Random Thought: Was Janeway Killed Because She was So Polarizing?

[BillJ]

When I was here yesterday, this thread was about Janeway. What happened?

The Janeway fans said the books were selling poorly and that's why Marco and Margaret were laid off. We still haven't seen any evidence of any of that, of course.

You very well could be right. These things could be selling like gangbusters on-line. But I would also think that Star Wars books would sell well on-line too and that doesn't seem to hurt their presence at brick and mortar outlets.

Star Wars has always been more popular, and more consistently popular, than Star Trek; comparing Trek's bookstore presence to Wars's is a completely meaningless piece of data in measuring whether or not Trek novels are selling reliably.

Sci's right. Star Wars sells a hell of a lot more than Star Trek. It's a much more mainstream, popular property. The number of Stephen King books in a bookstore doesn't tell you anything about how the other horror writers are doing, does it?

Besides, we had a discussion around here not long ago in which I pointed out that Star Trek books were showing up regularly in the Locus monthly bestselling media SF tie-in list again. Star Wars still dominates the list, but for a couple of years Star Trek was making occasional appearances on the list instead of showing up every month, as it has this year. Without actual numbers of copies sold it's hard to say exactly what that means, but it suggests the Trek books are doing reasonably well.

The Locus list would probably be more meaning full with numbers and if the lists were merged to show how the tie-ins related to regular SF. But thanks for the resource!

 

[Sci]

The Locus list would probably be more meaning full with numbers and if the lists were merged to show how the tie-ins related to regular SF. But thanks for the resource!

How well media tie-ins sell compared to original sci-fi is a meaningless metric; what matter is whether or not they sell consistently enough to make back more than production costs.

 

[Dark Gilligan]

I've been a manager at my company (a bank) for eleven years and have never once seen someone who was making the company money let go.

Broaden your horizons and you'll hear a very different tale. Higher-paid managers are typically the first ones let go if TPTB believe the jobs can be done by others with smaller paychecks. I personally have seen it happen in the medical, retail, and semiconductor industries. Publishing companies aren't any different. Printed media is on the way out, hence less variety in bookstores.

 

[flemm]

I don't think there's evidence to support the "most." It's a mix, which is why Pocket Books has had a lot of success expanding the TrekLit range, getting rid of some characters, while also keeping other core characters.

It's true that there is a mix. However, the one thing that they all have in common is the premise that there are people who are interested in reading more about the very well-known and familiar Star Trek universe. Even before we get to the discussion of characters we can establish that it isn't the thirst for something entirely fresh and new that drives this line of books.

After that, there is a varying degree of novelty depending on the particular title you are interested in. Many of the books are marketed with fans of a specific show in mind, though, such as the Voyager, TNG and DS9 relaunch books. The selling point here is that if you pick up one of these books you will be getting a story within a basic framework that you recognize from the tv show. All of these books deliver on that promise.

There was a thread on this forum recently in which a reader of Vanguard complained about small universe syndrome in this title caused by too many familiar characters popping up. He wanted less familiar characters, more things he didn't recognize:

Hopefully Vanguard will continue to be left pretty much alone. The little bits of continuity are great although the last story suffered from the small universe syndrome. Carol Marcus AND Admiral Nogura? Does everything have to revolve around the characters from TOS? A mention or a brief (up to two books) appearance is fine. I'd rather get to know some new characters.

Plenty of posters were there to point out to him that it is after all a tie-in and that familiar characters popping up is part of the point and part of the attraction. Here are some nuggets of wisdom from that thread:

Look -- it's Star Trek: Vanguard, not just Vanguard. It's assumed that if you're interested in reading Star Trek tie-ins, you want them to, you know, tie in to Star Trek. If you want fiction that doesn't have any connections at all to aired Star Trek, there are thousands and thousands of works of original science fiction that are worth checking out. Try some Asimov or Cherryh or Niven or Benford or Brin or McCaffrey or Egan or Banks or... you name it.

^ I think you missed his point. He wasn't suggesting you hadn't read them, just that if you buy something with Star Trek on the cover, it will likely contain some references to the larger canon of Star Trek. If you don't want any references to the established universe, there's lots of other stuff to read.

And I agree. It seems churlish to insist that tie-in novels have a lack of tie-in material in order to enjoy them.

And I'll bet for every person who wants less guest appearances by known Federation personnel, UFP aliens and enemy races we've only glimpsed before, there are others who want more, more more.

