Maybe I should clarify what I mean by that statement. I don't expect to be profoundly challenged or have some sort of epiphany about things when reading Star Trek.
I read Star Wars in the same way, in which I enjoy alot of the books that 99% of people hate because I take it for what it is.
These books are entertaining to me, and I keep them on my shelf. But I treat these as like I'm watching an episode. I don't expect great characterization in one book, but over a series of them, etc.
without coming off too harsh, I think you were perfectly clear in your first post. I do think that you should read any and all fiction (incl. sci-fi. media tie-ins etc) with the intent of learning something new, feel challenged, etc. The fact that these books are "just" Star Trek, does not (or rather should not) diminish your expectations of them, and we, as readers, should hold these works to a highr standard.
By the way, I believe that this has been occuring in the last few years, hence the overall quality of the Trek Lit franchise.
Not harsh at all, I think we can both say that we have different views on it, and that's okay. I don't think the books are just "Star Trek" but there is only so much you can do with a licensed product, and you really don't want to alienate the readers who aren't into the Hard Sci-Fi of Star Trek. While I don't believe that the books should all be light hearted and alienate the core star trek fans, I don't believe that every Star Trek book needs to be a big ordeal.
On a spearate note to the above post about Resistance not having good characterization, I was wondering why? I just finnished it and liked the book alot actually.