A word about the novels

[Aquarius]

Something I wanted to address, but CW's thread is already so cracked out I thought it was better to just let that rest for a moment.

Transwarp said something I wanted to respond to:

crystalswolf writes: I've already stated that this story is based loosely on the book that pretty much scratches out *the_abomination*.

Couldn't let that one go: The book doesn't scratch out *the_abomination*, it actually endorses it by building far-fetched scenarios just so Trip doesn't have to be dead. (Another of my many problems with the book.)

From what I understand, there's a good reason for that. Honeybee is more knowledgeable about this so maybe when she comes back into town, she can elaborate a little for us...but from what I understand, the author had to fight with the publisher to be able to write a book that negates *the_abomination* and Trip isn't killed. When the publisher finally said okay, they put the stipulation that *the_abomination* had to be addressed, it couldn't be just ignored.

So the fact that the book you don't like "endorses" *the_abomination*, that's the publisher's fault, not the author's. The publisher was reluctant to "erase" canon, and they may have even been under orders from Paramount and/or BnB not to--when Gene was alive I know he had a whole list of dos and don'ts for profic authors, and I don't see any reason for that to not continue with the new people in charge.

So this is one of the reasons why criticism of the Enterprise novels rankles me sometimes: it's often misplaced. If we're publicly vocal about blaming the books, they may get the wrong impression about why they're not liked...and then we'll get only two things: Jack, and sh*t...and Jack might even leave town.

We'll never know the whole circumstances, because I'm sure that there's a lot the authors can't say, because they can't continue to bring us Trek lit if they bite the hand that feeds them. From what I understand, the authors are fans of the TnT ship, and they made a list of everything they found wrong/offensive about *the_abomination*, and wrote to address each of those issues. Just, remember, it's the publisher that has the final word on what happens. So while having Trip undercover may be a stretch, it's entirely possible (likely, even) that the authors pitched lots of other stories that we may have been happier with, but this is what got a "yes" from the publisher.

Basically, the authors did the best they could with what they were handed and the restrictions they were given.

[EntAllat]

As someone who's been studying the Star Trek line of novels for *mumble*mumble* years with the express purpose of eventually getting published in it someday, I heartily agree with Aquarius's assessment and note here.

The publisher's rules for potential authors of Star Trek novels is strict, strict, strict and based on licensing agreements with the owners of the franchise (which is either CBS or Paramount now, I'm not sure when it comes to the books.) For new authors it's shades of magnitude stricter and I know of many a disillusioned first-time attempt. You cannot affect anything significant in the Star Trek universe, nor the lives of the characters; you have to bring everything back to zero by the end of your book. That the sitting editor at the time was able to allow M&M to include a hint that Trip still lived into the framing of the book Last Full Measure was quite a feat - and a testament to her sympathy with the fans of Enterprise, IMHO. (Even more so when Trip's 'being alive' became the lynch pin for Enterprise's literary re-launch.) That probably took a hell of a lot of meetings and discussions behind the scenes at the publisher and with the franchise owners to make that possible.

Yeah, some of the plot machinations may not have been the most satisfying (and remember, J.J. Abrams new movie wasn't yet out, which would have thrown a whole new possible direction onto the pile of plot possibilities) but it's also very likely that was the very best that the authors and a sympathetic editor could do for us fans. It's still a well written yarn and I'm grateful for it - and entertained by it - even if I might have approached the topic very differently. But then, isn't that why we love fanfic? So we can write it/expereince it differently?

[justTripn]

I read an interview with Andy Mangels in which he explained his motivation. He was thrilled to be able to rewrite *the_abomination*, which he thought was awful, but he wasn't as big a Star Trek geek as his coauthor. He needed him to help with continuity stuff. I bet there is a link to that interview on this site. I should find it.

[justTripn]

Oh and as for the books. I LOVED The Good That Men Do, though I didn't like Trip as a Romulan, but . . . Trip was Trip. That is he was totally in character. I got my Trip fix. Smart, brave generous, big hearted Trip, connecting with every person he meets, including the bad guy he's sent to spy on. I thought the book was suspenseful and exceptionally well written. I used the picture from the book as my avatar for the longest time. Then I started into the subsequent book and just got stuck. I tried so hard to read it and just couldn't. Finally and reluctantly, I decided the sequel is just not that good.

[Aquarius]

I'm kind of coming at this crunked up and sidewas--I read Kobyashi Maru, and I started TGTMD before the semester began, but I never got through it because my cat passed away and then time just got away from me. Hopefully, I'll have more time for pleasure reading once the semester is over!

[Transwarp]

the author had to fight with the publisher to be able to write a book that negates *the_abomination* and Trip isn't killed. When the publisher finally said okay, they put the stipulation that *the_abomination* had to be addressed, it couldn't be just ignored.