It really sounds to me like you'd be happier reading Larry Niven's "Ringworld" books. Ooops, nah, there are kzinti in there! Watch out!

http://trekbbs.com/showthread.php?p=3458592#post3458592

To be clear: I sympathize with the idea that it is good to rock the boat, stir the drink, change the formula, whatever metaphor you choose, from time to time, but at the end of the day these tie-ins are anchored in a familiar, well-known universe, even in the case of those books that do not deal with an established ship or crew from one of the tv series.

The desire to see one's favorite character, that same old familiar face, continue to appear in these novels is not some kind of crazy talk. It's not difficult to understand and certainly not worthy of ridicule.

 

[Sci]

The desire to see one's favorite character, that same old familiar face, continue to appear in these novels is not some kind of crazy talk. It's not difficult to understand and certainly not worthy of ridicule.

And no one -- certainly not me -- is arguing against that.

I do, however, argue against the idea that there's anything wrong with killing a beloved fictional character, or that there's something wrong with someone who enjoys stories where that happens.

 

[Defcon]

I do, however, argue against the idea that there's anything wrong with killing a beloved fictional character, or that there's something wrong with someone who enjoys stories where that happens.

And against the idea that the perceived mishandling of a fictional character is enough to wish ill on an actual person, like some of the militant Janeway fans seem to do:

(PS the editor that thought up the excising of one of the most important women in Trek has recently been laid off, so maybe someone new at PB will come to their senses & bring KJ back some day, but if not, at least that person who caused so much sadness is gone from Trek lit. Yes, I am that angry.)

That's from an Amazon review of Unworthy by a person who hasn't even read the book.

I had my problems with Clark's handling of the line, but that's way over the line in my opinion.

 

[flemm]

I do, however, argue against the idea that there's anything wrong with killing a beloved fictional character, or that there's something wrong with someone who enjoys stories where that happens.

I think we are in agreement on this point: there is nothing fundamentally wrong with making that creative choice, or wrong with enjoying reading about it. Believing the opposite would be taking things too far in the opposite direction and failing to understand that too much stability could lead to stagnation, loss of interest, etc. There has to be an element of creative freedom if these stories are to endure.

Mostly I have been trying to establish that it shouldn't really be that difficult to sympathize with those who found that Janeway's death was a poor choice in this particular case, or with those who are attached to the basic principle that tie-in stories involving their favorite characters should continue to involve their favorite characters in a non-deceased condition.

Agree? Not necessarily. Understand? Sure.

And against the idea that the perceived mishandling of a fictional character is enough to wish ill on an actual person, like some of the militant Janeway fans seem to do:

Certainly that is taking things too far and is not deserving of empathy.

 

[Deano2099]

Bingo! You want new characters or "out of the ordinary" plots? There's a whole universe of literature out there! You don't have to limit yourself to Trek Lit.

I pick up a tie-in book because I want to immerse myself in a familiar setting with characters I already know and love. Otherwise, I can go read Dante...

The thing is those who want the other kind have outlets.

They are fair points, but also, there are about 30 novels with Janeway alive and well in them already out there. Now I'd be willing to bet a considerable sum of money that the number of Voyager books featuring dead-Janeway won't ever exceed that number. I'd be shocked if it even made it halfway. She'll be bought back, the entire re-launch will be junked or they'll stop publishing Voyager books altogehter before we reach book 30 in the 'relaunch'.

So by that logic, there's plenty of other places for folks that want Janeway stories to go and look also. Not to mention all the fanfic which we're being told is awesome (don't mean that in a snide way either, I haven't read any but I'm sure there's good stuff out there).

It's really just a blip. With the current schedule averaging 1-2 books per series per year I wouldn't expect to see more than another 5 or so dead-Janeway books. I'd go so far as to suggest that there have now been more words written on this BBS debating Janeways death than there will ever be words written in dead-Janeway books.

And that's mental.

 

[flemm]

And that's mental.

How do you mean? I'm sure the combined hours logged by people discussing the various Trek shows on this forum far outnumber the actual running time of the shows themselves. Let's not even get started on the combined hours people have spent reliving, discussing, fanfic-ing, criticizing, rehashing and debating the meager three seasons of the original series since it aired.

You could make a case that fandom itself is mental, but then I expect everyone posting here is more or less guilty from that point of view.

 

[AuntKate]

To be clear: I sympathize with the idea that it is good to rock the boat, stir the drink, change the formula, whatever metaphor you choose, from time to time, but at the end of the day these tie-ins are anchored in a familiar, well-known universe, even in the case of those books that do not deal with an established ship or crew from one of the tv series.

The desire to see one's favorite character, that same old familiar face, continue to appear in these novels is not some kind of crazy talk. It's not difficult to understand and certainly not worthy of ridicule.

I think I love you!