Poll: Bring Janeway back?

[Vestboy]

Believe me or not but it is actually possible to come up with unpredictable, exciting and thrilling stories without killing off a main character.

I've read some books which were impossible to stop reading before finishing them (hello there Greg Cox!) and believe it or not, none of the main characters were killed off even if it was close for some of them.

But, in the course of reading those works, did you believe that any of those main characters could die? Was there enough of a sense of danger, of risk, that you could fear for the safety of those characters? And wasn't that part of what made it impossible to finish?

That's part of what he's talking about. Trek fiction before did have a sense of toothlessness because you knew-- knew-- while you were reading it that everyone was safe as houses. So they would be fun adventures, but no sense of danger.

Now, reading them... I don't have that safety net. I read Full Circle on edge about B'Elanna and Miral because... I really didn't know if they might make it or not. And that's part of what makes the books coming out now more interesting.

 

[Trek]

I'm not sure that's a particularly relevant point here, though. Who other than fans are likely to buy tie in novels?

Um, me?

I was not a Star Trek fan in 1979. The pre-publicity for ST:TMP made me so hungry for information about it, I saw the novelization in a rack next to the cashier at my local supermarket and I pounced on it. I started reading it on the way home and was off to the cinema - by myself! - to see the movie multiple times over the next few weeks.

The exception does not prove the rule. I seriously doubt there are large numbers of people who aren't already fans reading these books. Of course, if anyone has numbers proving it one way or the other, I'll be happy to be stand corrected.

I'm not a Voyager fan, but I am intrigued enough by Full Circle to read it.

But then I wasn't even talking about me.

There are thousands of people around the world who read Trek books who never post on forums or even discuss them with anyone else and these are the people I was calling readers. These are the silent majority who just enjoy the fiction and if they like what they see they'll read more, if they don't they won't. However because they are a silent majority the only measure we have is how many books are sold (of which we also have an incomplete picture).

Fans (i.e. those who take an active part) are but a small, yet vocal minority who are for the most part ignored when it comes to business decisions.

 

[aelius]

Therin, that music video sounds like it would be good. Where can I find it?
Thanks.

 

[Trent Roman]

Doesn't take much to give you a sense of danger, then. A stunt death is, by definition, something notable because it differs from the norm, something not apt to be repeated anytime soon, otherwise it loses what made it remarkable and the whole thing is run into the ground trying to out-stunt itself. My sense of 'danger' hasn't been affected by Before Dishonor; or, if it has, only fractionally so. Which is of no relevance to me in the first place because I watched the show and read the books for years without some artificially-induced sense of peril to substitute for suspense, and enjoyed them just fine, which is more than I can say about the obverse.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Lynx]

Believe me or not but it is actually possible to come up with unpredictable, exciting and thrilling stories without killing off a main character.

I've read some books which were impossible to stop reading before finishing them (hello there Greg Cox!) and believe it or not, none of the main characters were killed off even if it was close for some of them.

But, in the course of reading those works, did you believe that any of those main characters could die? Was there enough of a sense of danger, of risk, that you could fear for the safety of those characters? And wasn't that part of what made it impossible to finish?

That's part of what he's talking about. Trek fiction before did have a sense of toothlessness because you knew-- knew-- while you were reading it that everyone was safe as houses. So they would be fun adventures, but no sense of danger.

Now, reading them... I don't have that safety net. I read Full Circle on edge about B'Elanna and Miral because... I really didn't know if they might make it or not. And that's part of what makes the books coming out now more interesting.

I knew that none of the main characters would die since the TV series was still in production when I read those books. But I still felt that incredible excitement which made it impossible for me to stop reading until I'd finished the book.

When I had finished those books, it was like "wow, what an incredible good book".

If one of my favorites had been killed off, it would have been like "why did I buy that one", I would have been annoyed and sad and someone on Ebay would have got an offer that he or she couldn't refuse.

 

[ClayinCA]

if you don't take us seriously then we win because there are far more than twenty-five, and if you take us seriously and actually go out there and look you will find we were right in the first place. I win either way.

Enjoy your victory. (What did you win again?)

It was early in the morning when I wrote it. Obviously I wasn't awake.

As you're a Janeway fan, may I suggest some coffee?

On the one hand, I agree. You see, I'm an Enterprise fan, I was on this board when it was airing and it wasn't pretty. I had people tell me I wasn't a real Star Trek fan because I liked Enterprise and there was a disturbing amount of hatred being poured on the show. So I can sympathise with the Voyager fans.

