The Grief of "Full Circle" (and other thoughts)

[CNash]

Well, I've just finished Full Circle. Hats off to Ms. Beyer both for revitalising Voyager, and for providing a much needed centre of grief in the aftermath of Before Dishonor and Destiny. My word, so much unrestrained emotion! In hindsight, I can see why Astall transferred off the ship - she would've practically exploded under the strain! It's won my title of "Star Trek novel most able to make grown men weep" From Chakotay in Venice, to Tom and his father, to Seven's heartbreaking glimpse of perfection... it's almost a perfect storm of sadness. And yet, it never stopped me from reading onwards.

Now, I was one of the (apparent) few who actually enjoyed Christie Golden's four relaunch novels. And yes, I am aware that Ms. Beyer has justified her actions in killing off Kaz and Lyssa Campbell as she did. I had been accidentally spoilered as to their fates, so it wasn't too bad, and I agree with her reasoning as far as Kaz goes. But I wasn't quite prepared for the true reality of Full Circle: that if you're a character not either from the TV series, or created by Kristen Beyer, you are marked for death. It got to the point where I was taking note of mentions of Golden's characters and mentally going "Yep, they're gone. Pity." From Akolo Tare on downwards, virtually nobody escapes. I understand that there was no obligation to continue on with other people's characters, but I can't help thinking that they could've been put to greater use than "fodder for a Klingon grizzly" or "victim of a random console explosion".

That (admittedly minor) criticism aside, I thoroughly enjoyed Full Circle, and am now about to start Unworthy. Please no spoilers for "Typhon Pact" novels in your comments, if you can help them - they're next on my reading list!

 

[DeVario]

Full Circle was the novel that turned me into a full blown Voyager fan. I think you'll enjoy Beyer's subsequent novels too. They are great.

 

[CaptainDonovin]

I read the four novels Christine Golden wrote & did enjoy them but love where Kirsten has taken things. Full Circle was a full range of emotions buti really like that when a story can tug on your feelings like that. The follow up novels are indeed great, not to give anything away but she makes the other ships in the Full Circle fleet interresting when there is focus on them.

 

[Killandra]

Warning, here be spoilers....and maybe some dragons...



Full Circle was good and it dealt with the grief the characters had for Janeway quite well, but there are some things that don't make sense to me...how in such a short period of time after the Federation lost nearly half it's fleet and crew could it afford both in resources and personnel to fix Voyager and equip it with a slip stream drive and and send a handful of ships with it to the Delta Quadrant?

Full Circle and it's subsequent novels are enjoyable, but that point nags at me a bit as it seems a little unrealistic...

 

[AuntKate]

Perhaps there is a place among Star Trek readers for a more "character-driven" book series? Why not Voyager, as it was focused on the crew from the first?

 

[JD]

^Most of the Trek series tend to be quite character driven, so I really don't see why there would be a need to single out Voyager there.

 

[Thrawn]

Especially since, as it stands, it IS an extremely character-driven book series that is very focused on the crew, and what most people seem to like the most are the character arcs.

 

[Guest12]

I certainly agree about the deaths of Tare and Kaz, but the new crew seems like it'll be interesting, as well. And Devi Patel survived so there's one character who's been with the crew since they re-staffed after getting back home (IIRC).

 

[Christopher]

...how in such a short period of time after the Federation lost nearly half it's fleet and crew could it afford both in resources and personnel to fix Voyager and equip it with a slip stream drive and and send a handful of ships with it to the Delta Quadrant?

It couldn't afford not to, in a sense. The primary goal (or at least the rationalization that was used to sell the project to Starfleet Command) was to go and make sure that the Borg really are gone. That was deemed important enough to justify the investment.

 

[captcalhoun]

Full Circle didn't make me cry. Wildfire's climax, on the other hand did. TWICE. even though I knew what was coming. Damn you to hell, Mack for being such a brilliant writer!

 

[Sci]

...how in such a short period of time after the Federation lost nearly half it's fleet and crew could it afford both in resources and personnel to fix Voyager and equip it with a slip stream drive and and send a handful of ships with it to the Delta Quadrant?

It couldn't afford not to, in a sense. The primary goal (or at least the rationalization that was used to sell the project to Starfleet Command) was to go and make sure that the Borg really are gone. That was deemed important enough to justify the investment.

There's also the fact that the only reason the Federation survived the Borg invasion was that it had already sent out ships on long-term exploration missions -- the starship Titan contacting the Caeliar was the key to saving the Alpha Quadrant from extermination at the Collective's hands. If exploration proved to be invaluable then, there's no reason to think it won't again.

Clearly the Federation understands something that we often forget today: Exploration, diplomacy, and the expansion of scientific knowledge are as essential to national security as a well-armed military.

