Star Trek Federation: The First 150 Years

[Enterpriserules]

^Could you provide an exact quote, please? It's a 90-minute podcast and I'm just asking about one statement. As you've described it, it doesn't make sense. CBS doesn't have some office that defines what is canon. That's the purview of whoever's currently creating new Trek content, which is currently J.J. Abrams and his team. CBS's licensing department makes sure that tie-ins are consistent with canon, but the canon is defined as what's onscreen.

It starts about the 71:20 minute mark, and what he actually said was that they told him that "it was "canon" until somebody films something that says it not". Listening to what he says afterwards I'm kind of wondering if Goodman even is aware what canon actually is, since if you use his requirements (published/licensed by the producer of Star TRek (CSB) and not contradicting on-screen stuff) almost every novel is canon.

I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon, yeah it can be written over onscreen, but why get a producer and writer for the show to write this if you didn't want to make it worth fans investment?

 

[Defcon]

^Could you provide an exact quote, please? It's a 90-minute podcast and I'm just asking about one statement. As you've described it, it doesn't make sense. CBS doesn't have some office that defines what is canon. That's the purview of whoever's currently creating new Trek content, which is currently J.J. Abrams and his team. CBS's licensing department makes sure that tie-ins are consistent with canon, but the canon is defined as what's onscreen.

It starts about the 71:20 minute mark, and what he actually said was that they told him that "it was "canon" until somebody films something that says it not". Listening to what he says afterwards I'm kind of wondering if Goodman even is aware what canon actually is, since if you use his requirements (published/licensed by the producer of Star TRek (CSB) and not contradicting on-screen stuff) almost every novel is canon.

I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon, yeah it can be written over onscreen, but why get a producer and writer for the show to write this if you didn't want to make it worth fans investment?

If we follow this logic the TMP novelization (by Gene Roddenberry), Jeri Taylor's novels and The Ferengi Rules of Acquisition (Ira Steven Behr) are canon, too.

 

[Enterpriserules]

So really, aside from his choice of words, he's not saying anything about this book that isn't equally true of every other tie-in.

After all, The First 150 Years contradicts Pocket's post-ENT novels which predated it; yet my Rise of the Federation novels are consistent with those novels and nobody told me that I had to ignore them and be consistent with TF150Y instead. And tie-ins always have to be consistent with canon. Therefore, TF150Y is not canon.

I am just telling you what David told us on the show. I asked this specific question at about 71 minutes so you can listen to David's own words.

 

[Christopher]

I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon, yeah it can be written over onscreen, but why get a producer and writer for the show to write this if you didn't want to make it worth fans investment?

For the same reason they did every other Trek novel and reference book they've done over the past few decades: to make more money by selling merchandise associated with a popular series. They're not interested in continuity; that's the purview of the creators of the show. CBS is a business. They want to make a profit. And the market value of media tie-ins has never been dependent on their canon status. Some fans obsess about things like that, but most just want to see stories about the characters and ideas they enjoy, and don't worry so much about consistency. It's worth the fans' investment if it's enjoyable. That's what this is all about. I'll never understand fans who treat this like they're studying for a test and have to get the right reference materials. It's not work, it's entertainment. It's about reading a book for enjoyment of its ideas. If another book offers an incompatible set of ideas, that doesn't have to detract from your enjoyment; on the contrary, it can add to it by offering another interesting variation on the theme.

Mr. Goodman offered one version of events surrounding the Romulan War and the Federation's founding; whereas Andy Mangels, Mike Martin, and I have been developing a separate and incompatible version of those events. And that's fine, because it gives readers options, lets them explore two different takes on the question. Just like DC and Pocket offered different versions of Kirk's first mission on the Enterprise back in the '80s, or Pocket and IDW offered different versions of Khan's exile, or the like.

 

[Enterpriserules]

I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon, yeah it can be written over onscreen, but why get a producer and writer for the show to write this if you didn't want to make it worth fans investment?

For the same reason they did every other Trek novel and reference book they've done over the past few decades: to make more money by selling merchandise associated with a popular series. They're not interested in continuity; that's the purview of the creators of the show. CBS is a business. They want to make a profit. And the market value of media tie-ins has never been dependent on their canon status. Some fans obsess about things like that, but most just want to see stories about the characters and ideas they enjoy, and don't worry so much about consistency. It's worth the fans' investment if it's enjoyable. That's what this is all about. I'll never understand fans who treat this like they're studying for a test and have to get the right reference materials. It's not work, it's entertainment. It's about reading a book for enjoyment of its ideas. If another book offers an incompatible set of ideas, that doesn't have to detract from your enjoyment; on the contrary, it can add to it by offering another interesting variation on the theme.

You'll get no argument from me. I read ST books cause I like them. I cannot wait to read your new Ent series and if that contradicts 150 yrs I'm ok with that. I was just relaying what David told us on the show. Literary Treks is a place for ST book and comic lovers and authors to come together over something we all love. So I'm with you Chris, I read because I enjoy. We're hoping you'll come on the talk Rise of the Federation: A Choice of Futures, we are both very excited to read it!

 

[F. King Daniel]

It starts about the 71:20 minute mark, and what he actually said was that they told him that "it was "canon" until somebody films something that says it not". Listening to what he says afterwards I'm kind of wondering if Goodman even is aware what canon actually is, since if you use his requirements (published/licensed by the producer of Star Trek (CBS) and not contradicting on-screen stuff) almost every novel is canon.

I was kinda shocked to discover how little Al Rivera (the lead designer of the Star Trek Online videogame) understands canon, when it was discussed in this podcast I linked to here some time ago. He had no idea whatsoever, thinking the Titan novels and Countdown comic were canon but Destiny and the stuff about Janeway dying wasn't. I was listening and thinking, "For gods' sake man, Google it!"

