New to trek literature please help - where to begin

[Christopher]

I'm not resistant at all. No question Vonda McIntyre originated a lot of Trek lore, including the idea that George Kirk was a Starfleet officer.

And that he was named George Kirk in the first place. Don't forget that she deserves credit for naming both George and Winona.

But the idea of him being first officer of a starship began with Carey - and the earliest versions of the Star Trek story supposedly began with Robert April and George Kirk on the Enterprise - an idea right out of Final Frontier.

Which built on what McIntyre had previously established. What I object to is that you only mention Carey and thus give the misleading impression that she created the characters. It's not about one versus the other, it's about only mentioning one when you should mention both.

 

[Spocky8492]

I read a couple of old Star Trek novel a long time ago but when I started again, after a long pause, l started from the post Nemesis novels and the voyager relaunch. I didn't try the DS9 relaunch but I will. I think all the relaunch are good point to start. They allow us to continue the adventure of our favorite TV show or our favorite characters. And I Iike the continuity they maintain.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'm not resistant at all. No question Vonda McIntyre originated a lot of Trek lore, including the idea that George Kirk was a Starfleet officer.

And that he was named George Kirk in the first place. Don't forget that she deserves credit for naming both George and Winona.

But the idea of him being first officer of a starship began with Carey - and the earliest versions of the Star Trek story supposedly began with Robert April and George Kirk on the Enterprise - an idea right out of Final Frontier.

Which built on what McIntyre had previously established. What I object to is that you only mention Carey and thus give the misleading impression that she created the characters. It's not about one versus the other, it's about only mentioning one when you should mention both.

Fair enough.

 

[JD]

^I don't think any of those are in print anymore though, so if you want them you'd probably have to find them used online or at a used book store.

I believe a number of those older books have been released as ebooks, not to mention that used bookstores tend to have quite a few copies of the books from the pre-1990's era than books from 1990 onwards.

The older Pocket books is, but as far as I know the Ballantine stuff hasn't been in print for several decades, and never in e-form.

 

[tomswift2002]

^I don't think any of those are in print anymore though, so if you want them you'd probably have to find them used online or at a used book store.

I believe a number of those older books have been released as ebooks, not to mention that used bookstores tend to have quite a few copies of the books from the pre-1990's era than books from 1990 onwards.

The older Pocket books is, but as far as I know the Ballantine stuff hasn't been in print for several decades, and never in e-form.

http://www.amazon.com/Star-Trek-Log...&qid=1363521658&sr=8-1&keywords=Star+Trek+log

The Ballantine Logs seem to have been back in print as recently as September 2006. The Bantam books were last released in the late 90's.

 

[JD]

Oh yeah, I do remember hearing about the Logs going back into print.

 

[zarkon]

Log wise I'd especially recommend 7 & 8. ADF did a brilliant job with his expansion of "The Eye of the Beholder". The new material is one of my favourite trek stories.

 

[Garrovick]

Log wise I'd especially recommend 7 & 8. ADF did a brilliant job with his expansion of "The Eye of the Beholder". The new material is one of my favourite trek stories.

I'd also recommend Log 10, which adapts "The Slaver Weapon" and adds quite a bit of new material to create a full novel-length story. The events of the TAS episode probably only comprise a quarter or so of the novel. Most of the weaknesses of the original episode are still present in the book, but the new material more than makes up for it. It was one of the first two Treklit books I ever owned (the other being Mudd's Angels, both given to me in 1978), and it's still one of my personal favorites.

 

[Christopher]

^What do you perceive as weaknesses in "The Slaver Weapon"?

 

[Garrovick]

Well, perhaps "weaknesses" isn't the best word to use, but what I was referring to were mainly the depictions of the Kzinti and the inconsistent "fit" of them into the larger ST universe - the line in the episode about the Kzinti having fought four wars with humanity and having lost them all, their lack of appearances in other ST canon, and such. I know, of course, that the Kzinti were a carryover from the "Known Space" universe, and they don't really neatly fit into the larger ST canon. It seems to me that their purpose in the story could have been served equally well by an Orion pirate crew, or something similar. I know the issue of the Kzinti and their fit into ST in general has been extensively discussed elsewhere, and there are varied opinions on the subject, but that's what I feel about it. Again, perhaps I could have used a different word to describe it but that's what I was referring to.

The novelization does do a good job of explaining what Spock, Sulu, and Uhura were doing in a shuttlecraft with a Slaver stasis box on board in the first place, and where the Enterprise was during all this. I've also always enjoyed the events taking place at the Gruyakin archaeological dig site, as well as the subplot involving Lieutenant M'Ress and other Caitian crew members. I also liked Lieutenant Vedama's "guest" role as the temporary science officer while Spock was off the ship.

 

[Christopher]

Well, perhaps "weaknesses" isn't the best word to use, but what I was referring to were mainly the depictions of the Kzinti and the inconsistent "fit" of them into the larger ST universe - the line in the episode about the Kzinti having fought four wars with humanity and having lost them all, their lack of appearances in other ST canon, and such. I know, of course, that the Kzinti were a carryover from the "Known Space" universe, and they don't really neatly fit into the larger ST canon. It seems to me that their purpose in the story could have been served equally well by an Orion pirate crew, or something similar. I know the issue of the Kzinti and their fit into ST in general has been extensively discussed elsewhere, and there are varied opinions on the subject, but that's what I feel about it. Again, perhaps I could have used a different word to describe it but that's what I was referring to.

I see what you mean. The thing is, though, that at the time the episode and its novelization were made, Trek chronology hadn't been firmly defined yet, so those aspects only became problematical later on, once TNG and its successors locked in the chronology and filled in the history. So it's only a weakness in retrospect.

Personally what surprised me is that Foster didn't attempt to reintroduce any of the details from "The Soft Weapon" that Niven had left out of the episode, or at least make a nod toward Niven here and there. He pretty much took his own independent approach to fleshing things out, as if it were any other episode. Of course, I don't know if Foster had even read "The Soft Weapon," but it seems like a reasonable possibility, given that he and Niven were contemporaries in the SF literary community.