They DID NOT just destroy... [SPOILERS]

[Patrick O'Brien]

I'm a HUGE DS9 fan, and I'm really enjoying "Raise the Dawn." (Its direct predecessor was pretty damn awesome too!) Sure, the station will be missed, but all the great characters continue on. I welcome the start of this new phase in the DS9 saga. Keep it coming!!

I Agree also. An event like this, done right, can be an exciting game changer. I would think it is a more fitting end than the Stations retirement/mothball? Let's face it the wormhole is very strategically important. That being the case, it is only a matter of time before Starfleet would have wanted a more modern station to guard it.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

DS9's destruction is like the middle-aged man who dies in a firefight on patrol; B5's destruction is like an old man who dies in bed after he decides to stop taking his heart meds. Both very sad, but in very different ways. It was kind of fascinating.

Nice analogy, Sci. I've wondered for some time how Trek lit would handle the destruction of DS9 (which I always assumed would be inevitable if the novel line went on for long enough, given that characters were pondering the station's replacement as early as Twilight). The destruction of Babylon Five is one of my favourite television sequences, and if DS9 had a similar send-off it wouldn't have the impact it should, because the comparison would be foremost in my mind. I'm pleased that David R George III went down a different route. The "middle-aged man" similie works really well - as I noted in my review of Zero Sum Game, DS9 felt somewhat tired and past its prime, but it wasn't so old as to be facing natural retirement.

 

[Sho]

At the end of the day, I'd rather have a Trek lit in which DS9 is destroyed than a timid Trek lit that's afraid of shaking thinks up too much and is closed to authors with ambitious ideas. I'm seeing a lot of "the novels should not be allowed to go there and do something this big", but I don't want the novels to have to restrict themselves in any such way, especially since there are no TV shows on whose toes they could tread. The novels are carrying the flame now: I want them to live up to that responsibility, and the only way they can do that is if they are given enough freedom.

And so, as I've said before, I'm open to DS9 being destroyed as long as it happens in the context of a meaningful story. I haven't read Raise yet, but the positive feedback makes me hopeful that's exactly what happened.

And I'm grateful to our editors and to CBS for letting the novels go there.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

At the end of the day, I'd rather have a Trek lit in which DS9 is destroyed than a timid Trek lit that's afraid of shaking thinks up too much and is closed to authors with ambitious ideas. I'm seeing a lot of "the novels should not be allowed to go there and do something this big", but I don't want the novels to have to restrict themselves in any such way, especially since there are no TV shows on whose toes they could tread. The novels are carrying the flame now: I want them to live up to that responsibility, and the only way they can do that is if they are given enough freedom.

Well said! I agree completely.

 

[Thrawn]

At the end of the day, I'd rather have a Trek lit in which DS9 is destroyed than a timid Trek lit that's afraid of shaking thinks up too much and is closed to authors with ambitious ideas. I'm seeing a lot of "the novels should not be allowed to go there and do something this big", but I don't want the novels to have to restrict themselves in any such way, especially since there are no TV shows on whose toes they could tread. The novels are carrying the flame now: I want them to live up to that responsibility, and the only way they can do that is if they are given enough freedom.

And so, as I've said before, I'm open to DS9 being destroyed as long as it happens in the context of a meaningful story. I haven't read Raise yet, but the positive feedback makes me hopeful that's exactly what happened.

And I'm grateful to our editors and to CBS for letting the novels go there.

Excellent post.

 

[Stephen!]

If construction on One World Trade Center had commenced in 2001

Maybe they didn't want to temp fate. Rebuilding it again so soon might have been seen as an invitation for terrorists to destroy it again.

 

[Enterpriserules]

I am ready to see what the new DS9 looks like!

 

[Sho]

Here's hoping they'll be as ambitious as they were with Vanguard re the new station design - get a good designer on board, do a foldout, etc.

 

[Enterpriserules]

That would be great. They have really been working hard with that recently, Aventine and Titan both turned out beautifully.

 

[RoJoHen]

It would be cool if they designed it with the old DS9 in mind.

They should have another design contest like they did with Titan.

 

[Sci]

If construction on One World Trade Center had commenced in 2001

Maybe they didn't want to temp fate. Rebuilding it again so soon might have been seen as an invitation for terrorists to destroy it again.

There were a number of reasons for delays in the construction of One World Trade Center, most of them having to do with public opinion on designs, insurance costs, ownership of leases, etc. Legal stuff, mostly.

But that's also besides the point -- the issue is not, "Why was there a delay on One World Trade Center," the issue was, "If they start building a new one right away, why should that be seen as making the loss of the original unimportant?"

It would be cool if they designed it with the old DS9 in mind.

They should have another design contest like they did with Titan.

I seem to recall Marco Palmieri posting at the TrekBBS that the Titan design contest turned out to be -- unexpectedly -- prohibitively expensive, which is why they haven't used open contests for subsequent original ships and stations (as excellent as the Luna-class design turned out).

