Where to start with Trek novels

[dryjoy]

Hi there. This is my first post here.

I've never read any trek novels before, but I need a trek fix and without a current TV series, a book is the only way to get it.

I don't know where to start though, there are so many books and I'm sure some must be better than others.

I like all the modern series from TNG through to Enterprise, but I think my favourite series is DS9, as I liked the darker vibe, especially the Dominion plot. Tying in with that, I also like the third season of Enterprise, due to the similar kind of approach.

On that basis, I suppose it might make sense to read a DS9 book, but what else might I enjoy?

Thanks for your recommendations!

 

[BillJ]

Hi there. This is my first post here.

I've never read any trek novels before, but I need a trek fix and without a current TV series, a book is the only way to get it.

I don't know where to start though, there are so many books and I'm sure some must be better than others.

I like all the modern series from TNG through to Enterprise, but I think my favourite series is DS9, as I liked the darker vibe, especially the Dominion plot. Tying in with that, I also like the third season of Enterprise, due to the similar kind of approach.

On that basis, I suppose it might make sense to read a DS9 book, but what else might I enjoy?

Thanks for your recommendations!

Avatar books I/II by S.D. Perry would probably be a good place to start. It picks up right after the end of DS9.

 

[ryan123450]

Seconded. The Good That Men Do plays a similar role for Enterprise.

Keep reading the forum. There is lots of info just like what you are looking for.

 

[Paper Moon]

Hi there. This is my first post here.

I've never read any trek novels before, but I need a trek fix and without a current TV series, a book is the only way to get it.

I don't know where to start though, there are so many books and I'm sure some must be better than others.

I like all the modern series from TNG through to Enterprise, but I think my favourite series is DS9, as I liked the darker vibe, especially the Dominion plot. Tying in with that, I also like the third season of Enterprise, due to the similar kind of approach.

On that basis, I suppose it might make sense to read a DS9 book, but what else might I enjoy?

Thanks for your recommendations!

Avatar books I/II by S.D. Perry would probably be a good place to start. It picks up right after the end of DS9.

If you are looking for a Trek fix, starting with Avatar is definitely a good idea. If you like it, there are about a dozen novels that follow it in something called the "DS9 relaunch". Plenty of Trek fix-material in there.

Another recommendation, if you like DS9, would be to start with Andrew J. Robinson's A Stitch in Time; basically Garak's memoirs. Masterfully written, and certainly more than a little dark, although if does remove some of the mystery around Garak. So if that's a big thing for you, beware.

I would strongly recommend starting with either of those and making your way through the DS9-R, and then entering the rest of the novel continuity from there. So many Trek fixes ahead of you!

If you prefer TNG, the last 3 "A Time To..." novels get very good reviews, and are suitably dark. These novels sorta start a "TNG Relaunch" (well, they're sorta prequels to it).

The Good That Men Do is a good read, and starts the "Enterprise Relaunch," but that series sorta peters out and isn't as good as time goes on, in my opinion. (The Romulan War novels spring particularly to mind.) So I don't recommend it as heartily as the rest.

You have a lot of fun ahead of you, in my opinion. Welcome to TrekLit.

 

[Christopher]

Another recommendation, if you like DS9, would be to start with Andrew J. Robinson's A Stitch in Time; basically Garak's memoirs. Masterfully written, and certainly more than a little dark, although if does remove some of the mystery around Garak. So if that's a big thing for you, beware.

Only if you believe Garak was actually telling the truth in his memoir. I take a lot of it with a grain of salt, considering the source.

 

[Paper Moon]

Another recommendation, if you like DS9, would be to start with Andrew J. Robinson's A Stitch in Time; basically Garak's memoirs. Masterfully written, and certainly more than a little dark, although if does remove some of the mystery around Garak. So if that's a big thing for you, beware.

Only if you believe Garak was actually telling the truth in his memoir. I take a lot of it with a grain of salt, considering the source.

Ha, you know, it's funny, I never thought of that before. I guess I've always taken him at face value.

I am curious, Christopher, which parts in particular you take with a grain of salt. (Though perhaps I should ask what you don't!) Although maybe for dryjoy's sake, we should discuss that elsewhere (or at least use spoiler tags).

