The State of Star Trek Literature

[BillJ]

It's may be time that Pocket realizes that Trek books aren't just competing against Trek books in the marketplace. There are literally thousands of sci-fi books sitting on the shelves at my local Barnes and Noble and most times the back-cover blurb is the only exposure a reader has to a book.

Since I only really read ST novels for my chosen recreational reading (other genres only for my part time reviewing job), and I barely get all the ST novels read these days, what other SF novels say on their blurb doesn't really matter to me. In fact, since I'm a ST collector, what's written in the blurb of ST novels is really just a curiosity, since I buy and read all the books anyway, and the blurbs are seemingly (and rightly) aimed at very casual readers. Why aim a blurb at me, since I'm buying anyway?

And with soooo many series it may be time to end the multi-book crossover events. With the Typhon Pact, me as a buyer, I am sitting out essentially four straight months of ST books. And I'm sure I'm not alone.

Pocket keeps doing multi-book crossovers because they sell well and they are also somewhat easier to market. A batch of interrelated novels looks great on book shelves, with their matching covers, and can be discussed by marketers as a group, especially in the absence of a current ST series on the air to cross pollinate the promotion.

If the sales for multi-book crossovers plunged, I'm sure you'd see a return to standalones only.

Would the cancellation/delay of the post-STXI line count as an editorial decision and answer to 5? I know it went above Pocket, but it was someone's "editorial decision". A bad one.

You know that there'd be an outcry if the next ST movie dared to deviate even slightly over the events depicted in the four currently-shelved tie-in sequel novels.

IDW's numerous movie prequel tie-ins and adaptations, and the two upcoming "Starfleet Academy" prequel tie-in "young adult" novels, will fill the gap quite nicely in the meantime.

Fish in the boat are a small number when compared to fish still at sea. Unfortunately for Pocket, the vast majority of readers are not like you. They don't buy Star Trek books just because they say Star Trek on the cover. They buy Trek if it looks interesting to them in comparison to other books out there. Most readers are looking for the "best bang for their buck" not what looks best on their shelves. Especially in these economic times.

Couple of years ago I thought I was beginning to fall "out of love" with Trek, my purchasing of Trek books began to fall off. What I found out was that I've fallen out of love with Trek Literature in general but my love for the rest of the franchise was as strong as ever.

IMO, this line is in trouble and has been for a while. When you subtract last years' Star Trek novelization the last NY Times best seller was Taking Wing, which was published in mid-2005. Shelf space for Trek continues to dwindle at local brick and mortar stores.

 

[JD]

I'm sorry, but this IMO mischaracterization of the whole line. You keep making it sound all of the books have been nothing death and destruction all the time, but they really really haven't. Like said up thread, of the six books that have taken place after Destiny only two have actually dealt with the death and destruction post-BI,

Say you so? Flame and ruin, despair and dementia--these are the hallmarks of genocide-chic. A Singular Destiny seems rather flame-and-ruin-ish (also, jigsaw-esque). My back cover copy of Over a Torrent Sea speaks of the scars of the cataclysm that remains with them, and apparently characters lose control and go nuts (yay). Full Circle covers the same time period as Janeway's death and Destiny, so don't tell me there's no genocide-chic there. Losing the Peace, more flame and ruins (and extras from "Thriller"). Synthesis is 'steeped in post-Destiny paranoia'. Unworthy has Seven of Nine going crazy as a result of Destiny (boy, they're just handing out psychoses at the door, aren't they), plus Janeway's still dead, with is a present, gaping hole left by the genocide-chic trend--of which I'm having a hard time seeing why these novels should be exempted from. I'll wait to see whether the Typhon Pact novels are equally as obsessed with death and devastation; if so, I guess I'll just have to wait some more for the darkness fixation to go away.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

Ok, like I said before, I'll give you guys ASD, and LtP. But from what I remember the post-Destiny destruction really plays a very small role in the other books. The after effects of Destiny really play a very small in OATS, it's pretty much just the first few chapters, and once they get into the events on the planets it pretty much takes a back seat to the stuff going on there. This is even more true for Synthesis, which is pretty much unconnected to Destiny once they run into the story's new aliens. As for Full Circle, the first half of the book takes place years before Destiny and features plenty of Janeway, and once it does get into the post-Destiny timeframe it focuses on setting up the new crew(s) and mission which just happens to take place after Destiny.

 

[William Leisner]

IMO, this line is in trouble and has been for a while. When you subtract last years' Star Trek novelization the last NY Times best seller was Taking Wing, which was published in mid-2005. Shelf space for Trek continues to dwindle at local brick and mortar stores.

