[TOS Reading Group]: Discuss Prime Directive Here!

[tranya]

As posted on that there other thread, I mentioned that we'd be reading Judith and Garfield Reeves-Stevens' Prime Directive, and start chatting about it on the 12th. Well, it's the 12th in some part of the world by now, so might as well start the thread. :-)

Post whatever you'd like, but here are a few questions/points of discussion to get the ball rolling (there are likely spoilers in here, so be warned):

1. Where do you rank this among Star Trek novels you've read? Probably in the top 6 ot 7 for me. It was well-written, the characterizations were pretty much on target, and there was very little to complain about. The characterizations of Alonzo Richter and some of the internal workings of the FCO were great touches, IMHO, and though some of their writing verged on schmaltzy near the end (not a huge fan of the epilogue), I found myself caught up in the story. One of the best Treks I've read.

2. Any particular moments jump out at you as noteable? I really enjoyed the beginning of the book -- Kirk's travails were well-written, as were the contemplative moments between him and Gauvreau, and Uhura and McCoy. I could have done without the Sulu/Chekov subplot (which seemed only there for comic relief, really), though I gather that many liked it.

3. What did you think of the "big reveal" at the end? I found it a bit hard to swallow, to be honest -- not only did it absolve the Enterprise crew of any fault, it also seemed to absolve most everyone of any fault in what happened. I realize that licensed Trek books have to leave the characters, ship, etc. pretty much back where they started, but here everything seemed to get wrapped up a bit too neatly for my tastes, especially given where the book started.

...

Finally, I've tried to create a poll here (my first time making one, and I'm not exactly sure how to make it, so I hope I don't screw it up); vote for the next book we read. In the other thread, a few books got mentioned which seemed good candidates, and I picked four that I found personally interesting enough to go with for the next one: The Lost Years, Strangers In the Sky, Best Destiny, and Spock's World. Select the one you prefer!

 

[KeepOnTrekking]

On a scale of 1-10, I'd give it a 6.
Let me start out by sating, I prefer stories with an A or A/B plot. I really despise books that jump around from Kirk's subplot to Spock's to McCoy's to Sulu's, etc, etc.

I could have done without the comic relief of the Sulu/Chekov subplot. The McCoy subplot of buying a ship and creating a rep as a pirate was absurd. Spock's interaction with his rebel group was interesting as was Kirk and Gavreau's exchanges.

I like Star Trek because it has a postive look and I prefer it when the Federation is an example of what we should be and not the buffoonry that ahs crept into it since ST III. Kirk and the Five should have had a fair shake at what really happened before all the resignation nonsense even begun. I guess I share some of Roddenberry's skepticism about wanting the Federation portrayed in a bad light like ST III and ST VI.

A thoughtful look into the Prime Directive and who it should apply to and when that time should start was a very interesting idea to explore. I wish they could have found a better story to do it with.

In conclusion, the positves being: interesting premise with the Prime Directive; good characterization with Kirk and Spock. Would I consider this story to be part of my own personal Star Trek canon...no.

 

[tranya]

I like Star Trek because it has a postive look and I prefer it when the Federation is an example of what we should be and not the buffoonry that ahs crept into it since ST III. Kirk and the Five should have had a fair shake at what really happened before all the resignation nonsense even begun. I guess I share some of Roddenberry's skepticism about wanting the Federation portrayed in a bad light like ST III and ST VI.

That's an interesting point, though I respectfully disagree. The buffoonery or simple idiocy of various representatives of the Federation was well-established in TOS (from Ron Tracey to Robert Fox). Though he was a bit of a "the Federation ain't all bad" deus ex machina, I appreciated Hammersmith's portrayal near the end -- like in any group, the Federation are going to look for the easy answer rather than the complicated one, and Kirk & Co. fell victim to that tendency this time.

I tend to find Roddenberry's utopianism to be rather silly at best and creepily imperialist at worst (as, of course, there are always "bad guys," they just all happen to be from other cultures than "us"). In this book, it didn't bother me too much, though I think the authors could have given us more of a glimpse of how the Enterprise crew was railroaded -- they sidestepped this, and in hindsight that didn't seem terribly satisfying for me.