 

[The Grim Ghost]

At the end of the day, I'd rather have a Trek lit in which DS9 is destroyed than a timid Trek lit that's afraid of shaking thinks up too much and is closed to authors with ambitious ideas. I'm seeing a lot of "the novels should not be allowed to go there and do something this big", but I don't want the novels to have to restrict themselves in any such way, especially since there are no TV shows on whose toes they could tread. The novels are carrying the flame now: I want them to live up to that responsibility, and the only way they can do that is if they are given enough freedom.

And so, as I've said before, I'm open to DS9 being destroyed as long as it happens in the context of a meaningful story. I haven't read Raise yet, but the positive feedback makes me hopeful that's exactly what happened.

And I'm grateful to our editors and to CBS for letting the novels go there.

I would argue that there have been too many shake ups.

I like that the novels have more freedom and are able to move things forward in a way they never could in the past.

But for big events to have an impact there has to be a status quo to shake up. I don't feel we have really had a status quo for quite awhile now.

SPOILERS from other books in Trek Lit follow:



Big events are coming too quickly and too close together. Janeway's badly executed death. Then a huge Borg war and all of the fallout from that. Now the destruction of DS9. I've left out some other not so big but fairly important events as well, such as Picard starting a family, Sisko leaving his, etc...

There needs to be some time between these events for things to settle down. It's just too much for me and one of the reasons I have given up on Trek Lit for the time being.

 

[Sho]

^ Seems like folks are reporting that Raise is setting up a stable new beginning for DS9 though.

 

[R. Star]

Wow, talk about spoilers... then again I clicked the thread. Still, destroying an important ship/station/character isn't a bad thing so long as it's done in a powerful and meaningful way.

The DS9 relaunch novels(have we ever learned what the heck happened with the Acendants yet? I am behind on that and the Typhon Pact novels just seem to hint it was resolved) were awesome. Really the only flaw I can see if the Vaughn character. What's wrong with him? That's it nothing. He's a proverbial Mary Sue, who can do everything, is on a casual first name basis with everyone important, and whose only flaw is he's a deadbeat Dad.

I'll have to start reading these books again if some new ones have come out.

 

[JD]

(This post was in response too The Grim Ghost, Sho and R. Star posted while I was typing.)
Yeah, but they really aren't happening that close together in universe. We're already three or four years past the destruction of Destiny in universe, and I don't really see this being that big of a thing for the universe at large. As for how we approach these things in real life, I still don't really see them being to close together. Sure there are lots of big things happening, but I like the fact that the books are willing to change things. And we've gotten plenty of smaller stories between the big events, since Destiny we've had Over a Torrent Sea, Losing the Peace, Unworthy, Snythesis, Zero Sum Game, Seize the Fire, Indistinguishable from Magic, Watching the Clock, and Children of the Storm, none of which had any major shakeups that I know of.

As for my feelings about the destruction of DS9, I really don't see where it's any different than the destruction of the Enterprises in the movies. For me Trek has always been more about the stories and the characters than the setting, and I'm still enjoying those so I have no problems with what's been happening in the books.

 

[CaptainDonovin]

I haven't finished quite yet but I'm ok with our beloved station meeting it's end. Nothing lasts forever & as O'Brien said to Worf in Way Of The WarriorI'm sure they'll build another one (which if you read the book you'll find out). I just hope the story of Deep Space Nine continues after this because I truly do love the series (tv & relaunch).

 

[DEWLine]

What little I read of the new design suggests something I keep thinking I've read about in one of the authorized backgrounder books about DS9's production history...?

 

[Paulcpick]

Big events are coming too quickly and too close together. Janeway's badly executed death. Then a huge Borg war and all of the fallout from that. Now the destruction of DS9. I've left out some other not so big but fairly important events as well, such as Picard starting a family, Sisko leaving his, etc...

There needs to be some time between these events for things to settle down. It's just too much for me and one of the reasons I have given up on Trek Lit for the time being.

For what its worth, its been almost 5 years in the real world since Before Dishonor....

 

[RoJoHen]

The impression that I've been getting from all these threads, though, is that every book now features some huge galaxy-changing event. Again, I haven't read them, but have there been any "in between" novels that are just decent standalone stories, or does everything now have to do with the larger arc?

 

[Thrawn]

Actually, the only really big status quo changers were Destiny, A Singular Destiny, Full Circle, TP: Rough Beasts, TP: Paths of Disharmony, and then this duology. I think it's pretty easy to say that all the rest were episodic stories. For the record, that's:

TNG - Losing The Peace; TP: The Struggle Within; Indistinguishable From Magic (couple minor changes there, but quickly reversed)
Titan - Over A Torrent Sea; Synthesis; TP: Seize The Fire
VOY - Unworthy; Children of the Storm
DTI - both of them
and even TP: Zero Sum Game, really. All the status quo changes there came from Rough Beasts.

Yes, the pace of things has accelerated, and lots of those books relate to the larger arcs, but saying there are no standalone stories is definitely stretching it.

In fact, I challenge anyone to read Indistinguishable From Magic or Children Of The Storm, especially, and say they don't work standalone.