The Completely Useless Unauthorized Star Trek Encyclopedia

[Joe_Atari]

Any other fans of this book?

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/m...4/46/Unauthorised_Trek_Encyclopedia_cover.jpg

http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/The_Completely_Useless_Star_Trek_Encyclopedia

It's from the U.K., and I confess to not getting the British sense of humor (humour?) a good deal of the time, but when I first read it when it came out I laughed out loud.. a lot. I still flip through it occasionally for a chuckle. It's an often scathing commentary on all of the Trek ouevre (up through mid-VOY anyway, when the book was published) but with a very humorous tone. What makes the book so special is that the authors are clearly very well-versed in Trek canon (their fixation on TAS notwithstanding). This isn't just a couple of wags making fun of Trek fans; they clearly have a strange affection for the shows that I share.

It's probably long out-of-print, but you should be able to find it used from Amazon, etc. It might not be for all tastes, but I recommend it; any other opinions? Maybe fans of the book could post their favorite entries...

 

[Dayton Ward]

I've had a copy of this book for years, and it's one of my favorites, even more so than Altman and Gross' Trek Navigator because, if I were ever to write a reference book, The Completely Useless Star Trek Encyclopedia would be one of my templates

 

[Rosalind]

Any other fans of this book?

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/m...4/46/Unauthorised_Trek_Encyclopedia_cover.jpg

Joe_Atari, hotlinking to images on sites not owned by you is against board rules, please don't do it again.

 

[Stevil2001]

I have it, and have dipped in from time to time. I love the entry on "Admiral" and whatever entry it is that lists TOS's missed opportunities for creating more MicroMachines. I keep on meaning to give it a proper read someday-- I loved the same authors' Doctor Who: The Completely Useless Encyclopedia.

 

[FalTorPan]

I'd never heard of this book. Looks like fun.

 

[KRAD]

It, and Howarth & Lyons's like volume for Doctor Who, are absolute classics and must-haves.

 

[PaulSimpson]

It, and Howarth & Lyons's like volume for Doctor Who, are absolute classics and must-haves.

You mean both of Chris and Steve's books on Doctor Who - they published a new series version through Mad Norwegian Press a couple of years back...

P

 

[KRAD]

^ It's an encyclopedia. Properly, the most recent revised edition is the only one that needs to be discussed. *nods*

 

[PaulSimpson]

^ It's an encyclopedia. Properly, the most recent revised edition is the only one that needs to be discussed. *nods*

Which I'd agree with - if it wasn't that the first one deals with Classic Who, and the new one deals with the new series. It's a volume two, not a replacement

 

[Stevil2001]

I believe the new book is entirely distinct from the old one, covering the new series and not repriting material from the first volume.

EDIT: Paul beat me to it!

 

[Steve Roby]

I've read all three cover to cover. Lots of fun.

 

[SiorX]

I'd completely forgotten that book! My sister had it when we were kids and it used to crack us up every time. That and the Nit-picker's Guide to TNG.

Some of my favourite entries were on "Impression, Kirk's Horse", "Horse Impression, Kirk's" and "Kirk's Horse Impression".

 

[captcalhoun]

the best bit in Nit-picker's Guide to TOS is the alternative descriptions for the empty starfield in the closing credits, the sarky comments about Balok's puppet in same and so on...

 

[JD]

My family used to have a couple of the Nitpicker's guides, but I'd never heard of this before. Sounds pretty funny, I'd probably look for it if I didn't already have a ton of stuff to read.

 

[Csalem]

This book is an absolute classic, especially their comments about Troi's abilities.