Worst Trek book?

[Dancing Doctor]

JWolf said:

Logically said:
I really, really hated the novel "Rosetta Stone" by Dave Stern, simply because it failed to attract my attention or interest.

Side Note: Someone earlier said that they hated "A Fury Scorned". I actually LOVED that book. Deanna was finally more than simply "I sense (fill in the blank), Captain". Probably why I also like "The Battle of Betazed"

The Battle of Betazed i found interesting, but overall unsatisfying. It has a good premise and it started off really well and then it went downhill after that. The ending total ruined what the book had going for it.

The battle scenes were interesting, as well as the destruction of Sentok Nor. The ending was a bit lackluster, in that "Hey, we'll randomly project emotions into the Jem'Hadar, and cross our fingers."

 

[Dancing Doctor]

historypeats said:

Logically said:
Side Note: Someone earlier said that they hated "A Fury Scorned". I actually LOVED that book. Deanna was finally more than simply "I sense (fill in the blank), Captain". Probably why I also like "The Battle of Betazed"

That was me, and I didn't like it because (no offense to anyone involved) the writing was absolutely terrible. I kept getting distracted by awkward phrasings, false-sounding bits of dialogue...basically, I wanted to rewrite the entire thing, except that at its core, it's not a very interesting story. It COULD have been, but it isn't - kind of like another Zebrowski book, Dyson Sphere. Ideas are all well and good, but if you can't use them properly in your writing, they're useless.

I haven't read Dyson Sphere, so I have no other Zebrowski book to base my opinion off of. It's been at least a month since I've read A Fury Scorned, so I'm not sure what you mean by awkward phrasing. The dialogue was a bit odd, however.

Another thing that was unusual was when Riker, Troi, and (enter random ensign name here) was held hostage by the crazy dolphin lovers. That part of the book I could have done without. Also, Pietro Barbeiri(sp?, is this even the right name?) as the fat-but-super-intelligent Admiral also made me pause.

Unimaginative writing is bad, but unimaginative writing that squanders great ideas (Hey! The Federation can make wormholes at will! Why isn't anyone more excited about this?) is worse. That's why I think A Fury Scorned is one of the worst.

I think the reason that no one was going "Oh my god, we created a frickin' wormhole, whooo!" was because of how dangerous the procedure was, and how small a chance of success and survival there was.

 

[fairyfloz]

Logically said:

JWolf said:

Logically said:
I really, really hated the novel "Rosetta Stone" by Dave Stern, simply because it failed to attract my attention or interest.

Side Note: Someone earlier said that they hated "A Fury Scorned". I actually LOVED that book. Deanna was finally more than simply "I sense (fill in the blank), Captain". Probably why I also like "The Battle of Betazed"

The Battle of Betazed i found interesting, but overall unsatisfying. It has a good premise and it started off really well and then it went downhill after that. The ending total ruined what the book had going for it.

The battle scenes were interesting, as well as the destruction of Sentok Nor. The ending was a bit lackluster, in that "Hey, we'll randomly project emotions into the Jem'Hadar, and cross our fingers."

I enjoyed that book. I liked the relationship scenes between Riker and Troi, they were done very well. I really enjoyed the depth of Troi that was conveyed.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

fairyfloz said:

Logically said:

JWolf said:

Logically said:
I really, really hated the novel "Rosetta Stone" by Dave Stern, simply because it failed to attract my attention or interest.

Side Note: Someone earlier said that they hated "A Fury Scorned". I actually LOVED that book. Deanna was finally more than simply "I sense (fill in the blank), Captain". Probably why I also like "The Battle of Betazed"

The Battle of Betazed i found interesting, but overall unsatisfying. It has a good premise and it started off really well and then it went downhill after that. The ending total ruined what the book had going for it.

The battle scenes were interesting, as well as the destruction of Sentok Nor. The ending was a bit lackluster, in that "Hey, we'll randomly project emotions into the Jem'Hadar, and cross our fingers."

I enjoyed that book. I liked the relationship scenes between Riker and Troi, they were done very well. I really enjoyed the depth of Troi that was conveyed.

I did too! It was that part of the plot and the book that interested me. I loved reading about her internship at the prison.

 

[AN_D_K]

I don't really have any books I despise. More often than not I don't like the writer rather than the story. Some writers aren't up to par and I stuggle to force myself though a book. These are the books it took me a long time to work through.

