Re: Typhon Pact: Rough Beasts Of Empire review thread
In response to Danoz, in all fairness I think you've set up a false comparison of sorts. DRG had Sisko take an extreme position, which I and some others did feel was out of character and didn't seem true to what we have seen of the character onscreen. But I don't think any of us have argued that we simply want Sisko to be conflict free either.
On the show he clearly went against the Prophets' warning and he followed his heart. He knew the consequences, or at least had the warning, but chose a different direction. I wish the Sisko of Rough Beasts had faced up to that decision instead of trying to shirk it. I wish he had sought some way to creatively address his 'problem' instead of just running away from it. Even Sisko post-Wolf 359 didn't run away from Jake though he did shut himself from a great deal of the world. Granted, he didn't have this warning hanging over his head, but because of that warning, I could see Sisko just as easily wanting his family by his side so he could protect them and not leave it up to others.
Who's to say that his presence alone will invite this danger. Joseph Sisko died without Ben being present. Though to be fair, I question why Sisko would think this was part of the prophecy. Joseph was old. I wish DRG had written Ben as an adult who can be man enough to talk to his wife about the prophecy at least. Let them argue, let them disagree if need be, and then if Ben left after that, I wouldn't like it, but at least we could get that kind of vital discussion, it just wouldn't find like such a cold dismissal. It also galls me that Avery Brooks worked with the DS9 writers to preclude the idea that Sisko would abandon his family on the series finale, but Trek Lit. just tossed that to the wind. On some storyline changes, like Trip's resurrection (though I'm starting to regret that a little), I was cool with the change, but not with DS9. It goes too much against who Sisko was.
Real people do make irrational choices and so do fictional characters, but I think there is a fine line with Star Trek captains. Trek captains stand for something, they inspire people. They are the tent poles of their respective series and you want to have them challenged, but you want to see them come through the challenge, not run away from it.
To be fair, perhaps this is what DRG plans to do in a future book, though I wish there had been more of a hint of that in Rough Beasts. As it stands, I don't know what's going to happen with Sisko. I doubt there will be separate adventures on his ship and I don't know when the next DS9 book is coming out, or if even Sisko will be the main focus, or significant part, of it. With this time jump that occurred, a lot of storylines need to be updated and Sisko's might get lost in the shuffle. If it does, that will truly suck.
In response to Danoz, in all fairness I think you've set up a false comparison of sorts. DRG had Sisko take an extreme position, which I and some others did feel was out of character and didn't seem true to what we have seen of the character onscreen. But I don't think any of us have argued that we simply want Sisko to be conflict free either.
On the show he clearly went against the Prophets' warning and he followed his heart. He knew the consequences, or at least had the warning, but chose a different direction. I wish the Sisko of Rough Beasts had faced up to that decision instead of trying to shirk it. I wish he had sought some way to creatively address his 'problem' instead of just running away from it. Even Sisko post-Wolf 359 didn't run away from Jake though he did shut himself from a great deal of the world. Granted, he didn't have this warning hanging over his head, but because of that warning, I could see Sisko just as easily wanting his family by his side so he could protect them and not leave it up to others.
Who's to say that his presence alone will invite this danger. Joseph Sisko died without Ben being present. Though to be fair, I question why Sisko would think this was part of the prophecy. Joseph was old. I wish DRG had written Ben as an adult who can be man enough to talk to his wife about the prophecy at least. Let them argue, let them disagree if need be, and then if Ben left after that, I wouldn't like it, but at least we could get that kind of vital discussion, it just wouldn't find like such a cold dismissal. It also galls me that Avery Brooks worked with the DS9 writers to preclude the idea that Sisko would abandon his family on the series finale, but Trek Lit. just tossed that to the wind. On some storyline changes, like Trip's resurrection (though I'm starting to regret that a little), I was cool with the change, but not with DS9. It goes too much against who Sisko was.
Real people do make irrational choices and so do fictional characters, but I think there is a fine line with Star Trek captains. Trek captains stand for something, they inspire people. They are the tent poles of their respective series and you want to have them challenged, but you want to see them come through the challenge, not run away from it.
To be fair, perhaps this is what DRG plans to do in a future book, though I wish there had been more of a hint of that in Rough Beasts. As it stands, I don't know what's going to happen with Sisko. I doubt there will be separate adventures on his ship and I don't know when the next DS9 book is coming out, or if even Sisko will be the main focus, or significant part, of it. With this time jump that occurred, a lot of storylines need to be updated and Sisko's might get lost in the shuffle. If it does, that will truly suck.