 

[Therin of Andor]

I never thought of that before. I guess I've always taken him at face value.

Bashir: What I want to know is, out of all the stories you told me which ones were true and which ones weren't?

Garak: My dear doctor... they're all true.

Bashir: Even the lies?

Garak: Especially the lies.

 

[Christopher]

I am curious, Christopher, which parts in particular you take with a grain of salt. (Though perhaps I should ask what you don't!)

Mostly it's not that specific. I don't have enough information to have specific opinions about what parts are accurate or inaccurate. It's just that, as a history student, I learned to approach sources critically. A first-person account can be valuable but can only be trusted so far without independent corroboration. At most, it's only evidence of how the narrator remembers the events in question, and memory can be quite fallible even for the most honest of us. When the memoirist is someone known to be proud of his skill at lying, that creates even more cause for skepticism. The only thing we can be sure of is that A Stitch in Time represents the text of an extended correspondence that Garak transmitted to Dr. Julian Bashir in the early months of 2376. Anything beyond that would require further evidence.

Although there is one bit in particular that I prefer to consider apocryphal, something Garak alleges about some distant constellation whose stars flicker as some sort of communication or something. That's way too fanciful to be real. Constellations just don't work that way. They're not actual physical clusters of stars, just arbitrary groupings of stars that happen to appear in the same direction as seen from a given planet.

 

[Timewalker]

On that basis, I suppose it might make sense to read a DS9 book, but what else might I enjoy?

Thanks for your recommendations!

My favorite DS9 book is Fallen Heroes.

 

[Paper Moon]

I never thought of that before. I guess I've always taken him at face value.

Bashir: What I want to know is, out of all the stories you told me which ones were true and which ones weren't?

Garak: My dear doctor... they're all true.

Bashir: Even the lies?

Garak: Especially the lies.

And to add insult to injury, Robinson included that exchange in one of those chapter divider thingies towards the end of the book, as I recall.

I am curious, Christopher, which parts in particular you take with a grain of salt. (Though perhaps I should ask what you don't!)

Mostly it's not that specific. I don't have enough information to have specific opinions about what parts are accurate or inaccurate. It's just that, as a history student, I learned to approach sources critically. A first-person account can be valuable but can only be trusted so far without independent corroboration. At most, it's only evidence of how the narrator remembers the events in question, and memory can be quite fallible even for the most honest of us. When the memoirist is someone known to be proud of his skill at lying, that creates even more cause for skepticism. The only thing we can be sure of is that A Stitch in Time represents the text of an extended correspondence that Garak transmitted to Dr. Julian Bashir in the early months of 2376. Anything beyond that would require further evidence.

A very good point. I would counter that we can use that argument (healthy skepticism of historical records) to cast doubt on many many stories throughout Trekdom, but that argument has nowhere productive to go. Your point is well taken.

(Although: there have been implications that Cardassian memory is typically equivalent to eidetic human memory, which would give Garak's memory more credibility. But I digress.)

However, I think, in terms of the character development, I think Garak is basically honest with his narrative. Perhaps he embellishes here or there, or reframes events slightly to make himself look better, but I think he is basically being honest.

Spoiler: minor spoilery stuff

Why do I think this? I think upon returning to Cardassia and seeing the total destruction that the "old ways" had wrought on Cardassia, Garak finally lost any sense of romanticism he had about the past. We saw, as the TV series went on, Garak engage in less and less obfuscation. Heck, by the end of Season 7, he told Damar straight out that Tain was his father. And while Garak definitely did not abandon deception and manipulation (we see this in his other post-WYLB appearances), I think he stopped doing it merely for the sake of doing it. As someone said, "Typical Garak; why tell the truth when a lie will do?". (I believe that was Tain.) I think Garak gave that up.

His desire for a new, democratic Cardassia seems genuine to me. I think his correspondance to Bashir, his laying out of himself, was his way to say, as much to himself as to Bashir, that he was abandoning the old ways, just as he believed Cardassia needed to do.

I grant that Garak should not necessarily be taken at face value, but I do think the Garak of 2376 is more likely to be speaking honestly about his past than would the Garak of 2366.

