Question for Marco and Co.

[TerriO]

Posted by MichaelS:
Apocrypha sounds good, but what about
[*]Forks in the Road
[*]Alternatives
[*]Alternity (if Allyn doesn't mind )
[*]Different Beginnings
[*]Roads
[*]Fragments ?

While all of these are okay, there's something a little too obvious about them. The "parallel worlds" notion has, IMO, developed some cliched phrasing around it. Variations on "path not taken" and "parallels" and such border on the cliche. It's almost like telegraphing the end of your story in the title.

Actually, and this isn't kissing up to the editor, I promise, Apocrypha really works for me. There's something subtle about it that's appealing.

(Not that I've been working on a novel outline recently around a group of non-Trek characters dealing with their parallel selves, nossir. )

EDIT: BTW: MichaelS, Hyperspace is an excellent book.

 

[MichaelS]

What's wrong with being a little obvious?

It's almost like telegraphing the end of your story in the title.

It's not my fault, but the environment I grew up in. *grin* What else would you expect from somebody for whom "Devil in the Dark" will always be "Horta Saves her Children" (as it was called in German)? I do agree that some (though not all) are a bit too obvious, but isn't that expected, at least to some degree? Especially if you look at the "Mirror" episodes or "Parallels". Sometimes they do hit you over the head with it ...

While I still like Apocrypha, I checked a couple of dictionaries to see what they had to say. If you leave out the obvious biblical connotations, you get (at dictionary.com as well as at Merriam-Webster) something like

Writings or statements of questionable/dubious authorship or authenticity

. I'm not sure I want to read a Trek book of questionable authenticity. If I did, I'd read bad fan-fiction.

Now, I admit that I may be missing some additional meaning, or maybe there isn't really anything wrong with the word's use in a "What if" context, so if you can convince me, fire away, please.

[Oh, and Terri: I've just started, but I think I can safely agree with you. The fact that I bought it can be directly attributed to Christopher mentioning it somewhere as a source for "Aftermath" - either here or at PsiPhi. Thanks, Christopher! I would never have found out about it otherwise.]

 

[MichaelS]

Ughh... haven't we had enough one-word plural titles in Trek episodes? Bloodlines, Brothers, Rascals, Ethics, Basics, Relics, Rivals, Riddles, Schisms, Facets, Faces, Phantasms, Parallels, Projections, Lifesigns, Liaisons, Lessons, Explorers, Hunters, Masks, Clues, Cardassians, Whispers, Suspicions, Maneuvers, Alliances, Resolutions, Emanations, Violations, Investigations, Initiations, Transfigurations, Generations

So?

I don't see anything wrong with one-word titles. You yourself named your S.C.E. story "Aftermath" - or was that chosen by somebody else?

However, I do agree with you that there is an overabundance in Trek. I thought it was especially obvious in the first season of Enterprise (at least, that's when I first really noticed it): Unexpected, Civilization, Fusion, Acquisition, Oasis, Detained, Shockwave. Also, most other titles consist only of two words. I miss the long - and often really GOOD sounding - titles that some DS9 episodes have: Wrongs Darker than Death or Night, Looking for par'mach in All the Wrong Places, Let He Who is Without Sin ..., etc. etc.

In the end, it's up to Marco to chose the title of the former Split Infinities. If he wants to go with a single-word one(whether plural or not), then so be it. I won't have a problem with that.

 

[Marco Palmieri]

Maybe I'll just call it The Project Formerly Known As Split Infinities, and use a glyph on the cover.

 

[8-4-7-2]

You could combine all the titles to something like Split Ripples on a Reflecting Alternative Mirror in Infinity

 

[Steve Roby]

Posted by Marco Palmieri:
I've been thinking of retitling the ST project Apocrypha. Opinions?

As someone pointed out, Apocrypha suggests fanfic a bit. May I suggest Deuterocanonica?

No, I'm not really serious. I just like using the word Deuterocanonica. I may be an atheist now, but I did learn something going to Catholic schools...

 

[KRAD]

I've been thinking of retitling the ST project Apocrypha. Opinions?

I like that title a lot. It gives the project a certain gravitas, has some punch to it, and still makes the subject matter pretty clear.

 

[OmahaStar]

Howsabout "Star Trek: Buy Me"? or "Star Trek: Infinite Realities in Finite Pages"?

 

[TrekGuide.com]

I haven't heard about this project before.

Is this like that old "What If ...?" series published by Marvel Comics in the '70s, exploring alternate realities that never happened (like "What if Dr. Doom had killed the Fantastic Four?")?

This sounds a lot like the plot of the TNG episode "Parallels," where Worf slipped between parallel timelines, or "What If" realities.

I think "Parallels" would be a good title for such a project, or maybe something with the words "Echoes" or "Shadows" or something.

Would this series just be an anthology of bogus, non-canon fan-fiction stories, or a serious exploration of parallel realities with a logical tie-in to the "real" Trek universe, as in the episode "Parallels"?

Maybe a story like the TV series "Sliders," where characters from "our" universe slip randomly through bizarre parallel realities with alternate histories, would work as the basis for a book series.

There's no reason for a series of "parallel universe" stories to be non-canon or "apocryphal." It can easily be worked into the canon world of trek with just a framing premise in which to tell the alternate stories.


