plw@panda.UUCP (Pete Williamson) (07/09/85)
Some people have recently mentioned that most of the Star Trek novels are either bad or "simply not Star Trek". I'm wondering if I'm alone ... for the most part I think the novels, especially the Timescape Series [1..22], are very good. Compared to the TV episodes, I think the ratio of good to bad is higher. The depictions of Alien cultures and customs are more detailed in the novels. The Star Trek characters are generally more vivid, especially characters like Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty. Any comments ?? -- Pete Williamson "By hook or by crook, we will !!" ... #2
jeand@ihlpg.UUCP (AMBAR) (07/10/85)
> Some people have recently mentioned that most of the > Star Trek novels are either bad or "simply not Star Trek". > The Star Trek > characters are generally more vivid, especially characters > like Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty. Any comments ?? > > Pete Williamson I think in the vast majority of the ST novels I have read, Spock is mishandled or (more commonly) outright abused. As a firm Spock fan, this pretty much spoils a story for me. Two excellent exceptions were Vonda McIntire's (sp?) THE ENTROPY EFFECT and (forgot the author; sorry) SPOCK, MESSIAH! -- AMBAR {the known universe}!ihnp4!ihlpg!jeand "You shouldn't let people drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance."
herbie@watdcsu.UUCP (Herb Chong [DCS]) (07/12/85)
In article <623@panda.UUCP> plw@genrad.UUCP (Pete Williamson) writes: >Some people have recently mentioned that most of the >Star Trek novels are either bad or "simply not Star Trek". >I'm wondering if I'm alone ... for the most part I think >the novels, especially the Timescape Series [1..22], are >very good. Compared to the TV episodes, I think the ratio of >good to bad is higher. The depictions of Alien cultures and >customs are more detailed in the novels. The Star Trek >characters are generally more vivid, especially characters >like Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty. Any comments ?? there can be really different ones. the "Phoenix" books by Marshak and Lichtenberg portray a "different" view of the Startrek universe than many people are used to. a lot of scientific accuracy went by the wayside to make a better emotional view of Kirk/Spock. the books that i feel represent both good SF and adhering to the known ST universe were "The Final Reflection" and "The Galactic Whirlpool". there are others that missed the very important feature of a realistic situation. "Spock, Messiah" has Kirk running all over a very dangerous planet with no advanced arms to speak of when redshirts should have been doing it. "World Without End" does a little better. as with any writing, 90% of ST novels are garbage. the problem this time is that the publishers think that they have a targeted audience that will accept anything provided that it says Star Trek somewhere on it. and you know, they probably are right. Herb Chong... I'm user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble.... UUCP: {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra|clyde}!watmath!water!watdcsu!herbie CSNET: herbie%watdcsu@waterloo.csnet ARPA: herbie%watdcsu%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa NETNORTH, BITNET, EARN: herbie@watdcs, herbie@watdcsu
tli@oberon.UUCP (Tony Li) (07/14/85)
In article <623@panda.UUCP> plw@genrad.UUCP (Pete Williamson) writes:
Some people have recently mentioned that most of the
Star Trek novels are either bad or "simply not Star Trek".
I'm wondering if I'm alone ... for the most part I think
the novels, especially the Timescape Series [1..22], are
very good. Compared to the TV episodes, I think the ratio of
good to bad is higher. The depictions of Alien cultures and
customs are more detailed in the novels. The Star Trek
characters are generally more vivid, especially characters
like Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty. Any comments ??
Well, I'm forced to disagree. There are good and bad episodes and good and
bad novels. The novels do tend to have a higher ratio of good to bad, but
in return, the bad novels *REALLY* smell. The quality of the shows just
seems more consistent to me. Of course, that consistent quality isn't quite
as high as we'd all like it.
Live long and prosper,
--
Tony Li ;-) Usc Computer Science
Uucp: ...!{{decvax,ucbvax}!sdcsvax,hplabs,allegra,trwrb}!sdcrdcf!uscvax!tli
Bitnet: tli@uscvaxq, tli@jaxom, tli@ramoth
Csnet: tli@usc-cse.csnet
Arpa: tli@usc-ecl.arpaokie@ihuxi.UUCP (cobb) (07/17/85)
> Some people have recently mentioned that most of the > Star Trek novels are either bad or "simply not Star Trek". > I'm wondering if I'm alone ... > ...Compared to the TV episodes, I think the ratio of > good to bad is higher. The depictions of Alien cultures and > customs are more detailed in the novels. The Star Trek > characters are generally more vivid, especially characters > like Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty. Any comments ?? Yes, a few comments. I agree that several of the ST novels are (in my opinion) good. I think those that portray most of the novels as "simply not Star Trek" are a bit narrow-minded, or perhaps enamored of their own view of the ST universe to the exclusion of others. My personal favorites include the two books by Diane Duane, "The Wounded Sky" and "My Enemy, My Ally," and David Gerrold's "The Galactic Whirlpool." The first two are rich, enjoyable portrayals of events in a busy ST universe; the last is a well-told tale that follows most of the "canon" (if there is such a thing) but in a light-hearted and, at times, tongue-in-cheek manner. In each case, characters are well- developed, situations are nicely plotted, and details abound (not to mention puns; case in point: what's the single reason Lt. Kevin Riley is in "The Galactic Whirlpool?"). Another favorite is John Ford's recent novel "The Final Reflection." While set in an earlier version of the ST universe (pre-Enterprise), it has the same characteristics mentioned above. I also like the development of the Klingon race into more than just baddies who don't use deodorant and who like to kick little old ladies across the street. As portrayed in this novel, they're a worthy spacefaring power to match up to the Federation, with an interesting history, psychology, and culture of their own. Others that I've enjoyed include "The Covenant of the Crown," "Spock: Messiah!", "Corona," and the two "Phoenix" novels. Now, to be sure, I haven't enjoyed all of the novels. There are some that I've read and thrown away, and a few that I've never finished (such as "Mutiny on the Enterprise" or "The Trellisane Confrontation"). But by and large, a number of authors have managed to flesh out ST's universe and characters in print (though often in slightly different directions) at least to my enjoyment. "I'll take you home again, Katholyn." B.K.Cobb ihnp4!ihuxi!okie