I said nothing about the editor leaving. I merely used a personal name in one sentence and a job title in another. Give Allyn the credit for his perceptiveness.
Not that it isn't their right, but how far we've come from the editors actively participating online (startrekbooks.com, psiphi, here) to now wishing to remain anonymous.
Yeah...taken at first glance, that's not a good sign. What, is being editorially associated with Trek nowadays like the touch of death to one's career or something? Is anyone at liberty to state why the current Trek lit editor wishes to remain anonymous?
I don't read the Trek magazine regularly. Only one I ever purchased was the one with the Aventine in it, and I loaned it out some time ago. No disrespect intended to the Star Trek Magazine, but reading through the issue with the Aventine design history as well as leafing through the occasional issue from time to time at Borders while waiting, I'm just not seeing stuff in there that I can't basically find right here in Trek Lit or Memory Alpha or Beta. Certainly not enough to justify spending $ on topics that get thoroughly hashed out here on the BBS. Back to the editorial topic at hand, are looking at the return of Margaret and/or Marco?
I can only guess, but I don't think there's any need to read anything ominous into it. I think it's just a matter of individual preference. If anything, the openness of past editors was more an exception than a rule. In decades past, the early Trek novel editors rarely got any publicity except for the occasional mention in acknowledgments. Heck, it wasn't until decades later that I learned who some of the early editors were. I'm sure there are plenty of editors who prefer to keep a low profile and let all the attention fall on the authors and the books themselves. I figure Marco and Margaret were so open with the audience because they came from DC Comics, and editors corresponding with the readers in the letter columns is a longtime tradition in comics. Editors who've spent their entire career in the book world may simply have a different approach.
There's also, perhaps, the factor that as the editorial staff has been cut down, so their individual workloads have multiplied, meaning they probably can no longer have time to spare on here...
^Good point. It's important to remember that none of Pocket's Trek editors have ever been exclusively Trek editors. They've had broader responsibilities that have included Trek. And if those responsibilities have multiplied, as you say, it makes sense to focus more on doing the actual work and not get involved with publicity.
And to be honest, in my opinion it's better for a writer who has written one of the books (in question) to comment on his or her novel and hype it up rather than someone who may only have a passing knowledge of what was done and why and who is probably as ill informed as us fans who like to speculate what is going on and why.
First of all Corran your reply is a wonderful reminder to me why I need to read things at least twice before having a reaction and three times before responding. I had missed the "t" at the end of "Not" and the "it" and was prepared to stridently disagree with "No that isn't their right,". *L* Having said that I personally have to say that I really don't care whether an editor or author pals around in places like this or not. I mean don't get me wrong I love it when they do. But the bottom line is I want the work to be good. If the work is good I will buy it, and if I buy it, and others buy it, then it is to be hoped that the people doing the good work will be able to keep on doing that work. I do not wish to be unduly harsh but the regard in which the last batch of editors was held by many of us, and their openess in public forums did nothing to spare them the axe. At the end of the day whether it's right or wrong the higher ups care mostly if not only about the bottom line it seems, and all the good feelings in the galaxy is unlikely to change that.
Of course there is. Books don't edit themselves. I don't see how it's any more jinxed than any other editorial position at Simon & Schuster. We're living through the Great Recession, the worst economic crisis in 70 years. Is it really all that surprising that we might lose a few book editors in it? Nor did Costas leave because of "family commitments," which implies it was somehow obligatory. She had a child and chose to resign to become a full-time parent. It was a choice, not an obligation. As for the current editor, this has not been publicly confirmed. As the authors have noted, he apparently prefers to remain anonymous. However, if we look at S&S's website for one of their imprints, Gallery Books, there's a list of their editorial team. http://imprints.simonandschuster.biz/gallery That list gives the authors for each editor. And one of the authors listed is CBS Consumer Products. CBS, of course, owns Star Trek, and is therefore the group that must authorize any Star Trek novels published. The editor whose authors include CBS Consumer Products is Ed Schlesinger, who is listed as doing media tie-in. Schlesinger, by the way, was one of the editors on the A Time to... miniseries about seven years ago, so he's not completely new to TrekLit, either.
