Star Trek Voyager: The Eternal Tide by Kirsten Beyer

[Christopher]

^But nobody who is a member of the Federation in the 24th century would interpret being sent through a transporter as being killed. Yet they did interpret Spock's and Janeway's fate as death. It's no fair shifting the goalposts at random to suit your argument. The goalposts belong where the characters in the stories would place them. And none of them would've perceived Scotty's status within that transporter as "dead."

 

[MatthiasRussell]

None of the characters in treklit are aware of the interaction between Lady Q and Janeway in Before Dishonor. They certainly are not aware of the interaction between the two of them after the Borg cube was destroyed. As far as they are aware, Janeway is dead. If they are aware of what we, the readers, are aware of, they may not have declared her dead.

I'm sure plenty in 24th century Starfleet who didn't believe in the Prophets felt Sisko died during the events of What You Leave Behind until he returned in Unity.

As for Scotty, was he not believed dead during those years in the transporter? His starfleet record may have stated "Missing" or MIA but no one believed he was alive after all those years. And for all intents and purposes, Scotty was dead to the universe.

These all seem like Schrodinger's Cat situations to me.

 

[Fer]

None of the characters in treklit are aware of the interaction between Lady Q and Janeway in Before Dishonor. They certainly are not aware of the interaction between the two of them after the Borg cube was destroyed. As far as they are aware, Janeway is dead. If they are aware of what we, the readers, are aware of, they may not have declared her dead.

I'm sure plenty in 24th century Starfleet who didn't believe in the Prophets felt Sisko died during the events of What You Leave Behind until he returned in Unity.

As for Scotty, was he not believed dead during those years in the transporter? His starfleet record may have stated "Missing" or MIA but no one believed he was alive after all those years. And for all intents and purposes, Scotty was dead to the universe.

These all seem like Schrodinger's Cat situations to me.

I feel it's a question of what we the audience have been shown. We were never given a big "This is Scotty's death!" episode, only to have it undone by "Relics"; as the audience, we only knew for sure that McCoy and Spock were still alive and we had no idea what the fates of the rest of the original TOS crew were.

(ETA: )
So having said that, the fact that we the audience saw the conversation between Lady Q and Janeway means there we know there is a possibility of her coming back; but having also seen her death, it would definitely be a case of resurrecting a dead character, as opposed to simply learning the fate of a character that had been previously unknown to us.

 

[JD]

Respectful to what? it's just a bit of corporate fiction - it's nothing truly important.

How about respectful to every woman who reads your post and is upset by the imagery of hideous sexual violence you employed so casually? Not to mention all the men who were equally offended by it? It was an incredibly disturbing, misogynistic thing to say, particularly over "nothing truly important."

I completely agree with this. I honestly think what you wrote, JoeZhang, was one of the most disturbing things I've ever read on these boards.

 

[nx1701g]

I wonder if the return of Captain Janeway may be a red herring. Maybe, if Janeway does return, she's actually the hologram that escaped in the novel Full Circle?

 

[Christopher]

That was in Unworthy, wasn't it? If you're referring to what I think you are.

 

[MatthiasRussell]

None of the characters in treklit are aware of the interaction between Lady Q and Janeway in Before Dishonor. They certainly are not aware of the interaction between the two of them after the Borg cube was destroyed. As far as they are aware, Janeway is dead. If they are aware of what we, the readers, are aware of, they may not have declared her dead.

I'm sure plenty in 24th century Starfleet who didn't believe in the Prophets felt Sisko died during the events of What You Leave Behind until he returned in Unity.

As for Scotty, was he not believed dead during those years in the transporter? His starfleet record may have stated "Missing" or MIA but no one believed he was alive after all those years. And for all intents and purposes, Scotty was dead to the universe.

These all seem like Schrodinger's Cat situations to me.

I feel it's a question of what we the audience have been shown. We were never given a big "This is Scotty's death!" episode, only to have it undone by "Relics"; as the audience, we only knew for sure that McCoy and Spock were still alive and we had no idea what the fates of the rest of the original TOS crew were.

(ETA: )
So having said that, the fact that we the audience saw the conversation between Lady Q and Janeway means there we know there is a possibility of her coming back; but having also seen her death, it would definitely be a case of resurrecting a dead character, as opposed to simply learning the fate of a character that had been previously unknown to us.

