• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Star Trek: The Fate of the Phoenix by Sondra Marshak and Myrna Culbreath (1979)

Granted, although Hotep seemed to be rather an exception. And eleven new sentient species in one novel is a record that might still stand today. A lot of the business with the species resembling Earth critters, and the ship's vet being pressed into service treating them (not to mention the rather punning names for the individuals, their species, and their planets of origin) seemed to be for comic relief.
 
Last edited:
Granted, although Hotep seemed to be rather an exception.

Not at all. A pyramid-shaped alien named Hotep? Probably inspired by the "pyramid power" New Agey pseudoscience crap that was trendy in the '70s, and named for an Egyptian word commonly found in the names of pharaohs and the famous pyramid architect Imhotep. That's just as derivative of Earth mythology as the vampire and the mermaid.


And eleven new sentient species in one novel is a record that might still stand today.

I think I've broken that record more than once.
 
That was one of the main things I disliked about Death's Angel, because the "aliens" were so unimaginative, all just oversized Earth animals or mythological creatures like vampires and mermaids. Given the freedom of prose to create any aliens imaginable, that was the laziest possible way to do it.
I don't know if it was the laziest way possible....
Untitled.png
ETA: Yes, I'm aware that "prose" was clearly specified.
 
"Price of the Phoenix" was the first Trek novel I bought. My Dad had bought me the first six Blish adaptions.

Even back then, I thought the violence was over the top. I didn't know what 'slash ' fiction was though.

As I read "The Procustrean Petard" after the Phoenix novels, I thought it was how Spock was more violent in the novels due to the extra chromosome!

I have a copy of "Killing Time". I read it, enjoyed it. How do you know if you have the original unedited version?
 
The Death's Angel aliens were cheesy as hell - but I thought it was delicious cheese.
I think you've summed it up perfectly.

And yes, Hotep was a sentient pyramid with limited shapeshifting ability, and yes, his name, and the name of his homeworld, and one of the first line he uttered (introducing himself by saying "I'm Hotep," an obvious groaner on Imhotep) were puns on his shape, but he wasn't simply a sentient version of a critter from Earth zoology, Earth mythology, or Earth literature.

And Mr. Bennett, in what single ST novel(s) did you manage to introduce as many as eleven never-seen-before nonhumanoid sentient species?
 
I cannot emphasise how much I hate "Death's Angel". Which considering my other taste in books might be a recommendation to some. ;)

Really? I've always had a soft spot for that, mainly because of the variety of non-humanoid species depicted.
Even if M'Benga, against all that had been established about him previously, turned out to be the killer.
.

Was this the book where McCoy kept telling his non-human patients that they needed a veterinarian or was it some other book? Because I hate that whatever book it was in. It makes McCoy out to be speciest or racist even if he were doing his best to look after the 'pets'.
I like that there were a lot of different species but I felt that they were just there for some cheap laughs. To me they all seemed a bit silly. Maybe their depiction improved later in the novel.
I hate the twist as mentioned in the spoiler - another cheap trick.

That won the ship and then as one of the main things I disliked about Death's Angel, because the "aliens" were so unimaginative, all just oversized Earth animals or mythological creatures like vampires and mermaids. Given the freedom of prose to create any aliens imaginable, that was the laziest possible way to do it.
Agreed, It didn't make sense for all aliens to be from Earth mythology.

The major reason I hate this novel more than any other in the Star Trek universe is because everyone is out of character. It makes the M&C books look like a documentary. Kirk, Spock, Sarek.

If you think M&C appears weak in Pheonix then you should see him in Death's Angel.
He just rolls over for the beautiful and talented Mary Sue. Spock also yields to the logic of her greatness.
 
I have a copy of "Killing Time". I read it, enjoyed it. How do you know if you have the original unedited version?
If your copy of Killing Time has the book’s title in embossed gold foil letters on the cover, or if it’s the Canadian printing (has a maple leaf on the cover) or if it’s the Gregg Press hardcover reprint, it’s the naughty version. Every other US printing, as well as the UK Titan edition, is the cleaned-up version.

Yes, I have examined copies of every printing, and wrote a short article about it. Which languishes on my computer’s hard drive.
 
If your copy of Killing Time has the book’s title in embossed gold foil letters on the cover, or if it’s the Canadian printing (has a maple leaf on the cover) or if it’s the Gregg Press hardcover reprint, it’s the naughty version. Every other US printing, as well as the UK Titan edition, is the cleaned-up version.