See, now this kind of thing just amazes me. As I've said elsewhere, I didn't particularly like Voyager (I thought the concept was good but that it had seriously execution problems and was plagued by bad writing, especially in its later years), and I was let down by a lot of Enterprise, though I did see some episodes that I enjoyed. But I cannot imagine telling anyone that because they liked one of the shows that I didn't like, then they're not a "real" Star Trek fan. I mean, that's just silly.

 

[Therin of Andor]

The exception does not prove the rule. I seriously doubt there are large numbers of people who aren't already fans reading these books. Of course, if anyone has numbers proving it one way or the other, I'll be happy to be stand corrected.

I wasn't saying I was the exception that proved the rule. Clearly, I became a Star Trek fan because I was influenced by publicity buzz to pick up my first Star Trek novel. There aren't people out there who buy and read every ST novel yet claim to have no interest in Star Trek.

After the first enjoyable novel experience, anyone who takes up the second or third book is on their way to becoming a fan of the show, whether they came to it via action figures, comics, books, publicity spin, collecting soundtrack CDs, an inherited collection of merchandise from a dead relative, etc.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Therin, that music video sounds like it would be good. Where can I find it?
Thanks.

I'm talking about the montage video that is part of the episode, "What you Leave Behind". Bashir and O'Brien mention earlier that one of the tiny Alamo soldiers is missing. Much later in the episode, you see O'Brien's hand pick up the soldier off the floor and, with Vic's "The Way You Look Tonight" music playing in the background, we get a montage of moving images - clips from many episodes - following all the main characters through their last seven years. (Or, one year for Ezri, since they couldn't use Jadzia clips due to some legal problems when they used Terri Farrell's voice without permission earlier in the season.)

It's in the episode.

Believe me or not but it is actually possible to come up with unpredictable, exciting and thrilling stories without killing off a main character.

Of course it is Lynx, and there have been hundreds already that do exactly that! But I don't always want to have my heroes proven to be invulnerable, and that's exactly what we get if there's an official mandate no character is ever allowed to die, or even have a life-changing experience, in the novels.

 

[Count Zero]

On the one hand, I agree. You see, I'm an Enterprise fan, I was on this board when it was airing and it wasn't pretty. I had people tell me I wasn't a real Star Trek fan because I liked Enterprise and there was a disturbing amount of hatred being poured on the show. So I can sympathise with the Voyager fans.

See, now this kind of thing just amazes me. As I've said elsewhere, I didn't particularly like Voyager (I thought the concept was good but that it had seriously execution problems and was plagued by bad writing, especially in its later years), and I was let down by a lot of Enterprise, though I did see some episodes that I enjoyed. But I cannot imagine telling anyone that because they liked one of the shows that I didn't like, then they're not a "real" Star Trek fan. I mean, that's just silly.

Yeah, it's pretty absurd. Especially so since I've been a Star Trek fan for most of my life, ever since I watched TOS in reruns at age 5 or so. In first grade, I went to the school carnival party as Spock. In the GDR no less.
I suggest to just laugh such foolishness off.

 

[Thrawn]

Doesn't take much to give you a sense of danger, then. A stunt death is, by definition, something notable because it differs from the norm, something not apt to be repeated anytime soon, otherwise it loses what made it remarkable and the whole thing is run into the ground trying to out-stunt itself. My sense of 'danger' hasn't been affected by Before Dishonor; or, if it has, only fractionally so. Which is of no relevance to me in the first place because I watched the show and read the books for years without some artificially-induced sense of peril to substitute for suspense, and enjoyed them just fine, which is more than I can say about the obverse.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

I think it's a little more complicated than this.

To me, the fundamental difference between the storytelling in the novels now and the storytelling in the episodic TV shows is that you don't have to go back to the status quo at the end of the book. In the TV shows, you more or less literally had to; at least through Voyager, they were written so the airing order could be shuffled around, so one episode wouldn't so much directly influence the next one. So, with a few obvious exceptions, things had to be the same at the end of the episode as they were at the beginning. The same was also true of the books, though for the different reason that they couldn't mess up what was on screen.

But now we have a type of storytelling where you don't know how things will end up. It's not just a question of "how will they solve this", but "WILL they solve this". It's a different kind of storytelling entirely, I think, in a real and legitimate way. Killing main characters is simply one of the most extreme manifestations thereof; a mission statement, if you will, that the status quo is no longer the objective at the end of the book. A promise that, even if other main characters don't die (because, as you say, that kind of thing can get annoying quickly... see post-NJO Star Wars as a brilliant example), things won't necessarily be the same at the end of the next story.

