Your LEAST favorite Star Trek Novel?

[Steve Roby]

Ya know, I think it's even worse when a writer who can't write then goes around shoving his undeserved sense of superiority around the board. Posting with such an undeserved smugness drives people away from his work. That's just my opinion.

People read the tone of posts differently because there are so many cues missing from strictly written communication. I know people sometimes react to my own posts in ways that suggest that they've read them in a way I never intended. But when someone's posts consistently annoy you, it isn't necessary to read them. That's what the Ignore list is for.

 

[Nardpuncher]

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?

I was going to step in and defend you here...but you did a good job yourself.

 

[Nardpuncher]

Gill-Man: I don't know what anybody else thinks, but I believe you have gone way over the line in your direct, personal attacks against Mr. Bennett. Had you stopped at your second paragraph, the worst I could have said about it is that you overstated your case but it was your right to hold that personal opinion about a style of writing that you do not care for.

But in that third paragraph, you crossed over the line into a personal dispute you appear to have with him that in my personal (non-mod) opinion ought to be taken up via PM directly with him and if that cannot occur civilly, then contact a moderator to help you two either work it out or keep it off the public board. For my part, I am interested in reading criticisms of writing styles, plot choices, characterization--substantive points--not about two posters' personality clash.

I'm going to have to say that I know where Gill-Man is coming from.
I've never personally been on the receiving end of one of CLB's corrections or ammendments or one of those times where he seems befuddled by soemone else's opinions or tastes and offers his "Why not?"...but I've seen enough of it( in this thread no less) to feel a mild aprehension at picking up one of his new books. I mean, I only read about 3 Trek books a year...and some of them are 2 or 3 years old by the time I get to them. I just find it difficult to pick up a book by someone who rubs me the wrong way.
And please don't come back and tell me what I'm missing. At the end of the day...it's a Star Trek book.

 

[Sci]

One Thing or Your Mother was the last Buffy book? That makes me really sad!

 

[The Nth Doctor]

Okay guys, let's steer this back to the topic.

 

[TheAlmanac]

Ancient Blood by Diane Carey. There's a big holodeck adventure in the middle involving seafaring vessels and whatnot. Ugh.

I loved that. If Carey started writing nautical fiction regularly, I would so be there.

Why isn't Diane Carey writing nautical fiction regularly? She clearly seems to want to, given her tendency to insert nautical elements into her other novels.

I recall her being one of the more popular ST authors of the 1980's, but the aggregate effect of her nautical subplots was to give the impression of a writer frustrated not to be writing in another genre.

 

[JWolf]

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.

Do you mean Myriad Universes? Because he hasn't done any Mirror Universe stuff.

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.

I happen to like Christoper's Trek books.

As for Greg Cox's Q tilogy, I thought it was quite good. It got Picard and Q spot on. It was quite enjoyable to read.

I guess it just goes to show that what one person likes, someone else can dislike.

 

[JWolf]

Two books I didn't care for were Spock Must Die by James Blish and Enterprise: The First Adventure by Vonda N. McIntyre. Both had too many bad characterizations and ETFA just had a really poor story along with a lot of coninuity errors from the show.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Why isn't Diane Carey writing nautical fiction regularly?

I don't know. I absolutely loved the nautical scenes in Ancient Blood, and I thought that Carey showed some real flair there. She has the passion for it, definitely.

I wonder if the reason she hasn't is that nautical fiction is niche. I mean, really niche. And thus, in doing a cost-benefit analysis (her time spent versus the eventual rewards), Carey made the calculation that it was not worth her effort. If she did, and she came to that conclusion, as much as I would want to read a Diane Carey "Age of Fighting Sail" novel, I couldn't fault her at all.

In bookstores, I can usually find all of O'Brien, most of Kent, some of Forester, some of Lambdin, occasionally some Dudley Pope, and that's about it. When James L. Nelson's Revolution at Sea series came out, those were pretty common in bookstores at first, but I don't recall ever seeing the fifth book in stores. Some of the other authors, like David Donachie or C. Northcote Parkinson or Richard Woodman, I've had to buy through specialty dealers online. It just seems, and this is in no way scientific being based wholly upon my observations, that nautical fiction is a genre that's difficult to place in stores.

 

[The Great Meech]

Of the ones I actually finished, because things like Warped got stopped before they could damage me further, Diane Duane's Intellivore was pretty bad, because I got to the end and wondered exactly why it was supposed to be entertaining. Admittedly, I read it when I was 11 or so, so if it had a point, I would have missed it. If it didn't, well, then it was just crap.