I will give points to the authors for wanting Trip to be alive. Their intent was good, but their execution left much to be desired. Aquarius, are you really saying the authors of TGTMD could not have found any other way to write a novel that addresses *the_abomination* and keeps Trip alive. Really? I would be willing to bet if I gave you an hour you could come up with half a dozen scenarios, all more plausible than the one in the book.

If we're publicly vocal about blaming the books, they may get the wrong impression about why they're not liked...and then we'll get only two things: Jack, and sh*t...and Jack might even leave town.

If they are reading my posts on this forum, they will know EXACTLY why I don't like the books. Any wrong impressions they come away with cannot be blamed on me. In truth, Jack and his sidekick are preferable to a book I can't enjoy because it is so completely and totally implausible, and which takes a character I love and morphs him into something unrecognizable to me.

My criticism may rankle, but I find I am unable to apologize for that. I had no issue with the many opinions publicly supporting the books, and I would expect my opinions to be similarly received. In truth, I doubt any criticism I make will have the slightest affect, one way or the other, on what is or isn't published by the Star Trek franchise.

Basically, the authors did the best they could with what they were handed and the restrictions they were given.

I respectfully disagree, and I offer as proof the entire catalog of finale fixes from this site and at HoT.

[Pegmumm]

Basically, the authors did the best they could with what they were handed and the restrictions they were given.

I respectfully disagree, and I offer as proof the entire catalog of finale fixes from this site and at HoT.

Much as it pains me... I have to agree.
Glanced at the books... couldn't bring myself to buy them.
My opinions of Hollywood producers are lower than those of the psychiatrists I work for.
I write for the sense of closure it gives me after watching the premature death of a series.
If those who hold the copyrights for Star Trek thought they could make a profit at sequels to the series, the "abomination" would be ignored... just as they writers planned to do if the series was renewed.
I plan to honor that intention... and ignore it as well.
When it comes to book sales, I believe in the Ferengi rules of acquisition...Which is definitely canon.
peg

[honeybee]

Basically, here is what I have heard. The Pocketbooks editor in charge of the Enterprise relaunch, Margaret Clark, was and is a fan of the show. She watched *the_abomination* and was as horrified and insulted as most fans were. She really fought to be able to undo the damage done. But Pocket Books's contract is firm that the books cannot contadict episodes. Also, tptb were spooked by all the harsh criticism the show got (much of it unwarranted), they were very, very reluctant to agree to MC's idea of undoing the damage. So, basically, she had to come up with an idea that jumped off from *the_abomination* or nothing.

She and Martin and Mangels sat down and made a list of all the things that were wrong with *the_abomination* and set out to write a story that fixed them. They brought back Trip and they moved TnT toward a better resolution.

It wasn't until the TnT stuff in TGTMD was well received that they decided to continue with Tnt in the later books. Even though they are a small part of the books, the are the main romance. Martin has even said he plans to give them the happy ending that fans wanted for them.

I don't think people are obligated to like the books, but I do think that MC and Co should be given credit for fighting to undo *the_abomination* in an official form and for promoting the TNT ship. It seems disingenuous to dismiss their effort in context.

[Aquarius]

Transwarp--your arguments neglect one big detail: the publishers have to agree to what the author wants to write. So your "evidence" of all the HoT finale fixes doesn't hold up. The authors could've pitched a bunch of fabulous ideas...and none of them mean squat if the publishers say no.

Sorry, but your criticism still seems misdirected, and based on a fallacy--that the authors are in complete control of what gets published. They don't, especially when they're writing in someone else's universe.

I'm not telling you you're not entitled to your opinion, or that you can't express it. I'm just asking you to consider that there's more to it, and your criticisms are continually directed at authors who may very well have done what you suggested, and these ideas got rejected by people higher up the chain.

[honeybee]

Middleman is the real expert on the book development but I believe MC pitched several scenarios for the undo and the spy story was chosen by paramount. So, while M&M had micro control (such as in their character detail) - the plot was developed by MC and reps for paramount and even b&b get a say because they created the show.

M&M thank B&B in the book notes because they had to sign off on the story.

[Transwarp]

Transwarp--your arguments neglect one big detail: the publishers have to agree to what the author wants to write. So your "evidence" of all the HoT finale fixes doesn't hold up. The authors could've pitched a bunch of fabulous ideas...and none of them mean squat if the publishers say no.

Sorry, but your criticism still seems misdirected, and based on a fallacy--that the authors are in complete control of what gets published. They don't, especially when they're writing in someone else's universe.

I'm not telling you you're not entitled to your opinion, or that you can't express it. I'm just asking you to consider that there's more to it, and your criticisms are continually directed at authors who may very well have done what you suggested, and these ideas got rejected by people higher up the chain.

I directed my criticisms at the authors because their names are on the jacket of the book. Where I come from, putting your name on something indicates a willingness to accept responsibility for it. I am perfectly willing to include any other party or parties who share responsibility in my criticisms. So, if the publisher really insisted on a boneheaded and ridiculous story line, then I have no compunction against pointing my finger at the publisher.