And I'm sure talking to some one in the flesh like that would go down really well. I am fully aware of what is going on economically in the world, I am fully aware that it started in America and due to you over extending your means this had a knock on effect across the pond. You got a cold, we sneezed and we've been sneezing harder and harder for three fucking years. How else would you describe a family commitment then Sci? If you and your significant other had a child and either of you decided to leave work for a bit, how would you describe it? Jamie had a baby and then thus decided to stay at home and raise it, ergo family commitments. As for calling it jinxed, I said it was seemingly jinxed, trying to add some light heartedness into it. From the casual observer knowing that three editors have been "used up" in three years does seem worrying regardless of the "Great Recession" (You Americans and your egos!!!) as the number of threads and people who come on here saying the same thing. Regardless of what you say, for me and it seems a fair few others, Trek Lit seems to be in a bit of a mess. What I've read of the Typhon Pact is mediocre (Zero Sum Game) at best and utter shite at worst (Seize the Fire) which has put me off the remainder of the series, I may pick up Indistinguishable From Magic as it seems fun, where as DTI although written by someone else would be brilliant, it just feels me with dread. Oh and I was never ever under the impression that some editorial control wasn't being implemented, I guess I should have used a smiley as sarcasm doesn't come across too well on the net and you certainly didn't take it that way.
Then you surely see why it is unreasonable to say that the TrekLit editor position is somehow "jinxed." I'm perfectly happy to condemn the irresponsible financial behavior of many in the United States, too. There's no need to turn this into an "Us vs. Them" thing. As a choice. A "family commitment" implies something like a family member facing death or something. Plenty of people choose to have children and keep working, and plenty don't. There's nothing wrong with either choice, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a choice, not an obligation. ? S&S is an American company. It was hurt by the American economy and laid off American employees. Is it really so nationalistic to use the commonly-accepted term to describe the problem affecting the American economy?
And there you go again missing the supposedly jinxed out yet again. No intention of starting an us vs them "thing." In 2007/08 when the American economy was really starting to take a beating several economists over here said that "when America gets a cold, Europe will sneeze" in relation to the cluster fuck on the horizon. A good proportion of the blame can be leveled at Europe as well, but it started in America and spread. You seem to be working on the false assertion that I think it is wrong for her to stop working and look after her child. Personally I don't think it is neither a good nor bad thing, it is in my opinion, a commitment, she decided to leave work because of it. I was referring to the use of "Great Recession" that was the first time I've heard of the financial crisis called that and it came across as very egotistical and ultimately silly.
Would you two cut it out already? Can't we be 'Trekkies' here, and not bloody Poms or Yanks? On the actual subject matter, I am glad that 'Indistinguishable from Magic' will carry on from Typhon Pact, at least chronologically. I'll be glad when TrekLit is rid of the 'Star Trek Online' stupidity and back to normal. Thankfully, Trek games have a history of early deaths, so heres hoping.
I think no such thing and never meant to imply it. It's simply that the phrase "family commitments" makes it seem like it was obligatory rather than a choice, that's all. There's absolutely nothing wrong with anyone choosing to leave a job to care for children; I just think that we shouldn't assume such things are obligatory unless we've been told there are other extenuating circumstances. So far as we've been told, she went on parental leave and then decided not to return. I'm not sure why you would call it "egotistical." It's the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression started in 1929; the phrase is used to evoke how historically serious the crisis is while also recognizing that it isn't as big of a crisis as the Great Depression was. It really has nothing to do with ego, it has to do with the historic size of the crisis.
I don't understand what you mean. There's been only one Star Trek: Online tie-in novel to date, and it's completely separate from the main novel continuity. Most of the novel continuity, from the DS9 Relaunch through Destiny and Typhon Pact, is incompatible with the ST:O timeline.