And, in terms of numerical rating, I'll give this book a solid 8.

 

[KeepOnTrekking]

I think the authors could have given us more of a glimpse of how the Enterprise crew was railroaded -- they sidestepped this, and in hindsight that didn't seem terribly satisfying for me.

I agree. Hammersmith seemed reasonable at the end with his deal with Scotty. I do wish I could have seen what led McCoy to slug him during the resignation fiasco. Was Hammersmith overruled or pressured by a higher authority?

TOS always had the "pain in the neck" diplomats. Ferris, Fox, Baris. They all were in a hurry to accomplish their mission that they were willing to take risks with Kirk's crew. Kirk was their with the authority to provide some checks and balances in the system to safeguard his crew. I have no problems there. Tracey and Decker both just kind of went off the deep end. That'll happen. I have no problems there. Roddenberry's view of his utopian Federation in TNG was flat out boring dramawise. I guess my only concern was during the movies where they dumbed down the Federation for the sake of the story or for the joke. ST 3 or ST 6. I did like how in ST 4 that they "punished " Kirk by demoting him to Captain but it was actually a reward for saving the planet. I wish the Federation had a little more trust like that with this situation in Prime directive.

Looking forward to the next book.

 

[captcalhoun]

i love PD, it's my favourite novel. bar none.

scenes that stand out to me: Kirk saving the baby Tellarites. Scotty snapping Styles' swagger-stick. Sulu and Chekov defeating the Orion pirates.

Spoiler: PD's end

i thought it was a really clever story, particularly the way the UFOs were aliens trying to provoke a war

 

[tranya]

More spoilery stuff about the ending:

Spoiler: the ending of PD

I thought much of it was a cop-out, to be honest -- we end up with an alien which is barely sentient (hence, absolved of any real culpability in destroying Talin), plus, since so many survived because of a convenient cocooning ability that wasn't really explored in the book, there's hardly a real "disaster" other than the death of a proportion of the population and property.

I'm happy they didn't invoke some kind of time travel nonsense to reset everything at the end, but instead we got a rather ridiculous alien that in order for its actions to make sense as being unintentional has to be improbably old, led to weird gobbledygook like it being "older than the Universe," etc. It was a lot to swallow, and it might have worked better had the Reeves-Stevenses given us some hint earlier that the ending would be so unusual. As it stands, it just seemed like a means to conveniently wrap up the story and "reset" everything back to Trek-normal.

 

[tranya]

Some of the strongest stuff was the disgraced Kirk and the Tellarites. I sort of want to see a whole book like that.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

1. Where do you rank this among Star Trek novels you've read? In the top 5 Star Trek novels, easily.

2. Any particular moments jump out at you as noteable? Spock's address to the Federation Council. The asteroid colony. Scotty's resentment of Styles. The ending, with Kirk and the Talin child, which gets at why Star Trek is important; it's about the dream.

3. What did you think of the "big reveal" at the end? If by the "big reveal" you mean the revelation that the events were caused by the hunger from the universe that preceded ours, I had no problems with it. (Indeed, I even made notes for my own amusement for an SCE sequel that would follow up on the creature and Talin IV.) The reason I had no problem with the reveal of the creature, even though some people have said "It's Kirk vs. Galactus," is that it fit with the themes of the book, that there are things that are simply unknowable, that all of our reason and all of our logic simply cannot comprehend, and the quest for answers only leads to more questions. There is life out there, and some of it doesn't fit our preconceived notions of what's possible and what's knowable.

 

[Christopher]

Having it be an alien creature was okay. Having it be a creature that had survived from an earlier universe, or even several? That strained my credulity, and I didn't feel it added anything to the story.

 

[ronny]

Having it be an alien creature was okay. Having it be a creature that had survived from an earlier universe, or even several? That strained my credulity, and I didn't feel it added anything to the story.

Bingo.

Other than that the book is great. Way up there on the list of favorites but the ending knocks it down a bit.

 

[tranya]

Having it be an alien creature was okay. Having it be a creature that had survived from an earlier universe, or even several? That strained my credulity, and I didn't feel it added anything to the story.

