• 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!

The next Big Bad?

Charles Phipps said:
I think characterization moving forward is something that is actually more or a double-edged sword than people think. Yes, it's great to see characters grow and change as well as their journeys. However, it is VERY easy to ruin characters and take away what was good about them.

I'll use one from a recent book. Ironically, of course, by his creator (who has the right to do this)

To quote a Vulcan proverb, "I ****ing *HATE* what they did with Xyon of Calhoun." I was really invested in the Kalinda/Xyon relationship and felt what they did to him was just plain vile. It left me feeling more than a little unhappy about the direction of the book series as a whole.

People become very emotionally invested in characters and hate when they are changed in a way they feel isn't organic or in a way that seriously hurts their investment. It's why shipping wars exists in other media. If you were really invested in Worf/Deanna Troi for some reason, Riker and Troi might bother the hell out of you.

It's human nature to want to have characters remain consistently the people you believe them to be.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between some fans of a character not liking a change made to that character, and a character being ruined. Heck, even just talking for me personally, I can acknowledge that there's a difference between me not liking where a character ends up, and me thinking that character is ruined. You have to separate your enjoyment of something from your opinion of its quality. "I like it" isn't the same as "I think it's good", nor is "I don't like it" the same as "I think it's bad".
 
Sci said:
Charles Phipps said:
I think characterization moving forward is something that is actually more or a double-edged sword than people think. Yes, it's great to see characters grow and change as well as their journeys. However, it is VERY easy to ruin characters and take away what was good about them.

I'll use one from a recent book. Ironically, of course, by his creator (who has the right to do this)

To quote a Vulcan proverb, "I ****ing *HATE* what they did with Xyon of Calhoun." I was really invested in the Kalinda/Xyon relationship and felt what they did to him was just plain vile. It left me feeling more than a little unhappy about the direction of the book series as a whole.

People become very emotionally invested in characters and hate when they are changed in a way they feel isn't organic or in a way that seriously hurts their investment. It's why shipping wars exists in other media. If you were really invested in Worf/Deanna Troi for some reason, Riker and Troi might bother the hell out of you.

It's human nature to want to have characters remain consistently the people you believe them to be.
Click to expand...

And it's human nature for most people to become bored of them when they do stop changing.
Click to expand...
I agee with Sci here. I don't think I would bother reading or watching anything if the characters never changed. Sure characters are sometimes taken in a direction that some people don't like, but I don't see where that's any worse than the chances that a book or show is just going to be bad overall.
 
A new "big bad" for Star Trek that might interest me would be a rival-like Federation from a parallel timeline — one that's *not* the Terran Empire from TOS and DS9.

Or perhaps an alternative could be something arriving from *outside* the galaxy — Trek's very own version of the Yuuzhan Vong! *LOL*
 
The Shedai are a great example of how Trek does what some might call "big bads".

Anyone mentioned the Ascendants yet?

I always figured "8472" would shake out similar to how things worked in that Myriad Universe were Voyager formed a Federation in the Delta Quadrant.
 
I'm satisfied that Christopher put a nice bow on top of 8472 and ended their arc! It doesn't make sense to me that they'd end up going after our universe again...
 
The Ascendants are referenced, but we have yet to have an explanation for how their arc played out...

Many have advocated a "DS9 Full Circle" to bridge the gap but nothing is in the works...
 
There's a DS9 book (or duology) due next year...so we'll just have to see what becomes of that!
 
Christopher said:
^And I think it's very sad that SF has used the cliche of resurrection so often that fans come to expect it. It should be an exception to the rule. It robs stories like this of any meaning if readers or viewers just assume that whatever change was made will be temporary.

The unambiguous intention of Dave Mack, Marco Palmieri, and Margaret Clark when they developed Destiny was to eliminate the Borg once and for all, decisively and permanently -- not merely as a cheap fakeout that would quickly be undone. Destiny was meant to be the final Borg story, and it eliminated them quite definitively without any help from me.
Click to expand...

A future writer could put the Borg in a TOS or ENTERPRISE novel.

A small point, but one worth noting.

Not that I'm arguing for it to happen, I'm in the camp that wants to get away from the "big bads" and go back to the exploration. I'm just saying that anything is possible.
 
Or tell a story set prior to 2381...or tell another Destiny Story from another point of view as was done in Full Circle...
 
JB2005 said:
It would make Destiny a whole bowl of suck...

"Numbah One, I really hate children."

[Riker replies with something smug]

[Data doesn't understand]

[Beverly attempts to get into Picard's pants]

[Wesley saves them]
Click to expand...

We need more novels like this. Except for the Wesley part. He's only good for Picard to yell at.
 
JB2005 said:
There's a DS9 book (or duology) due next year...so we'll just have to see what becomes of that!
Click to expand...

You mean the DRGIII books? They are not DS9. Elements from DS9 might crop up, but they aren't full DS9 novels.
 
In a seperate post...

I feel Star Trek should stay away from One Big Bad. It works in movies I suppose, it's easier for the average person to focus on a bad person instead of a bad entity/group/government/etc.
Personally, I feel that the Typhon Pact can shift Star Trek back to things we've seen before and worked well: political cold war situations between governments. You can have so many great stories set in such a situation, from political and social intrigues, espionage (as in ZSG), and the occasional battle/action stories. Situations like that can give so much more then just the simple 'ok, we have a very naughty person and we shall kill him heroically'.
 
RandyS said:
JB2005 said:
Start at TNG #1, they;re all like that!
Click to expand...

Already read 'em. We need a (partial) return to that.
Click to expand...

I'd tentatively agree...I think things along the lines of Q&A where the story is a stand-alone would be better in the future...

Having said that I just finished Christopher's new e-book and thoroughly enjoyed it, so I'm happy either way!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Starscape
Contest: ENTER March 2025 Art Challenge - Suggest Your Themes!
Replies
2
Views
627
Starscape
Starscape
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top