Star Trek is the most prolific media tie-in line on the planet. There were only 10 original Star Wars novels in 2009, and I count the same number of adult fiction titles for 2010. Stargate generates 4-5 novels a year. The Buffy and Angel lines have been staked. The 4400 isn't going to see a book five. Murder, She Wrote gets props for longevity after cancellation, but still, Jessica and Donald only write two books a year.

If this line is in trouble, I'm sure there are hundreds of IP owners who would give a favorite appendage to be in such trouble...

 

[pookha]

In fact, in (I
That was at the end of Destiny (unless there is also a similar speech in A Singular Destiny). And I didn't believe of a word of it. Bloody ludicrous to send ships out into the unknown when your civilization is devastated, you've got a massive refugee crisis on your hands, and all resources need be directed towards humanitarian relief and rebuilding.

ah but in the trek verse there is intelligent life out there;and always a chance one will find new technologies or even new allies.

IMO, this line is in trouble and has been for a while. When you subtract last years' Star Trek novelization the last NY Times best seller was Taking Wing, which was published in mid-2005. Shelf space for Trek continues to dwindle at local brick and mortar stores.

Star Trek is the most prolific media tie-in line on the planet. There were only 10 original Star Wars novels in 2009, and I count the same number of adult fiction titles for 2010. Stargate generates 4-5 novels a year. The Buffy and Angel lines have been staked. The 4400 isn't going to see a book five. Murder, She Wrote gets props for longevity after cancellation, but still, Jessica and Donald only write two books a year.

If this line is in trouble, I'm sure there are hundreds of IP owners who would give a favorite appendage to be in such trouble...

star trek may be more prolific but star wars is beating it out for shelf space.
heck my local borders didnt even plane on carrying some of the titles until i (and i suspect others) told them well i purchased my trek books else where.

i even told the manager of a borders in nearby town while purchasing three st books that it was too bad i had to go out of town to purchase my trek books because the nearby borders refused to stock them.


but, after buying a lot last fall i dont see a lot i am interested in for the immediate future.

and i am finding a lot of good sf and other stuff to read.

oh yeah.. i would have purchased the abramverse books .

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Shelf space for Trek continues to dwindle at local brick and mortar stores.

Could this maybe be because more and more people are buying Star Trek books online, when I went to a Borders near where I live there were about two to three rows of trek books on a shelf. When I checked the Trek books being sold by Border online there were way more Trek books there. I also noticed the same at Barnes and Nobels and their store site.

 

[BillJ]

IMO, this line is in trouble and has been for a while. When you subtract last years' Star Trek novelization the last NY Times best seller was Taking Wing, which was published in mid-2005. Shelf space for Trek continues to dwindle at local brick and mortar stores.

Star Trek is the most prolific media tie-in line on the planet. There were only 10 original Star Wars novels in 2009, and I count the same number of adult fiction titles for 2010. Stargate generates 4-5 novels a year. The Buffy and Angel lines have been staked. The 4400 isn't going to see a book five. Murder, She Wrote gets props for longevity after cancellation, but still, Jessica and Donald only write two books a year.

If this line is in trouble, I'm sure there are hundreds of IP owners who would give a favorite appendage to be in such trouble...

I wouldn't expect you to do anything less than defend the line. But unless Pocket is willing to release current and historical numbers, all I can do is evaluate based on what I see.

- Star Wars released 10 books in 2009 and yet has five shelves of book space at pretty much every store I go to.

- Star Trek released probably twice that and has one shelf of space. At one local store the shelf is practically on the ground, if you don't know where to look you'd never find it.

- I use to see promotions for Trek books at my local stores... not any more. No longer are new release Trek books given special promotional space like in the old days.

- The fact that there was absolutely no promotions around the re-launch of the franchise. Even if it had to be reprints with the new likenesses on the covers... Pocket should have done something.

It's almost to the point where it seems like Pocket thinks the books should sell just because they have Star Trek on the cover. I do understand that the book franchise lost 'some' promotion when the TV series went off the air. But the fact of the matter is that Trek continues to lose shelf space.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

I've noticed the lack of promotion as well--Star Wars gets WAY more in comparison. The only place that's even remotely close to balanced is Hastings...and that's because they accept used books as well as new.

 

[ATimson]

Star Trek is the most prolific media tie-in line on the planet.

Second-most. Doctor Who's had it beat the last few years.

 

[William Leisner]

I wouldn't expect you to do anything less than defend the line.

Well, gee, thanks. Unfortunately, I would expect you to do more than accuse me of toeing the company line for a company has yet to contract me to write another book. "Unfortunately," that is, because I was apparently very wrong to give you that kind of credit.

So, since we're going to have to use your version of fact-free reality, why don't you tell us about these huge promotions you remember Pocket Books running back in the good old days? Because, y'know, long before I was a lapdog mouthpiece slavishly doing John Ordover's bidding, I worked for a number of bookstores, and I'm having trouble recalling anything of the sort...