ENT: Rosetta - Dave Stern
VOG: String Theory 2: Fusion - Kirsten Beyer
Vulcan's Soul 1: Exodus - JS & SS

The writing is either very dry and/or uses the words "as the humans say..." far too often (really pisses me off).

And this may annoy some people, but I don't like Peter Davids stuff. It always sounds too fan-fic/wank to me. Sure, it can be funny and fun but something just doesn't sit right with me.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Christopher said:

So, where's David Arnold these days?

Err, probably writing the music for the movie Amazing Grace or Casino Royale. Did you mean Richard Arnold?

Burning in fan-h*ll, hopefully...that idiot destroyed what I consider the "golden age" of unofficial Trek. His position as "Archivist" and Keeper of the Canon (at the time) let him DESTROY the FASA RPG, ruin he DC comics version, AND deal a crippling blow to the novel franchise that it has only just (in the last few years) began to recover from.

Anyways, my nominees for WORST novel: "Black Fire", "Spock Must Die", and "Battle for Betazed".

 

[darkwing_duck1]

ronny said:
I saw Richard Arnold at the Star Trek Experiance in Vegas in December. He was at a table next to Suzie Plakson. She was selling autographed photos. I don't know what he was selling, I didn't talk to him.

I was going to buy a photo from Plakson and have her sign it for my girlfriend saying something like "I'm sorry you're not a Star Trek fan" but as I was about to go up to her my girlfriend called and asked when I was going to be done and that she had just lost $175. That could only mean one thing, she had found the three handed poker table. I figured we has splurged enough at that point so I passed.

(sorry if you've read this before as i've typed this before but hey, i'm bored at work and felt like repeating that story again)

oh but the point of all this, a few people talked to Suzie but no one talked to Arnold...

YES! There is at least SOME karmic justice in the world!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[darkwing_duck1]

TerriO said:
So, what about the writing style detracted from the story? Too descriptive? Not descriptive enough? Not subtle enough? Too subtle? Odd narrative voice? Just saying "writing style" can encompass many, many things.

I can't speak to this specific instance, but all too often I find that when a writer makes a choice to introduce a gay character they can't just have them be a character who goes about their business and who happens to be gay, but the character is EXPLICITLY introduced as gay, and who often acts in stereotypically gay mannerisms. Then the author seems to use every other sentance about the character to remind the reader: "this is a gay character".

For me, it's too much, and too pushy, and too "message" driven.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Dayton Ward said:


The Neutral Zone on this board?

Talk about your pots and kettles.

Well, at least in the Zone you can fight back no holds barred when you get jumped by others...

 

[Hoshi_Mayweather]

darkwing_duck1 said:

TerriO said:
So, what about the writing style detracted from the story? Too descriptive? Not descriptive enough? Not subtle enough? Too subtle? Odd narrative voice? Just saying "writing style" can encompass many, many things.

I can't speak to this specific instance, but all too often I find that when a writer makes a choice to introduce a gay character they can't just have them be a character who goes about their business and who happens to be gay, but the character is EXPLICITLY introduced as gay, and who often acts in stereotypically gay mannerisms. Then the author seems to use every other sentance about the character to remind the reader: "this is a gay character".

For me, it's too much, and too pushy, and too "message" driven.

darkwing,

So far I haven't seen that direction taken with the character Bart Faulwell in the SCE books. (An entertaining series, btw...)

I recommend you check it out...

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Smiley said:
That is patently false. If you give some sort of reason why you don't like a story, then the author(s) will accept the criticism and move on. It's only when posters get nasty or just say they hate something with no explanation that there is a problem.

As an example, I posted a not-so-favorable review of Progress in the SCE thread, but neither Terri nor Keith got nasty. Like anywhere else, opinions delivered with courtesy go further than nonsensical diatribes.

Frankly, you don't have to go any further than this thread to disprove your statement, IMO. AJA simply and courteously stated his opinion, and he got gang jumped, again IMO.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

darkwing_duck1, certainly you know better by now not to post five times in a row in a thread.

One warning for spamming. Please follow the new MA procedures.

Please do not break back the AJA business again as I've already stated.

 

[David Mack]

leandar said:
And you know what else really annoys me? No overweight people!! Everyone in Trek anymore is skinny!! BOO!!