All this talk of Scotty's death makes me wonder what readers would think if Scotty "returned from the dead" again. But then Scotty IS a miracle worker.

And speaking of the deaths of TOS characters, I have a few questions.

Has it been said whether or not Admiral McCoy is dead?

Are there any books in the relaunch line that mention the latter days of other central TOS characters?

Was Kirk's body left where Picard buried it? I understand some comics have mentioned that Picard never told anyone about Kirk's death and burial but I would expect Picard to tell Starfleet who would want to bring his body home.

 

[JD]

David McIntee has said he does have an out for Scotty's death, so his return has already been mentioned as a possibility if a story needed him after it happened.
And as for later day adventures of the TOS crew, we've gotten quite a few.
The Sundered takes place on the Excelsior 5 years after Kirk's death, and along with Captain Sulu, also has Checkov, Rand, and Chapel as crew members.
Vulcan's Forge takes place 1 year after Kirk's death, and features Spock in command of the USS Intrepid II, with Uhura as his first officer, and McCoy as his CMO.
The Art of the Impossible, and Catalyst of Sorrows, both feature Uhura as head of Starfleet Intelligence.
She also appears in the same role in Vulcan's Heart, along with now Ambassador Spock, Captain Saavik, and Dr. McCoy. Spock, McCoy, and Scotty appear in the TNG novel Crossover, which takes place between "All Good Things..." and Generations. McCoy, and Spock appear in the Double Helix novel Red Sector. Spock, Saavik, Uhura, and Checkov, appear in all three of the Vulcan's Soul novels, which are set after the Dominion War, and I believe are the latest appearances of TOS characters, other than Spock's appearance in RBoE. I'm sure there are probably others, but those are all the ones I know of.

 

[captcalhoun]

Spock, Scotty and McCoy appear in the Tales of the Dominion War anthology; Spock on Romulus, Scotty and McCoy together in a story set not long after the Breen attack on Earth. Spock's also appeared in NF, as did T'Pau.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Has it been said whether or not Admiral McCoy is dead?

McCoy's death was shown in a comic, with Scotty and Spock summoned to his bedside, but no date was specified.

Was Kirk's body left where Picard buried it? I understand some comics have mentioned that Picard never told anyone about Kirk's death and burial but I would expect Picard to tell Starfleet who would want to bring his body home.

Some people say the cairn of stones was too small to conceal a body. Maybe Picard built a memorial, but took Kirk back to Earth?

I seem to recall a novel which had Spock making plans to take the body to Earth. Of course, in the Shatnerverse, the Romulans revive the corpse with Borg nanites.

 

[F. King Daniel]

All this talk of Scotty's death makes me wonder what readers would think if Scotty "returned from the dead" again. But then Scotty IS a miracle worker.

Spoiler: Indistinguishable From Magic

I really don't think beaming himself off an exploding ship to parts unknown (Scotty knew his plan, and that it was a longshot at best, but us readers weren't enlightened) can count as anything more than being M.I.A.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

if Janeway comes back, i am done with Trek Lit.

If Janeway comes back I'd only buy this book if it finished with her dying again and a Hirogen skull-f**king her corpse.

If it features that scene I'll buy two copies.

Jesus Christ, dude.

I'm about ready to jump on the Bring Janeway Back bandwagon just because that's such an ugly, alienating image.

It will be interesting to see how this subforum will react - considering the endless discussions on Janeway's death that took place here.
Nobody likes to be proven wrong - and, apparently, the 'don't bring back Janeway' crowd WILL BE proven wrong.

I'm aware of no one in the "don't bring Janeway back" crowd who asserted that they couldn't bring Janeway back; obviously, it's fiction, so they could. Nor anyone who asserted that they wouldn't; creative directions and ideas change, and in point of fact Janeway was already "brought back" in the Star Trek Online novel. The assertion that I'm aware of most "don't bring back Janeway" folks making was that they shouldn't -- and saying they shouldn't isn't "proven wrong" just because it happens.

Now you see what I meant in my previous post - beyond semantic hair-splitting -, Sci?

