Might not be the Typhon Pact. Could be another political union or federation of some sort...
Or the Picard-Crusher baby taking its first steps.
New Frontier?
- Thread starter Dsven43
- Start date
Or the Picard-Crusher baby taking its first steps.
Might not be the Typhon Pact. Could be another political union or federation of some sort...
Or the Picard-Crusher baby taking its first steps.
Star Trek : The Tumble - hmmm
I don't think a "reset button" ever meant that those major events now didn't even happen. It just means that whatever status quo change occurred got unchanged back to how it was originally.
So say Data is made the Chief Veterinary Officer of the Enterprise in an episode of TNG. The reset button would be him getting fired for accidentally killing one of Spot's kittens and made 2nd Officer again. It doesn't mean that history was erased and his time as CVO never happened. It just means that the old status quo is restored.
Might not be the Typhon Pact. Could be another political union or federation of some sort...
Or the Picard-Crusher baby taking its first steps.
TNG from the point of view of all the children.
I asked PAD about this twice in the last 2 years on FB. Each time he said that he's approached Pocketbooks, but has not heard back. In fact his last response indicated people at Pocketbooks have said they've been in discussions with PAD about NF, but he said that that is not correct. 
I'd much much rather have had one final blowout and wrap it all up. Oh well maybe someday.
sorry double post
;Relayer1 said:
Hello everyone.
I agree with you.
And It's too bad that he didn't get the chance to write an apropriate end for the Frontier books.
I hope he will recover.
Last edited:
What continuity errors did Indistinguishable from Magic have?
And even if there isn't another NF novel, I would like somebody somewhere to give us an explantion of the whole Nechayev thing. PLEASE!!!!
Also, I'm in the process of going back and getting all the earlier NF novels. I was wondering about some of the books that are part of other series, such as Gateways, Double Helix, Captain's Table etc. Do the non-NF books in those series fit in continuity-wise with the current Relaunch era novels, or are there a lot of continuity mistakes? Just curious.
Last edited:
David Mack details the continuity issues with IFM and the rest of the novelverse HERE. And HERE is the rest of the thread about it. The vast majority of posters here believed the story could fit into the novelverse just fine. Pocket Books' editor apparently felt differently and instructed that it be ignored.
As for continuity with older novels, I think they're part of the universe in broad strokes, although some details may no longer fit. I haven't yet read the Pike entry in The Captain's Table, but I suspect it's depiction of Number One may not jibe with the Morgan Primus of NF.
Especially since Plagues of Night/Raise the Dawn made several direct references to it (and not only tried to acknowledge Geordi's rank issue but resolved the "Proconsul Tomalak" issue rather nicely). I certainly consider it part of my continuity, even if I have to squint to do it.
So I've read the other thread, and pretty much the only continuity problem I can see that can't (or hasn't already) been explained away is the Ogawa thing. Considering IfM takes place in 2383 and the last published Titan book takes place in 2382, couldn't they just say in a future book that Ogawa left Titan for awhile, then went back after the Challenger was destroyed?
The Nog thing has been referenced in a subsequent novel, Geordi being on the Challenger has been referenced in a subsequent novel, the Sela characterization apparently was explained away. The Leah Brahms thing? Didn't Christopher say there is 14 months or something inbetween, maybe they broke up and Harstad came back to the Enterprise?
I don't know, just seems stupid to throw out a book from the canon, when all you have to do is drop a few creative continuity fixes.
Also, isn't it never actually confirmed that Morgan Primus is Number One from Pike's Enterprise? So that really would dismiss any differences in the books.
The Nog thing has been referenced in a subsequent novel, Geordi being on the Challenger has been referenced in a subsequent novel, the Sela characterization apparently was explained away. The Leah Brahms thing? Didn't Christopher say there is 14 months or something inbetween, maybe they broke up and Harstad came back to the Enterprise?
I don't know, just seems stupid to throw out a book from the canon, when all you have to do is drop a few creative continuity fixes.
Also, isn't it never actually confirmed that Morgan Primus is Number One from Pike's Enterprise? So that really would dismiss any differences in the books.
Well Morgan doesn't really jibe with the humorless, canonical Number One of "The Cage" anyway. Morgan's personality is more Lwaxana Troi, and celebrates her emotional outbursts about her love for her daughter.
