Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds - Pike series and novel continuity

[Damian]

In all honestly when it comes to SNW and original series books it's probably much less of an issue than Picard was for the post-Nemesis novels. While there is some continuity on occasion in original series novels, there really hasn't been an attempt to create a unified narrative within original series novels.

Granted some authors have their own continuity, such as Diane Duane and Christopher's movie era novels. And occasionally they touch on other novels within the same era, which I know Christopher has done with his here and there when it fits and makes sense.

But when it comes to original series novels, and Pike era novels in particular, there's a lot of disparate stories out there that are hard to reconcile together already.

 

[Christopher]

In all honestly when it comes to SNW and original series books it's probably much less of an issue than Picard was for the post-Nemesis novels. While there is some continuity on occasion in original series novels, there really hasn't been an attempt to create a unified narrative within original series novels.

That doesn't really matter, because any bit of worldbuilding detail or backstory could contradict any novel. For instance, what's been revealed already about Cadet Uhura's backstory in Strange New Worlds completely contradicts the backstory I gave her in Living Memory. And the show hasn't even premiered yet. At this point, all bets are off.

 

[Damian]

That doesn't really matter, because any bit of worldbuilding detail or backstory could contradict any novel. For instance, what's been revealed already about Cadet Uhura's backstory in Strange New Worlds completely contradicts the backstory I gave her in Living Memory. And the show hasn't even premiered yet. At this point, all bets are off.

Well that's a bummer. You're novel is still pretty new. Would have been nice if it could have stood up for at least a few years .

But in all seriousness I was basically trying to contrast original series era novels with the post-Nemesis (and post-Enterprise novels for that matter) which had a much more unified narrative. There really has never been a concerted effort to keep original series novels consistent with one another, which is quite a bit different from the relaunch novels.

 

[Christopher]

Well that's a bummer. You're novel is still pretty new. Would have been nice if it could have stood up for at least a few years .

I don't really mind. I wrote Living Memory because I felt that Uhura was long overdue for some exploration of her backstory and personal life. And clearly the makers of SNW feel the same way and are doing the same thing I tried to do, in spirit if not in specifics. And their version will reach a far wider audience than mine did, so more power to them. Whether the surface "facts" align is by far the least important part of any of this.

Writing tie-ins is like writing science fiction in general. We make conjectures, knowing full well that real developments will probably disprove them eventually. Sometimes the disproof happens soon after the story is published, sometimes even before (as in the Isaac Asimov story that was predicated on Mercury keeping one face constantly toward the Sun, which was disproved between the story's sale and publication). That's just the way the game works. The goal is not to "get it right," just to present an entertaining conjecture, to explore an idea or a theme.

 

[Damian]

I don't really mind. I wrote Living Memory because I felt that Uhura was long overdue for some exploration of her backstory and personal life. And clearly the makers of SNW feel the same way and are doing the same thing I tried to do, in spirit if not in specifics. And their version will reach a far wider audience than mine did, so more power to them. Whether the surface "facts" align is by far the least important part of any of this.

Writing tie-ins is like writing science fiction in general. We make conjectures, knowing full well that real developments will probably disprove them eventually. Sometimes the disproof happens soon after the story is published, sometimes even before (as in the Isaac Asimov story that was predicated on Mercury keeping one face constantly toward the Sun, which was disproved between the story's sale and publication). That's just the way the game works. The goal is not to "get it right," just to present an entertaining conjecture, to explore an idea or a theme.

Yeah, it was nice to get some background on Uhura. It was about time she got some love as well.

And I know you guys all know that's part of the risk of writing tie-in fiction. And this all being fiction it doesn't really matter how many alternative explanations there are for different things. If someone really wants to sweat it out they could just apply a blanket alternative universes explanation to it in universe. I mean, me personally I probably wouldn't in this case. I did that in my head for the post-Nemesis relaunch and Picard but in that case it was because there was over 20 years worth of novels following a single continuity (and as I'm finding in Coda that seems to be how they are presenting things, not unexpectedly). And I've noted in the past that personally I prefer the continuity in the novels over Picard, despite that not being canon. And it's possible I might like Uhura's history in Living Memory more than what SNW does. But we'll see.

