal attacks. Speaking for myself it's not personal. In fact, personally I could probably sit and have a beer with just about anyone on the board. Just don't tell me that I'm an idiot for not liking the way that the only female captain in the Trek franchise (okay, televised Trek franchise) has been treated by Pocket Books. Yes, I accept that it's not going to change and yes I respect the opinions of those who think it's a good idea but no I'm never going to like it.

 

[kimc]

I for one am not interested in this thread being hijacked like the thread in question by either pro or anti Janeway fanatics.

To a lot of us threads like this are started expressly to cause dissention between the Pro and Anti Janeway factions. And ultimately to run the Pro Janeway faction off. You know it's a very hot button but you start it anyway. PMs were made for private discussions, if you post a public thread then you get public response.

Brit

The hell?


Look, if you want to make up a persecution that isn't there, more power to you, but it's not going to make you come across very well. Since this has been going on, "for years" here, as you say, please to show your work.

So prove her wrong. Show some respect and tolerance or simply ignore her posts.

 

[Semah]

To a lot of us threads like this are started expressly to cause dissention between the Pro and Anti Janeway factions. And ultimately to run the Pro Janeway faction off. You know it's a very hot button but you start it anyway. PMs were made for private discussions, if you post a public thread then you get public response.

Brit

The hell?


Look, if you want to make up a persecution that isn't there, more power to you, but it's not going to make you come across very well. Since this has been going on, "for years" here, as you say, please to show your work.

So prove her wrong. Show some respect and tolerance or simply ignore her posts.

The poster refers to abuse that has occurred "for years" and refers to threads started for the purpose of abusing Janeway fans. I disagree with both of these statements and asked, in my way, for examples of this sort of thing. If my "the hell' was disrespectful or intolerant, than I apologize.

 

[kimc]

The hell?


Look, if you want to make up a persecution that isn't there, more power to you, but it's not going to make you come across very well. Since this has been going on, "for years" here, as you say, please to show your work.

So prove her wrong. Show some respect and tolerance or simply ignore her posts.

The poster refers to abuse that has occurred "for years" and refers to threads started for the purpose of abusing Janeway fans. I disagree with both of these statements and asked, in my way, for examples of this sort of thing. If my "the hell' was disrespectful or intolerant, than I apologize.

Fair enough. Look, I'm sure we could all play the "thread search game" for examples of things that ticked us off. There are those who are okay with the direction that Pocket books is going. Fine. There are also those who are not okay with it and would like to voice their opinions. That should also be fine. If folks sound a bit angry then please try to understand that it's not necessarily personal - sometimes you just need to vent.

 

[captcalhoun]

captcalhoun, the last time I looked this is a board that is supposed to welcome anyone and right here in this thread it's pretty obvious that you have no tolerance for anyones opinion but your own. You wouldn't know a rational argument if it bit you ...well you know where.

oh go forth and multiply. you don't even know my opinion. MY opinion is, Before Dishonour was hugely entertaining and that it was shocking when Janeway got assimilated and then got blown up. but my opinion beyond that is: i don't give a good goddamn. i don't care whether she's dead, alive or someplace inbetween. i just wish that all these militant Janeway fans would rack off and quit bitching about something that happened a year ago and get the hell over it. it's a character in a fragging book! it's not like someone raped your cat and murdered your kids! IT. IS. A. BOOK!

IT'S NOT REAL!!!

 

[Sci]

I don't think anyone gangs up on "Janeway fans." I'm a Janeway fan, and I've never felt ganged up on for that. But there's a small group of what I'd have to call militant Janeway fans, a very small number of people who choose to be aggressive and confrontational about their preferences and get hostile toward other posters, authors, and editors when Janeway isn't treated exactly the way they want. And their aggressive behavior and extreme positions naturally provoke objections and counterarguments. That's got nothing to do with fondness for Janeway. It's a response to the provocative, confrontational posting style of these few people. People who are in no way representative of Janeway fans or Voyager fans as a whole and who have no right to speak on behalf of all Janeway fans, despite their persistent tendency to pretend they do.

Okay, now I'm genuinely puzzled. I've been around the board for a while and while I've seen fans get very passionate about Janeway as well as other characters the term "militant" seems a bit strong. Hostile, aggressive behavior simply should not be encouraged on the board (Neutral Zone being an exception) - whether it's from someone who is pro or anti Janeway. Do you have any examples of these "personal" attacks?

Check out this post.

Quoting from it:

And yes, I'm p***ed off by the fact that those in charge doesn't care about if they make many fans angry and upset. It's the same s****y, arrogant, superior attitude which those in charge of the TV series did show up when they destroyed the character Kes in "Fury" and gave the J/C:ers the finger with the Seven-Chakotay thing in "Endgame". I useed to think that those responsible for the books had a better understanding for the fans and cared more for the characters than berman's gang but obviously I was wrong.

Right there is a prime example of the kinds of ad hominem attacks Christopher was describing. Instead of arguing that he disagreed with the creative decision to kill Janeway off, he instead decided to attribute malice and apathy, acts of gross unprofessionalism, to the authors and editors. And when confronted with this, he then refused to apologize.

 

[ClayinCA]

Finally ClayinCA, you avatar alone drives Janeway fans off, it's already been discussed on another board and our feeling is that it should be removed, but I am not an Admin or Mod here (and yes I am on other Boards and yes that is plural) so all I can do is report it to the Mods of this forum.

