What would be the point of that? It's like being picked for the team but never getting to bat. (Cricket metaphor, not baseball, before anyone asks)
I think the worst I have read thus far is "Vulcan's Glory by DC Fontana. She just got a lot of stuff wrong in there that she really shouldn't have. I just couldn't get through it.
Huh? You realise that Amanda's "Spock is the only son of Sarek" line was written before ST V started filming, so she was quite within her rights to say it, and ignore the plans Shatner was exploring for Sybok. But what else did DC do that annoyed you? I remember enjoying "Vulcan's Glory" very much.
Well, while not technically "wrong" with respect to canon at the time, there are some assumptions in Vulcan's Glory that conflict with what fans have generally believed about Vulcans and Trek history. For instance, there being a whole bunch of Vulcans on the Enterprise rather than Spock being the first/only one, and the Vulcans being portrayed as more emotional and romantic than they're usually seen to be.
thought so, cuz there was a discussion about the MU i was reading after IaMD aired and someone was claiming the vulcans were equal partners in the Empire cuz of something to do with sulu or chekov being afraid of 'the vulcans' and i thought it could be mrely people on the ship.
.. and 17 years later, I found this thread and wondered what were people's current choices for worst Trek books (or maybe most disappointing)?
It's a car crash for sure, but I loved every second of it. As for worst, I'd vote for dozens of boring as hell novels that I didn't click with.
I've written in my copy of "Dreadnought" - Diane Carey..."Bizarre book in which writer seems to have failed to grasp how "The Federation" works and seems to think that Ayn Rand's "philosophy" is/ought to be its basis" I must have felt strongly about it as I don't write in books! I was really disappointed by the Autobiography of Jean-Luc Picard as I couldn't imagine the precise captain of our acquaintance writing such sloppy English, never mind being so cavalier as to not checked on some of the information. I haven't read Coda as yet...they've been sitting on the shelf for some time and I'm not encouraged by the above comments.
Personally, I like Diane Carey's "April era" stuff. And her "Piper" stuff. In spite of the hard-Libertarian politics infused therein (even to the point of a Vulcan spouting it). And I like Vonda's Enterprise (and consider it much better than her The Entropy Effect, even if it does have something combining vaudeville with a 3-ring circus on board). I would regard Marshak & Culbreath's "Phoenix" books to be objectively the very worst ST novels to be officially published. That said, if I had a choice of re-reading both of them, vs. re-reading almost any Section-31-centric novel, I'd take M&C any day of the week. (And if a Section 31 series ever actually gets produced, it could very easily be the very first time I've ever refused to watch a ST series.)
In general, and for what it's worth, I like to think that most writers aren't going to get pissed off by a bad review, as long as the poster is reviewing the work and not the writer. - I can't speak for every author, but I figure the books themselves are fair game. You want to critique the plot, the characters, the writing? Have at it. I wouldn't hang out in a review thread if I couldn't cope with the occasional bad review. You can't expect to please everyone. The only reviews that stick in my craw are the ones that venture beyond the words on the page to impugn my motives, my character, my fan cred, etc. "Cox clearly knocked this one out for the money." "Cox has obviously never watched STAR TREK." "Cox obviously hates Scotty." "Cox is obviously a basement-dwelling nerd with no life." Etc. Pick apart the books all you want, but don't presume to read my mind.
I have a new one for my list. I really struggled with "The Typhon Pact #2: Seize the Fire" by Michael A. Martin. I can't pin down what made this one such a struggle, but I carried it around in my bag - but preferred playing on my iPhone when on long train journeys - rather than finishing the book. "Seize the Fire" just moved... so... slow... It moved slower that a TOS Gorn. The only section that took on a compelling tone was the chapter in which Titan crewman, Qur Qontallium, the reptilian security officer (from Gnala) who shares his room with a refugee Gorn. I guess I really miss Andy Mangels' contributions to the novels that they used to write together? I had loved them working as a duo. I just moved on many other Trek novels that seemed more interesting. I started reading "Seize the Fire" when it was first published (2010) but I had already read the fourth instalment, Dayton Ward's "Paths of Disharmony" (in manuscript form, as a beta reader), and David Mack's "Zero Sum Game". It means that, due to my ongoing struggles with "Seize the Fire", which I finally finished earlier this year, I never got around to DRG3's "Rough Beasts of Empire" (#3)! A shame, because I quite enjoyed Books #1 and #4 and also Martin's other early solo effort, "The Needs of the Many".
I recall Final Fury by Dafydd Ab Hugh being standout bad, but can't remember it well, it being a long, long time since I read it.