Spoilers Section 31: Control by David Mack Review Thread

[Christopher]

Well, it doesn't have to be a reference to a Kelvin film. We're just interpreting it that way. Something else (perhaps with similar consequences) could be in store for the novelverse.

The novels can't contradict screen canon. The fate of Romulus in 2387 is part of the canonical history of the Prime universe, and the novels have to stay consistent with that history even if they can't mention every part of it. So they can't make up some similar event to take the place of the canonical one.

 

[Markonian]

The novels can't contradict screen canon. The fate of Romulus in 2387 is part of the canonical history of the Prime universe, and the novels have to stay consistent with that history even if they can't mention every part of it. So they can't make up some similar event to take the place of the canonical one.

Romulus may face a other catastrophe before the Hobus supernova. In STO, Shinzon's coup crippled the RSE long before Hobus.
Or, "When it rains, it pours."

^ Not that I believe something like that will happen. But it's an explanation that fits the loophole.

 

[Snaploud]

Well, they're going to have to figure out some sort of compromise. It's a bit hard to stay consistent with a major event that you can't reference.

 

[DimesDan]

I've not read Control yet, not even picked it up, but plan on doing so on Friday as we're away for the weekend for a wedding and from what has been said in this thread, I really am looking forward to reading it.

As for the whole Romulus being destroyed thing and the books not being able to reference anything from the Kelvinverse, as well as what @The Wormhole said up thread, there was also a reference in the Prey trilogy to masked Klingons and also a while back there was a reference to mourning Romulans tattooing their faces plus one or two little references here and there.

So to think that Pocket hasn't established something as a way to reference the mind-meld scenes from Star Trek 09 or outright show the before, during and after of those events is just downright silly, it's been the best part of a decade since the film was released and seven since the Kelvinverse books were shelved. As I've said in other threads on the matter, my money is on @Dayton Ward addressing this Heffalump in the room.

 

[Christopher]

Well, they're going to have to figure out some sort of compromise. It's a bit hard to stay consistent with a major event that you can't reference.

Not really. I mean, the vast majority of Trek stories have nothing to do with the Romulans.

 

[Dayton Ward]

Once more, with feeling:

We're presently not allowed to tie in to anything established in the JJ films. Cute throwaway references are one thing, but any story hinging on anything put forth in those films isn't permitted, per our current marching orders. That may change when Pocket negotiates with CBS to renew/modify their licensing agreement, but until then? So far as we simple freelance tie-in writers are concerned, those films don't "exist."

 

[Christopher]

I'm still unclear on where the line goes between "not telling stories directly based on elements from the films" and "not acknowledging the films at all." I mean, when I did my Marvel novels for Pocket Star, I wasn't allowed to have "on-camera" guest appearances by Marvel heroes other than the ones I was writing about, but I was free to mention them all I wanted and describe them participating in the story's events as long as they did it just "offscreen" or in between scenes (sort of like how Supergirl's first season handled Superman or how Powerless handles the A-list superheroes in general). And Wildstorm's and IDW's lack of a Voyager license didn't prohibit them from making references to events or characters from Voyager, just from doing out-and-out Voyager stories. So is the restriction really that much tighter in this case?

 

[Dayton Ward]

I know this is going to come as a shock to some people, but discussing the supernova and other JJ events has come up on occasion over the last eight years. Honest. I've actually asked - more than once - "Can I write a story dealing with the supernova?" and been told, "No, you can't. It's JJ-Trek. It's off-limits."

Now, I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I was able to suss out the hidden meaning of that particular message.

Will this change at some point? Anything's possible, but for now? It is what it is, and we march merrily on.

 

[Ronald Held]

That's essentially the patch that Mack puts over it. Basically, he retained a permanent residence at the hotel in perpetuity as part of the sale. It doesn't match perfectly with how it's portrayed in Lang's book, but it works well enough. Honestly, the only reason I noticed it at all was because I tore through Cold Equations and The Light Fantastic within the last couple of months before reading these last two S31 books.

Not completely satisfying on the initial reading, but it is a patch I can deal with.

 

[jaime]

I know this is going to come as a shock to some people, but discussing the supernova and other JJ events has come up on occasion over the last eight years. Honest. I've actually asked - more than once - "Can I write a story dealing with the supernova?" and been told, "No, you can't. It's JJ-Trek. It's off-limits."

Now, I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I was able to suss out the hidden meaning of that particular message.

Will this change at some point? Anything's possible, but for now? It is what it is, and we march merrily on.

It doesn't need any build up anyway. The only real elephant is dealing with what comes after. And goodness knows we have time jumped before. The real dance is around the countdown comic, in a way.

 

[Jinn]

The real dance is around the countdown comic, in a way.

Not really, that can just be ignored as it isn't canon. It doesn't even fit what was established with the current novels so there's no reason to keep others consistent.

 

[Dayton Ward]

It doesn't need any build up anyway. The only real elephant is dealing with what comes after. And goodness knows we have time jumped before. The real dance is around the countdown comic, in a way.

We're presently not allowed to tie in to anything established in the JJ films.

Still true.

 

[Christopher]

I know this is going to come as a shock to some people, but discussing the supernova and other JJ events has come up on occasion over the last eight years. Honest. I've actually asked - more than once - "Can I write a story dealing with the supernova?" and been told, "No, you can't. It's JJ-Trek. It's off-limits."

Now, I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I was able to suss out the hidden meaning of that particular message.

