Captain's Table/KILL NEW FRONTIER! (fwd)
KIRNEH
On Thu, 16 Jul 1998, button wrote:
> There is still one book missing, Captain's Table with the New Frontier.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not *another* Calhoun book!!!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!!!!
Dull, full of mistakes (putting them suddenly on the *Excelsior*
at the end of book 4? Without explanation, or even Sulu's permission?),
extremely unrealistic crew (Zak Kebron is Worf and The Thing's
illegitimate step-boulder, yes?), Calhoun nicknaming his first officer
"Eppy"... not to mention Joe Morton (?) portraying Calhoun's voice as a
monotonous bunch of pauses worse than even Shatner's? Need I go on?
My advice to Pocket is to leave New Frontier, PERIOD. Concentrate
on quality, instead of thinking up new subgenres every week. Besides, NF
isn't even canon. It doesn't *deserve* to be canon.
Please-- for the sake of STAR TREK literacy, STOP NEW FRONTIER.
--da laffin (and extremely literate, yet opinionated) tlhIngan
Stacie Schwraz
out once a month. Now I consider myself lucky if they come out three times a
year!
JFunnell
<sta...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Amen! And in the its place, why not have more TOS books. They used to come
>out once a month. Now I consider myself lucky if they come out three times a
>year!
I have to agree. And TNG is also pretty spare on the ground when it
comes to Pocket Books. And I do *not* consider the X-Men crossover to
be TNG. Sorry, Mr Ordover. I just don't.
KIRNEH
On Fri, 17 Jul 1998, Stacie Schwraz wrote:
> Amen! And in the its place, why not have more TOS books. They used to come
> out once a month. Now I consider myself lucky if they come out three times a
> year!
>
Ordover'd prolly say that TOS is behind the times (hmmmmm-- 2260s behind
the times?) and not relevant to today. But if that's true, why'd ST4 and
ST6 work?
Two of the best novels to date don't even have much of Kirk's
crew-- sort of a precursor to Next Gen's "Lower Decks". DREADNOUGHT and
BATTLESTATIONS! rock, and rock *hard*. Both *severely* recommended.
I'll tell you right now-- if New Frontier gets to the small screen, I'll
boycott. Captain Sulu should be the new series star-- he deserves it.
And it'd intro a whole new bunch of youngsters to *real* Trek. :>
Opinions?
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
KIRNEH
sprinkled throughout. If ya don't wanna read it, don't :>
*
*
*
*
*
*
<rant>
What say we all write to Ordover/S&S on their page at
startrekbooks.com and tell him and his staff, pointedly yet politely, that
we want pork chops and not bacon bits? :>
SNW was a great thing; it showed me what *real* Trekfic cand and
should be if written by people who really care about writing solid,
involving stories with substantial characters. OTOH, most of the recent
mass market stuff is written by big-name writers who don't *care*.
The Ashes of Eden series is an example-- a *good* series, but it
has too much Shatnerism in it (most of the place names, ships etc are
in-jokes-- if you read closely, you'll see that one of the indigenous
lifeforms is a bird called-- guess what?-- an "ordover". One of the ships
in the series, the Tobias, is named for Michael Tobias, who cowrote
"Believe" with Shatner. What's next? Will Kirk end up on the Cardigan
Colony, addicted to Tek? :>
New Frontier? Toxic waste committed to massive public release.
Clumsy; plot holes and errors big enough to give the Prophets a new place
to live (that is, provided they can tolerate the stench of used Pakled
sweat socks). It sells because Peter David's name is on *all* of it. David
should have more respect for his readers than to expose us to this. New
Frontier is STAR TREK because some junior editor put the name on it.
