Shrinking ST Selection in Bookstores

[donners22]

Therin of Andor said:

My definition of ST novels tending towards "tepid", probably due to the memo:

"The Final Nexus", "Enemy Unseen", what remains of "Ghost-walker" and "Probe", "Renegade", "The Starship Trap", and TNG's "Boogeymen", "Spartacus", "Chains of Command" and "Nightshade".

The time period you mention is one of only three years, and I have "Boogeymen", "Spartacus", "Chains of Command" and "The Starship Trap" on my shelves, and enjoyed them more than the majority of recently-written books I have read.

As I've said, it's a purely personal thing, and I may well be in the minority. If those are what you consider the most notably tepid of the earlier novels, it's a pretty sad state of affairs when I like them much more than many other recent ones.

 

[JD]

JoeZhang said:
I don't know what the overall historical picture is - but here in the UK books sales have been increasing, around 9% up on the previous year.

I think part of the problem with Trek books, once you have read one, why would you want to read the rest? Buyers seem more adventurous than in the past and there is something vaguely wasteful in spending your time reading all the books from one franchise - it all gets a bit samey in the end.

If that were the case, I doubt the Star Wars books would be as popular as they are. I've enjoyed the books that I've read, but IMO they are alot more "samey" than any of the Trek books have been.

 

[Therin of Andor]

donners22 said:
The time period you mention is one of only three years

The memo was only in effect three years, yes, but Richard Arnold was already vetting proposals and manuscripts earlier than that (the memo clarified his reasoning when the new tie-in licenses were signed in 1989), and the problems about no crossover characters and the ST Office changing its mind between proposal stage and submission of (what authors assumed was) a final manuscript started before the memo came out.

And its effects actually stretched long after Roddenberry's death for some novels and comics - because many manuscripts were already underway from RA-altered proposals.

I have "Boogeymen", "Spartacus", "Chains of Command" and "The Starship Trap" on my shelves

I read them, but they weren't earth shattering or even terribly memorable, but I guess that's exactly what you seek. They were quite "safe" and short novels.

If those are what you consider the most notably tepid of the earlier novels, it's a pretty sad state of affairs when I like them much more than many other recent ones.

Well, I found you titles in the era of Richard's memo mandates on what made a safe ST tie-in: ie. the standard TV crew, on a mission-gone-wrong to a brand new (often blah) planet, with a B-plot virus or tech emergency for the ship-bound crew. I describe them as tepid simply because... they (together with "The Final Nexus", "Enemy Unseen", most of "Ghost-walker", most of "Probe", "Renegade", and "Nightshade", all in that same time period) really didn't create an awful lot of excitement for me at the time, esp. when compared to the books that were coming out before RA started his official stint at Paramount.

I see RA at conventions annually, and he knows my disappointment by the changes wrought by that memo, but he believes he was helping Gene R. to keep the tie-in comics and novels from diluting the ST franchise. Interesting that few novels from the memo era made the "NY Times Bestseller" lists, even though Pocket was selling a lot of ST novels every month.

During the time of the memo, though, it meant that very few ST novels took literary risks. I really don't want a return to that style of cookie cutter formula.

 

[donners22]

^ Fair enough. I see where you're coming from, and agree to an extent.

I would prefer a "safe" read to a bad read, but whether a novel is bad or not depends on the reader to a significant degree. If there were more particularly good novels these days to counter the bad ones (again, IMHO), it would make it far easier for me to warm to the more recent books, but again, I feel the strike rate is much lower than it once was.

Incidentally, I met Richard Arnold at a Melbourne convention last year, and the books were not mentioned by him or the audience. Whether they were ignorant of his role, didn't care or had heard it all before, I don't know.

 

[Gatekeeper]

Christopher said:

Gatekeeper said:
I think it's precisely because the last movie bombed and Enterprise was cancelled that book sales were impacted in a negative fashion. I'm not saying the bombing and cancellation are the sole reasons for the decline in space devoted to ST on stores' bookshelves, but they're likely contributing factors.

I suspect the main contributing factor to the decline in space devoted to ST on store shelves is the rise of Amazon.com. I mean, do you really know that book sales in general have declined, or just that sales from physical bookstores have declined? In an age of online retail, you can't assume those are the same thing. Maybe it's just that a larger percentage of Trek fans have adopted online shopping.

Hmm. In that case, then apparently readers of trashy romance books and Western escapades have yet to discover Amazon.com, to judge from the selection of *their* books available at the mainline retailers.

Gatekeeper

 

[Therin of Andor]

Gatekeeper said:
apparently readers of trashy romance books and Western escapades have yet to discover Amazon.com, to judge from the selection of *their* books available at the mainline retailers.

That would be right. The broader the appeal the more likely the target audience won't have Internet access.

 

[Trent Roman]

^ Though even there, subject to variation. I can't remember the last time I saw a bookstore with a 'western' section. Honestly, I thought that phase was long past.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[trampledamage]

Therin of Andor said:

Gatekeeper said:
apparently readers of trashy romance books and Western escapades have yet to discover Amazon.com, to judge from the selection of *their* books available at the mainline retailers.

That would be right. The broader the appeal the more likely the target audience won't have Internet access.

Plus readers of westerns and romances are not, by and large, quite as likely to be tech-geeks like Star Trek readers

I figure stores stock what their customers buy, ergo we buy the Star Trek books, they'll stock more of them. I've started buying my books from the local store rather than amazon. Admittedly, I only have the money for a couple of paperbacks every few months so I won't be breaking any records, but I'm trying!

 

[HIj'Qa]

I just might have figured out why my local Borders was clearing shelf space - the shelves are full now of bright shiny reprints of all the Indiana Jones and the [fill in blank] Bantam books from the early 90s. What, is there some kinda movie coming out or something?

Will Pocket reprint all the TOS books for next summer's movie release?

 

[ATimson]

Will Pocket reprint all the TOS books for next summer's movie release?

I highly doubt they'll reprint all 100+ novels...

 

[Therin of Andor]

Will Pocket reprint all the TOS books for next summer's movie release?

I reckon it's a safe bet that another wave of something akin to either "Great classic novel at a great price!" MMPBs reprints or an equivalent to the "Signature Edition" reprints in trade size will turn up at some time.

Shops will probably order in available warehoused backstock (which we also saw happen with ST IV and "First Contact").

Pocket reprints ST novels whenever there is a demonstrated demand for them, and if the movie causes lots of new fans to demand novels about Kirk and Spock, reprinting proven winners is a no-brainer.

I'm not speaking on behalf of Pocket. This is my personal opinion that it will happen.