Yeah, but my point is, there's a difference between a story dealing with a subject matter and a story that happens to mention that subject matter while being about something else. Like how, when IDW only had the TOS and TNG licenses, they were still able to show Phlox in flashback in Blood Will Tell and mention the events of "Affliction"/"Divergence," because it was just a peripheral reference in a story based on TOS elements.

So I get not being able to do a story about the supernova, but that doesn't necessarily rule out doing a story where someone says "Gee, have you heard the latest news about that supernova? Glad we're here in the next quadrant over, dealing with this totally different problem rather than being in the middle of that mess." Unless it specifically does rule that out, which is what I'm not clear on.

 

[DimesDan]

I know this is going to come as a shock to some people, but discussing the supernova and other JJ events has come up on occasion over the last eight years. Honest. I've actually asked - more than once - "Can I write a story dealing with the supernova?" and been told, "No, you can't. It's JJ-Trek. It's off-limits."

Now, I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but even I was able to suss out the hidden meaning of that particular message.

Will this change at some point? Anything's possible, but for now? It is what it is, and we march merrily on.

Now I could be completely off-base with this, but this implies that the writers can not in any way shape or form show the destruction of Romulus or what actually leads to it, but there seems to be a bit of a wiggle room that would allow skipping those events, mention them in past tense and then move on a bit like the recentish time jump that occurred with the Deep Space Nine line. Which from a certain point of view be dealing with the Heffalump in the room for all parties concerned in a similar manner as to the other times that things from the Kelvinverse have been mentioned.

 

[JD]

This just seems weird to me. I would think it would be more of an all or nothing kind of thing, with all of this kind of stuff. If it's not part of the license, then I would think it would be completely 100% off limits, no references, no cameos, nothing at all.

 

[Christopher]

This just seems weird to me. I would think it would be more of an all or nothing kind of thing, with all of this kind of stuff. If it's not part of the license, then I would think it would be completely 100% off limits, no references, no cameos, nothing at all.

In my experience, it generally isn't. I mean, in my original novel Only Superhuman, I was able to mention copyrighted characters from DC and Marvel Comics by name, as works of fiction that the characters were aware of and influenced by, even though I would've gotten in trouble for trying to tell a story about Superman or Spider-Man as characters without being licensed to do so. There is generally a difference between telling a story based on a concept and telling a story that merely refers to that concept. (So references and cameos are actually two distinct categories -- a reference can be allowed when a cameo is forbidden, as in my X-Men novel where I had to rewrite Spider-Man's cameo so that he was merely referenced as being nearby.)

Although it can be different when trademarked images are involved. I could have an original character in a novel mention Wonder Woman, but I couldn't have her wearing a Wonder Woman t-shirt in a comic book unless it were published by DC. I think that the characters in The Big Bang Theory (from Warner Bros.) routinely talk about both DC and Marvel characters, but they only ever show the characters with DC-based t-shirts, toys, cosplay, etc.

 

[The Wormhole]

I'm just wondering how Bad Robot managed to overlook these things, as they have made it abundantly clear that they refuse to allow the novelverse to mention anything from a Kelvin film.

This just seems weird to me. I would think it would be more of an all or nothing kind of thing, with all of this kind of stuff. If it's not part of the license, then I would think it would be completely 100% off limits, no references, no cameos, nothing at all.

Mentioning something appears to be okay, but having something from the Abrams movies actually be an active part of the narrative is not. One of the best examples actually isn't even from Pocket Books, but rather from the Captain Kirk autobiography. In it, it is mentioned that George Kirk served on the Kelvin, Captain Robau is mentioned, but they do not have the Kelvin doing anything in the story. Likewise, Robau is not active in the narrative as a character. In fact, they seem to very carefully navigate around this by mentioning George Kirk and Robau had a conversation and what that conversation was about without actually depicting the conversation itself.

 

[Christopher]

Mentioning something appears to be okay, but having something from the Abrams movies actually be an active part of the narrative is not. One of the best examples actually isn't even from Pocket Books, but rather from the Captain Kirk autobiography. In it, it is mentioned that George Kirk served on the Kelvin, Captain Robau is mentioned, but they do not have the Kelvin doing anything in the story. Likewise, Robau is not active in the narrative as a character. In fact, they seem to very carefully navigate around this by mentioning George Kirk and Robau had a conversation and what that conversation was about without actually depicting the conversation itself.

Yeah, but that wasn't from Pocket, so the license parameters aren't necessarily the same.

 

[The Wormhole]

Still, I imagine it's a similar enough situation for Pocket. For example, a novel featuring Carol Marcus might mention her father's name is Alexander, and might even mention he is/was a Starfleet admiral, but Admiral Alexander Marcus will not be a character active in the narrative of a Pocket Books Star Trek novel.

 

[Titus Andronicus]

I thoroughly enjoyed this novel. As others have said, it's as universe-shattering as Destiny--where does the Federation and Starfleet go from here?

Especially with

Spoiler: future of the Federation

the fact that the Federation's diplomatic ties with the other major powers have been damaged. And with knowledge of Starfleet's involvement in the 2379 coup, we might see more in the Federation aggressively condemn the power of Starfleet in Federation government and society.

But I have to also say my favorite parts were those set in the 22nd century, explaining the growing pains of a United Earth coming to be. One of my regrets when it comes to Enterprise is that we didn't see more of that in the series. If anything, I'd like to see a novel one day set on Earth in the 2130s and 2140s showing humanity becoming more accepting of a united, global government.