Your LEAST favorite Star Trek Novel?

[Sci]

WOW.
I feel for those writers -- truly an impossible task =)

Which they nonetheless accomplished, so... possible.

(I just can't believe there'd be demand for TNG books while TNG was just starting (hey, just watch it on TV! you don't need a book! we're making new shows!) - but I guess I had to be there!

You weren't there? What, you just dropped from the sky in 2005, after ENT was cancelled?

Just for a bit of perspective:

I certainly wasn't there in 1987 when TNG premiered. Well, okay, I existed, but I was only two years old at the time.

 

[Gagarin]

Which they nonetheless accomplished, so... possible.

Uhm - impossible, as in, impossible to get it completely right. Which, from the sounds of it, they didn't, because it was impossible, because no one knew what they sounded like, acted, like, or what the show would feel like. So... it wasn't possible.

Way to post about semantics, good job. I'm amazed. You should write books - about ST XI.

You weren't there? What, you just dropped from the sky in 2005, after ENT was cancelled?

Wow, what a jerk.

No, I was 4 yearsold in 1987. Learning how to read.
TNG fiction was the furthest thing on my mind. I was, however, enjoying watching TWoK and The Cage. And by the time I was 11 I had 20 VHS TOS episodes, so, uh, no - and I've only ever seen 2 episodes of Enterprise.

When we you dropped out of the sky?

 

[Therin of Andor]

(hey, just watch it on TV! you don't need a book! we're making new shows!) - but I guess I had to be there!

Why, then, do people buy novelizations if they can just go to the cinema?

TNG was airing a new ep each week, but only for 22-26 weeks of the year. The rest of the time it was repeats or hiatus. Plenty of time to read all-new stories in the tie-in novels and comics.

 

[Christopher]

(I just can't believe there'd be demand for TNG books while TNG was just starting (hey, just watch it on TV! you don't need a book! we're making new shows!)

Why not? I mean, if it had been a brand-new show, I'd see your point, but TNG was a continuation of a franchise that had been highly popular for the better part of two decades. When it was announced that Star Trek was coming back to television and that Gene Roddenberry himself was producing it, that generated enormous buzz, not only in fandom but in the mainstream media as well. TNG was a huge, huge deal even before it premiered.

And there had already been a highly successful line of Star Trek fiction from Pocket for over half a decade. There wasn't that much risk in branching it out to include a TNG novel or two, because that was just an extension of what was already a successful publishing program. It wasn't like they were gambling on something totally new and untried.

And it's amusing to look back in my mind at how the show was covered at the time. Back then, before the show premiered, the most famous member of the cast by far -- at least to American audiences -- was LeVar Burton, courtesy of Roots and Reading Rainbow. And the actress playing Dr. Crusher was still going by Cheryl McFadden. I was puzzled when I saw the opening credits to "Farpoint" and it said someone named Gates McFadden was playing the role. No, actually, I think I'd first seen the name in a newspaper article earlier that same day and assumed it was a typo. For some reason, every bit of publicity prior to the premiere date called her Cheryl, and every bit of publicitly on it or subsequent to it called her Gates.

 

[JD]

I didn't realize she'd ever gone by anything other than Gates. I never even noticed that she was credited as Cheryl for her choreography for Labyrinth, I'd just assumed she was credited as Gates.

 

[flandry84]

Least favourite- "Windows on a lost world"
I remember nothing about the book except hating it.
Also really wanted to like those "Phoenix" books a lot more than I did.

 

[William Leisner]

Way to post about semantics, good job. I'm amazed. You should write books - about ST XI.

Golly, you really think I could? Thanks!

You weren't there? What, you just dropped from the sky in 2005, after ENT was cancelled?

Wow, what a jerk.

No, I was 4 yearsold in 1987. Learning how to read.
TNG fiction was the furthest thing on my mind. I was, however, enjoying watching TWoK and The Cage. And by the time I was 11 I had 20 VHS TOS episodes, so, uh, no - and I've only ever seen 2 episodes of Enterprise.

When we you dropped out of the sky?

Hey, hey! Sit down, buddy, catch your breath. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say something like "I can't believe they would publish books about a show while it's still on the air" when that's exactly what Pocket Books had been doing for eighteen years, with not inconsiderable success.

As impossible as that may seem.