Yeah, exactly. And, given the rather bizarre behavior of the alien...

Spoiler: ending spoilers

... being able to unwittingly drive an alien planet toward nuclear conflict because it somehow evolved to do this? I guess the only way the authors thought this could be remotely plausible is if the alien was ridiculously old (assuming that these kinds of adaptations would only ever make sense if they happened over a staggering timeframe). Hence the multiple universes thing.

I, too, found this to be unsatisfying. It seemed like an ending that didn't beg the question of "why doesn't the Federation go to war with someone over this?" They really strained to make it so that the ending was one that didn't leave any open plot threads, presumably for the reason that most of these one-shot novels have to do that.

Still, it was a well done Trek novel, and one of the better ones I've read. I'll let you decide if that means I haven't read enough or if my standards are currently too low.

 

[casey]

So I did the unthinkable and lost the book. I haven't had time to track down another copy, so my contribution to the thread will be coming much later.

I voted Strangers From the Sky, and luckily I am 96% sure I know where that is!

 

[Sci]

I read Prime Directive about two years ago and was struck by how unrealistic its depiction of the Federation Council would be in real life. Thousands of legislators? Ackh. Nothing would ever get done!

 

[William Leisner]

I read Prime Directive about two years ago and was struck by how unrealistic its depiction of the Federation Council would be in real life. Thousands of legislators? Ackh. Nothing would ever get done!

Yes, a legislature where nothing gets done would be totally unrealistic.

 

[Sci]

I read Prime Directive about two years ago and was struck by how unrealistic its depiction of the Federation Council would be in real life. Thousands of legislators? Ackh. Nothing would ever get done!

Yes, a legislature where nothing gets done would be totally unrealistic.

A legislature that's specifically designed to get nothing done would be. And that's what a legislature with literally thousands of members would be -- one DESIGNED to do nothing!

 

[Stevil2001]

I don't think anyone's yet come up with a realistic fictional legislature for governing hundreds of worlds and quadrillions of people, so I'm willing to cut the Reeves-Stevens some slack here.

 

[Kelso]

I was too late to join the party on this one, but I'm looking forward to the next read. When do we get started on the next book?

I've never read Prime Directive but it sounds interesting. IIRC, Roberto Orci mentioned that it was among his favorites (along with Spock's World). I definitely need to check this one out. I love the idea of Kirk's mission ending in disgrace and the gang getting backing together to seek redemption. Actually, that would make a decent idea for the second & third parts of a new film trilogy. Maybe Orci will keep it in mind.

[TOS Reading Group]

Man, this club needs a catchier name... we sound like a bunch of squares.

How about... The Atoz Club... or... The Atavachrons!... or maybe... The Lawgivers?

Okay, we can work on that.

Also, what is the preferred method for nominating a book for future reading? I see that Best Destiny is listed as a candidate... but it would make sense to read Final Frontier first.

 

[dbush]

I am new to posting but have been reading threads for a long time. Am very interested in getting in on the book club. I see there hasn't been an update for a while.... Should I be looking for a new thread?

 

[Darkwing]

Well, I really liked PD, rating it in the top 10. I love the detail they give - the idea of the trust worlds, for example, and the FCO.
I would have liked the eventual bad guy to be a real bad guy, and either way would have killed it - we do and should put down rabid dogs, after all.

I personally see this story as the real reason Kirk became an admiral - after he was exonerated, starfleet had to give him everything back, but institutions have a distorted corporate memory, and so, rather than let him have a starship again, they bumped him upstairs, where he might be 'rewarded' on one hand with more rank, but also kept on a leash.

 

[Christopher]

Well, I really liked PD, rating it in the top 10. I love the detail they give - the idea of the trust worlds, for example, and the FCO.
I would have liked the eventual bad guy to be a real bad guy, and either way would have killed it - we do and should put down rabid dogs, after all.

But this wasn't a rabid dog. It was more like a healthy wolf. It was doing what it evolved to do, living out its natural life cycle. You don't wipe out every predator on the planet just because they're predators. You coexist by avoidance, by keeping the predators away from people.