Yes, I have examined copies of every printing, and wrote a short article about it. Which languishes on my computer’s hard drive.

I'm away from my books at present, but I might have a gold embossed title copy. But quite a few of the Trek novels from that period had that style. I'll check.

What's the overall page count difference between the two versions?

EDIT: Oops, didn't see Chrisophers post, doesn't sound like it might make an actual page count! :)
 
I'm away from my books at present, but I might have a gold embossed title copy. But quite a few of the Trek novels from that period had that style. I'll check.

What's the overall page count difference between the two versions?

EDIT: Oops, didn't see Chrisophers post, doesn't sound like it might make an actual page count! :)
No change in page count, because, as Christopher says, the changes were minor. A sentence here, a paragraph there. Probably no more than a few hundred words removed, all told.

Also, back in that era, the first printing of a title was something like 100,000 copies. Subsequent printings were based on how many orders came in once the stock was exhausted, and were a lot smaller. I’ve documented another 6 printings (2-7) which, even if they were reprinting 10,000 at a time, still total fewer than the initial run. The cleaned-up version is actually rarer than the naughty version.

EBay bears this out: there are more copies of the first printing on sale than there are of subsequent printings.
 
I have a copy of "Killing Time". I read it, enjoyed it. How do you know if you have the original unedited version?

https://lexx-the-flex.livejournal.com/877.html

The link above gives you the differences between the unaltered and the altered version, including where they can be found. That'll tell you which version you have.

I too think the whole Killing Time 'controversy' was overblown. If I read my copy and never knew a thing about it I wouldn't have probably even noticed the homoeroticism in it to be honest.

The Price of the Phoenix is way more salacious then Killing Time when it comes to slash elements.
 
Not at all. A pyramid-shaped alien named Hotep? Probably inspired by the "pyramid power" New Agey pseudoscience crap that was trendy in the '70s, and named for an Egyptian word commonly found in the names of pharaohs and the famous pyramid architect Imhotep. That's just as derivative of Earth mythology as the vampire and the mermaid.

That's starting to sound like Warlords of Ka'a. Or possibly three-player chess. :lol:

From James Blish through the TWOK era, I religiously bought and read almost every Star Trek book there was (I missed Mission to Horatius). I remember disliking the sexual themes in the Phoenix novels, but they came at a time when finding any ST book was still an event in my life, so they got a pass.

Also, some of it went over my head at the time, if the long and horrible excerpts above are any indication. Non-consensual and nasty. One of their later books, I think it was The Prometheus Design, was wrapped up in clinical depression, and once again undermining the Kirk character. It's like the authors had "issues," and when they opened up their imaginations to write fiction, the issues spilled out unbidden.
 
EBay bears this out: there are more copies of the first printing on sale than there are of subsequent printings.
Unless they included an image of the copyright page, I don't think you can use eBay auctions as a reliable source. In my experience, most sellers see "First Printing, MMMM yyyy" and think they have a first printing, ignoring the number strip completely.
 
Unless they included an image of the copyright page, I don't think you can use eBay auctions as a reliable source. In my experience, most sellers see "First Printing, MMMM yyyy" and think they have a first printing, ignoring the number strip completely.
Oh yeah, I pay very little attention to what is claimed about a particular printing, and rely on either a photo of the copyright page, or just a photo of the front & back covers. Running changes to the front cover design, SRP, and the ISBN are pretty much definitive tells as to which printing is being sold.

Except for online retailers that use a generic picture, rather than a photo of the actual item offered for sale. I ignore their listings.
 
Death's Angel - worst Star Trek novel I've ever read. Actually half-read because I couldn't stand it anymore.

A friend was excited by this one and was shocked when I didn't rave about it. "But you like aliens!"

But there were too many cutsie names (esp. the pyramid alien, "Hotep"), for a start. Although I did laugh when someone thought he was an hors d'oeuvre on the buffet table.

My friend even created a "Death's Angel" costume for his first convention:


Si-s-s-s (click) from "Death's Angel"
by Ian McLean, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
I read this disaster waaay back in Jr. High School (so somewhere between 1979 and 1981) and I was really looking forward to it because I loved "Price" so much, but it only left me bewildered. At the time I chalked it up to just being over my head as a young reader. Never went back to read it again. So glad to find out that others were just as confused as I was. Honestly it has been nagging me for going on 40 years.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top