should PARAMOUNT take over?

[ronny]

I would expect any idea that starts out with "...why not stop publishing the books after the current crop come out..." is going to be bad and this didn't disappoint me.

I feel like a fool. I don't read any threads that have "canon" in the subject and here I am in a canon thread...

 

[KRAD]

Heck, Roddenberry tried to say that Wrath of Khan wasn't canon right up until he realized that everyone liked it....

 

[Squiggy]

Yeah, Roddenberry said lots of things.

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

Canon Schmannon. It's not the end of the world if an idea presented in one book contradicts an idea presented in another. Just enjoy the damn books and stop nitpicking!

 

[Rush Limborg]

Canon Schmannon. It's not the end of the world if an idea presented in one book contradicts an idea presented in another. Just enjoy the damn books and stop nitpicking!

Amen, bro. Myself, I LIKE finding the occasional contradiction. I almost always come up with an way to explain it off --and many times, it inspires a story idea or two!

 

[Nerdius Maximus]

Canon Schmannon. It's not the end of the world if an idea presented in one book contradicts an idea presented in another. Just enjoy the damn books and stop nitpicking!

Amen, bro. Myself, I LIKE finding the occasional contradiction. I almost always come up with an way to explain it off --and many times, it inspires a story idea or two!

I always liked those books that were a radical departure from anything you'd see on the shows, anyway. "Yesterday's Son?" You'd never see anything like that in a movie or episode. Or how about TNG's "Gulliver's Fugitives?" That would have never been made into an episode, either.

 

[Steve Roby]

From then on any book that is published would be considered canon (like Star Wars books) and any future books would honor the new continuity...

The Star Wars books aren't considered canon. Lucas can and does contradict what's in them. That's why they're called "Expanded Universe." The very name implies a core universe that the books aren't part of.

 

[Wowbagger]

Why can't these writers write books that take what the others have written into account? Star Wars books do it. Why can't star trek?

Everyone has already thoroughly refuted this point, so I won't do it again. Yet I have to ask: what actual story benefit is there to intense, Star Wars-style book continuity? It makes the series as a whole much more difficult to follow, makes accessibility to non-hardcore book fans a joke (here, fellow DS9 freak who's seen every episode but never read a DS9 novel in your life, borrow my copy of Warpath! You'll love it!), and makes writing within the universe a good deal harder, since not only Trek's film canon (the largest in existence), but all the other written work (proportionally huge)--or at least the written work from the year 2000 on--must to be obeyed.

You need to be more acceptable to other people's opinions or, at least, go to an anger management specialist.

Trent has many virtues, but he does not suffer outright foolishness lightly.

I like him that way.

 

[captcalhoun]

*takes a deep breath, screams, runs into the night again*

 

[Dayton Ward]

I always liked those books that were a radical departure from anything you'd see on the shows, anyway. "Yesterday's Son?" You'd never see anything like that in a movie or episode.

What, that a character had a heretofore unknown offspring (STII) or sibling (STV)? As for the plot of Yesterday's Son, take away the part about Zar being Spock's kid, and it's just another Feds vs. Romulans story with some time travel thrown in. JJ Abrams seems to think that's interesting enough....

Or how about TNG's "Gulliver's Fugitives?" That would have never been made into an episode, either.

Why not? It's basic plot is no more outlandish than others which *did* make it to film.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Ah, there's nothing quite like an uninformed opinion.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Rick made it more constant ("On-screen Trek is canon, everything else is not.").

Rick Berman only ever restated the old Roddenberry Star Trek Office's mantra: All live-action Star Trek, as produced by Desilu/Paramount/Viacom, is canonical.

The memo to tie-in licensees, which essentially removed Filmation's TAS applied from from 1989-91, but is no longer considered by CBS Consumer Products.

GR also once said he considered parts of ST V to be apocryphl. People have extended this sentiment to parts of ST VI, but since GR passed away just days after seeing the finished ST VI - and was very ill at the time of seeing the movie - his comment was probably based on the script.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Heck, Roddenberry tried to say that Wrath of Khan wasn't canon right up until he realized that everyone liked it....

Yep. We've had people mention here that they heard GR at university lectures say as much. After ST II's success, his negativity zeroed in on a few specific things, such as Kirk phasering a Ceti eel (strange new life) without studying it, and his uneasiness about the death of Spock.

The same Kirk who wasn't worried about the last living Salt Vampire getting disintegrated.

 

[Starbreaker]

So if they're "canon" but written by hack authors who turn them into total crap, you'll buy them? Just because they're "more official"? WTF?

 

[Braxton]

From then on any book that is published would be considered canon (like Star Wars books) and any future books would honor the new continuity...

The Star Wars books aren't considered canon. Lucas can and does contradict what's in them. That's why they're called "Expanded Universe." The very name implies a core universe that the books aren't part of.

My understanding is that Star Wars books are considered canon but are overruled if on-screen evidence says something different.

 

[KRAD]

^ The short definition of that is "not canon."

 

[David cgc]

So, practically speaking, the only difference between Trek and Wars novels as far as canonicity goes is marketing bull.

I hope that means we can put this whole thing behind us now.

 

[Dayton Ward]

^ BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Ahem.

Sorry, bro. Can't blame you for trying.

 

[KRAD]

So, practically speaking, the only difference between Trek and Wars novels as far as canonicity goes is marketing bull.

Yup.

I hope that means we can put this whole thing behind us now.

Have you met the Internet?

 

[Therin of Andor]

^ The short definition of that is "not canon."

I tried to say that, but then I saw your post and your way is so... efficient.