I've read that when Richard Arnold took a dislike to Peter David, Arnold refused to approve one of David's stories for the DC TOS comic book series, on the grounds that it was too violent. Suspecting what the real reason was, David re-submitted the same story outline to Arnold, but used the false name of Robert Bruce Banner (!!!) and added even more violence to the tale, and lo and behold, Arnold approved it. Does anyone know which story this was exactly?
Peter David comic book story
- Thread starter Noddy
- Start date
^As I recall, it was (logically enough) PAD's last Trek comic, "Once a Hero," issue 19 of vol. 2.
Although it wasn't the same outline. It was a different story that PAD had written specifically to include the things Arnold had called out as needing to be changed in a previous story, as an experiment to see how he'd react to seeing the same type of content under a different name.
Although it wasn't the same outline. It was a different story that PAD had written specifically to include the things Arnold had called out as needing to be changed in a previous story, as an experiment to see how he'd react to seeing the same type of content under a different name.
I guess you mean TOS comic as he has written TNG and NF comics after that one.
Told in various chapters of the trade compilation of PAD's regular column, "But I Digress".
Yeah, It was during the DC-era of books, once the license was with other publishers David had no problem writing.
Those 'problems' Arnold had issue with were things like Kirk flirting with women or getting into a fist fight, things that obviously Kirk would never do.
If Arnold thought those kind of things weren't acceptable, it's a wonder he ever got the position at all.
The authors have a list of complaints about RA, but I've heard him speak at conventions many times and he was passionate that he was preserving "Gene's vision".
Yes, he often challenged the authors on references to Kirk being ordered on a diet by McCoy, and too much womanizing, fistfighting and breaking of the Prime Directive - because if that happened in every novel and every comic, it loses impact. After all, Kirk wasn't ordered on a diet by McCoy every episode/movie, nor did he womanize, fistfight or break the Prime Directive every episode/movie.
RA was employed by Roddenberry to represent Roddenberry's viewpoint on Trek. He got the position because he worked on a volunteer basis for GR for many, many years, and amazed everyone with his photographic memorie for Trek trivia.
Now, it's debatable whether RA went beyond his brief; he certainly trod on many toes. But he had a job that made him the envy of many fanboys.
Funny, every fanboy I've ever known has always hated his guts.
Those aren't mutually exclusive. "The envy of fanboys" doesn't mean they admired him, it means they wished they had his job. And envy often goes hand in hand with hatred.
Given Arnold's antipathy towards PAD and his abject hatred of anything that smacked of fun, I now wonder how DC ever got The Modala Imperative through approvals.
The strangest thing I ever read was an interview with Arnold for a German non Fiction book for Star Trek's 40th anniversary where he actually is complimentary about Peter David's writing.
(Still pretty much dizzes the novels as a whole and Margaret Wander Bonanno for Music of the Spheres/Probe specifically, though.)
The strangest thing I ever read was an interview with Arnold for a German non Fiction book for Star Trek's 40th anniversary where he actually is complimentary about Peter David's writing.
That's actually a constant thing going back to the early '90s. Even in the Tim Lynch interview from 1991, Arnold says nice things about PAD's writing. He also says some critical things, saying that he's a good writer but one ill-suited to Star Trek:
You misunderstand. Many of the people who hate him wished that they had his job. He wielded a lot of power over the licensed tie-ins from 1986 to September 1991..
Ah, I jumped to soon.
Exactly. Thanks!
Again, I never met anyone that wanted Arnold's job. Most of the people I knew at the time, myself included, believed that his job as "Mr. No-You-Can't-Do-That-In-Star Trek" should never have existed in the first place.
That's the perception created by how he did his job. I'm talking about what the job was in the first place, how it would've been seen before his approach tainted perceptions of it.
I mean, seriously, given how picky so many fans are about how they think Trek continuity should work, I find it impossible to believe that there aren't plenty of Trek fans out there who would've jumped at the chance to get paid to oversee all the tie-ins and ensure their consistency.
Had the post essentially been recognized as simply a "cross-platform script editor" of sorts, sure. But that was not how most fans perceived it. Arnold was the seemingly self-professed "Voice of Gene," who told us we couldn't have nice things.
Explaining what his job was meant to be doesn't negate what I've said. My personal experience of the time was that none of the other Trekkies or Trekkers I knew wanted his job. Some might have been envious of his apparent closeness with Gene, but even they, and many more besides, were increasingly suspect of that supposed closeness, especially as Gene's illness wore on and the desires and wishes Arnold relayed got more and more ludicrous.
The perception I encountered of him was "He's a tool, his job is a crock, and he's intentionally 'miscommunicating' things back and forth between Gene and the licensees and fans."
^But if people thought he was doing his job wrong, doesn't it logically follow that some of them would've wished they had his job instead so they could do it right? I mean, isn't that always the implied corollary when a person criticizes another person's job? Namely, "I could do that job so much better?"