And that *IS* a fundamental difference worth appreciating; not "some artificially-induced sense of peril to substitute for suspense". It's a different kind of suspense entirely, and one I happen to vastly prefer.

And yes, that same atmosphere could've been created without main character death, in much the same way Voyager could've still had lots to say about women empowerment even if the captain wasn't a woman. Not required, but very important nonetheless.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Which is of no relevance to me in the first place because I watched the show and read the books for years without some artificially-induced sense of peril to substitute for suspense

Me too, mostly. But I used to hang around with 200 or so ST fans (100 or so die hards, the rest casual SF fans and relatives of diehards) every month through the 80s, at monthly TOS marathons on a big screen, and I know that I was one of the few who was reading all of the novels as they came out. Most other fans there would boast that they had no interest in the tie-ins because the stories "didn't really happen", and that they knew the authors weren't allowed to put the characters into impossible situations, unless they were new redshirts created by the authors, of course.

(When Paramount people first started mentioning that they knew that less than 1% of general audiences were completist collectors, I could see they were right.)

I do recall being less than impressed reading most TOS novels set in the 5YM while the movies were running, because I knew everyone would always survive. (Similarly, DC Comics were eventually told to set later comics between movies that had already screened, to lessen continuity problems.) And I remember well the huge controversy caused by Pocket's first original novel, "The Entropy Effect". Kirk was slated to die - horribly - and the cover art had the characters in their ST:TMP uniforms. It was coming out after TMP and the Kirk fans were in uproar. They remained in uproar even when "Starlog" printed a chapter of the novel, and pointed out that this adventure took place before TMP. Then the novel came out, it was hugely successful, and author Vonda McIntyre had gained herself many more fans for her original SF.

But you can only do that kinda stuff every so often. Spock's canonical death in ST II ended up even bigger, of course, and Nimoy went into that with absolutely no intention of ever returning.

And, despite what any editor might have said about the permanence of death, you can't ever leave a good character dead in science fiction. (Unless the character stakeholders have enjoyed this endless Janeway debate so much that they keep Janeway dead to enjoy the continued publicity it generates.)

 

[Octavia]

And, despite what any editor might have said about the permanence of death, you can't ever leave a good character dead in science fiction.

But then doesn't that completely negate killing said character off in the first place? Where's the "sense of peril" if that good character never stays dead?

It seems contradictory to say, on the one hand, "We need peril to make things interesting! Off with their heads!" and on the other "Who says the deaths are permanent?" In which case, death isn't perilous at all. It's simply a break for snacks and coffee.

 

[Therin of Andor]

But then doesn't that completely negate killing said character off in the first place? Where's the "sense of peril" if that good character never stays dead?

People have said that for years about Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Captain America, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Teen Titans and Flash comics. Some characters have been dead several times.

We're having the "sense of peril" aftermath of Janeway's death now. When it all blows over she may be back. Or not. No guarantee of a happy ending, just like in real life. But, being science fiction, someone will inevitably bring her back.

Or.... like the "Crucible" trilogy, someone may pitch a standalone Admiral Janeway novel that chooses to disregard the events of the TNG and VOY Relaunches.

It's simply a break for snacks and coffee.

Why not? Sounds yummy.

 

[Octavia]

People have said that for years about Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, Captain America, X-Men, Fantastic Four, Teen Titans and Flash comics. Some characters have been dead several times.

That sounds pretty pointless to me, I have to say. And for me, it would absolutely take away the sense of peril, which is supposedly the point of knocking them off in the first place.

It makes "we need to kill 'em off to provide peril" sound like a weak argument.

The same thing happened at the end of BD with the Q. Pocket can't expect me to believe they're heading in a brave new direction, being all bold by killing off the characters when the get-out-of-jail-free, cover-you-arse-card is right there! Cognitive dissonance ftw.

Why not? Sounds yummy.

Yummy, but not perilous. Unless Neelix is cooking fugu.

 

[Dayton Ward]

The same thing happened at the end of BD with the Q. Pocket can't expect me to believe they're heading in a brave new direction, being all bold by killing off the characters when the get-out-of-jail-free, cover-you-arse-card is right there! Cognitive dissonance ftw.

It's important to note that Pocket was instructed by Paramount to insert the Q-clause into BD, so your beef is with them.

 

[Octavia]

The same thing happened at the end of BD with the Q. Pocket can't expect me to believe they're heading in a brave new direction, being all bold by killing off the characters when the get-out-of-jail-free, cover-you-arse-card is right there! Cognitive dissonance ftw.