 

[Gagarin]

Way to post about semantics, good job. I'm amazed. You should write books - about ST XI.

Golly, you really think I could? Thanks!

You weren't there? What, you just dropped from the sky in 2005, after ENT was cancelled?

Wow, what a jerk.

No, I was 4 yearsold in 1987. Learning how to read.
TNG fiction was the furthest thing on my mind. I was, however, enjoying watching TWoK and The Cage. And by the time I was 11 I had 20 VHS TOS episodes, so, uh, no - and I've only ever seen 2 episodes of Enterprise.

When we you dropped out of the sky?

Hey, hey! Sit down, buddy, catch your breath. I'm just trying to figure out why you would say something like "I can't believe they would publish books about a show while it's still on the air" when that's exactly what Pocket Books had been doing for eighteen years, with not inconsiderable success.

As impossible as that may seem.

That I couldn't believe means I was surprised and I was shocked - not that I thought I knew better than the account managers at Pocket, but had you said they did it, I would say 'noway- surely they would wait a few years because I though books came from people not getting enough of the characters they love, and it had been too soon, right?' and not believe you. But apparently it worked out.

Pocket has been doing it for 18 years, but that was after TNG (and spinoffs) were already a success - so it's less surprising to me that they had the series on the air along with books then, but I was still shocked to see a Voyager book when I hadn't seen Voyager yet (no UPN).

My hats off to those authors who wrote those books - it's hard enough writing about existing characters, I can't imagine stepping out into the unknown. I'm sincere in that.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Pocket has been doing it for 18 years, but that was after TNG (and spinoffs) were already a success.

No. Pocket Books did 35 numbered TOS novels, plus numerous others, before TNG premiered, and many of those were classified as "New York Times Bestsellers". Next year it'll be 30 years since the first Pocket licensed ST (ie. TMP novelization).

 

[ClayinCA]

I certainly wasn't there in 1987 when TNG premiered. Well, okay, I existed, but I was only two years old at the time.

I am so...very...old...

I was just starting college when TNG premiered!

The Mirror Universe book by Christopher Bennett. How can one person get everything he writes so wrong? Actually, I should just put everything by that "writer" in the same category. I've pretty much despised everything he's put out. "Bad fanfic" describes it pretty well.

Ah ... Greg Cox. I tend to lump Greg Cox and Chris Bennett in together with their writing, they're equally bad. I still cringe, just thinking of that moronic attempt at writing a Q "trilogy" ... stupid, stupid, stupid.

You do know both those gentlemen post here regularly, right?

As for least favourite Trek novels, pretty much anything by Marshak & Culbreath is at the bottom of my list (I do have a sneaking fondness for Star Trek: The New Voyages, but that doesn't count, 'cause they only edited that ). Count me in, also, for not being able to stand either Ghost Ship or Ship of the Line, although I did like most of Carey's other work.

And I hated, hated, hated The Fearful Summons. The characterization was so far off that it might as well have been about new characters entirely rather than the Original Series characters, the plot was uninvolving, and the editorial end was a mess.

 

[Christopher]

That I couldn't believe means I was surprised and I was shocked - not that I thought I knew better than the account managers at Pocket, but had you said they did it, I would say 'noway- surely they would wait a few years because I though books came from people not getting enough of the characters they love, and it had been too soon, right?' and not believe you. But apparently it worked out.

That's an odd and inaccurate perception of the reasons for doing tie-ins. As a rule, tie-in fiction only does well while the show or film series it ties into is still in production. There are a few tie-in series that have continued to sell strongly after their "mother" series were cancelled -- Star Trek, Doctor Who, Star Wars, Buffy/Angel -- but they're the exceptions to the rule. For the most part, tie-in lines that come along after their "mother" shows get cancelled tend to sell poorly and don't last long.

Pocket has been doing it for 18 years, but that was after TNG (and spinoffs) were already a success...

As Therin said, that's incorrect. Pocket began publishing original Trek novels in 1981. The "18 years" reference wasn't to the entire time Pocket has been publishing Trek fiction, but to the period when Pocket's publishing line coincided with the existence of one or more ST series on television (from TNG's premiere in 1987 to ENT's finale in 2005).

- so it's less surprising to me that they had the series on the air along with books then, but I was still shocked to see a Voyager book when I hadn't seen Voyager yet (no UPN).