And as an aside I actually preferred the history of human exploration as presented in the "official" account at the beginning of Strangers In The Sky over that of First Contact (even though I really liked the movie otherwise).

It's sometimes kind of fun to read different versions of similar events and backstories. A little variety never hurts.

 

[F. King Daniel]

From what we've heard, they just copypasted a well worn Starfleet officer backstory onto Uhura.

Starfleet orphan #16305. Grand.

 

[Smiley]

From what we've heard, they just copypasted a well worn Starfleet officer backstory onto Uhura.

Starfleet orphan #16305. Grand.

Better than #24601 or #8675309, right?

 

[Christopher]

It's just been announced that James T. Kirk will be appearing in SNW season 2, played by Paul Wesley.

https://www.startrek.com/news/paul-wesley-joins-the-cast-of-strange-new-worlds

There goes The Captain's Oath, I guess. I figured it was only a matter of time. Maybe we'll finally get a canonical identification of Kirk's first command.

Although Kirk said in "The Menagerie" that he only met Pike once, when he was promoted. I wonder if they'll ignore that, or find some way to avoid having them come together directly.

It's an odd coincidence how both latter-day Kirk actors have similar names to Kirk's senior commanding officers. Chris Pine/Chris Pike, Paul Wesley/Bob Wesley.

 

[Leto_II]

...Welp.

Yeah, hoping they keep what "The Menagerie" established intact, as much as they're able to. Wasn't even believing they'd introduce the character so quickly.

 

[Christopher]

Yeah, hoping they keep what "The Menagerie" established intact, as much as they're able to. Wasn't even believing they'd introduce the character so quickly.

To be fair, the bit in "The Menagerie" isn't even consistent with itself, since it claims Pike is about Kirk's age in the present even though he was about Kirk's age 13 years earlier. And Pike's inability to communicate with more than beeps is hard to reconcile with "Metamorphosis" revealing that Starfleet has technology that can literally read thoughts and turn them into speech. So it's not the end of the world if they choose to ignore that throwaway line for the sake of the stories they need to tell.

While I am hoping they canonically establish Kirk's first command (which has variously been the the Saladin, the Lydia Sutherland, the Oxford, the Hotspur, the Sacagawea, and probably others), I'm not looking forward to all the complaints (which have already started) from the fans who erroneously believe that the Enterprise was Kirk's first command.

 

[Nightowl1701]

I still think that was either a bad edit or a misread line reading - that they meant to say either Mendez met Pike when he was about Kirk's present age, or Pike was promoted to Fleet Captain when he was Kirk's present age.

 

[Christopher]

I still think that was either a bad edit or a misread line reading - that they meant to say either Mendez met Pike when he was about Kirk's present age, or Pike was promoted to Fleet Captain when he was Kirk's present age.

The latter doesn't work, since he was around Kirk's present age in "The Cage," and he became Fleet Captain at the same time that Kirk replaced him on the Enterprise, which Roddenberry intended at the time to have been 3-4 years before.

I think it was just a sloppily written line, because Roddenberry wrote the frame story in a hurry when the show fell behind schedule and they decided to do a 2-part clip show to catch up. He was probably thinking of how he intended both characters to be around the same age (indeed, Kirk's bio in the series bible was basically Pike's bio with the name changed), and he forgot at that point about the 13-year time gap he introduced to explain the changes between the pilot and the series. Believe me, when you're in the middle of writing something, it's easy to be focused on one part of it and forget something you established in another part. Generally you catch those contradictions in the rewrite process, but there's always something you miss, especially if you don't have time to do enough rewrites.

 

[dupersuper]

To be fair, the bit in "The Menagerie" isn't even consistent with itself, since it claims Pike is about Kirk's age in the present even though he was about Kirk's age 13 years earlier. And Pike's inability to communicate with more than beeps is hard to reconcile with "Metamorphosis" revealing that Starfleet has technology that can literally read thoughts and turn them into speech. So it's not the end of the world if they choose to ignore that throwaway line for the sake of the stories they need to tell.