I love STAR TREK. I love *writing* it, and reading it, especially
when written by skilled craftspeople (Laura J. Valentine, Mercutio, Jungle
Kitty, Greywolf, Alara Rogers, E Wallace, Atara Stein, and "Auntie Ruth"
Gifford are just a few off the top of my brow ridges.). I know I'll
probably never get the official nod to write Trek, because I won't
tolerate crap, but that's okay, because fanfic ROCKS and nobody can take
that away. :>
</rant>
Constructive opinions welcome. Flames ignored. :>
--da laffin (and literate, opinionated) tlhIngan :>
(non Trek recommendations made upon request; just finished
reading Heinlein's "Methuselah's Children".)
Unzadi
I tried to read the first four, in hardcover format, just to see if the law of
averages was working in Peter David's favour and he was getting good again.
Sadly, I couldn't force myself to go any farther than the beginning of book
two. The pain! the pain!
>In plain terms: they suck.
That's being kind. "Substitute for ipecac" could be another phrase. What
happened? PD used to be soooo good! Vendetta and Q-in-Law were and are
classics, but after that...sigh. It ain't like it used to be.
>Please get rid of New Frontier; it is an insult to Trek--and IMO, Peter
>David
>has ruined three great Trek heroines.
Elise, I couldn't agree more. Peter David has ruined not only three great Trek
heroines, but many readers as well, with New Frontier and recent books. I
don't read the Trek books anymore, and I used to be the happiest of campers
when a new NG book hit the stands. Now the same thing makes me shudder.
I don't count the X-Men crossover, either. Who thought that was a good idea?
What's next, Riker's torrid affair with Wonder Woman? Bev swept off her feet
by Spiderman? I think I'm going to be ill. I'm going back into my fanzines,
where it's safe.
Anna
>If you aren't Nat at the Novel Annex, don't
>be touching this. Thank you. Please do not
>forward or post elsewhere without the authors'
>permission.
>
></PRE></HTML>
F.B.& M.A.C.
> by Spiderman? I think I'm going to be ill. I'm going back into my fanzines,
> where it's safe.
>
> Anna
Well, I suppose it's better than waiting around until Picard
gets tired of going the every two years space bimbo trip.
I read this x-over and well, I still have a horrid taste in
my mouth from it. I gave it to my ten year old. That way I know
it will be destroyed. I'm with you, I'll stick to fanzines.
MAC
Randy Landers
The X-Men crossover is NOT a part of my collection, nor will it ever
be.
Peter David's NEW FRONTIER suffers from lack of editing. The Captain
Sulu novel "The Captain's Daughter" also suffered from this, as do
other novels written by some of the "in crowd." It's as though once
you become a successful Star Trek author, you're no longer edited.
Either that, or once you become a successful Star Trek author, you
stop giving a damn about trying to do a good job with a story, with
its characters.
I never left fanzines for a good reason. In fact, one of our most
productive period was when Bantam was publishing DEATH'S ANGEL and
PERRY'S PLANET, and if PocketBooks continues publishing on this sort
of level, I imagine the interest in fanzines will grow. :)
Randy Landers
ORION PRESS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
---
For 11MB of quality Classic Trek fan fiction, go to:
http://www.mindspring.com/~randylanders/archives/oaindex.html
For 2MB of quality Next Gen fan fiction, go to:
http://www.mindspring.com/~lindamarcusky/eridani/index.html
For information on ORION PRESS and its fanzines, go to:
http://www.mindspring.com/~randylanders
KIRNEH
On Sat, 18 Jul 1998, Randy Landers wrote:
> I agree, Anna, on several points:
>
> The X-Men crossover is NOT a part of my collection, nor will it ever
> be.
>
> Peter David's NEW FRONTIER suffers from lack of editing. The Captain
> Sulu novel "The Captain's Daughter" also suffered from this, as do
> other novels written by some of the "in crowd."
It's as though once
> you become a successful Star Trek author, you're no longer edited.
> Either that, or once you become a successful Star Trek author, you
> stop giving a damn about trying to do a good job with a story, with
> its characters.
Mr Landers,
What about if the characters/plot you write are garbage to begin
with, ala New Frontier? No amount of shoveling will dig you out of a pile
of manure, if it's manure all the way down, right?