 

[Relayer1]

Now, I was one of the (apparent) few who actually enjoyed Christie Golden's four relaunch novels. And yes, I am aware that Ms. Beyer has justified her actions in killing off Kaz and Lyssa Campbell as she did. I had been accidentally spoilered as to their fates, so it wasn't too bad, and I agree with her reasoning as far as Kaz goes. But I wasn't quite prepared for the true reality of Full Circle: that if you're a character not either from the TV series, or created by Kristen Beyer, you are marked for death. It got to the point where I was taking note of mentions of Golden's characters and mentally going "Yep, they're gone. Pity." From Akolo Tare on downwards, virtually nobody escapes. I understand that there was no obligation to continue on with other people's characters, but I can't help thinking that they could've been put to greater use than "fodder for a Klingon grizzly" or "victim of a random console explosion".

Well, you appear to be (at least on here) in the minority in liking them - I (and many others) can't stand them, BUT there are some fairly esteemed supporters too.

Ms Beyer has been far too professional to discuss her preferences, but I am interpreting her summary execution of all of Goldens characters as a hint...

 

[Christopher]

Clearly the Federation understands something that we often forget today: Exploration, diplomacy, and the expansion of scientific knowledge are as essential to national security as a well-armed military.

Yup. Knowledge is power. No telling what useful discoveries might pass you by if you stop investing in the effort to look for them.

Ms Beyer has been far too professional to discuss her preferences, but I am interpreting her summary execution of all of Goldens characters as a hint...

But if you assume she's professional, isn't it contradictory to assume she'd be so unprofessional as to get rid of so many characters based only on petty dislike rather than having valid story reasons for it? Besides, Kirsten has discussed her reasons for the character changes in detail, back in the Full Circle review thread in 2009, and as she makes clear, it's completely untrue to say that she killed off all of Golden's characters:

Characters: Golden gave us five new senior staff members, Admiral Montgomery, and the development of Libby.

Yes, Libby and Harry break up early on, but that's hardly the end of Libby's story, or her impact on Harry. I mean she does come back and helps Harry find a little closure.

Montomery is there, beginning to end. Just because he's not going to the DQ, he's also not going anywhere as the Admiral running things from the AQ. I'm not sure why you got the sense he was being phased out.

Patel lives on.

Astall's only issue is that she is constitutionally incapable of conflict. Interesting to think about but hard to use in a story. We always need obstacles. They can come from inside an individual or outside the ship. What do you do with a character who can never, by definition, be an obstacle unless you change her basic definition?

Jarem Kaz was a great character and I thoroughly enjoyed giving him as much time as I could here. But he's a joined Trill. Another species that has been explored quite thoroughly in DS9. We did Trill as a World of DS9 for crying out loud. This limits the numbers of stories we can tell about him that would not be repetitive. Or, we could begin to explore another race we've never delved into before. So we get Doctor Sharak, a Tamarian instead.

Akolo Tare was challenging in that her only developed personal arc in Golden's books was that she was raped by a hologram. I find that too emotionally difficult to really contemplate going into so that was that.

Lyssa Campbell was completely unobjectionable. No reason to keep her. No reason not to. I needed women warriors on that planet, though, and she was an obvious choice. Also, going forward and looking at the total crew, I really felt we could use another new male officer to balance some of the female officers. (Yes, once again, I have betrayed the sisterhood.)

So of the seven discussed, three have the potential for ongoing development, one transferred, and three died (two of them in a battle that killed half the crew). When you pile it all up it may look like it was all conveniently dismissed. It wasn't. It was always weighing what we had vs. what we needed. When what we had worked with the bigger picture, it stayed. When it didn't, or too severly limited possibilties, we went a different direction.

Finally, as to why they died instead of other series regulars... are you kidding me? Permeating the whole book is the death of Janeway. If any of the other regulars are going to die, they're going to get their own damn book. They've earned it.

 

[Relayer1]

Well, I wouldn't have called it petty dislike - it could simply be genuinely not liking the character, not connecting with the character, not understanding the character, not having a use for the character, or simply having shaped a story that did not need them or work with them in it.

The summary execution bit was tongue in cheek, but whatever the reasons, and however well considered their removal (if not death), they got pretty short shrift, clearing the decks for what came afterwards.

 

[Christopher]

^But when you said her treatment of Golden's characters was a "hint" to her preferences, what you evidently meant was "I hated Golden's books and I think Kirsten Beyer's choices show that she shares my hatred but is simply too polite to confirm it." And as Kirsten's very thorough explanation shows, you were wrong to make that assumption (just as you were wrong to claim that she'd never discussed her reasons or that she'd killed off all of Golden's characters). It wasn't about not liking them, it was simply that different writers have different approaches and ideas and what works for one won't necessarily fit another's needs and goals.

 

[CNash]

Do note that I was ever so slightly exaggerating the situation regarding Full Circle and Golden's characters in my initial post. I do know that Admiral Montgomery survived, as did Devi Patel, although she gets very little to do in Full Circle compared to Spirit Walk. As I said, I've read Ms. Beyer's reasoning behind most of the deaths in Full Circle (and thanks Christopher for digging up that long post of hers, which I hadn't read) and agree with her on Kaz - while I liked him, it's true that Trills have been done to death due to having one first as a canon regular and then as spotlight character in the novels, and Kaz did have a lot of Spirit Walk devoted to his relationship with his previous host, which was resolved.