Although there is one bit in particular that I prefer to consider apocryphal, something Garak alleges about some distant constellation whose stars flicker as some sort of communication or something. That's way too fanciful to be real. Constellations just don't work that way. They're not actual physical clusters of stars, just arbitrary groupings of stars that happen to appear in the same direction as seen from a given planet.

Yeah, I can see dismissing that as Garak's narrative license and not something to be taken literally. That makes sense.

(Heh, although, it is possible that the constellation in question really was a cluster of stars at relatively close range. )

 

[Christopher]

A very good point. I would counter that we can use that argument (healthy skepticism of historical records) to cast doubt on many many stories throughout Trekdom, but that argument has nowhere productive to go.

The difference is that most Trek tales are presented from a third-person omniscient perspective. They aren't accounts that somebody in-universe wrote down, they're god's-eye views of events in a fictional universe. So they don't represent any in-universe person's bias, except to the extent that individual scenes are always told from a given character's point of view and their attitude may color their perception of events. But most such stories are told from many points of view, which ameliorates the effect.

But when something is presented as a written first-person account existing within the universe, that's a different matter. Then it represents only one character's viewpoint and recollection, and unless that character is Data, it's pretty much a given that their recall is imperfect, and unless that character is a Q, it's a given that their understanding of events is incomplete.

However, I think, in terms of the character development, I think Garak is basically honest with his narrative. Perhaps he embellishes here or there, or reframes events slightly to make himself look better, but I think he is basically being honest.

As far as he's capable of honesty, sure. But Garak always has an angle. He interprets things in the way that suits his goals. Even if those goals have become more benevolent, the interpretation would still be part of his nature. And who's to say he's managed to keep track of the difference between true memories and convenient fictions? It's easy to overwrite a real memory with a false one. Even if he's trying his best to be honest with himself and others, there might be a lot of his past that he's lied to himself about for so long that he can't be sure what's really true.

It's not so much that I actually think parts of the book are untrue; I just think that since it is presented as the subjective recollections of a character not known for his honesty, that makes a handy way to reconcile any inconsistencies that might pop up between A Stitch in Time and other books or whatever.

 

[WarsTrek1993]

I'd definitely recommend The Good That Men Do, as someone else said. It was a brilliant redoing of one of the most vile, godawful series finales ever aired.

 

[Relayer1]

As well as A Stitch in Time I'd strongly suggest reading Hollow Men by Una McCormack before starting down the Avatar / relaunch path. It's not the best thing I've read by her (you must try The Never Ending Sacrifice later in your reading) but it's well worth it.

I'm not a big fan of most of the other stuff set during the series (that's not to say it's necessarily bad, though I'd approach the early stuff with some caution) but I'd also suggest Saratoga, The Lives of Dax and Armin Shimerman's The 34th Rule.

 

[dryjoy]

Thanks for all the great replies! I've got some good ideas about what to read first now. I'm really looking forward to some new stories, and interesting developments beyond the TV series.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I'd definitely recommend The Good That Men Do, as someone else said. It was a brilliant redoing of one of the most vile, godawful series finales ever aired.

I wouldn't. I'd recommend avoiding any of the post-series Enterprise novels. They're easily the weakest Trek Lit has to offer. Bland and uninteresting, and at times intelligence-insulting. And I was a fan of the Enterprise TV series.

Spoiler: very minor

They present the visual difference between ENT and TOS as being an actual technological downgrade, blantantly contradicting "In a Mirror, Darkly" as well as common sense - TOS was made in the 60's, ENT in the 00's. The look of the technology needs no more explanation than the look of a recast actor or why the Gorn from "Arena" looked so much like a guy in a rubber suit.
FWIW, it's also since been contradicted on-screen by the USS Kelvin seen in STXI, which showed us a post-ENT, pre-TOS starship with a far more modern look.

IMO the best Enterprise novels are the ones set duting the series. I very much enjoyed Daedalus, Daedalus' Chidren and Rosetta.

 

[bbailey861]

I envy you, dryjoy, having all that Treklit waiting for you for the very first time. After you get through the DS9 novels, carry on to your next favourite series. Many new adventures await you. Have fun.

 

[Relayer1]

I'd definitely recommend The Good That Men Do, as someone else said. It was a brilliant redoing of one of the most vile, godawful series finales ever aired.

