Finally read the paragraph reyconning in DSC. Did not think I would ever hear Data cite Joni Mitchell.
Spoilers Picard Autobiography by David Goodman - Discussion and Review Thread
- Thread starter AutoAdmin
- Start date
‘In the event of an emergency, I am equipped to put up a parking light. I can also put the arboreal samples we collected in a museum, but I believe that since we live in a post-scarcity society, I shall not be able to charge visitors a dollar and half, Sir.’
‘Very good Mister Data, Make it so...Number One, you shall drive the Big Yellow Taxi. Mister Worf, you shall ride in the back.’
‘Sir, I must protest, Hippies are without honour.’
‘Your concerns are noted, now tie these flowers in your hair...Number One set a course for San Francisco...’
...
Yeah. I got carried away.
Are you certain?
Mr. Goodman came up with a decent explanation of why Hobus had a subspace component. I did not care for the links to All Good Things, but at least Picard seemed mentally healthy at the end.
Hey Mr. Held -
Thanks for reading the book! I'm curious why you didn't like the references to All Good Things?
Mr. Goodman, I did not think it would be in the post Nemesis future, as in many works, showing you "your future" usually does not happen that way.
I suppose you needed to include events in the 2009 movie, and given that, Picard should have more options then to go to the family vinyArds.
I suppose you needed to include events in the 2009 movie, and given that, Picard should have more options then to go to the family vinyArds.
So I just finished this book. An excellent read, touching all the highlights of Picard's career. Found towards the end, from Data's resurrection onwards it is irreconcilable with the main novelverse continuity. Picard's resignation etc. while in keeping with All Good Things... is again not compatible with the TNG relaunch. I suppose that was by design, and we'll have to put that part in its own little parallel universe.
IMO bios are not part of current novel continuity.
Back to the matter of the Vedala for just a moment: I can't imagine how I could have forgotten their involvement in Forgotten History, given how central their technology turned out to be to the plot.
"IMO"? That's not opinion, that's fact. The bios are not part of the novel continuity, and I don't know why everyone keeps commenting on the book being different from the continuity.
Yes, indeed, that the "biographies" are out-of-continuity with the Novelverse (and in some places, only barely in continuity with canon) is an indisputable fact.
The only room for opinion is on whether or not it was such a good idea for Mr. Goodman to have made no attempt to avoid really obvious and irreconcilable contradictions with the novel continuity.
The only room for opinion is on whether or not it was such a good idea for Mr. Goodman to have made no attempt to avoid really obvious and irreconcilable contradictions with the novel continuity.
Why is that even an issue? The novel continuity has never been the only tie-in continuity out there. The comics and the games have always had their own distinct continuities, and even the novel continuity isn't shared by 100% of the novels. There is no single tie-in continuity that's ever been treated as a default that others should be expected to follow.
Why is the word biography in quotes there, hbquikcomjamesl
This and the Kirk book are both biographies of a fictional character
I can at least somewhat get your objection to the word autobiography for it since kayfabe is a horrible thing not worth a single ounce of respect, but it's indisputable that both works are biographies, given that they're both narrative presentations of a person's life
I guess this is the part where you authoritatively cite some dictionary entry that happens to say that a biography has to be of a real person and thus implicitly claim that it turns out a reference work that's meant to record usages of words in practice in order to aid for understanding and record the living history of a language and by the very nature of what language is can't possibly be a complete work of record nor can account for unexpected contexts is actually secretly really an authority on the only way people are allowed to use words in a language
Probably because for those who don't know, there is some expectation that the bios be so because of the relaunch novels maintaining continuity to a large extent. And when the expectation isn't met, out comes a comment. It isn't the worst crime in the world.
Thing is, this is David Goodman's third Star Trek book, and we have the same people complaining about the other two not being part of the novel continuity making the same complaints here. The author's previous books aren't in continuity with the novels, there's no reason why this one would be any different.
You're right. It should be "autobiography" in quotes. Since a fictional character can hardly write an autobiography (or anything else, for that matter).
If the book began with "Kirk took his pen and wrote" and the whole rest of the book would be in quoted, would that make it an autobiography or the Making Of of the autobiography?