 

[Christopher]

^Well, there's so much misinformation and misunderstanding about canon among the general public that I can't blame a tie-in newcomer for being confused. I've had the advantage of working alongside the folks at Pocket, who've been doing Trek tie-ins longer than anyone and thus were able to fill me in on how it works.

 

[Enterpriserules]

^Well, there's so much misinformation and misunderstanding about canon among the general public that I can't blame a tie-in newcomer for being confused. I've had the advantage of working alongside the folks at Pocket, who've been doing Trek tie-ins longer than anyone and thus were able to fill me in on how it works.

Thanks for sharing. Honestly if the story is good and the characters are well written, that is what makes for a good Trek book, any book to me.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon

CBS didn't "do the book", they licensed it out to becker&mayer and 47North. It is no more "legitimate" than books put out by Ballantine, Corgi, Bantam, Pocket/Gallery, Abrams Publishing or Running Press, etc.

He had no idea whatsoever, thinking the Titan novels and Countdown comic were canon but Destiny and the stuff about Janeway dying wasn't. I was listening and thinking, "For gods' sake man, Google it!"

Canon [for the the purposes of his videogame project].

 

[Sci]

Moral of the story:

Fans are, as per usual, way more concerned about how "canon" a work of tie-in fiction is than the actual licensors or authors.

 

[Enterpriserules]

Moral of the story:

Fans are, as per usual, way more concerned about how "canon" a work of tie-in fiction is than the actual licensors or authors.

You should see Star Wars forums, it's insane

Honestly, I just enjoy good character stories

 

[The Wormhole]

You should see Star Wars forums, it's insane

I suspect things will get more insane (and by extension more interesting) in the next few years as Abrams rolls over EU continuity.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Moral of the story:

Fans are, as per usual, way more concerned about how "canon" a work of tie-in fiction is than the actual licensors or authors.

Some fans.

I came to "Star Trek" fandom by way of the ST:TMP novelization. Those first few months, I'd try to pacify fans' angry complaints about the movie by suggesting that there were answers in the novelization. They just didn't want to know about it.

Ditto the "Star Trek Logs", when I found them. They filled in many, many gaps in the Filmation TAS episodes. And then, when the Pocket novels started coming out. I'd loved "The Entropy Effect", but so many ST fans seemed to be angrily resistant to reading things that "never really happened".

I actually convinced a few fans to read the ST III novelization during the six month delay between the US and Australian premieres. We went to see the movie and one complained, "They left out all the best bits!"

 

[Tommunist]

Christopher, have you read the "Federation: The First 150 Years" book yet? And if, for whatever reason, you actually did want to incorporate a data point or two from it in your next "Enterprise" novel, would you be able to?

 

[Christopher]

Christopher, have you read the "Federation: The First 150 Years" book yet?

Haven't had the opportunity yet.

And if, for whatever reason, you actually did want to incorporate a data point or two from it in your next "Enterprise" novel, would you be able to?

Of course I could. While different tie-ins over the decades have never been obligated to stay consistent with each other, they've always been free to reference each other if the authors chose.

Really, all fiction is about building on pre-existing ideas, and in franchise fiction, you often see ideas shared by incompatible continuities: Superman comics adopting Jimmy Olsen and The Daily Planet from radio; Batman: TAS character Harley Quinn showing up in the comics and in other screen adaptations like Birds of Prey; the Raimi Spider-Man 3 drawing as much on the '90s animated series' adaptation of the Alien Costume/Venom story as on the comics' version; Star Wars: The Clone Wars adopting some characters and ideas from the novels and comics while contradicting others; and so on. You can see a similar pattern of borrowing in original science fiction, like the way Ursula LeGuin's word "ansible" for an instantaneous FTL communication system has been used in a lot of other SF, or the way terms coined by SF author Jack Williamson like "terraforming," "ion drive," and "genetic engineering" have become universal not only in other SF but in actual science. SF is an ongoing dialogue as authors write stories to respond to earlier stories, sometimes adapting and expanding on their ideas, other times challenging and refuting them.

 

[DavidAGoodman]

I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon

CBS didn't "do the book", they licensed it out to becker&mayer and 47North. It is no more "legitimate" than books put out by Ballantine, Corgi, Bantam, Pocket/Gallery, Abrams Publishing or Running Press, etc.

He had no idea whatsoever, thinking the Titan novels and Countdown comic were canon but Destiny and the stuff about Janeway dying wasn't. I was listening and thinking, "For gods' sake man, Google it!"

Canon [for the the purposes of his videogame project].

Well, in point of fact, CBS was very involved in the production of the book - the manuscript had to be approved chapter by chapter by the head of licensing of CBS inc.

 

[Christopher]

^Which is true of every licensed Trek tie-in from every publisher.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Well, in point of fact, CBS was very involved in the production of the book - the manuscript had to be approved chapter by chapter by the head of licensing of CBS inc.

Not disagreeing with you, but CBS didn't "do the book", as the OP (Enterpriserules) insisted. CBS licensed it out to becker&mayer and 47North. It is no more "legitimate" than books put out by Ballantine, Corgi, Bantam, Pocket/Gallery, Abrams Publishing or Running Press, or any other licensed Star Trek tie-in.

Enterpriserules said: "I'm not sure why CBS would do the book if it did not have some legitimacy in canon..."

 

[Stevil2001]

I think David A. Goodman probably knows that.

 

[Therin of Andor]

I think David A. Goodman probably knows that.

I would have thought so too, but his comment seemed a little odd in light of the earlier discussion. And a previous thread when his book first came out.