--da laffin (and NF-protesting) tlhIngan :>
Randy Landers
the ripe
old age of 34 to open his own business. Just call me Randy, please. :)
Secondly, I don't necessarily think the basic plot (a disintegrating
star
empire needs a Federation presence to protect its interest) is flawed.
If
the Romulan Empire fell apart, it seems clear that the Federation
would have no choice but to put a few patrol vessels in the affected
sectors to protect its interests.
The characters of New Frontier do interest me with one exception:
Calhoun. I find him unbelievably superhuman. The physical injuries he
suffered should have killed him outright, and I've never cared for
psionics in my leads. My heroes are Human, and, while this may be a
bias on my part, superhuman and alien lead characters bore me.
KIRNEH
On 19 Jul 1998, MissElise wrote:
> Do you think that Selar, Shelby, and Leffler were garbage? I thought
> they were great Trek heroines--prior to NF. Once PD got his mitts on
> them, they turned to trash.
My apologies-- I should have said, "the NEW characters" --
Burgoyne 172, Zak Kebron,
and-especially-the-Xenexian-scarface-zombie-in-command (imitating the
captain's extremely stilted speech pattern in the tapes-- are *all*
Xenexians supposed to speak that way, or was he born when his mom had a
severe attack of hiccups?). Soleta is *passable*, if I can figure how she
fits in.
And speaking of Kebron, how did they figure he'd need the gravity
compensators anyway? Did he keep falling through the floorboards at the
Academy? That might be a good parody subject (How I Fell Through at
Starfleet Academy). :>
-- da laffin tlhIngan :>
Unzadi
educators have to stick together)
>The characters of New Frontier do interest me with one exception:
>Calhoun. I find him unbelievably superhuman. The physical injuries he
>suffered should have killed him outright, and I've never cared for
>psionics in my leads.
Anyone who's been involved with zines for any legnth of time can spot a Mary
Sue from light years away. Mary Sue is the character, most usually female and
of the author's own creation, who is TOO perfect. TOO smart, TOO pretty, TOO
well-liked, the one everybody jusssst wuuuuuvs to bits and pieces!
Calhoun is Mary Sue's mate. I couldn't care about what happened to the man,
because he wasn't a fully realised character. I felt like this professional
writer (PD) was playing with a thirteen-year-old's role-playing alter ego. I
do believe that readers deserve more.
< My heroes are Human, and, while this may be a
>bias on my part, superhuman and alien lead characters bore me.
>
>Randy Landers
>ORION PRESS
Alien characters are fine, as long as they have a humanity about them, which
readers can identify (how many Hortas, for example, buy fanzines?) If not,
then the readers won't stick with it. This is true of any fiction, fanzines as
well as pro.
I do like to introduce original characters of my own making into the lives of
established Trek heroes, but I also make sure to give them fatal flaws (not
just fashionable Hollywood-type cum Clint-Eastwoody scars to prove they're
"tough") so that they're interesting.
If pro fiction continues along the NF lines, I foresee more and more
disgruntled fans like myself deserting Paramount's version entirely in favour
of fan-created adventures that actually make sense and are crafted with loving
care.
Conflicting opinions always welcome.
Anna
Kailinn
<randyl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
<snip>
>Peter David's NEW FRONTIER suffers from lack of editing. The Captain
>Sulu novel "The Captain's Daughter" also suffered from this, as do
>other novels written by some of the "in crowd." It's as though once
>you become a successful Star Trek author, you're no longer edited.
>Either that, or once you become a successful Star Trek author, you
>stop giving a damn about trying to do a good job with a story, with
>its characters.
You know, when I originally read this post yesterday, I thought this
may have been a bit of an exaggeration. However, I happened to have
trekked (no pun intended) on over to the bookstore this afternoon, and
picked up a copy of "Q-Space," the first in the Q-Continuum series.
