Worst Trek book?
- Thread starter Xploda
- Start date
Wow, Allyn, historypeats, that sounds great. I think I'm going to the wrong school! 
Tragically so. I've actually been able to study Frankenstein in a class ("Studies in the Gothic", awesome stuff), but the prof giving it is something of a black sheep in the faculty; the type who'll rope a bunch of students together for informal seminars on Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I mentioned Frankenstein specifically because of just such an experience: in a 19th century poetry class, the prof brings up the topic of the Industrial Revolution and a pro-nature reaction against science in poetry. I mentioned that it was also visible in some of the prose work at the time, and mentioned Frankenstein as a novel warning against the overreaching of science.
Seems logical enough, right? Well, the prof, who must be pushing eighty but has a mind like a bear trap, fixes me from across the conference table and says: "Please, Mr. Asselin, we're trying to have a serious discussion here." One of the more extreme reactions perhaps (he must have seen the Boris Karloff movie as a kid and been traumatized, I speculate), but I still find that (a few profs excepting) trying to reference speculative works still gets a pretty chilly reception, particularly amongst older faculty.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
Tragically so. I've actually been able to study Frankenstein in a class ("Studies in the Gothic", awesome stuff), but the prof giving it is something of a black sheep in the faculty; the type who'll rope a bunch of students together for informal seminars on Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I mentioned Frankenstein specifically because of just such an experience: in a 19th century poetry class, the prof brings up the topic of the Industrial Revolution and a pro-nature reaction against science in poetry. I mentioned that it was also visible in some of the prose work at the time, and mentioned Frankenstein as a novel warning against the overreaching of science.
Seems logical enough, right? Well, the prof, who must be pushing eighty but has a mind like a bear trap, fixes me from across the conference table and says: "Please, Mr. Asselin, we're trying to have a serious discussion here." One of the more extreme reactions perhaps (he must have seen the Boris Karloff movie as a kid and been traumatized, I speculate), but I still find that (a few profs excepting) trying to reference speculative works still gets a pretty chilly reception, particularly amongst older faculty.
Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman
If only my former art teacher had checked my official web site before introducing me prior to my speech on Friday night. He read off a list of "my" accomplishments that left me explaining to the audience moments later that, in fact, I was not fluent in Japanese, nor had I studied World History or anatomy....Hoshi_Mayweather said:
I almost confused you with the 'other' David Mack, who did 'Kabuki' for Icon comics...(until I saw the blurb on your page)...
I strongly suspect he did it on purpose, just to put me on the spot.
Well, not to put words in your professor's mouth, but if he's that old, it could be as much the fact that Frankenstein was written by a woman as the fact that it's genre. Mary Shelley's being considered among the Romantics (along with Dorothy Wordsworth's) is a comparatively recent phenomenon, one the Grand Old Farts are probably still having trouble with. Many of the older texts I studied on the Romantic period (the 19th century was my specialty in college) were completely dismissive of any contribution made by the female half of the population, in particular dismissing Frankenstein as a lesser work, in part simply because it was prose, and therefore not as "elevated" as verse, and in part because the person writing it had the temerity not to have a penis.
Well, it was fanfic, essentially, but they were lucky enough to get it professionally published by Bantam.
They did "get away" with a direct sequel, editing two professional short story anthologies of fan writing, and then two more ST novels, this time for Pocket, including "Triangle", which was one of my nightmare books. Just remember that, for some ST fans, M&C were their favourite ST authors, and if they ever wrote a new ST novel, some readers would snap it up!
Dare I mention their, um, contributions to William Shatner's first "auto"biography, "William Shatner: Where No Man..."?
G
Guest
Guest
I have to admit that Well of Souls from the Lost Era was more like (shameless pun ahead) Well of Confusion for me...
I reread it a week ago and my feelings are mixed. The Kirk story was pointless and boring and was even hurting the Kirk character by making him look like a cry baby in my opinion and the framing story was rather lackluster,too. The other stories were quite good, though.
The book probably suffers from being judged in the "novel" category, when it's more like a "collection of rather random short stories" book.
Still, I have to admit that even the individual stories irk me somewhat. Scotty's story is refreshing in idea and execution, as far as Academy stories go, but quite stereotypical in terms of the character. Chekov is handled the best in terms of drama and character (that is, he's consistent with the later LA Graf treatment of that character - the canon Chekov is such a blank slate that anything fits), but it's difficult to see Starfleet engaging in the sort of stuff they did in that storylet.
But the damning fault for me is that these stories reinforce the objectionable interpretation that Starfleet would have something called "the Kobayashi Maru test". This doesn't sound plausible at all: if such a test existed, the cadets would know all about it after the first day on the campus.
What ST2:TWoK instead gives us is the "no-win scenario", a no doubt varied test where only one possible iteration involves the rescue of a distressed vessel named Kobayashi Maru from the Neutral Zone... This at least makes some sense, even when we note that some of Kirk's friends refer to the test Kirk specifically took as the "Kobayashi Maru test". Perhaps Kirk chose that iteration for Saavik because he found it personally relevant (that is, he literally rescued the Kobayashi Maru in his own test, or at least in the last of the three tests he took), and knew that Saavik in turn was personally relevant to Spock?
