Discussion in 'Trek Literature' started by historypeats, May 14, 2020.
Think he just needs an editor; missing a comma.
I'm still going to continue to hold onto that tiny little itsy bitsy bit of hope, that if nothing else we at least get something to tie up the lose ends.
Seeing how the Star Wars franchise went after Disney restarted the film series, I was completely expecting the Novel-verse to go away once DSC was in production. I was even kinda surprised that there was some overlap (with some Novel-verses borrowing from the new continuity branch and DSC tie-ins referencing Novel-verse stuff despite not connecting to that incarnation of things), but whatever.
I can empathize with people who got really invested in the Novel-verse seeing it sad to go, but it makes perfect sense that they're going to want to have a clean slate to keep new tie-ins consistent with the TV shows. On the plus side, IMHO, the new novels/comics are really feeling like companion pieces to the TV shows instead of "just" being new one-offs that one can take or leave.
Not the same situation. Star Wars had to make a clean break with its tie-in continuity because the new movies were covering the same ground as the majority of the tie-ins over the years: the generation in the wake of Return of the Jedi and the ultimate fates of Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, etc. It was too direct an overlap of subject matter to reconcile them, so the only option was to make a clean break and start anew. That wasn't the case with Discovery, as it covered a period in Trek history that had virtually no overlap with any of the tie-in literature. So it was possible to continue the same way we did when Enterprise was on, occasionally seeing certain details contradicted but able to tweak things to fit them in and keep the bulk of the narrative intact. (This is, in fact, what Star Wars tie-ins did during the prequel trilogy and The Clone Wars, pretending to be "canon" while being frequently contradicted and overwritten. They just retconned or quietly glossed over the contradicted parts and continued the pretense of depicting a consistent whole.)
So it wasn't until Picard that we ended up in the same boat as Star Wars, with a new onscreen sequel series covering the same ground as the novel continuity (and separately ST Online) and contradicting it wholesale (at least from 2380 onward). Although of course, Trek tie-ins have never followed SW's lead of pretending they all represented a single consistent continuity to begin with. I really wish people would stop expecting ST stuff to automatically work the same way as SW stuff. We are not a subset of them. We were here first.
I never liked comparing the two myself. Other than taking place in space, they really aren't that much alike. Star Trek is 'science fiction' while Star Wars is a 'space opera/fantasy'. Gene Roddenberry, and those that followed, tried to keep at least a bit of realism in the shows--it takes place in our galaxy, Earth is very much a part of it and it takes place in the future. And they try to keep science in mind. Even the production designers over the years tried to think about the things they created on sets and how things might work.
Star Wars, on the other hand, is pure fantasy. George Lucas has said that, he never intended on creating it as being realistic. I don't even consider Star Wars and Star Trek true competitors because they are different styles of entertainment. Sort of like comparing a horror film to a drama film. Say comparing "Friday the 13th" to "Deliverance". Other than they both take place in the woods they really don't share that much in common.
I guess people like to compare things. They both are huge franchises with a large following, but they just don't share a lot in common.
Besides. Star Trek is way better
I admit I consider both Space Opera and loving siblings.
On the basis of on screen stuff I would agree.
However, on the basis of the novels I would say they’re about equal.
I'm seven books in and very much enjoying it. I need to sit down and do some reviews. Love the "adventure of the week" format and characters.
Well, technically, the Star Wars Expanded Universe started way before Star Trek tried their own hand at creating a consistent world of tie-ins that fit together as a single whole. In any case, invoking Star Wars was just an example to my point; the Novel-verse was mostly formed with the TV/movie part of the franchise was dead or dying, giving them room to continue the story in another medium. Once DSC came around, that signaled that CBS was interested in tying to get the TV show back again, meaning that the novels were no longer without competition. You could use any franchise where a revival upended other parts of the franchise produced in the interm.
No, actually Star Trek did that first in the 1980s, which came to an end because of TNG starting. Then Star Wars tried their had at it in the 90s, and Star Trek swooped in again during the 2000s.
Um, some authors kept continuity with their previous work and/or referenced common reference books, but I do not recall there ever being any overriding "one world" for the tie-ins.