I wouldn't. I'd recommend avoiding any of the post-series Enterprise novels. They're easily the weakest Trek Lit has to offer. Bland and uninteresting, and at times intelligence-insulting. And I was a fan of the Enterprise TV series.

Spoiler: very minor

They present the visual difference between ENT and TOS as being an actual technological downgrade, blantantly contradicting "In a Mirror, Darkly" as well as common sense - TOS was made in the 60's, ENT in the 00's. The look of the technology needs no more explanation than the look of a recast actor or why the Gorn from "Arena" looked so much like a guy in a rubber suit.
FWIW, it's also since been contradicted on-screen by the USS Kelvin seen in STXI, which showed us a post-ENT, pre-TOS starship with a far more modern look.

IMO the best Enterprise novels are the ones set duting the series. I very much enjoyed Daedalus, Daedalus' Chidren and Rosetta.

Whereas I like the post Ent novels - I didn't like the series much (apart from season 4) but think the books generally improve on the show.

I liked the explanation for the change in look and I don't give a monkeys chuff what the Kelvin looked like. Didn't like that ship anyway...

 

[Cybersnark]

See, I kinda liked the explanation for the tech downgrade (mainly because it invokes the kind of pointy-haired "management" stupidity that I believe is both universal and eternal).

Although there is one bit in particular that I prefer to consider apocryphal, something Garak alleges about some distant constellation whose stars flicker as some sort of communication or something. That's way too fanciful to be real. Constellations just don't work that way. They're not actual physical clusters of stars, just arbitrary groupings of stars that happen to appear in the same direction as seen from a given planet.

OTOH, Stranger Things have happened, and the Enterprise can't be everywhere (well, I guess it could, under some circumstances. . .).

 

[Christopher]

^I don't see what the Enterprise could possibly have to do with it.

 

[Paper Moon]

A very good point. I would counter that we can use that argument (healthy skepticism of historical records) to cast doubt on many many stories throughout Trekdom, but that argument has nowhere productive to go.

The difference is that most Trek tales are presented from a third-person omniscient perspective. They aren't accounts that somebody in-universe wrote down, they're god's-eye views of events in a fictional universe. So they don't represent any in-universe person's bias, except to the extent that individual scenes are always told from a given character's point of view and their attitude may color their perception of events. But most such stories are told from many points of view, which ameliorates the effect. [emphasis added]

I think that's where we get into "potayto, potahto," territory. A lot of TrekLit does not show the same scene multiple times from different perspectives, leaving us with only "third-person subjective" accounts of particular events. These accounts, of course, are not so easily susceptible to a historian's skepticism, but I think you could certainly use that technique to explain away inconsistencies.

However, I think, in terms of the character development, I think Garak is basically honest with his narrative. Perhaps he embellishes here or there, or reframes events slightly to make himself look better, but I think he is basically being honest.

As far as he's capable of honesty, sure. But Garak always has an angle. He interprets things in the way that suits his goals. Even if those goals have become more benevolent, the interpretation would still be part of his nature. And who's to say he's managed to keep track of the difference between true memories and convenient fictions? It's easy to overwrite a real memory with a false one. Even if he's trying his best to be honest with himself and others, there might be a lot of his past that he's lied to himself about for so long that he can't be sure what's really true.

Again, we're in "potayto, potahto" territory here, but I think you don't give Garak enough credit. From all that we've seen of him, he is exceedingly precise. He abhors sloppy work and loose ends. I personally doubt that Garak would allow himself to overwrite real memories. He seems too self-aware to do so. In fact, I would be very surprised if the Obsidian Order did not train its operatives to avoid doing so. One can easily imagine situations where relying on false memories would be catastrophic. (And again, there is Cardassian psychophysiology.)

But I do agree that he always has an angle. And I agree that it's possible that Garak is putting a slant on his autobiography in order to be more sympathetic to Bashir, possibly with the ultimate goal of securing more help from the Federation. But, while I think it's possible, it's not how I choose to interpret it. But, still, "potayto, potahto."

It's not so much that I actually think parts of the book are untrue; I just think that since it is presented as the subjective recollections of a character not known for his honesty, that makes a handy way to reconcile any inconsistencies that might pop up between A Stitch in Time and other books or whatever.

Agreed.