I don't agree with her reasoning, however, when it comes to Tare. Fair enough that rape is a difficult subject to broach (and the fact that it was at the hands of a hologram is at once irrelevant in terms of Tare's emotional development, and very relevant if the subject of holographic rights is ever put back on the table...), but it is nonetheless an unpleasant fact of life which - and do correct me if I'm wrong - I don't think Trek has ever truly looked at.

 

[Relayer1]

^But when you said her treatment of Golden's characters was a "hint" to her preferences, what you evidently meant was "I hated Golden's books and I think Kirsten Beyer's choices show that she shares my hatred but is simply too polite to confirm it." And as Kirsten's very thorough explanation shows, you were wrong to make that assumption (just as you were wrong to claim that she'd never discussed her reasons or that she'd killed off all of Golden's characters). It wasn't about not liking them, it was simply that different writers have different approaches and ideas and what works for one won't necessarily fit another's needs and goals.

No - I don't 'hate' them, that's too strong for a dislike of a work of fiction. I do, however, consider them to be amongst the worst Treklit I have read. I do not have any evidence to indicate that Kirsten 'hates' them or even dislikes them as I do. What I am saying is that her speedy removal (in some cases even done 'offscreen') of all of these characters indicated her strong preference not to use them and to waste as little time as possible disposing of them.

I have not seen a similarly draconian elimination of a group of characters before and was somewhat taken aback at how little time was spent wrapping up the dangling plot threads and clearing the decks. I think most authors would have retained at least one or two of the characters and written them out more gently in later books if they really didn't want them around.

It certainly did not spoil my enjoyment of Full Circle - it is a very fine novel, one of Treklists best, even allowing for my surprise at the above...

 

[Christopher]

What I am saying is that her speedy removal (in some cases even done 'offscreen') of all of these characters indicated her strong preference not to use them and to waste as little time as possible disposing of them.

And you seem to be oblivious to the fact that Kirsten's own words prove you completely wrong. She didn't have a "strong preference not to use them." There were several she didn't have a problem with at all (Montgomery, Patel, Libby), one she said she enjoyed working with to the extent that it was feasible but couldn't see anything new to say about in the long term (Kaz), and one that she said she found "unobjectionable" and eliminated for reasons of cast balance and the needs of the plot (Campbell). She also said that the reason she only killed off Golden characters rather than main characters is because killing off a main cast member would be a big enough event to require its own book.

(I think one problem a lot of people have understanding a writer's decisions comes from the tendency to assume that everything a writer does is what the writer wants or prefers to happen. That's not the case. Writers do what the story needs, even if we hate having to do it. Many times in my career I've had to make choices I found painful, put myself through the emotional wringer, because it was what the story needed. I've killed off characters I loved and cried about it afterward. Indeed, if you're going to kill off a character, it should be one you hate to lose, because you want to make the audience feel that same sorrow and regret. So it's deeply wrong to assume that if a writer kills off a character, it's because the writer disliked the character.)

And you're still using the phrase "all of these characters," which you should now know to be untrue, since she only wrote out four of the seven characters under discussion.

I have not seen a similarly draconian elimination of a group of characters before and was somewhat taken aback at how little time was spent wrapping up the dangling plot threads and clearing the decks. I think most authors would have retained at least one or two of the characters and written them out more gently in later books if they really didn't want them around.

She retained Devi Patel. She retained Admiral Montgomery. She left open the possibility for Libby to return.

And a gradual approach like that wouldn't have worked for Full Circle. It's one book that spans over two years' worth of story time, two of the most eventful years in Trek-Lit history. It was originally conceived to be two books, but ended up being reduced to one. The very nature of the story required covering a great deal of change and transition -- it had to wrap up the lingering threads from the former books, deal with Janeway's death, tie into Destiny, and set up the new status quo all in a single volume. So while the changes in the crew are mostly gradual in terms of in-universe chronology, the book covers so much time that it feels more compressed.

 

[Relayer1]

^ I stand by her preference not to use them for whatever reason, supported by the fact that she didn't !

I used 'all' as, IF I remember correctly (Patel ?), none of those characters are in the current stories, even though they may not be dead or definitively 'gone'.

I also concede that your point regarding the assumption that everything a writer does is what the writer wants or prefers to happen is not necessarily the case and can be dictated by the needs of the story.

The timespan does make it appear all the more sudden, and losing the characters over a couple of books would have seemed somewhat less so.

I think that I see some professional courtesy and personal consideration in the way that Kirsten explains her decisions, which is to her credit.

I still don't think she had a great deal of fondness for these characters and think we will have to agree to disagree on some of this !

 

[Christopher]

I think that I see some professional courtesy and personal consideration in the way that Kirsten explains her decisions, which is to her credit.

I still don't think she had a great deal of fondness for these characters and think we will have to agree to disagree on some of this !

Well, Kirsten is a friend of mine and we discussed her thinking process in private correspondence when I beta-read Full Circle for her, so I'm not speculating here. I distinctly remember her telling me, for instance, that she liked Dr. Kaz and seriously considered keeping him.