Going by memory, I think it was All-Star Squadron. I know I also had letters in issues of Action Comics and Avengers. (Of course, when I want to check Grand Comics Database, it’s down at the moment.)
— David Young
What's the worst non-canon decision in the history of Trek?
- Thread starter F. King Daniel
- Start date
Going by memory, I think it was All-Star Squadron. I know I also had letters in issues of Action Comics and Avengers. (Of course, when I want to check Grand Comics Database, it’s down at the moment.)
— David Young
Aha, the very last issue, #67: https://www.comics.org/issue/42566/
Oh, that's definitely canon.
Meanwhile, I don't think I ever had a letter in a Trek comic but I was a pretty prolific comic-book letter hack back in the day, most in Marvel Comics like THE DEFENDERS, DAREDEVIL, etc. And I once had two letters printed in the same issue of STAR WARS, one of them under a pseudonym!
Still remember the first time I discovered one of my letters in print. I was in the back seat of our old station wagon, driving home from Sunday dinner at my grandparents' house, when I flipped open the new issue of Marvel Preview (which I had just picked up at 7-Eleven) and . . . ohmigod, they printed my letter about Lilith, Daughter of Dracula!
I was thrilled!
I had a letter printed in Newsweek, so I know your feeling.
Bringing Captain Sisko back from the wormhole. It just doesn't work and no one has yet made it satisfying.
seriously him returning for his daughters birth doesn't bring a tear to the eye?
My favorite part of that is how Avery Brooks had a problem with Sisko just abandoning his family and that's why they had Sisko say he'd be back or whatever, but then when Sisko came back he almost immediately dicked off to the Gamma Quadrant.
I've had letters published in the NMRA Magazine a number of times (probably at least once under its previous title of Scale Rails), and at least one in the Automobile Club of Southern California's Westways.
Over a decade ago, I got published in one of the IBM Midrange trade magazines (I don't recall which one, and I think there are, or at least were, at least two). They'd sent out a cattle-call for letters describing variations (serious or humorous) on the "data warehouse" concept, and I came up with
Presumably it would be implemented as an array of write-only memory.
I was pretty happy with how they handled his return and what they did with him up to the Taurus Pact books. It was after that that I wasn't thrilled with how he was handled.
I didn't mind the start of it, with Sisko returning for the birth of his daughter. Considering Avery Brooks' own disapproval of the idea of Sisko leaving his pregnant wife and unborn child, it made sense for him to come back for it.
But his portrayal in the DRG post-Destiny DS9 novels never sat right. I see some seeds being planted in Fearful Symmetry/The Soul Key of Sisko being some kind of tool of the Prophets to set certain things in motion, presumably in the expectation of tackling it further in the then-still nascent Ascendants storyline, but then the time jump to after Star Trek Destiny happened and... Sisko did NOT respond like Sisko anymore as far as I could tell. The division of him from his family, from Kasidy in particular, ESPECIALLY, again, after Avery Brooks had expressed his concerns about the optics of a black man abandoning his family... It just did not play as Sisko.
Basically, I think that Sisko, post-Prophets, would not fall back into the standard mold of just another Starfleet captain, and yet that was the version of Sisko that it seemed that DRG had chosen to make him in to, for... whatever reason that never made sense to me.
That said, I'd personally say that it's tied into a bigger "worst non-canon decision" made, and that was DRG being the lead voice in the development of the corner of DS9's ongoing story - I've said before, I feel that he became very focused on the grand plan, making sure that all the pieces were where they needed to be over the course of his writing, but it ended up meaning that the plot was driving the story, while one of DS9's greatest strengths to me was how the CHARACTERS had always driven things, and that just completely tanked a lot of my interest in the developments there, because it didn't feel like the characters mattered, just the way that they were in the right place for the bigger plot. That on top of how it also felt like there was a lot of waiting around for those plot developments to happen, with the characters just standing around, waiting and talking about "well, there's a thing that'll happen, so let's discuss the thing that'll happen so we're ready for when the thing happens and we know how to handle the thing happening when the thing happens."
When there were the occasion side story featuring DS9 developments - Una McCormack's The Missing and Enigma Tales, Jeffery Lang's Force and Motion, even the use of DS9 elements through David Mack's entry in The Fall - it felt more like the familiar developments, because these were stories that had stories centered on the characters and how they responded to the events around them. But the "main" storyline, for lack of a better term, being written and advanced by DRG just felt like novels I was picking up more out of obligation than genuine interest.
Ending the Kelvinverse. Hated that part.
OH yeah, especially the way they have him grow the hair again and shave off the beard when those where both things Avery fought FOR when he was in the role and the nonsense about Kira becoming a Vedek which I just did not like. The funny thing is I actually like his writing but remain unconvinced about literally every create decision he made a DS9 lead.