It's important to note that Pocket was instructed by Paramount to insert the Q-clause into BD, so your beef is with them.

I do know that, but that doesn't let Pocket off scot-free, I'm afraid.

IMO at least, insert a cover-your-arse scene to mitigate a death and you've got a half-arsed death with little true peril (it can be reversed if needed). Kill or don't kill, but waffling in between is ridiculous in a franchise where resurrection is often perceived as being over-used.

Paramount may have said "If you're going to do this death, make sure it's reversible (half-arsed)" but Pocket said "Okey-dokey, sure will!", so ultimate responsibility for the half-arsedness lies with them, to my mind. Surely there would have been other characters - original ones - that could have been killed off without Paramount giving a damn? They don't seem to care about minor canon characters (see Lyssa Campbell). What about major non-canon characters? Could Calhoun have been killed off without the cover-your-arse bit tacked on?

I admit I'm annoyed that Janeway is dead. But a small part of that annoyance stems from the fact it's being lauded as a bold move, when in fact that caveat makes it anything but.

Edit: and yes, I'm aware I could be arguing for Janeway to stay dead, which is ironic, considering.

 

[Dayton Ward]

Paramount may have said "If you're going to do this death, make sure it's reversible (half-arsed)" but Pocket said "Okey-dokey, sure will!", so ultimate responsibility for the half-arsedness lies with them, to my mind.

Yes, Pocket said "Okey-dokey" because that's what you do when you're a licensee and you want to play with someone else's toys.

Surely there would have been other characters - original ones - that could have been killed off without Paramount giving a damn? They don't seem to care about minor canon characters (see Lyssa Campbell). What about major non-canon characters? Could Calhoun have been killed off without the cover-your-arse bit tacked on?

Apparently you've never encountered the rabid Lyssa Campbell fandom.

As for Calhoun: Yes, he could almost certainly have been killed without the escape clause, as he's a creation of the fiction line and not one of the TV series. Such has already been done on a few occasions with with other similarly-created characters.

And just so we're clear: While I don't know if I'd be the first to offer up the notion of offing a main character -- particularly one I really liked -- I don't really care if a character is killed, so long as it's for the good of the story being told. I didn't agree at first with the decision to kill Kieran Duffy, one of my favorite characters from SCE, but once I saw what was going to go down and how it would affect the series going forward, I was on board. If Margaret or some other editor called me up today and said "Picard dies in your next book," so long as I thought there was a good story to tell in which that event occurs, I'd kill that dude stone cold dead. Twice.

 

[Octavia]

Yes, Pocket said "Okey-dokey" because that's what you do when you're a licensee and you want to play with someone else's toys.

Oh, sure. I get that. But it does kind of scupper the "we're doing it for the good of the story!" argument for me. Especially when, as you say, important characters like Calhoun could have been killed off in her place, and without the waffle, which would necessarily increase the sense of peril - which some are arguing is the reason for offing characters in the first place. An unambiguous death beats makes a better story than a waffly death, yes?

Apparently you've never encountered the rabid Lyssa Campbell fandom.

I'm breeding them in my basement. There shall soon be an army.

 

[Dayton Ward]

Oh, sure. I get that. But it does kind of scupper the "we're doing it for the good of the story!" argument for me. Especially when, as you say, important characters like Calhoun could have been killed off in her place, and without the waffle, which would necessarily increase the sense of peril. A good story and an unambiguous death beats out a poor story and a waffly death, yes?

Well, "good" and "poor" are subjective, after-the-fact judgments that don't help the writers and editors when they're developing the story. Everybody's a quarterback on Monday morning, etc. Anyone who thinks the folks at Pocket had a meeting and said, "We're gonna toss out a shitty story and murder a favorite character just to piss people off because reading the backlash on the message boards is better than watching American Idol" or whatever...well, such people are idiots.


(FYI, reading the message boards really is better than watching American Idol, but that's just me.)


As for another character vs. Janeway, well show of hands: Who among the general Trek fandom knows who Lyssa Campbell or even Mac Calhoun are? Janeway has greater recognition, which of course provides more "umph!" when the marketing department is trying to promote this thing. I don't know why she was chosen over a different "main character" from one of the shows, but I'm willing to bet that's why it was her and not a "books-only" character. After all, there's a reason Chewbacca bought it in the SW books, and not some member of Rogue Squadron (or whatever books-only SW series you'd care to name) to give that book some "weight."

 

[William Leisner]

*cautiously sticks head into thread after several weeks absence*

*looks around*

*backs out and runs into the night screaming*