I just skimmed through the thread and didn't see it mentioned, but can someone give me a hand? There's a printing error in my copy with a footnote from the James T. Kirk bio in the section at the very beginning about Picard's family history. I figure it's probably already been corrected in the eBook versions (or maybe not, since it's still in the Google Books online version), and there's a footnote on the next page that refers to whatever the note was supposed to be, so I'm a bit curious. It's on page 11, at the end of the paragraph that mistakenly puts WWIII in the 22nd century. It apparently has something to do with England, as opposed to a lack of historical documentation of Franklin Kirk buying a farm.
I downloaded this on Kindle ages ago, but just got around to reading it this weekend.
I really enjoyed it for the most part - I haven't read many of the Pocket books, and certainly not since the more connected ongoing post-Voyager continuity was established, so I didn't miss any of the post-Nemesis continuity.
I enjoyed the pre-TNG stuff a lot, especially Picard's childhood, his building of model ships and dreaming of the stars and his difficult relationship with Robert and Maurice. One of my favourite Trek novels was Reunion - so in some ways I missed those Stargazer characters, but this was a great alternative. Making Stargazer's first captain a lazy sack of shit who has no control over kids running around his junk starship worked well.
I found the repeated continuity name-drops a little tiresome as it went on - 90% of the crew of the teeny tiny Reliant end up being Admirals from TNG for example. I don't need every single character who Picard met to be someone from the show.
I didn't get the Spock wedding gag - was it supposed to be an in-joke that Picard didn't know who he married and never bothered to check? Presumably Goodman didn't want to pre-judge his own upcoming Spock book.
It naturally becomes less interesting once he becomes captain of the Enterprise, as we're just going over well-trodden ground. There were some nice observations though - I hadn't realised that Sisko rakes up Locutus right after Picard has been brutally tortured by Madred, but it completely lines up with the show. Ouch Benjamin.
It completely glosses over the Dominion War, which is a bit weird. That's an obvious untold area of Picard's life. Even a "Command kept us out of the fighting because they didn't want to risk losing the Enterprise" line would have done.
His retirement rang true, and I liked the way it lined up with the All Good Things timeline, with Picard alone in his vineyard. Quite the downbeat end to his great life.
I'll check out the Kirk book next.
I really enjoyed it for the most part - I haven't read many of the Pocket books, and certainly not since the more connected ongoing post-Voyager continuity was established, so I didn't miss any of the post-Nemesis continuity.
I enjoyed the pre-TNG stuff a lot, especially Picard's childhood, his building of model ships and dreaming of the stars and his difficult relationship with Robert and Maurice. One of my favourite Trek novels was Reunion - so in some ways I missed those Stargazer characters, but this was a great alternative. Making Stargazer's first captain a lazy sack of shit who has no control over kids running around his junk starship worked well.
I found the repeated continuity name-drops a little tiresome as it went on - 90% of the crew of the teeny tiny Reliant end up being Admirals from TNG for example. I don't need every single character who Picard met to be someone from the show.
I didn't get the Spock wedding gag - was it supposed to be an in-joke that Picard didn't know who he married and never bothered to check? Presumably Goodman didn't want to pre-judge his own upcoming Spock book.
It naturally becomes less interesting once he becomes captain of the Enterprise, as we're just going over well-trodden ground. There were some nice observations though - I hadn't realised that Sisko rakes up Locutus right after Picard has been brutally tortured by Madred, but it completely lines up with the show. Ouch Benjamin.
It completely glosses over the Dominion War, which is a bit weird. That's an obvious untold area of Picard's life. Even a "Command kept us out of the fighting because they didn't want to risk losing the Enterprise" line would have done.
His retirement rang true, and I liked the way it lined up with the All Good Things timeline, with Picard alone in his vineyard. Quite the downbeat end to his great life.
I'll check out the Kirk book next.
I still have no access to this book and the Google Books only went up to his graduation and planned assignment to the U.S.S. New Orleans.
What does it say about his time aboard Stargazer, particularly when it came to Jack Crusher?
What does it say about the time between 2355 and 2364?
What origin for the Borg does it say?
What happened between 2375 and 2379?
What does it say about his time aboard Stargazer, particularly when it came to Jack Crusher?
What does it say about the time between 2355 and 2364?
What origin for the Borg does it say?
What happened between 2375 and 2379?
A hell of a lot. Seriously, that's far too broad and vague a question to summarize as it covers a decent portion of the book.
Administrative duty.
The Queen was a scientist who took over her society with a cybernetic weapon.
The book doesn't say anything about this period at all.
Similar threads
- Poll