Ending the Relaunch. It could have continued as a separate universe.
Same. Like, I understand that it had to come to an end and getting an end was more or less a gift...but man, I would have been way happier with 'and then they saved the universe! the rest is up to your imagination! the end!' It wasn't a fun adventure and it wasn't a fun ending to something I had so much fun enjoying at the time it was a thing. Not having the transporter clones be the narrative lynchpin of the trilogy was unforgivable.
Honestly, that's not how media tie-in novels work.
Readers who buy STAR TREK novels (or BUFFY novels or ALIENS novels or whatever) can reasonably expect that they will be consistent with the source material.
I get what you’re saying, and I understand that’s how Star Trek tie-ins have always worked. But as pointed out by others before, other properties have differing continuities in different types of media (or even between different series in the same medium), and I personally have no problems with the idea of a Star Trek book continuity that is distinct from the Star Trek TV continuity.
Others’ mileage may vary, of course.
Yeah, all they needed to do was give us a story that solidly established that it was a separate universe from the Prime Universe that Picard, Lower Decks, ect. were taking place in, and maybe come up with a way to indicate on the covers which universe it was in, and I think most fans would have understood what was going on. Parallel universes have been part of the canon going back to TOS, so it would have still been well within the bounds of the canon to do something. But I guess they must have decided it would have been too confusing for people who weren't hardcore Trekkies to two different versions of the post-Nemesis universe going at the same time.
How did the no-subtitle Star Trek series from IDW handle Sisko return from the wormhole? Was it any better than what we got in the novels?
How did the no-subtitle Star Trek series from IDW handle Sisko return from the wormhole? Was it any better than what we got in the novels?
The thing is, with the output of Star Trek novels going down since the switch to TPB from MMPB combined with the franchise's return to television, there was going to be something cut from the novels. They need to make room for tie-in novels for the current show, and TOS 5YM novels have always been the bestsellers anyway, even in the Litverse's heyday, so those aren't going anywhere. The Litverse continuity was therefore the most logical choice, given it's no longer consistent with onscreen material anyway.
Another thing to consider, Star Trek fans don't get subtlety. When the Kelvin movies were released, you had people who believed they overwrote the Prime universe which no longer existed. When Disco moved to the 32nd century there were those who insisted it was only temporary and they had to return to the 23rd century before the series ended. And in the novels you had those who believed that just because the post-finale Enterprise novels reinterpreted TATV that all Trek novels going forward should be free to do as they wished regardless of onscreen material. Combine this with those in Star Wars fandom who keep demanding the revival of Legends continuity, and you can understand the desire in Star Trek to put a definitive end to the Litverse continuity. And I say that as someone who disagreed with the decision to completely and irrevocably eradicate the timeline the Litverse continuity took place in. But the truth is, the Litverse was never going to be revisited regardless. And given Trek fandom's proven inability to grasp subtlety, and to avoid a "bring back the Litverse" campaign like the "Bring back Legends" campaign amongst Star Wars fandom, the only logical choice was to put a definitive end to the Litverse continuity.
Besides, everything ends eventually, nothing is permanent or forever. The Litverse lasted for twenty years and only ended because of the existence of onscreen material superseding it. That is the best case scenario anyone could have hoped for. Litverse fans should be celebrating what it accomplished rather than crying because it's over.
Another thing to consider, Star Trek fans don't get subtlety. When the Kelvin movies were released, you had people who believed they overwrote the Prime universe which no longer existed. When Disco moved to the 32nd century there were those who insisted it was only temporary and they had to return to the 23rd century before the series ended. And in the novels you had those who believed that just because the post-finale Enterprise novels reinterpreted TATV that all Trek novels going forward should be free to do as they wished regardless of onscreen material. Combine this with those in Star Wars fandom who keep demanding the revival of Legends continuity, and you can understand the desire in Star Trek to put a definitive end to the Litverse continuity. And I say that as someone who disagreed with the decision to completely and irrevocably eradicate the timeline the Litverse continuity took place in. But the truth is, the Litverse was never going to be revisited regardless. And given Trek fandom's proven inability to grasp subtlety, and to avoid a "bring back the Litverse" campaign like the "Bring back Legends" campaign amongst Star Wars fandom, the only logical choice was to put a definitive end to the Litverse continuity.
Besides, everything ends eventually, nothing is permanent or forever. The Litverse lasted for twenty years and only ended because of the existence of onscreen material superseding it. That is the best case scenario anyone could have hoped for. Litverse fans should be celebrating what it accomplished rather than crying because it's over.
Similar threads