I would NOT like to see a Trek series like DC Comics' "Elseworlds" series, like "What if Batman were a cowboy in the Old West," or "What if Superman were a Communist" or other purely made-up stories using a familiar character in another historical context. At least Marvel's "What If ...?" series diverged logically from the real events in the real Marvel Universe. I would like to see something similar with a Trek series.

 

[Marco Palmieri]

Posted by TrekGuide.com:
I haven't heard about this project before.

Is this like that old "What If ...?" series published by Marvel Comics in the '70s, exploring alternate realities that never happened (like "What if Dr. Doom had killed the Fantastic Four?")?

Sure, that's one way of thinking about it.

This sounds a lot like the plot of the TNG episode "Parallels," where Worf slipped between parallel timelines, or "What If" realities.

Right. Now imagine stories set entirely within some of those timelines. That's the project concept.

I think "Parallels" would be a good title for such a project, or maybe something with the words "Echoes" or "Shadows" or something.

Well, as I mentioned upthread, I'm trying to stay away from keywords that have been used in other ST titles. All of those you mention have been.

Would this series just be an anthology of bogus, non-canon fan-fiction stories, or a serious exploration of parallel realities with a logical tie-in to the "real" Trek universe, as in the episode "Parallels"?

Serious explorations of divergent realities. The format has yet to be decided. Originally it was going to be collected novellas. More recently I've been considering it as a few standalone novels, like Section 31 or The Lost Era.

Maybe a story like the TV series "Sliders," where characters from "our" universe slip randomly through bizarre parallel realities with alternate histories.

That it definitely won't be. I prefer to immerse the reader in each parallel universe and let the alternate timeline stand on its own, without characters commenting on how different everything is.

 

[Defcon]

What about:

• possibilties
• unexplored trails
• divergency

 

[David Mack]

A poster known as Rich suggested on the PsiPhi Star Trek Books BBS that an appropos title for this series might be Tangents.

As I replied in that forum, I like this one. I think it evokes a sense of the geometric nature of time and parallel quantum events, and it also serves as a double-entendre for the authors being permitted to go off on their own literary tangents.

It has a techy "feel" to it, and it's short enough that you can print it on a cover in large type.

 

[TGTheodore]

I've got it! After days of agonizing over the perfect title for the work, I came up with a simple, direct, yet intriguing title suggesting alternate realities, timelines, circumstances, or otherwise.

And yes, I am serious. (But not about the above paragraph.)

Presenting

W
A
I
T

F
O
R

I
T

.
.
.





Or


I think it says it all without giving anything away.

--Ted

 

[JAG]

^^^^
That is so quirky, it just might work. I like Tangents better though.

 

[Christopher]

Posted by MichaelS:
The fact that I bought [Hyperspace] can be directly attributed to Christopher mentioning it somewhere as a source for "Aftermath" - either here or at PsiPhi. Thanks, Christopher! I would never have found out about it otherwise.

Actually I've never read that book. I probably referred to The Elegant Universe, which I have read, and mentioned Hyperspace as a book which I'd heard was also a good source for the subject. (I guess I really should read it sometime.)

I don't see anything wrong with one-word titles. You yourself named your S.C.E. story "Aftermath" - or was that chosen by somebody else?

I'd better fall back on Walt Whitman: "Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes."

I guess it's a case of every rule having its exceptions. Aftermath is an uncharacteristic title for the author of "Aggravated Vehicular Genocide," "Among the Wild Cybers of Cybele" and "...Loved I Not Honor More." But it fit that particular story because it invoked the central theme which pervaded the story on many levels.

Besides, it's a singular word, and I was complaining about one-word plural titles. Those sound vaguer somehow, more generic. Kind of like how doctors will take you less seriously if you talk about having "pains" rather than "pain" (as studies have shown), because it sounds more unfocussed and indefinite.

Marco wrote:

Originally it was going to be collected novellas. More recently I've been considering it as a few standalone novels, like Section 31 or The Lost Era.

I'm rooting for novels, since I don't think the idea I pitched could really be done justice in a novella.

David Mack wrote:

A poster known as Rich suggested on the PsiPhi Star Trek Books BBS that an appropos title for this series might be Tangents.

Hmm. Despite my rant about one-word plural titles, I think this one sounds good.

Except it raises a geometric problem: how can two timelines be both parallel and tangential at the same time?

 

[Christopher]

Hey, I just thought of another one:

Side Treks

 

[Trent Roman]

If it is going to be several books, we could use many of the titles suggested. Maybe use one (I say Apocrypha) as the series' title, then give the books themselves the titles like Tangeants and Prodigal Realities.

I know, I know - probably putting the nacelles before the warp engine.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[TGTheodore]

Posted by Christopher:
Hey, I just thought of another one:

Side Treks

Ooh. Yeah.

Or ...

--Ted

 

[CharmCityCrab]

Posted by Christopher:
Side Treks

Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. ;-) I think that'd be an excellent title.

Really, though, they could call this project anything and I'd still buy it. This is the most intriguing concept I've ever heard for a limited series of Star Trek books. I'm a real sucker for "what-if" stories.

John

 

[Worf2DS9]

Posted by Marco Palmieri:
Right. Now imagine stories set entirely within some of those timelines. That's the project concept.

Well, whatever the title ends up being, I think this sounds pretty cool!