Actually, I have an overweight Starfleet officer in Vanguard: Harbinger. (Lt. Commander Raymond Cannella, Starbase 47's fleet operations manager).

 

[Steve Roby]

darkwing_duck1 said:

I can't speak to this specific instance, but all too often I find that when a writer makes a choice to introduce a gay character they can't just have them be a character who goes about their business and who happens to be gay, but the character is EXPLICITLY introduced as gay, and who often acts in stereotypically gay mannerisms. Then the author seems to use every other sentance about the character to remind the reader: "this is a gay character".

For me, it's too much, and too pushy, and too "message" driven.

Can you please cite a specific example? Also, can you please cite some specific stereotypically gay mannerisms?

 

[TerriO]

^Yes, please.

Because not only do we have Faulwell in the S.C.E., but I've also got a same-sex couple in Progress and I haven't seen a single person mention it yet.

 

[Bobatiel]

darkwing_duck1 said:
...all too often I find that when a writer makes a choice to introduce a gay character they can't just have them be a character who goes about their business and who happens to be gay, but the character is EXPLICITLY introduced as gay, and who often acts in stereotypically gay mannerisms. Then the author seems to use every other sentance about the character to remind the reader: "this is a gay character".

For me, it's too much, and too pushy, and too "message" driven.

I find the complete opposite.

If anything, the gay characters in Star Trek books, which are very few and far between, (unless we assume that a certain proportion of characters whose sexual orientation is unestablished, is gay) have their sexuality writtten in a subtle and understated manner.

 

[Dancing Doctor]

Another Trek book that I find terrible is "Perchance to Dream", the novel, not the awesome comic. I barely remember the plot, only that it involved Deanna, Data, and a shuttle (never a good combination) as well as some alien species that was dying out or required a new planet to live on. It was a struggle trying to finish it.

 

[Christopher]

David Mack said:

leandar said:
And you know what else really annoys me? No overweight people!! Everyone in Trek anymore is skinny!! BOO!!

Actually, I have an overweight Starfleet officer in Vanguard: Harbinger. (Lt. Commander Raymond Cannella, Starbase 47's fleet operations manager).

And then there's Scotty...

darkwing_duck1 said:
I can't speak to this specific instance, but all too often I find that when a writer makes a choice to introduce a gay character they can't just have them be a character who goes about their business and who happens to be gay, but the character is EXPLICITLY introduced as gay, and who often acts in stereotypically gay mannerisms. Then the author seems to use every other sentance about the character to remind the reader: "this is a gay character".

For me, it's too much, and too pushy, and too "message" driven.

Okay, you must not be talking about Star Trek novels at all here, because I've never seen a depiction of a gay character in a Trek novel that was remotely like this.

Besides, even if the fact that a character is gay happens to be brought up now and again, how is that any worse than reminding you that a character is female by using the pronoun "she" all the time? Or reminding you that a character is Vulcan? It's part of who a character is, not some shameful thing that has to be talked about in whispers. The idea that "homosexuality is okay as long as nobody acknowledges that it exists" is outdated even by 21st-century standards, let alone 24th.

 

[Trent Roman]

Bobatiel said:
I find the complete opposite. If anything, the gay characters in Star Trek books, (...) have their sexuality writtten in a subtle and understated manner.

Most characters in Trek are sexually understated, in my opinion, and those who aren't are often villains like Intendant Kira. But I don't disagree that this seems moreso the case for gay characters. Probably because there don't see to be many principal gay characters in relationships. Bart Faulwell has a boyfriend, but he's offscreen most of the time. Keru and Hawk were together, but that was for the space of a book, and didn't get much time as a couple besides. There's a lesbian pairing in the DS9R, but they're minor characters. There was another in Harbinger, this one with both characters being part of the central cast (so to speak), but it was very briefly touched on (don't know if StT spends much time there). This is probably a function of proportions... most casts aren't likely to have more than one homosexual character in the main entourage - Vanguard being the exception, though it does have a nice, expansive cast of characters compared to many other series.

Fictitiously yours, Trent Roman

 

[Jag2112]

I have to go with "How Much for Just the Planet?" I thought the characterizations were a mess, the humor bland and the storyline a waste of space.

But I also realize that many people love this novel, so it's one of those "You either love it or hate it" novels - very little middle ground.