It's never been confirmed. When pressed, PAD used to say that Morgan Primus was the New Frontier role that would have been played by Majel Barrett.
In the IDW comic mini-series, we saw Morgan's holographic appearance - and she was a dead ringer for Number One of "The Cage", right down to the collar on her uniform top.
There was a bit on an in-print/online altercation between Jerry Oltion and PAD regarding Oltion calling Number One "Lefler" in his Pike novel. Oltion claimed that PAD had told him the characters were one and the same - and PAD disagreed that he ever said it. Oltion namedropping her surname didn't really work, unless the decades-future Mr Lefler, Robin's Dad, took one of his wife's old names when they were married.
I'm not sure what happened with IFM and why we have no more NF. I do think, in reading the IFM thread that was linked to, I think it was either editorial oversight (at various stages) to allow some of those continuity issues to occur at all. As Lonemagpie noted, there were several check-ins with editorial through the writing process of IFM. I think it is pretty unprofessional of the editors to just ignore David for 2 years as opposed to tell him they plan to no longer have him write ST. I don't have an issue with editors changing their minds about what is or isn't continuity or even choosing to no loger use a writer. Hoever, they should be professional and let the writer know in both scenarios.
Also, this unprofessional editorial administration apparently has indicated they have been in talks with PAD about NF, but for the last 2 years I have connected with PAD on FB and in both cases he said he has made overtures to the ST editorial that have not been responded to. Pretty unprofessional on the current editorial's part. If you don't want to continue NF with PAD or what want to mothball it, why not tell PAD? Even if you don`t know what you want to do with NF, why not tell PAD you`re thinking about what do with the franchise and that you`ll eventually tell him. Editorial can choose to do anything with NF or not, but not returning a call(s) or e-mail(s) from creators is unprofessional.
I recently had lunch with a former ST prose editor. They did not reference the current regime or anything related to current Trek lit. However, when I was listening to their literary career path, what was interesting was that in the ``old days`` many of the editors were ST fans who also happened to be editors as a profession. I believe the current regime are editors who may or may not be fans or even well versed in ST lore or lit. I guess I don`t expect the current editors to be ST fans I guess, but I do expect them to at least know what they have approved under their watch and the major story and character beats going forward in their shared TNG ST universe.
That said, I get that errors can happen in a shared-universe among different creators, and they did happen before the current editorial regime. However, editorial not the writers need to take ownership of any significant missteps. Certaily I won`t worry about the usual small mistakes, but big ones like those in IFM are solely at the feet of editorial.
I don`t think we`ll get more NF by PAD under this administration nor, sadly, do I think we`ll see more from Lonemagpie under them. However, it isn`t because the writers aren`t willing.
That doesn`t mean that there aren`t great books coming out under the current editorial regime, it just means that they could be more professional generally and could do a better job in one much-beloved corner of ST prose (NF) and in potential line (IFM).
I had taken a pass on IFM when it came out not because the back cover blurb wasn`t intriguing, but because I was still getting caught up on my pre-Destiny DS9 and NF. Now that I am caught up with NF and have started Fearful Symmetry (with only Soul Key left to go before the Destiny Trilogy), I may just pick up IFM and plug it into my post-Destiny reading.
I have other thoughts on the state of editorial which I may get around to if I can dig up the thread that was created a while back on that subject. I just thought I`d share some IFM and NF thoughts.
Also, this unprofessional editorial administration apparently has indicated they have been in talks with PAD about NF, but for the last 2 years I have connected with PAD on FB and in both cases he said he has made overtures to the ST editorial that have not been responded to. Pretty unprofessional on the current editorial's part. If you don't want to continue NF with PAD or what want to mothball it, why not tell PAD? Even if you don`t know what you want to do with NF, why not tell PAD you`re thinking about what do with the franchise and that you`ll eventually tell him. Editorial can choose to do anything with NF or not, but not returning a call(s) or e-mail(s) from creators is unprofessional.
I recently had lunch with a former ST prose editor. They did not reference the current regime or anything related to current Trek lit. However, when I was listening to their literary career path, what was interesting was that in the ``old days`` many of the editors were ST fans who also happened to be editors as a profession. I believe the current regime are editors who may or may not be fans or even well versed in ST lore or lit. I guess I don`t expect the current editors to be ST fans I guess, but I do expect them to at least know what they have approved under their watch and the major story and character beats going forward in their shared TNG ST universe.