 

[Space Lemur X]

OK at this point I have to say that if it weren't for Christopher Bennett I probably wouldn't be reading Trek books right now. I'd given up on them in the mid-90s, until I noticed a copy of Ex Machina a couple of years ago and bought it out of curiosity since I've always been curious about that era. Anyway, I thought it was phenomenal, and it was then that I discovered that there'd been this amazing Trek lit renaissance of the past 7 or 8 years, and I've been blissfully catching up on the various series and relaunches ever since.

Also, I realize that obviously not everyone is going to enjoy Bennett's (or any author's) writing style, but it's sort of a privilege to have the writers joining us here to discuss their work, and certain people could probably stand to be a little less caustic in their criticisms, out of simple human decency.

Finally, apologies to Marshak and Culbreath (because I'm sure you're totally reading my post right now): Triangle. Worst ever. I know it's been said before, but you have to find yourself a copy for the sheer absurdity of the petty teenage drama that unfolds between Jim and Spock. Hm... maybe I should also list it as most realistic Trek novel ever for that reason.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

Of the ones I actually finished, because things like Warped got stopped before they could damage me further, Diane Duane's Intellivore was pretty bad, because I got to the end and wondered exactly why it was supposed to be entertaining. Admittedly, I read it when I was 11 or so, so if it had a point, I would have missed it. If it didn't, well, then it was just crap.

While I think it still stood well above many other Trek novels, I am forced to admit it was her weakest effort by far. While Dark Mirror came off very well, partly (I suspect) because she was able to develop the Mirror Universe versions of the characters like her own originals, it's my personal theory that she just wasn't as comfortable with the more "sterile" TNG characters and general era as she was with the camaraderie, wonder, and chaos of the TOS universe and characters, and it showed.

 

[Christopher]

OK at this point I have to say that if it weren't for Christopher Bennett I probably wouldn't be reading Trek books right now. I'd given up on them in the mid-90s, until I noticed a copy of Ex Machina a couple of years ago and bought it out of curiosity since I've always been curious about that era. Anyway, I thought it was phenomenal, and it was then that I discovered that there'd been this amazing Trek lit renaissance of the past 7 or 8 years, and I've been blissfully catching up on the various series and relaunches ever since.

Neat! That's great to hear. Glad I was able to lure you into our tra -- err, reintroduce you to Trek Lit.

 

[Rush Limborg]

Okay guys, let's steer this back to the topic.

Phew! Thanks, Doc.


NOW--my least favorite? Hmm...frankly, there are no Trek books that I've read, which I actually despised, per se. There are a couple that bored me, though....

However, I would say my least favorite would have to be Ghost Ship. I LOVE Diane Carey's books, for the most part, but this one was kinda irritating, as far as the main characters were concerned. Picard seems permanently frustrated, Riker acts unwilling to accept Data as a "he", and Geordi actually lashes out at Riker, when Will sends Data on a possible suicide mission.

The story was OK, but I really think they should've given Diane more time to rewrite.

By the way...there was a reference to the Traveler, so it seems that she had access to some of the scripts....

 

[ronny]

However, I would say my least favorite would have to be Ghost Ship. I LOVE Diane Carey's books, for the most part, but this one was kinda irritating, as far as the main characters were concerned. Picard seems permanently frustrated, Riker acts unwilling to accept Data as a "he", and Geordi actually lashes out at Riker, when Will sends Data on a possible suicide mission.

The story was OK, but I really think they should've given Diane more time to rewrite.

By the way...there was a reference to the Traveler, so it seems that she had access to some of the scripts....

I read Ghost Ship fairly recently and I don't remember the Traveler reference. Can you clue me in where that is? I'd be interested in checking that out.

 

[Anika Hanson]

Spectre

 

[Lonemagpie]

Okay guys, let's steer this back to the topic.

Having joined the ranks of Trek-lit types it'd be remiss of me to name my least favourite, which I also happen to think is the worst novel of any kind that I've read!

Suffice to say it's quite old now - 1992 or 93, I think - and thankfully was the author's only Trek novel. Though I'm familiar with some of said author's other work, which is nothing like as mind-buggeringly dire as that one book. I dunno what went wrong there. Richard Arnold, probably.

 

[Brian]

So you can attack Richard Arnold by name, but you can't mention the person who actually wrote the book, or even its title?

 

[HappyDayRiot]

Spectre

Really? I thought Spectre was the best Shatnerverse book of them all. Cracking cliffhanger as well.

 

[Lonemagpie]

So you can attack Richard Arnold by name, but you can't mention the person who actually wrote the book, or even its title?

Yes. You may direct any complaints to the Complaints Department: