Kirsten Beyer invitation in VOY forum

[JoeZhang]

Then there are people like me who don't take much of this stuff very seriously and would only want her to come back in a story where a Hirogen makes sweet love to her corpse simply because of the reaction that would get.

For similar reasons, at times Star Trek (and its fans) irk me with how seriously all this stuff is taken and I'd love someone like Garth Ennis to do their slant on it in a similar way to how he pissed all over the marvel superheros in his Marvel Knights Punisher series.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

The event was poorly executed, but the follow-through has been amazing. If you don't read that part, though, it's a pretty weak arguing position to tell people that the whole storyline sucks...

Well, sure, if someone argues that the whole storyline sucks without reading Beyer's novels, then I would agree that they aren't in a position to make that case. However, at least two of the BBJ posters commenting in this thread, and possibly others that I don't recall, have specifically stated that they have read Beyer's work and have even extolled those novels in certain respects. So they are not arguing from a position of ignorance regarding the aftermath of her death.

Chalk me up as one of those who've read the Voyager novels since Before Dishonor and enjoyed it.

However, I would say (and have said elsewhere) that the books aren't "Voyager" anymore, but have become much larger, in both scope, concept, and execution, which, for me at least, has helped not get stuck on the lack of Janeway.

And yet, I still want her back. Mostly because I found her death to have been atrociously written, in an atrocious book that wasn't even "part" of the Voyager relaunch. That's what's been stuck in my craw the whole time, and it probably won't change.

The other reason why I want her back is because, for me, she was Voyager. She was the main reason I would watch the show, and I would look forward to seeing what she did in the books. Did/Do I have other characters that I like and watch and want to see what happens next? Of course (B'Elanna and Tom being two examples, as well as Counselor Cambridge and Seven and so on). But they didn't connect with me as much as Janeway had.

 

[Christopher]

Another person might think that killing off Janeway was the equivalent of murdering a close family member. I definitely disagree with this. I would rather they kill off every single major character than kill my mother.

Exactly. It's one thing to regret the loss of a fictional character. But if you equate it with the loss of a real human being, with the pain that people who really have lost family members endure, that's completely losing perspective.

Particularly given that Janeway is only dead in the main novel continuity, and explicitly still alive in other tie-in continuities such as the Shatnerverse and Star Trek Online. So it's not like she's actually irrevocably gone in the first place. Her death is simply a story choice that one branch of the tie-ins has taken. So it's not like the Janeway fans have actually lost anything at all. If they can't get their Janeway fix from the main novel continuity, they still have other options, other continuities where she's alive and well. So to talk about it as though it's on a par with actually losing a family member -- that's just pathetic. They haven't really lost anything. Except their sense of proportion.

 

[Scout101]

However, I would say (and have said elsewhere) that the books aren't "Voyager" anymore, but have become much larger, in both scope, concept, and execution, which, for me at least, has helped not get stuck on the lack of Janeway.

I'd agree with most of that, other than to say that the last couple of books are as close as you could reasonably get now. They're back out there, exploring and doing their thing. Not all of them, and not the exact same way (there on purpose rather than stranded, exploring rather than trying to get home, not completely alone), but the spirit of these last books has been comfortingly familiar.

Since the series was geared towards fighting to get home, and they GOT home, there's gotta be some changes if you want it to continue, anyway.

And yet, I still want her back. Mostly because I found her death to have been atrociously written, in an atrocious book that wasn't even "part" of the Voyager relaunch. That's what's been stuck in my craw the whole time, and it probably won't change.

Totally understand the part about being disappointed in the book that killed her (both that actual act, and the book itself), but don't understand how that equates to wanting her back just because the book sucked. Saying if that book had been written a LITTLE better, you'd be ok with her being dead? Hell, if that's the case, just skip over it and pretend she died the biggest, most epic and important death ever. The aftermath would still be basically the same (what we got from Full Circle and onward), and you'd have a hard time arguing that those aren't good books, Janeway isn't still a big part of them, and she isn't seen as hugely important to her old crew.

If the problem is MOSTLY about the actual death, easy enough to ignore it and get to the aftermath. Seems that in a lot of these arguments, people pin it all on that book, but it's more a strawman for hating the fact that she actually died. The details and book involved aren't really essential to that argument.

The other reason why I want her back is because, for me, she was Voyager. She was the main reason I would watch the show, and I would look forward to seeing what she did in the books. Did/Do I have other characters that I like and watch and want to see what happens next? Of course (B'Elanna and Tom being two examples, as well as Counselor Cambridge and Seven and so on). But they didn't connect with me as much as Janeway had.

Not much i can argue with here, other than to suggest you keep reading and see if you latch onto new characters. Old characters in new dynamics may also be of interest. People will eventually find new things to like, or drop out. Quitting in a huff over the decision (not you, in general) is a poor way of handling it, especially those who rail against the series, claim to be huge Janeway fans, and refuse to read Full Circle...

 

[flemm]

So to talk about it as though it's on a par with actually losing a family member -- that's just pathetic. They haven't really lost anything. Except their sense of proportion.

Yeah, possibly, if the person actually believes that the two are equivalent. But using an analogy like that for illustrative purposes doesn't necessarily suggest exact equivalence, or that the person believes that she/he would experience the same level of pain at the loss of an actual family member.

I would give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that is likely true. In that case, it's just a form of hyperbole, a rhetorical device that many posters with widely divergent views on the subject have been known to use from time to time.

 

[Christopher]

The other reason why I want her back is because, for me, she was Voyager.

For you, for some, yes. Just as there were people who only watched TOS because of Spock or TNG because of, I dunno, Data or Worf. But it's not Pocket's job to cater to only one subset of fandom. Pocket has to serve the whole franchise, not just a single character's fans. Objectively, Janeway is not Voyager. Voyager, like its two predecessors, was created specifically to be an ensemble show. That's why it was named Star Trek: Voyager and not Star Trek: The Adventures of Captain Kate.

Most of the post-series novel lines have featured cast changes. Post-Nemesis TNG lacks Data, Riker, and Troi (and of course Wesley left long before). Post-series DS9 lacked Odo, O'Brien, Worf, and for a while, Sisko. Changing the composition of an ensemble, dropping canon characters and adding original characters, is an established storytelling choice in post-series fiction, a way of moving the story forward once you're no longer compelled to maintain a strict status quo. So the people who write and edit these books can't base all their decisions on any one single character.

I would give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that is likely true. In that case, it's just a form of hyperbole, a rhetorical device that many posters with widely divergent views on the subject have been known to use from time to time.

And if so, it's a very tasteless and inconsiderate hyperbole, because it trivializes the pain that people who actually have lost loved ones are going through. How dare they pretend that their unhappiness with a piece of entertainment even remotely approaches the grief endured by those of us who've lost family? If anything, that's even worse than if they were so sincerely deranged that they actually couldn't tell the difference betwen fantasy and reality. At least then they'd have an excuse.

 

[flemm]

And if so, it's a very tasteless and inconsiderate hyperbole, because it trivializes the pain that people who actually have lost loved ones are going through. How dare they pretend that their unhappiness with a piece of entertainment even remotely approaches the grief endured by those of us who've lost family? If anything, that's even worse than if they were so sincerely deranged that they actually couldn't tell the difference betwen fantasy and reality. At least then they'd have an excuse.

I think, as was the case with Sci earlier, that you are overreacting and flipping the outrage switch when it's not really necessary. I've certainly lost loved ones, as I'm sure many of us have, yet I do not feel that such an analogy belittles my grief in even the slightest way.

This is partly due to the knowledge that analogies do not imply an equivalence with regard to degree. But it's also because people searching for ways to express strong feelings will often find analogies and figures of speech that are imprecise or hyperbolic. It's very common, and we've all been guilty of it from time to time, so there's really no cause to be outraged or to infer that the posters in question are deranged.

EDIT: Obviously, if someone has experienced loss and is offended, it would be perfectly appropriate to ask that other posters refrain from such hyperbolic analogies. But even then, one could proceed on the assumption that the posters are not deranged or being intentionally insensitive.

 

[AuntKate]

The event was poorly executed, but the follow-through has been amazing. If you don't read that part, though, it's a pretty weak arguing position to tell people that the whole storyline sucks...

Well, sure, if someone argues that the whole storyline sucks without reading Beyer's novels, then I would agree that they aren't in a position to make that case. However, at least two of the BBJ posters commenting in this thread, and possibly others that I don't recall, have specifically stated that they have read Beyer's work and have even extolled those novels in certain respects. So they are not arguing from a position of ignorance regarding the aftermath of her death.

Chalk me up as one of those who've read the Voyager novels since Before Dishonor and enjoyed it.

However, I would say (and have said elsewhere) that the books aren't "Voyager" anymore, but have become much larger, in both scope, concept, and execution, which, for me at least, has helped not get stuck on the lack of Janeway.

And yet, I still want her back. Mostly because I found her death to have been atrociously written, in an atrocious book that wasn't even "part" of the Voyager relaunch. That's what's been stuck in my craw the whole time, and it probably won't change.

The other reason why I want her back is because, for me, she was Voyager. She was the main reason I would watch the show, and I would look forward to seeing what she did in the books. Did/Do I have other characters that I like and watch and want to see what happens next? Of course (B'Elanna and Tom being two examples, as well as Counselor Cambridge and Seven and so on). But they didn't connect with me as much as Janeway had.

Well said. To be a Voyager book, to have that title, implies that it is based on the crew of the series--especially the captain. Why not call this relaunch STelta Quadrant? Then the Voyager title can be used elsewhere for the original crew?

 

[Thrawn]

^ Because the vast majority of the original crew is still there.

DS9 was still called DS9 even with half the main cast and more of the supporting cast dead or missing. Why have a double standard?

Voyager's post-finale books actually have MORE of the Voyager regulars, percentage-wise, than either TNG or DS9.

 

[Scout101]

It IS "based" on that series. Based on that crew, that ship, that area of space even. It's just not a cookie-cutter continuation of that series without change.

Heck, if you want to have fun with that premise, Star Trek: Voyager is based on Star Trek, so how'd this upstart Janeway even get in here, where's Kirk?

Voyager books are based on the series and characters within, but have evolved to continue to tell the story past it's pre-defined endpoint (lost ship got home). To continue to move forward in time, they were going to have to change things no matter what...

 

[flemm]

DS9 was still called DS9 even with half the main cast and more of the supporting cast dead or missing.

I think it's probably a good idea to either have a critical mass or a few key characters.

With TNG, I doubt Picard is going to be eliminated anytime soon. Furthermore, of the main characters on the show, only Data is gone, and he was not eliminated by Trek Lit. The rest of the cast is either still on the ship or starring in another series.

With DS9, there has been a good balance of old and new. However, here again, most of the new has been determined by the events of the show (Odo and O'Brien leaving, Sisko with the Prophets, etc.) If forthcoming DS9 novels largely focus on Captain Ro and Co., I'm not sure I will necessarily be happy with that choice. That is because for me DS9 is not about a space station primarily, but a certain set of characters. Of course, the mix should not remain static, and characters should come and go, but, fundamentally, I want to read more about a specific set of characters. DS9 tie-ins starring Ensign Ro... not so much.

So, I do think that a balance should be struck, and, obviously, the more one cares about a particular character, the more one is likely to perceive the removal of such a character as a big deal.

To me, the early DS9-R struck a nearly perfect balance: reading these novels I truly felt that the series was being continued in a way that was at once novel and familiar. Then... something happened. I guess it was the departure of Marco Palmieri, at least in part.

I don't think it helps, by the way, that Janeway's death involved that rather half-ass final scene where she's "with the Q" or whatever, which blatantly feels like an "out" is being written into the story to allow for her return.