 

[Hartzilla2007]

David McIntee has said he does have an out for Scotty's death, so his return has already been mentioned as a possibility if a story needed him after it happened.
And as for later day adventures of the TOS crew, we've gotten quite a few.
The Sundered takes place on the Excelsior 5 years after Kirk's death, and along with Captain Sulu, also has Checkov, Rand, and Chapel as crew members.
Vulcan's Forge takes place 1 year after Kirk's death, and features Spock in command of the USS Intrepid II, with Uhura as his first officer, and McCoy as his CMO.
The Art of the Impossible, and Catalyst of Sorrows, both feature Uhura as head of Starfleet Intelligence.
She also appears in the same role in Vulcan's Heart, along with now Ambassador Spock, Captain Saavik, and Dr. McCoy. Spock, McCoy, and Scotty appear in the TNG novel Crossover, which takes place between "All Good Things..." and Generations. McCoy, and Spock appear in the Double Helix novel Red Sector. Spock, Saavik, Uhura, and Checkov, appear in all three of the Vulcan's Soul novels, which are set after the Dominion War, and I believe are the latest appearances of TOS characters, other than Spock's appearance in RBoE. I'm sure there are probably others, but those are all the ones I know of.

There was a doctor mentioned in A Singular Destiny that sounding like he was McCoy.

 

[rfmcdpei]

if Janeway comes back, i am done with Trek Lit.

Jesus Christ, dude.

I'm about ready to jump on the Bring Janeway Back bandwagon just because that's such an ugly, alienating image.

It will be interesting to see how this subforum will react - considering the endless discussions on Janeway's death that took place here.
Nobody likes to be proven wrong - and, apparently, the 'don't bring back Janeway' crowd WILL BE proven wrong.

I'm aware of no one in the "don't bring Janeway back" crowd who asserted that they couldn't bring Janeway back; obviously, it's fiction, so they could. Nor anyone who asserted that they wouldn't; creative directions and ideas change, and in point of fact Janeway was already "brought back" in the Star Trek Online novel. The assertion that I'm aware of most "don't bring back Janeway" folks making was that they shouldn't -- and saying they shouldn't isn't "proven wrong" just because it happens.

Now you see what I meant in my previous post - beyond semantic hair-splitting -, Sci?

What's hair-splitting? Saying that someone shouldn't do something is rather different from saying someone couldn't do something: justification for an action is different from capacity for an action.

 

[Edit_XYZ]

Now you see what I meant in my previous post - beyond semantic hair-splitting -, Sci?

What's hair-splitting? Saying that someone shouldn't do something is rather different from saying someone couldn't do something: justification for an action is different from capacity for an action.

wouldn't, shouldn't - I didn't use these verbs.

"Nobody likes to be proven wrong - and, apparently, the 'don't bring back Janeway' crowd WILL BE proven wrong."

The 'don't bring back Janeway' posters think Janeway shouldn't be brought back.
Pocket books and Kristen Beyer - the creators of the current trek continuity everybody argues about in this subforum AKA the authority on the matter (if there is one) - obviously think Janeway should be brought back (since they are bringing her back). Implicitly, they think the 'don't bring back Janeway' fans are wrong.


Why are the 'don't bring back Janeway' posters so highly annoyed - as is obvious from this thread? Because they are aware (even if only in the backs of their minds) of this implicit refusal of their position by the 'authority' of current trek lit.
Which was my essential point in that post - a point Sci chose to overlook in favor of said irrelevant semantic hair-splitting.

 

[nx1701g]

That was in Unworthy, wasn't it? If you're referring to what I think you are.

Sorry, had the wrong book.

 

[BritishSeaPower]

Has it been said whether or not Admiral McCoy is dead?

McCoy's death was shown in a comic, with Scotty and Spock summoned to his bedside, but no date was specified.

Was Kirk's body left where Picard buried it? I understand some comics have mentioned that Picard never told anyone about Kirk's death and burial but I would expect Picard to tell Starfleet who would want to bring his body home.

Some people say the cairn of stones was too small to conceal a body. Maybe Picard built a memorial, but took Kirk back to Earth?

I seem to recall a novel which had Spock making plans to take the body to Earth. Of course, in the Shatnerverse, the Romulans revive the corpse with Borg nanites.

I just read "Star Trek Special" form Wildstorm which has the McCoy death comic you're talking about. Sadly, the book very clearly says it is set in 2371, which has since been contradicted by two stories in the Tales of the Dominion War collection, which take place 3-5 years later. I, personally, am just ignoring the date for my own reading order.