I've gotten 91 pages into it, and realised that Randy's opinion may be
closer to the truth than I originally believed.
(Spoiler space regarding the book inserted for safety's sake.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the book, they talk about an 11 year old Betazoid, his toddler
sister and (to my eyes) their very mature telepathic abilities. If I'm
not mistaken, it was established that a Betazoid doesn't develop full
telepathy until adolescence... which I would take to be a bit beyond
the ages of the children given in the book. Also, even though the
setting is the Enterprise-E, the author has Troi introduce herself as
a *Lieutenant* Commander. It's very jarring when you're just getting
into the story and run across these kind of things.
Please excuse my rant... I just bought the book and have been quite
disappointed with it so far. I'm gonna go get some chocolate now. :)
- Kailinn
email: kailinn at mindspring dot com
Trooper
series. Wish he was still writing it!!
Doug
MissElise <miss...@aol.com> wrote in article
<199807191833...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> > What about if the characters/plot you write are garbage to begin
> >with, ala New Frontier?
>
> Do you think that Selar, Shelby, and Leffler were garbage? I thought
they were
> great Trek heroines--prior to NF. Once PD got his mitts on them, they
turned
> to trash.
>
> @>---`---,--- Elise made this!
> http://members.aol.com/etobler/home.htm
> Evil Overlord Rile #23: I won't turn into a snake, it never helps.
>
>
.
<randyl...@mindspring.com> writes
>Secondly, I don't necessarily think the basic plot (a disintegrating
>star
>empire needs a Federation presence to protect its interest) is flawed.
>If
>the Romulan Empire fell apart, it seems clear that the Federation
>would have no choice but to put a few patrol vessels in the affected
>sectors to protect its interests.
>
>Calhoun. I find him unbelievably superhuman. The physical injuries he
>suffered should have killed him outright, and I've never cared for
>bias on my part, superhuman and alien lead characters bore me.
>
After reading all these very negative comments in this newsgroup I
wonder if it is such a good idea for me to join in. But anyway, I would
like to remind people that New Frontier also has its fans like me. New
Frontier is even my favourite Star Trek series and there are many people
who like it. It is the best selling Star Trek novel series in the USA
and also in Britain.
I am also entitled to my opinion - no flaming please!
I could read in the Pocket Books website that quite a few fans asked if
New Frontier stories would also be allowed in the Strange New World
contest. Therefore I am quite confident that there would also be
interest in New Frontier fanzines. I would definitely buy them!
Recently I looked into the Orion Press website for the first time (It is
very good in my opinion) and I could see that you are not accepting
fanfiction for this series. I hope you will change this in spite you are
not a fan of New Frontier.
Anyway, I would also like to use this opportunity to tell you that I
think you and your team do a great job with Orion Press! I will
certainly order more fanzines in future. I am only quite broke at the
moment.
>Randy Landers
>ORION PRESS
Baerbel Haddrell
Unzadi
>I am also entitled to my opinion - no flaming please!
Of course you are! Most certainly! Though we disagree on New Frontier, the
Warrior Queen will gladly take up her bat'leth and defend your right to enjoy
this series without being flamed.
As a Worf/Troi fan and a non-imzadian, I've felt the flames of cyberspace many
a time, so I know how it feels. It's not the New Frontier fans I have a
problem with, it's the general direction of the licensed Trek series, both in
books and film. That's why I've picked up stakes and moved permanently into
fanfic.
While working on a professional fiction career (and believe me, it's *work*) I
need something fun and relaxing to keep the creative juices flowing. For me,
fanfic fills that need.
When I turn to the good ol' televised (read: rerun) Trek, I like Next Gen. Some
people like DS9 best, some TOS, some VOY. Yes, some people will look at the
books and like NF best. That's their right. It's also the right of any
individual fan to disagree. We're all allowed to have a say in the newsgroup,
and that's one of the most fun parts of it all.
> I am quite confident that there would also be
>interest in New Frontier fanzines. I would definitely buy them!