 

[captcalhoun]

i'd like to know how many of these militant Janeway fans have actually lost a close member of their family to be able to make an accurate comparison between the pain of such a loss and the alledged pain of losing Janeway.

if the answer to that is that they haven't or even if they have and think such a comparison is valid, then clearly in the words of W Shatner Esq, they need to seriously get a life.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

It might also be nice to know how many militant Janeway fans have made such a comparison, too.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Just to make a point... the idea that more than half of Sisko's fans would rather he have stayed "dead" (with the Prophets) is completely absurd, and completely baseless. I can only speak for myself, obviously, but despite his having been poorly used in Rough Beasts I am still happy he returned. Sometimes characters just don't go in the direction you want.

I can honestly say that I wanted Sisko to remain dead. I wasn't convinced by "What You Leave Behind" that Sisko wasn't dead, I thought the vision of him being "with the Prophets" was wish fulfillment on the Kasidy's part, and I was disappointed that Unity brought Sisko back from his death.

 

[elaithin]

See, it never occurred to me that Sisko WAS dead. In that vein, I eagerly await Dukat's return as well.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

i'd like to know how many of these militant Janeway fans have actually lost a close member of their family to be able to make an accurate comparison between the pain of such a loss and the alledged pain of losing Janeway.

if the answer to that is that they haven't or even if they have and think such a comparison is valid, then clearly in the words of W Shatner Esq, they need to seriously get a life.

You do know that only ONE person has said this right?

But I suppose it was so deliciously outrageous its a wonderfully colorful stick.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

To me, the early DS9-R struck a nearly perfect balance: reading these novels I truly felt that the series was being continued in a way that was at once novel and familiar. Then... something happened. I guess it was the departure of Marco Palmieri, at least in part.

I loved the early DS9-R so very much.. it truly was season 8 to me. Absolutely compelling. I remember reading Avatar and being just so thrilled at how accurately the characters were done.

I feel the blending of all the story lines and characters had gotten unwieldy in places and made the novels less solid. I loved a lot of Destiny but there was a lot of it that was just choppy and intrusive to the exciting story IMHO.

 

[{ Emilia }]

i'd like to know how many of these militant Janeway fans have actually lost a close member of their family to be able to make an accurate comparison between the pain of such a loss and the alledged pain of losing Janeway.

You do know that only ONE person has said this right?

But I suppose it was so deliciously outrageous its a wonderfully colorful stick.

What do the other militant Janeway fans think then, Teacake?
It does seem so be quite a touchy subject and we all know what the Voyager forum is like.

I think I tend to agree with Gov Kodos on this issue. Just loosen the canon. Instead of coming up with some lame Janeway resurrection just ignore the book in which she dies and write new stories as if nothing ever happened.

I know, I know... some people think canon is holy.

 

[HoneyBLilly]

I'm with DD on the people who have read the books after she died and enjoyed them. While I would like her back in the books I'm not going to kick and scream until I get my way. She's gone in the books. The books are canon in their own little world and not established canon, so in my eyes she's not really dead unless Spock Prime ever says something about that in the movies.

And even in the books I don't think she counts as dead since her spirit is with Lady Q.

But I have yet to read Children of the Storm since I have not been able to run to Barnes & Nobles lately. But it is on my list.

It does seem so be quite a touchy subject and we all know what the Voyager forum is like.

And what is the Voyager forum like Emilia?

 

[{ Emilia }]

I'm with DD on the people who have read the books after she died and enjoyed them. While I would like her back in the books I'm not going to kick and scream until I get my way. She's gone in the books. The books are canon in their own little world and not established canon, so in my eyes she's not really dead unless Spock Prime ever says something about that in the movies.

But do the books really have to be canon in their own little world? Like Kestrel pointed out there are already different continuities. I don't see a problem if some author just decides to ignore the book in which Janeway dies.
It's a big franchise so one author killing off a character has a big effect on other authors who might or might not agree with that decision.

Having said that I do think it's a good idea to kill off a character once in a while to progress a stale series of books if necessary.

I just don't see the definite need in having a strict canon in the book universe but I'm sure others disagree.