Ooh, you saved me for last! I feel so special.

My little old avatar (which I didn't make myself, but found somewhere on this very board) is driving Janeway fans off?? Well, um...I have to go with a big old "oooooookaaaaay..." as a response. If said Janeway fans are going to let something like my avatar prompt them not to post (or even lurk) here, that implies a certain...thinness of skin on their part. Honestly, I was thinking about changing it soon (I like to change my avatars every so often 'cause I get bored of having the same one for too long), but I'm not about to knuckle under to that kind of a pitiful attempt at pressure. I tell you what, though: please, please report my avatar to the mods of this forum. If one of them decides I should take it down, I'd be happy to do so. But in response to a complaint from a post as illogical and overwrought as yours? Nah.

Oh, and...you're on other boards?? PLURAL?? Wow ...I mean, that is awesome. Any man who could manage such a feat, I wouldna dare disappoint.

The regulars here rarely agree with each other. It's not as if we unite to gang up on new posters. Every opinion will have a range of reactions. As in real life.

Actually you do, and Janeway fans have been treated that way for years. It's time it stopped.

Or you'll...do what, precisely? Cry some more?

You know, we went on and on about this in a ridiculously long thread already, and whereas it was entertaining as hell, do we really need to go down this road again?

I couldn't agree more.

And yet, I supposedly shut down Janeway thread newcomers through humour and wordplay.

To back up a point you made earlier, Therin, I don't agree with you on a lot of things. But I find your posts to be always well-written and well-considered, frequently funny and always worth reading. I've never seen you come even close to shutting anyone down.

ClayinCA's Avatar is gloating as are you and you know it.

Oh, I see the confusion here! Let me clarify matters for you. No. No, it's not. It's celebratory. And (as I'll get to in a minute) it's a joke.

Maybe he thinks of your proper comma usage as rubbing it in.

Now that was damn funny.

Then stop throwing out bate.

Do you mean bait?

In all seriousness, your arguments are a lot more likely to be listened to if they're written well and spelled correctly.

And my first thought upon finishing Before Dishonor was that PAD, despite not liking her, had actually nailed the character entirely, and I was pleased that she'd been given such a respectful sendoff. I thought it was easily the best element of the story. I came on here and was just blown away by the number of people, like Trent, criticizing the book's treatment of her, not the death itself but the characterization. I found it absolutely spot-on.

After posting about it, and I think maybe even Trent himself describing the horrible characterization he had seen, I actually went back and read the parts at the beginning of the book with her in them to try and see that point of view, and I found I simply couldn't. It read exactly like her, to me.

So, just for the record, even upon this particular point there is disagreement, and I certainly felt no authorial "glee" at killing her off.

Yeah, to actually talk about the book here for a second, I agree with this completely. I had heard that Peter David was no fan of Janeway, so I too was kind of pleasantly surprised at how well he'd captured the character (though I suppose I shouldn't have been - he is a professional, after all).

Now, as for the death itself, I freely admit I wasn't a fan of the character Janeway, the actress who played her, or the show she was on, but I was surprised by the decision to kill her off - I thought it betokened a boldness of direction to kill a main character of one of the TV series, and I was really surprised that the book range (who I guess I should personify as Margaret Clark, right?) would make such a, well, ballsy move. Am I glad it wasn't a character that I personally liked? Well, yeah. Was I a little bit happy to see a character I didn't especially like in a TV show I gave up watching bite the dust? I mean...I guess so, but any dislike I had for Janeway wasn't taking up a large enough portion of my life to really make that much of an impression on me, beyond what I said above, about what her death betokens for the book range. (My avatar is a joke, for heaven's sake. Sorry if you don't think it's funny. I don't think Family Guy is funny, but I'm not asking anybody to cancel it.)

 

[kimc]

i just wish that all these militant Janeway fans would rack off and quit bitching about something that happened a year ago and get the hell over it. it's a character in a fragging book! it's not like someone raped your cat and murdered your kids! IT. IS. A. BOOK!

IT'S NOT REAL!!!

If it upsets you so much then don't read the posts. You have the right to put certain posters on "Ignore" if you need to but you do not have the right to say who can and can't post here.

 

[kimc]

Right there is a prime example of the kinds of ad hominem attacks Christopher was describing. Instead of arguing that he disagreed with the creative decision to kill Janeway off, he instead decided to attribute malice and apathy, acts of gross unprofessionalism, to the authors and editors. And when confronted with this, he then refused to apologize.

And right below your post is another poster personally attacking another poster. How is that even acceptable?

 

[captcalhoun]

yeah? well, i'd start with you, if you weren't a mod...

 

[Therin of Andor]

I was really surprised that the book range (who I guess I should personify as Margaret Clark, right?) would make such a, well, ballsy move.

Ironically, the same Margaret Clark has been the target of both praise and harsh criticism for resurrecting Trip Tucker to remain a major player in the ENT Relaunch!

 

[kimc]

yeah? well, i'd start with you, if you weren't a mod...

We mods have pretty thick skins. Still, it's probably not a very good idea what with all those pesky board rules.

 

[Therin of Andor]

And right below your (Sci's) post is another poster personally attacking another poster. How is that even acceptable?

You mean ClayinCA defending his right to use an avatar Brit finds offensive, or when he asks for clarification that our supposed techniques for shutting down pro-Janeway posters' comments will be "stopped"?