Then you're easily shocked. Again, it would be unusual to see a tie-in for a wholly original series before that series came on the air, but when there's already been a highly successful Trek publishing line for years and years, it shouldn't be that great a surprise that it's already geared up to acknowledge a new spinoff. You seem to be thinking of the various Trek series as wholly independent entities, but from a marketing standpoint, they're all facets of the same franchise.

 

[flandry84]

/\Quick,unrelated question.
If the various ST properties are viewed as one franchise,are there any limitations on using characters/plot devices from the various shows?

 

[Christopher]

/\Quick,unrelated question.
If the various ST properties are viewed as one franchise,are there any limitations on using characters/plot devices from the various shows?

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. It depends on how much of that franchise a publisher's license covers. Marvel's first Trek comic only had the rights to material from ST:TMP, not from the TV series; and IDW currently only has the rights to feature TOS and TNG in its comics (which means that characters and elements from other series can appear, but not be central to the stories). But Pocket has the license to the whole shebang, and there's plenty of crossover among series; just look at Destiny for an example.

But my point wasn't about that. It was that any new Trek series would be assumed to have a built-in audience, so that there'd be no reason to wait to go ahead with tie-ins.

 

[OmahaStar]

You do know both those gentlemen post here regularly, right?

And?

I mean, if you are trying to say that posting here makes them write better, I disagree. If you're trying to say I should like their books because they post here, again, I disagree. I'm not sure what you're trying to say, so please feel free to expand your thought.

 

[Steve Roby]

Never mind.

 

[David Henderson]

As a rule, tie-in fiction only does well while the show or film series it ties into is still in production. There are a few tie-in series that have continued to sell strongly after their "mother" series were cancelled -- Star Trek, Doctor Who, Star Wars, Buffy/Angel -- but they're the exceptions to the rule. For the most part, tie-in lines that come along after their "mother" shows get cancelled tend to sell poorly and don't last long.

I'm not sure I'd call the Buffy/Angel books sales "strong". They had somewhere around 18 books/year when the shows were on the air, but as far as I can tell, the last three Buffy books were:

• Queen of the Slayers, by Nancy Holder: June, 2005
• Dark Congress, by Christopher Golden: August, 2007
• One Thing or Your Mother, by Kirsten Beyer: January, 2008.

It's been a really long time since the latest Angel novel. Three books in the past three years is a pretty slim line, especially with that 26-month gap in the middle. Amazon.com doesn't list any upcoming Buffy books, so I don't know when the next one will be out.

davidh

 

[PaulSimpson]

As a rule, tie-in fiction only does well while the show or film series it ties into is still in production. There are a few tie-in series that have continued to sell strongly after their "mother" series were cancelled -- Star Trek, Doctor Who, Star Wars, Buffy/Angel -- but they're the exceptions to the rule. For the most part, tie-in lines that come along after their "mother" shows get cancelled tend to sell poorly and don't last long.

I'm not sure I'd call the Buffy/Angel books sales "strong". They had somewhere around 18 books/year when the shows were on the air, but as far as I can tell, the last three Buffy books were:

• Queen of the Slayers, by Nancy Holder: June, 2005
• Dark Congress, by Christopher Golden: August, 2007
• One Thing or Your Mother, by Kirsten Beyer: January, 2008.

It's been a really long time since the latest Angel novel. Three books in the past three years is a pretty slim line, especially with that 26-month gap in the middle. Amazon.com doesn't list any upcoming Buffy books, so I don't know when the next one will be out.

davidh

As I understood it, both lines are now finished. Wasn't Kirsten's book actually promoted as the last one?

P

 

[Deano2099]

The Buffy/Angel comics are still doing pretty well though no?

 

[Julio Angel Ortiz]

The Mirror Universe book by Christopher Bennett. How can one person get everything he writes so wrong? Actually, I should just put everything by that "writer" in the same category. I've pretty much despised everything he's put out. "Bad fanfic" describes it pretty well.

Have you ever read Orion's Hounds? I mean, really?

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

The Mirror Universe book by Christopher Bennett. How can one person get everything he writes so wrong? Actually, I should just put everything by that "writer" in the same category. I've pretty much despised everything he's put out. "Bad fanfic" describes it pretty well.

Have you ever read Orion's Hounds? I mean, really?

I liked that one too.