 

[William Leisner]

Star Trek is the most prolific media tie-in line on the planet.

Second-most. Doctor Who's had it beat the last few years.

Okay, I'll give you Doctor Who (which I would count as including Torchwood and Sarah Jane Adventures)... though as far as the US mass marketplace is concerned, I think that's being generous.

 

[ATimson]

Okay, I'll give you Doctor Who (which I would count as including Torchwood and Sarah Jane Adventures)...

As would I.

...though as far as the US mass marketplace is concerned, I think that's being generous.

True. But you did say worldwide.

 

[William Leisner]

True. But you did say worldwide.

Curse you for actually paying attention to things I post online!

 

[BillJ]

I wouldn't expect you to do anything less than defend the line.

Well, gee, thanks. Unfortunately, I would expect you to do more than accuse me of toeing the company line for a company has yet to contract me to write another book. "Unfortunately," that is, because I was apparently very wrong to give you that kind of credit.

So, since we're going to have to use your version of fact-free reality, why don't you tell us about these huge promotions you remember Pocket Books running back in the good old days? Because, y'know, long before I was a lapdog mouthpiece slavishly doing John Ordover's bidding, I worked for a number of bookstores, and I'm having trouble recalling anything of the sort...

1. You have a vested interest in defending the Star Trek line (which is what I was referring to). There's nothing inherently good or bad about that. Even if the line was a total train wreck I wouldn't expect any author to come in here and admit to it. And being critical of the line could jeopardize future contracts. Apologies if the remark offended you.

2. Well we used to have the cardboard stand-ups that book retailers would put in high traffic area's that I haven't seen since the String Theory (2005-2006) trilogy. And if I remember correctly there was absolutely no tie-in promotions with Star Trek 2009. But that was last year and my feeble brain may not remember that far back. And I said 'promotions' guess you needed to embellish my remark to get your desired effect.

 

[Desert Kris]

1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?

I think it's done okay. I haven't read any of it yet, but my main commentary is based on the choices provided.

2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time? Any favorite novels?

The options. I collected the TNG relaunch 'cause that's what I grew up with, and that's what I'm mainly familiar with. I also got Destiny, A Singular Destiny and Losing the Peace, to get a sense of where the story is directed. However, I reached a point where I had to draw the line, as I haven't found time to catch up on all this stuff. The four books based on the new Star Trek movie's continuity were going to be my final purchase. There has been some compensation for their loss in The Needs of the Many, the mass market paperback release of the latest New Frontier novel (I thought it wasn't going to get a MMP release), and I'm intrigued about the Saavik novel (but can't afford it just now).

3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so?

I was disappointed by the loss of the Star Trek movie-based novels. I found an easy stopping point at Losing the Peace, because I really can't make the reading investment in the interconnected series that is on the horizon. I have always steered clear of novel series that run through all the different Star Trek series, and only have the corresponding New Frontier (and praying that the continuity's not too much).

4. Any new recurring trends or themes in the last 12 months have you noticed? Anything you've liked or disliked about them?

I get what people are saying about ST lit veering close to cataclysms and genocidal madness, yet, I will still give it a chance. It is disappointing the way it resembles what my wife has described is happening with the forward moving Star Wars literature. She has stopped following SW novels, and there's a sense that those character's great achievements, immortalized in our culture, have been messed up by the direction of the series.

6. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?

Well, I just hope they will be wary of how the farthest future point impacts on projects that they want to develop. Star Wars fans complain about how a comic series set 120 years in the future impacts on the novels that feature Luke, Han and Leia forty years after Return of the Jedi. One of the complaints is a concern that creativity for the novels in endangered, and could fall into the trap of only being useful for setting up situations seen in the future. Admittedly, ST:Online already has some possible differences from the other novels, and as long as that is kept in mind, then the creativity of the novel series' doesn't have to be enslaved to the future depicted in ST: Online.

 

[William Leisner]

1. You have a vested interest in defending the Star Trek line (which is what I was referring to). There's nothing inherently good or bad about that. Even if the line was a total train wreck I wouldn't expect any author to come in here and admit to it. And being critical of the line could jeopardize future contracts. Apologies if the remark offended you.

There is a difference between defending a thing, and refraining from being critical of a thing. And yes, I do take offense to accusations that I, or any of my other fellow authors, are not trustworthy in their posts here. Maybe you're the kind of person who puts your desires ahead of your personal integrity, but don't project that on me.

2. Well we used to have the cardboard stand-ups that book retailers would put in high traffic area's that I haven't seen since the String Theory (2005-2006) trilogy. And if I remember correctly there was absolutely no tie-in promotions with Star Trek 2009. But that was last year and my feeble brain may not remember that far back. And I said 'promotions' guess you needed to embellish my remark to get your desired effect.