As for Kirk's body, I know the TrekLit-verse has a few different answers. Most recently, the IDW comic Spock: Reflections depicts Spock leaving Romulan space to visit Kirk's burial cairn and then Picard helping him transport the body to a grave on Earth. (Presumably to an Iowa Farm.) That story is ostensibly set in the first year of the Enterprise-E, as Picard has the new uniform and the Stardate, If I'm remembering correctly, places it in 2372/3.

 

[Fer]

Now you see what I meant in my previous post - beyond semantic hair-splitting -, Sci?

What's hair-splitting? Saying that someone shouldn't do something is rather different from saying someone couldn't do something: justification for an action is different from capacity for an action.

wouldn't, shouldn't - I didn't use these verbs.

"Nobody likes to be proven wrong - and, apparently, the 'don't bring back Janeway' crowd WILL BE proven wrong."

The 'don't bring back Janeway' posters think Janeway shouldn't be brought back.
Pocket books and Kristen Beyer - the creators of the current trek continuity everybody argues about in this subforum AKA the authority on the matter (if there is one) - obviously think Janeway should be brought back (since they are bringing her back). Implicitly, they think the 'don't bring back Janeway' fans are wrong.


Why are the 'don't bring back Janeway' posters so highly annoyed - as is obvious from this thread? Because they are aware (even if only in the backs of their minds) of this implicit refusal of their position by the 'authority' of current trek lit.
Which was my essential point in that post - a point Sci chose to overlook in favor of said irrelevant semantic hair-splitting.

Oh, I dunno... I think that makes it sound a lot more personal than it really is.

Do I think Janeway's death would be more dramatic if she was not brought back? Sure. Do I care one bit if TPTB agree with me? Nope. They're going to do whatever they feel is best.

It's just a difference of opinion, and if the opinion of the people making the product differs from mine it doesn't make either of us "right" or "wrong." They're going to do whatever they choose to do irregardless of my opinion, so if they choose to take the story in a direction that I wouldn't have, I don't --even in the back of my mind-- feel that I'm being "proven wrong" somehow.

But again, being a comic book fan, I had to come to terms with this kind of thing decades ago.

 

[Sci]

What's hair-splitting? Saying that someone shouldn't do something is rather different from saying someone couldn't do something: justification for an action is different from capacity for an action.

wouldn't, shouldn't - I didn't use these verbs.

"Nobody likes to be proven wrong - and, apparently, the 'don't bring back Janeway' crowd WILL BE proven wrong."

The 'don't bring back Janeway' posters think Janeway shouldn't be brought back.
Pocket books and Kristen Beyer - the creators of the current trek continuity everybody argues about in this subforum AKA the authority on the matter (if there is one) - obviously think Janeway should be brought back (since they are bringing her back). Implicitly, they think the 'don't bring back Janeway' fans are wrong.


Why are the 'don't bring back Janeway' posters so highly annoyed - as is obvious from this thread? Because they are aware (even if only in the backs of their minds) of this implicit refusal of their position by the 'authority' of current trek lit.
Which was my essential point in that post - a point Sci chose to overlook in favor of said irrelevant semantic hair-splitting.

Oh, I dunno... I think that makes it sound a lot more personal than it really is.

Of course it does. That's Edit's schtick -- he turns everything into the most highly-charged personal fight he possibly can.

 

[DimesDan]

wouldn't, shouldn't - I didn't use these verbs.

"Nobody likes to be proven wrong - and, apparently, the 'don't bring back Janeway' crowd WILL BE proven wrong."

The 'don't bring back Janeway' posters think Janeway shouldn't be brought back.
Pocket books and Kristen Beyer - the creators of the current trek continuity everybody argues about in this subforum AKA the authority on the matter (if there is one) - obviously think Janeway should be brought back (since they are bringing her back). Implicitly, they think the 'don't bring back Janeway' fans are wrong.


Why are the 'don't bring back Janeway' posters so highly annoyed - as is obvious from this thread? Because they are aware (even if only in the backs of their minds) of this implicit refusal of their position by the 'authority' of current trek lit.
Which was my essential point in that post - a point Sci chose to overlook in favor of said irrelevant semantic hair-splitting.

Oh, I dunno... I think that makes it sound a lot more personal than it really is.

Of course it does. That's Edit's schtick -- he turns everything into the most highly-charged personal fight he possibly can.

Something you've never done, is it.