While I am hoping they canonically establish Kirk's first command (which has variously been the the Saladin, the Lydia Sutherland, the Oxford, the Hotspur, the Sacagawea, and probably others), I'm not looking forward to all the complaints (which have already started) from the fans who erroneously believe that the Enterprise was Kirk's first command.

Meh. 13 years isn't that big a difference in age, especially by the 23rd century.

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's just been announced that James T. Kirk will be appearing in SNW season 2, played by Paul Wesley.

https://www.startrek.com/news/paul-wesley-joins-the-cast-of-strange-new-worlds

There goes The Captain's Oath, I guess. I figured it was only a matter of time. Maybe we'll finally get a canonical identification of Kirk's first command.

Although Kirk said in "The Menagerie" that he only met Pike once, when he was promoted. I wonder if they'll ignore that, or find some way to avoid having them come together directly.

It's an odd coincidence how both latter-day Kirk actors have similar names to Kirk's senior commanding officers. Chris Pine/Chris Pike, Paul Wesley/Bob Wesley.

A lot of wiggle room in the line. It doesn't have to mean he met him once and never again.

 

[BillJ]

A lot of wiggle room in the line. It doesn't have to mean he met him once and never again.

Yeah, but I would think any other meetings would have been after Pike became Fleet Captain.

The CBS stuff is starting to make the novels look inventive.

 

[Enterprise1701]

I am a little surprised Simon & Schuster even approved The Captain's Oath for release in 2019 given the obvious prediction that Kirk's ascension to the Enterprise had to be among the top five most appealing plot hooks the TV staff would inevitably explore.

Then again, Bryan Fuller approved Spock, or at least shrugged an okay for Desperate Hours in the near-term, and we all know how that went. Life is funny.

 

[The Wormhole]

I am a little surprised Simon & Schuster even approved The Captain's Oath for release in 2019 given the obvious prediction that Kirk's ascension to the Enterprise had to be among the top five most appealing plot hooks the TV staff would inevitably explore.

There were obviously no plans to do so at the time, otherwise the novel would not have been approved.

Then again, Bryan Fuller approved Spock, or at least shrugged an okay for Desperate Hours in the near-term, and we all know how that went.

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Fuller had no plans on using Spock on Disco, which is why requested a Disco novel about Spock be written. The decision to bring Spock onto the show was made by the next showrunners after he left.

 

[Greg Cox]

This stuff happens. With UNDERWORLD, the filmmakers specifically instructed me to write a prequel, not a sequel, to the original movie so that I wouldn't step on the toes of the upcoming movie sequel. At the time, the assumption was that a prequel, sent hundreds of years before the first movie, was a safer bet since the movies were not planning to go there . . . at that time.

Two movies later, along comes RISE OF THE LYCANS . . . .

 

[Enterprise1701]

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Fuller had no plans on using Spock on Disco, which is why requested a Disco novel about Spock be written. The decision to bring Spock onto the show was made by the next showrunners after he left.

That is not my point. Michael Burnham premiered as Spock's sister and Sarek's daughter. Anyone could have predicted that counting on not using Spock in the near-future would be a foolhardy gamble.

 

[Christopher]

That is not my point. Michael Burnham premiered as Spock's sister and Sarek's daughter. Anyone could have predicted that counting on not using Spock in the near-future would be a foolhardy gamble.

That doesn't matter. We're not trying to "get it right." There is no "right" in make-believe. There's just telling stories. Every work of fiction is a conjecture, not a prediction of fact. It doesn't matter if the conjectures agree, it only matters if they're interesting.

I've said many times, every single work of science fiction will eventually be contradicted by reality. There's no predicting or controlling how long that will take -- it could be decades after publication or weeks before publication. So it would be self-defeating to rule out a story just because you're afraid it might not avoid contradiction for long. As long as you're in the clear in the here and now, as far as is currently known, that's the best you can hope for.

So there are no "foolhardy gambles," because we're not trying to "win" at predicting reality. The goal of the conjecture is not to be accurate and enduring for all time, merely to be creative and plausible given what's known at the time it's presented.