Actually, here's what you said:

I do understand that the book franchise lost 'some' promotion when the TV series went off the air.

Even without the quotes around "some," this clearly implies that there was something much bigger and much more significant than a first-run weekly television series (or two) promoting the books.

By which you meant cardboard displayers.

Heh.

All right. As I mentioned, I worked in bookstores for most of the 1990's. I moved to Minneapolis to work at the home office of a national book retailer. And I can tell you, with no fear of contradiction whatsoever, that those book displayers were no great boon to the Trek line.

With very rare exception, more than half of the books in those 18 to 36 count displayers would be stripped of their covers and destroyed after spending a month or two on the floor. (And I'm not just talking about Trek; same goes for every author below the Stephen King, instant-bestseller-list level.) It was a tremendous waste of money for the publisher, it was a tremendous waste of money for the retailer, and it was a tremendous waste of paper, cardboard, shipping costs, etc.

That's why today, when you walk through B&N or Borders, you'll notice there are nowhere near as many cardboard displayers as there were 10 or 20 years ago, for any genre. What you will notice is permanent wood and metal displayers for mass markets which lets the store give high-profile display space to certain titles with as few as two copies on hand.

And which have been used in recent months to promote Trek titles.

 

[BillJ]

1. You have a vested interest in defending the Star Trek line (which is what I was referring to). There's nothing inherently good or bad about that. Even if the line was a total train wreck I wouldn't expect any author to come in here and admit to it. And being critical of the line could jeopardize future contracts. Apologies if the remark offended you.

There is a difference between defending a thing, and refraining from being critical of a thing. And yes, I do take offense to accusations that I, or any of my other fellow authors, are not trustworthy in their posts here. Maybe you're the kind of person who puts your desires ahead of your personal integrity, but don't project that on me.
.

That 'some' remark came back to bite me in the ass.

And I bow to your superior knowledge of the book industry.

Since you are participating in the thread... I would like to see your thoughts on the questions that the original poster posed.

 

[T'Bonz]

1. How do you feel the Trek book line has done in the last 12-15 months?
--I can't really judge that, but I have noticed that my one remaining brick and mortar (Borders closed recently here) carries much less Star Trek.

2. What specifically have you liked in regards to the entire Trek book line in that time? Any favorite novels?
--I'm much more prone to go for a TOS or a DS9 novel. For a while, I eagerly bought the DS9 relaunch. Now I'm not even sure where it's at or what I've missed.

3. And what specifically have you disliked in regards to the Trek book line of the last year or so? Any bad or disappointing novels?
--n/a

4. Any new recurring trends or themes in the last 12 months have you noticed? Anything you've liked or disliked about them?
--n/a

5. What editorial decisions and changes from the last 12-15 months have you like or disliked?
--LOL. I'm annoyed at not getting press releases! All kidding (sorta) aside, I've noticed the decrease in books published.

6. What changes would you like to see in the Trek book line? Be it production choices or story editorial decisions?
--More standalones.

I may not be the best person to have answered this, as my interest has fallen off when it comes to reading Trek books (minus the new Saavik book, which I intend on picking up in the near future.) I'm not sure why. I don't think it has anything to do with quality, but my own changing preferences. I'm a bit Trekked-out after ten straight years here.

I do prefer exploration and boldly going where no man has gone before. I don't like darker books or war/spy books or such as much as I do stories about exploring new cultures.

Usually, when I buy a Trek book, it's because I like the story topic, or else, I've read some recommendations that make me think a book might be interesting.

It probably doesn't help that I have a few books at home and I'm behind in my reading.

 

[Sxottlan]

Since you are participating in the thread... I would like to see your thoughts on the questions that the original poster posed.

That would be interesting William.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Could this maybe be because more and more people are buying Star Trek books online

Most definitely. Even ten years ago, bookshops were telling me that ST readers were early adopters of online buying.

when I went to a Borders near where I live there were about two to three rows of trek books on a shelf. When I checked the Trek books being sold by Border online there were way more Trek books there. I also noticed the same at Barnes and Nobels and their store site.

And, as I've often mentioned here, when the JJ movie was out, stores in Australia gave over shelf space normally used for "Star Wars" to "Star Trek". Stores which hadn't had many new titles for a while went through many copies of the JJ movie novelization and airfreighted copies of recent other titles (with S&S Australia actually absorbing the extra shipping costs), such as "Titan", VOY, NF, "Vanguard" and the "Destiny" trilogy. However, both ST and SW lines are again competing against numerous "Doctor Who" and "Twilight" books.

 

[PaulSimpson]

Since you are participating in the thread... I would like to see your thoughts on the questions that the original poster posed.

That would be interesting William.

Not dreaming of speaking for Bill, but while it might be interesting, surely it puts him in an invidious position, given he's one of the authors who is the subject of these discussions?