Which still does not make it any less irrational to expect every other tie-in franchise to imitate Star Wars's approach. The fact that they did something first, or did it at all, is irrelevant to any other tie-in franchise, because Star Wars does not control the whole universe of fiction. There are no universal rules to how tie-ins work, and the way SW does things is only relevant to SW, nobody else.
And I already explained why that analogy is misapplied because it overlooks a key factor. The situation with Discovery is equivalent to the situation with the Star Wars prequels or The Clone Wars -- new screen content set in a prequel era that did not overlap directly with the primary time frame of the tie-in continuity, so that it was possible to work around the changes and keep the overall tie-in continuity intact. The situation with Picard is the one that's analogous to the Disney-era SW reboot -- new screen content set in the same era as the bulk of the tie-in continuity and contradicting it wholesale, so that it was no longer possible to reconcile them.
Weirdly, I'd say a reboot is a good thing because I actually wouldn't want them to mess with the continuity enough to make it work. It's a beautiful interlocked universe and if you did a novel that "fixed" everything like "Before and After" that resulted in the changes then it would be kind of horrifying.
(I still feel that's the most horrifying episode of Trek if you think about its implications)
Book Picard deserves his marriage, kid, and happy ending.
Honestly I don't think there's any way to reconcile where we left off with "Collateral Damage" with where Picard is. The only thing you can say is that it's an alternate timeline of events. Might make for an interesting DTI book though, say if the litverse characters found out about the Picard timeline somehow--but it'd still be an alternate universe.
I'd love to see the litverse universe continue as an alternate timeline--but I doubt that will happen (though there is a "plan" I guess so we'll see).
While I haven't seen Picard I did read "The Last, Best Hope" so I know the basic set up and that shows seems much darker then where we last left off TNG novels.
It's not that the characters as seen in the novels didn't go to Hell and back. It's just their hellscape happened several years ago and now things are looking up. I'm hoping that by the end of Picard that universe is in a similar situation, with things looking up for Admiral Picard and the Federation.
What's I find interesting for me personally is I've read the novels for years now and have become so invested in that storyline that I find myself considering that the prime-timeline and the Picard timeline an alternate timeline similar to how we see the Kelvin movies. I know 'officially' the 'canon' timeline is the prime timeline, but I actually see it the other way around. Not that it matters to anyone but me, but something I was thinking about.
So in my prime timeline Captain Picard is still in command of the Enterprise going off to do the thing he does best, exploring strange new worlds with his wife, Dr. Crusher and his son, and all the other aspects of that timeline with Admiral Riker, a new station at Deep Space Nine, Captain Sisko is off exploring in the Gamma Quadrant with Kasidy and his daughter, etc. etc.
I admit, I prefer the Picard timeline.
Because that means Section 31 is still protecting us from the perils of democracy and freedom!
*is pelted with warp coils and rotten replicator food*
Ha-ha. You know I liked that Section 31 played a big role in STID. But you know the novelty is starting to wear off a bit. I kind of liked that the novels basically ended Section 31 (or at least it seems that way). Kind of like the Borg. Loved them as a villain but I was kind of glad when Destiny finally brought the Borg to a conclusion.
Funny thing. "The Fall of Section 31" was what I always wanted to see in "the last batch" of Trek Books. If this is the end, I can live with it. There are, to paraphrase, Picard, plenty of other books left on the store shelves.
Well I'm enjoying and TV troping the DISCO and PICARD books so its hardly the end.
I definitely want to see some books set on the Picard Party Bus a.k.a Mermaid.
The situation seemed close enough at the time. If I was wrong, fair enough.
I admit, I wasn't fond of the Skynet retcon to Section 31. I love the novels and the final results were very good for the story they were telling but I admit I always felt the novels leaned a bit too hard into Section 31 and the Borg's villainy. I always liked that Section 31 should have a point even if it's not right. They should have the Magneto or Psicorps, "I am ethically wrong but my reasoning remains sound." Likewise, the Borg becoming omnicidal never quite sat right with me.
I admit, part of that was due to my headcanon they stopped attacking Earth because they finally assimilated all the data they needed from Starfleet's computers about the Federation's technology. It was never personal with the Borg.
But that's the price of serialized storytelling. Sometimes stories go in a different direction than you want.
Separate names with a comma.