Well, I personally wouldn't, as I don't read the published version, but as
years of zine writing and publishing (not to mention reading) has taught me,
there's something for everyone.
The idea of spinning beloved Trek characters off into their own adventures
(MissElise, jump in here anytime!) is as old as fandom itself and should be,
IMHO, a time-honoured tradition. E. Catherine Tobler and I did it to Riker
(gee, that sounds dirty, but it's not!) in the Tapestry Saga, which has now
become our main fanfic passion. It's fun, it's creative,and I think it's often
a better way to stretch the old noggin than following Paramount's blueprint,
confusing as it is.
>Recently I looked into the Orion Press website for the first time (It is
>very good in my opinion) and I could see that you are not accepting
>fanfiction for this series. I hope you will change this in spite you are
>not a fan of New Frontier.
Randy, I'm sure you'll be responding to this yourself, but as a fellow zine
publisher, please allow me to put in my two credits. Every publisher, whether
zine or pro, has their own guidelines. The key to a good story is for the
people who produce it, i.e. the author and the publisher, to be in love with
it. That's why there are guidelines.
My zine press, Cat Toy, doesn't publish imzadi stories, for example, because
that's not what I love to read and to write. I couldn't honestly spot a good
one. Other publishers love Riker/Troi and specialise in that. Now,give me a
good Worf/Troi story, or Picard/Crusher, and you've got yourself a good
looking-at for one of our zines. That's our preference.
Many publishers have many different zines, each tailored to fit a particular
fandom. Look around enough, and I'm sure you'll find one that does accept NF
fanfic. Or maybe you might want to start your own. Publishers like Orion or
Cat Toy who aren't NF fans, wouldn't be able to enthusiastically produce and
promote a NF zine. We're already up to our eyeballs in other things.
Climbing off my soapbox for a few minutes,
Anna C. Bowling
"All writers cannot please all readers...that's why there are so many of us."
-- author Eugenia Price
for fanfic with a difference, visit the Chamber of the Warrior Queen at:
Randy Landers
<<I could read in the Pocket Books website that quite a few fans asked
if New Frontier stories would also be allowed in the Strange New World
contest.>>
I saw that, too. Unfortunately, their answer was "no."
<<Therefore I am quite confident that there would also be interest in
New Frontier fanzines. I would definitely buy them! Recently I looked
into the Orion Press website for the first time (It is very good in my
opinion) and I could see that you are not accepting fanfiction for
this series. I hope you will change this in spite you are not a fan of
New Frontier.>>
The problem, Baerbel, is that Peter A. David created the New Frontiers
universe specifically for Pocketbooks, which is the sole publisher. In
order to avoid any entanglements, ORION PRESS has _never_ used any
characters or situations created in the pro-novels, despite an
enormous temptation (and pleas from fans such as yourself) to do so.
To do so would be to invite more legal attention than we currently
merit.
You might want to try
http://www1.ridgecrest.ca.us/~curtdan/NewFrontier/Excalibur.cgi?FILE=M
ain_GN
It's an excellent site which features info on the New Frontiers saga.
--
Randy Landers
<<. Publishers like Orion or Cat Toy who aren't NF fans, wouldn't be
able to enthusiastically produce and promote a NF zine. We're already
up to our eyeballs in other things.>>
Yeah, we've published zines in every form of aired Trek (TOS, TNG, DS9
and VOY), and if New Frontiers gets slighted, hey, we're doing our
best. With half a dozen periodicals and dozens of one-shots per year,
I don't know if we're coming or going.
Randy Landers
creating your own fanzine or website or whatever. My opinions and 99
cents will get you a Biggie Fries at Wendy's.
One more thing: I suspect that PocketBooks (which already frowns
mightily on fanzines) might be more inclined to sue anyone doing a New
Frontiers zine.
Randy Landers
and enter that URL by hand, making sure you get
ain_GN on the end, otherwise you'll get nowhere.
.