And I'm not sure which is a bigger slam on the authors--saying their plot is flawed, or saying they pitched several decent plots to the publisher, but then agreed to a plot they knew to be flawed...

[Transwarp]

I'm not telling you you're not entitled to your opinion, or that you can't express it.

Forgot to add this to my reply: No one on this site has EVER made me feel like my opinion wasn't welcome or that I wasn't entitled to express it. Even those that disagree with me have done so respectfully.

Just wanted to be clear about that.

[honeybee]

Forgot to add this to my reply: No one on this site has EVER made me feel like my opinion wasn't welcome or that I wasn't entitled to express it. Even those that disagree with me have done so respectfully.

The last thing I would want is for anyone who is respectful to fellow posters to feel like their opinion is not welcome. Yours is always welcome.

But, I would like to say that your incessant criticisms of books you have not read has been based on your own "inability to suspend disbelief" has irked me a few times. I've taken it to mean that you think that those of us who enjoy the books are just as boneheaded as the authors. I am not stupid for liking the books, nor have I gotten the feeling that anyone who does enjoy the books is stupid or boneheaded. I'd be happy to debate the merits of the spyplot in the recent book (which is damn good, btw) but you haven't read it.

I have my criticisms of the books, but they are based on having read all of them. I also think when Margaret Clark, Martin & Magels dedicated a large portion of their careers and lives to trying to fix *the_abomination* and did the absolute best they could - that whatever one thinks of the outcome - it's basic human decency and good manners to show some appreciation. They have feelings, just like fic writers. And while it is okay not to like the books - if you refuse to read them and just call the authors names - it's rude.

I think I've noticed this dynamic in CW's thread and the comments page as well (in the larger sense not with your posts) those who incessantly lob negative criticism seem to be out to spoil the enjoyment of those who like a particular piece, profic or fanfic. Or even discourage the writers from writing.

When it becomes redundant pounding instead of debate (especially from people who have not read the works in question based on their premises) - a feeling emerges that the critics aren't after the works themselves or even the authors, but those who are enjoying them.

People work hard on their writing whether they are pros or not -in my opinion, despite some issues, the recent Romulan War book was better written and showed more respect for Trek history than most anything B&B ever did (and I respect much of what they did, outside of *the_abomination* which I actually believe was sabotage).

I guess what I'm saying is that while expressing criticism is okay, being a killjoy isn't. Nor is hating on something you refuse to read based on the premise.

I remember not wanting to read Escriba's Mirage based on the premise - but when I finally did "suspend my disbelief" - I was rewarded with enjoying a great, original story.

[Transwarp]

I would like to say that your incessant criticisms of books you have not read has been based on your own "inability to suspend disbelief"

Let me be clear: I have read 'The Good That Men Do' and 'Kobayashi Maru'. I have not read 'The Romulan War', which I understand to be a continuation of the first two. I do intend to read it at my earliest opportunity (but haven't been able to get it yet).

My criticism of the books stems from their underlying premise, which I have argued is completely implausible, highly unlikely, and totally unrealistic. If you disagree with my opinion, you can point out where I'm wrong. Explain to me how Trip reasonably could impersonate a member of a culture he knows absolutely nothing about. So far, in all my 'incessant criticisms', no one has actually done so. Instead, I've been told I'm putting the future of the 'Enterprise' publishing franchise at risk by not keeping silent.

I can go back and find previous posts where I said the writing itself was quite good. I've taken great pains to make it clear I do not indict anyone else who enjoy the books. As for being rude to the authors, I DO recall using the term 'boneheaded'. (As I type this, I can't go back and look at the exact quote, but I'm HOPING I applied the term to the plot and not the authors or publishers. If I did, then you are right and I owe them an apology.)

When it becomes redundant pounding instead of debate...

I have done this exactly once (and I did it to you, Honeybee) but I learned my lesson. No more relentless pounding (from me, anyway). I do not think I have been guilty of that in this thread.

I also think when Margaret Clark, Martin & Magels dedicated a large portion of their careers and lives to trying to fix *the_abomination* and did the absolute best they could

Since we weren't there, we can only speculate. But if this is true--if they pitched numerous scenarios and were forced to write this one; if this TRULY is the best they could do--then would you at least agree that the publishers who forced them are deserving of some scorn?

[Dinah]

For some reason, this is one topic where there is no middle ground: you either like the books or you don't. So far I've seen little indication the "do"s have been able to say anything to sway the "don't"s and vice versa.

Discussion is fine. An exchange of ideas is always stimulating. But over the past several years, I've seen way too many hurt feelings because of these books. Actually I believe there have been several people who no longer felt they were welcome here because of their views on the relaunch. I would hate to see that happen again. I like all of you too much for that.

Everyone has the right to their opinion and everyone has the right to disagree. But like religion and politics, this is just one of those emotionally charged topics that tends to divide rather than unite.