That said, I get that errors can happen in a shared-universe among different creators, and they did happen before the current editorial regime. However, editorial not the writers need to take ownership of any significant missteps. Certaily I won`t worry about the usual small mistakes, but big ones like those in IFM are solely at the feet of editorial.
I don`t think we`ll get more NF by PAD under this administration nor, sadly, do I think we`ll see more from Lonemagpie under them. However, it isn`t because the writers aren`t willing.
That doesn`t mean that there aren`t great books coming out under the current editorial regime, it just means that they could be more professional generally and could do a better job in one much-beloved corner of ST prose (NF) and in potential line (IFM).
I had taken a pass on IFM when it came out not because the back cover blurb wasn`t intriguing, but because I was still getting caught up on my pre-Destiny DS9 and NF. Now that I am caught up with NF and have started Fearful Symmetry (with only Soul Key left to go before the Destiny Trilogy), I may just pick up IFM and plug it into my post-Destiny reading.
I have other thoughts on the state of editorial which I may get around to if I can dig up the thread that was created a while back on that subject. I just thought I`d share some IFM and NF thoughts.
You seem to be jumping to a lot of conclusions there. While I do agree they might have treated PAD, and Lonemagpie in a crappy manner, I don't think I'd go so far as to accuse them of not being Trek fans or not knowing TrekLit. I believe the people in charge now have been working on Trek since before Marco and Margaret left, so they probably know their stuff. I also find it hard to believe someone who wasn't a Trek fan would have any interest in working on the Trek books.
You don't need to be a ST fan to be a ST prose editor, but it certainly should dividends in the mid-late 1990s when that was the case. In terms of IFM, clearly the editors weren't on top of their own lit nor the plan / character and plot beats going forward. And in terms of PAD and Lonemagpie, they clearly lack business ethics. That said, there have been some great books that came out under this "new" regime lead in IMHO by DTI.
I just don't understand how IFM is supposed to be outright ignored, especially considering how many references Plagues of Night makes of it, including Geordi rationalizing to Spock why he surrendered his rank of Captain and Spock acknowledging Scotty's death
I know David Mack was told to write his Cold Equations trilogy with a clean slate but, by doing so, that undoes any explanation DRGIII attempted to make in Plagues of Night/Raise the Dawn regarding IFM.
So now we have to look at Plagues of Night and Raise the Dawn as two novels who have a gigantic role in the current novel continuity...but also contain a few continuity errors that are now just flat out inconsistent with LaForge's characterization in the Cold Equations trilogy.
I know some author's don't understand why some fans care so much about continuity in the novel-verse...but I think it's a big deal. I guess I just don't understand how such an error could have been made. It's incredibly frustrating but I guess we'll just have to ignore not only IFM but DRGIII's explanation as to what happened in Plagues of Night and Raise the Dawn.
Ugh.
I know David Mack was told to write his Cold Equations trilogy with a clean slate but, by doing so, that undoes any explanation DRGIII attempted to make in Plagues of Night/Raise the Dawn regarding IFM.
So now we have to look at Plagues of Night and Raise the Dawn as two novels who have a gigantic role in the current novel continuity...but also contain a few continuity errors that are now just flat out inconsistent with LaForge's characterization in the Cold Equations trilogy.
I know some author's don't understand why some fans care so much about continuity in the novel-verse...but I think it's a big deal. I guess I just don't understand how such an error could have been made. It's incredibly frustrating but I guess we'll just have to ignore not only IFM but DRGIII's explanation as to what happened in Plagues of Night and Raise the Dawn.
Ugh.
I'm not gonna deny that things surrounding IFM aren't a little screwed up, but I don't know if we really know enough about exactly what was going on at Pocket at the time to start saying things like that is all.
Keep in mind you're only hearing PAD's version. The current Pocket/Gallery editor, Ed S., was Peter David's editor on numerous Star Trek and non Star Trek projects - for many years, even when other editors were working on most of the other ST titles. It seems likely the two men have had some kind of falling out and do not wish to discuss the details in public.
How is Ed being "unprofessional"? It's not unusual for publishers to take a long time between communications. Admittedly, PAD and Ed know each other well but, as I said, neither of them want to air their differences.
No one seems to care that David R George III's best-selling "Crucible" trilogy went off on its own tangent.
Have you considered that some ST novels might be written for fans who do not like inter-novel continuity?