Whoa, hobby horse, whoa. Easy now. Have some sugar. Good boy.
...Sorry about that.
Timo Saloniemi
Still, I have to admit that even the individual stories irk me somewhat. Scotty's story is refreshing in idea and execution, as far as Academy stories go, but quite stereotypical in terms of the character. Chekov is handled the best in terms of drama and character (that is, he's consistent with the later LA Graf treatment of that character - the canon Chekov is such a blank slate that anything fits), but it's difficult to see Starfleet engaging in the sort of stuff they did in that storylet.
But the damning fault for me is that these stories reinforce the objectionable interpretation that Starfleet would have something called "the Kobayashi Maru test". This doesn't sound plausible at all: if such a test existed, the cadets would know all about it after the first day on the campus.
What ST2:TWoK instead gives us is the "no-win scenario", a no doubt varied test where only one possible iteration involves the rescue of a distressed vessel named Kobayashi Maru from the Neutral Zone... This at least makes some sense, even when we note that some of Kirk's friends refer to the test Kirk specifically took as the "Kobayashi Maru test". Perhaps Kirk chose that iteration for Saavik because he found it personally relevant (that is, he literally rescued the Kobayashi Maru in his own test, or at least in the last of the three tests he took), and knew that Saavik in turn was personally relevant to Spock?
Whoa, hobby horse, whoa. Easy now. Have some sugar. Good boy.
...Sorry about that.
Timo Saloniemi
My least favorite? I dunno. There's a couple nominees: One Small Step and Badlands, Book One, both for the same reason--Susan Wright's TOS-era stories just don't feel like TOS, they feel like TNG.
Possession, because it seemed like I was supposed to know what the artifacts were and didn't (though I haven't read it since learning that it was a sequel to a TOS book--that might change my opinion).
Harbinger, because I didn't find a single sympathetic or understandable character in the cast. (Though I plan to give it another shot soon, before Summon the Thunder, so I may have to revise this.)
"Age of Unreason" wasn't actively bad; problem is, it wasn't actively good either. A boring plot combined with dry writing made me glad this was only a novella.
Anything by that hack Killiany--he wouldn't know a good book if it hit him on the head. Thank goodness that Ilsa's recent domination of BattleCorps has kept them from publishing anything by him or those Weldon, Bills, and Coleman wannabes KRAD also took failed chances on....
Possession, because it seemed like I was supposed to know what the artifacts were and didn't (though I haven't read it since learning that it was a sequel to a TOS book--that might change my opinion).
Harbinger, because I didn't find a single sympathetic or understandable character in the cast. (Though I plan to give it another shot soon, before Summon the Thunder, so I may have to revise this.
)"Age of Unreason" wasn't actively bad; problem is, it wasn't actively good either. A boring plot combined with dry writing made me glad this was only a novella.
Anything by that hack Killiany--he wouldn't know a good book if it hit him on the head. Thank goodness that Ilsa's recent domination of BattleCorps has kept them from publishing anything by him or those Weldon, Bills, and Coleman wannabes KRAD also took failed chances on....
oh, yeah, age of unreason is probably the single SCE story i really don't like from the 7 MMPBs.
I think that's a book that's so bad it's good. It's just such an insane mishmash of ideas and poorly written characterization that just makes me want to set my neighbors lawn on fire and dance naked in the street. That's my idea of a good time!
Not quite a book, but close enough: the Captain Sulu audio adventure Envoy, written by L.A. Graf. It's been at least a couple years since I heard it, but its crappiness is still emblazoned on my mind: tired concept, unbelievable wooden dialogue, phoned-in or bizarre performances. If not for the decent sound effects (and the humor value), it would be utterly worthless.
Actually Envoy was my favorite of the Sulu audiobooks. I felt it was the least awkwardly structured of the three. And the "alien" singers were quite intriguing.
I going to guess you didn't get to Genesis Force then? Cause that book was pretty ridiculous. (although the ones I listed earlier obviously fall further down the list that this one for me).
The Laertian Gamble -- Seems to me like the author intended it as an absurdist parody of Star Trek. Horrible, horrible book.
The Price of the Phoenix -- Just dull. I've heard that it was originally intended as a short story, but was padded out into a novel. Perhaps The Fate of the Phoenix will be marginally better.
The Abode of Life -- Sloppily written, headache-inducing.
The Price of the Phoenix -- Just dull. I've heard that it was originally intended as a short story, but was padded out into a novel. Perhaps The Fate of the Phoenix will be marginally better.
The Abode of Life -- Sloppily written, headache-inducing.
"Cacophony" was the one that annoyed me. Originally promoted as a Peter David project, it turned out to be by the unknown JJ Molloy (a pseudonym?). It tried too hard to be oh so clever with the "ambisonic 3-D sound" and ended up being a... well, a cacophony of inaudible sounds.
From the blurb: "... the din growing ever more deafening." Yes indeed.
Similar threads
