Rihannsu...yes or no?

I have read Vulcan's Forge and Vulcan's Heart, as well as the Vulcan's Soul trilogy (all by Sherman & Shwartz), and I really liked the history they set out for the Romulans and Remans. I could hardly put them down. As I liked them so much, I recently acquired the first 4 Rihannsu books, and was wondering if Rihannsu contradicts the Sherman/Shwartz Vulcan books or do they add to them and the story of the Vulcan/Romulan schism and the Romulans in general? I know Rihannsu came first, but you never know when comparing older trek-lit to more recent stuff. What does eveyone think?

 

They're not 100% compatible, as Jo and Susan had TNG-era stuff (including the Remans) to take into account, and their fate for the Commander from "The Enterprise Incident" differs, but Diane's work was a huuuge inspiration for the Vulcan's Noun books certainly.

 

Diane Duane is eternally brilliant. If you miss out on any of her stuff, you're doing yourself a massive disfavor.

 

Duane's stuff is definitive. Anything that disagrees with Duane's writing is wrong.

What the heck is a Reman?

 

Cute, but tie-in writers don't get to do that.

 

Maybe not for official canon, but for my personal one, if I've got to choose between the absolutely brilliant "Spock's World" and the Rihannsu books, or Star Trek: Nemesis and the episodes of Enterprise that took place on Vulcan.... well, let's just say I preferred Star Trek V to that movie, by a good measure, and I'd trade the whole series of Enterprise for Duane's stuff. (Although I'd regret letting go of the Mirror Universe eps - fan service was the best thing they managed, IMO, but they did it well in those two eps.)

We all have this choice to make in our personal Trek fandom. But I'll remind you of this: They gave us Voyager, and still they came. They took away a pre-1701 Enterprise with a spherical primary hull, and still they came. They tried to take away Duane's Vulcans and Rihannsu. The line must be drawn here!

The reset this upcoming movie provides would be a good time to amend their ways.

 

^ The term "official canon" is a redundancy, like "opening gambit" or "imperial empire" or "final destination." Canon, by definition, is official. "Personal canon" is a nonsense phrase, and if you use it again, I will be forced to taunt you a second time. Also: you don't have a canon. You can't possibly. You have stories that you prefer in your own personal continuity, perhaps, but that has nothing to do with canon, which is simply what people who write for the property are obligated to be beholden to (which does include Voyager, "Kir'Shara," Nemesis, and Star Trek V; the only writings by Diane Duane that qualify is the TNG episode she co-wrote with Michael Reaves).

 

Don't tell me what I can and cannot have. I've had both tea and no tea for a ridiculously long time now. I'm quite mad.

I do have a canon, 'cause really (and this is a secret, so don't tell anyone) I, and I alone, run Star Trek. The spirit of The Great Bird of The Galaxy came to me and told me so Itself. What I say goes. The fact that Paramount seems to think differently is their own problem, and a sadness that all other Star Trek fans must suffer the consequences of. Or....

This may, in fact, have been what I meant. I will consult with myself, and get back to you on that.

 

^ Do please let me and Mr. Flibble know what you tell yourself. Mr. Flibble is particularly curious, isn't that right, Mr. Flibble?

 

We decided that that was correct. But we also decided not to tell anyone.

Damn.

 

Definitely read the Rihansu books. I am reading The Empty Chair right now and don't want to finish it because there will me no more

 

Though it's true they aren't 100% compatible, I'm not really sure I understand your two examples Keith.

What is incompatible regarding the Remans or Charvanek's fate?

 

One of the definitions given "canon" by the Oxford American Dictionary is

The works of a particular author or artist that are recognized as genuine.
​

There is no requirement that such recognition include any affect on persons or actions not included among or belonging to those persons who give recognition. In the context of licensing, "official" is a needless prefix, yes. In the world beyond licensing - among the readers or watchers of works of fiction, for example - it may be entirely appropriate to speak of and consider canons apart from those sanctioned by the license-giver.

Moreover, a second definition of "canon" which is relevant in this context - also taken from the Oxford American Dictionary - reads

A list of literary or artistic works considered to be permanently established as being of the highest quality.
​

This term is freely used by persons constructing lists of great films, poetry, fiction, speeches, etc. even when the imprimatur of a corporation has not been imposed.

 

In the Duane books, the Remans are merely Rihannsu (Romulans) living on the planet ch'Havran (Remus to humans), which is a lush and fertile world. This is clearly different from the Remans of Nemesis and subsequent fiction.

In the Duane books, the Romulan Commander (the name Charvanek comes only from the Sherman/Shwartz books) has reportedly died in disgrace as a result of the cloaking-device incident. In the Sherman/Shwartz books, the Commander lived and became a powerful player in Romulan politics.

 

^ What he said.

 

Am I the only one who disliked the Rihannsu series? I haven't read The Empty Chair yet, but I just read the first four, and I count My Enemy, My Ally, Swordhunt, and Honor Blade to be three of my four least favorite Star Trek books that I've read. The only one I enjoyed was The Romulan Way. (And find it interesting that the only one I enjoy is the one that features the TOS and Bloodwing crews the least.) I went in to these books wanting to like them, and plowed through them hoping they'd grow on me, but I just couldn't get into them.

I'm now reading the Vulcan's Soul trilogy (almost through Exiles now), and am enjoying them much better. And given that I liked The Romulan Way, I'm really liking the connections between the two stories.

 

I don't dislike them, but to be honest, they are my least favorite of Diane Duane's works, both Trek and otherwise. Too much politics and war for my tastes, especially in the newer ones. And the attention they get tends to overshadow other terrific Duane books like The Wounded Sky and Doctor's Orders.

 

Offhand, I don't think I've read any other Duane works. I would like to get my hands on some of them at some point, because I do like to give authors a second chance if I haven't enjoyed their work. For instance, the fourth slot of my four least favorite Trek novels was Dwellers in the Crucible, so I tried MWB's Burning Dreams, and loved it.