<randyl...@mindspring.com> writes
>Baerbel Haddrell says
>The problem, Baerbel, is that Peter A. David created the New Frontiers
>universe specifically for Pocketbooks, which is the sole publisher. In
>order to avoid any entanglements, ORION PRESS has _never_ used any
>characters or situations created in the pro-novels, despite an
>enormous temptation (and pleas from fans such as yourself) to do so.
>To do so would be to invite more legal attention than we currently
>merit.
>
I understand. I was a bit hopeful when I got the OK from Peter David and
the answer from John Ordover I also posted here a while ago. But I am no
legal expert. Well, I thought it was worth a try :-).
>You might want to try
>http://www1.ridgecrest.ca.us/~curtdan/NewFrontier/Excalibur.cgi?FILE=M
>ain_GN
>
>It's an excellent site which features info on the New Frontiers saga.
>
I already discovered it in the past, but thanks for the tip! Yes, I
agree, it is very good!
>--
>Randy Landers
>ORION PRESS
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
Baerbel Haddrell
Aleph Press
: Oh, and Baerbel, don't let my opinions ever stop you from either
: creating your own fanzine or website or whatever. My opinions and 99
: cents will get you a Biggie Fries at Wendy's.
: One more thing: I suspect that PocketBooks (which already frowns
: mightily on fanzines) might be more inclined to sue anyone doing a New
: Frontiers zine.
Ordover implied not. I'm fairly sure that what sells to the public about
the New Frontiers stories is Peter david's name; an NF fanzine could not
possibly sell enough copies to do Pocket Books any damage. Ordover said
that as far as he was concerned, it's no more or less problematic than
fanfic in general.
However, I will also say this: you're probably better off with going
directly on the web then trying to put out a fanzine, because NF fans (of
which I admit I'm one; yeah, it's got problems, but I just love Peter
David's writing style enough that for me, it works) are probably few and
far between, and you're not likely to get enough of them to make a zine
break even in sales.
--
Be good, servile little citizen-employee, and pay your taxes so the rich
don't have to.
--Zepp Weasel
Alara Rogers, Aleph Press
al...@netcom.com
All Aleph Press stories are at http://www.mindspring.com/~alara/ajer.
Unzadi
>and VOY), and if New Frontiers gets slighted, hey, we're doing our
>best. With half a dozen periodicals and dozens of one-shots per year,
>I don't know if we're coming or going.
While Cat Toy is *far* smaller than Orion, with a *far* tighter focus, it just
shows that every publisher has their own scope and range of reference.
If NF is what an author wants to write, then go ahead and post such stories on
the web. Print zines are lovely to look at, delightful to read, but a pain in
the butt to produce at times, and they do tend to get expensive.
While Peter David isn't my cup of Tarkalian tea (early works excepted) I do
have to agree that it's probably his name that's selling a lot of the NF
franchise. Web publication will get you read, get you comments, and all
without the headaches a print zine will cause (not to mention dents in the
wallet!)
Another thing to consider is spinning off individual characters from whatever
other genre of Trek you like, combining them with your own original characters
and make an original NF-type series. Things like that can be awfully fun. (I
oughta know!)
One of the best things about fandom is the diversity. There truly is something
for everyone, so just pick whatever you like and go with it.
Anna
Unzadi
>whatever
>>other genre of Trek you like, combining them with your own original
>>characters
>>and make an original NF-type series. Things like that can be awfully fun.
>>(I
>>oughta know!)
>
>
>
>
Yep, and you might meet other good writers who are doing the same thing,
thereby forging lifelong friendships...and often ending up quoting yourself by
quoting them. Or at least moaning into the phone long-distance about how
fictional characters won't talk to you.
Anna
ORDOVER
First off, NF is our most popular line. The order the books sell in is:
NF, TNG, TOS, VGR, and then DS9. So there are a lot of readers who disagree
with this thread about NF.:)
Second, all I've ever said is that NF fan fiction is NO MORE OR LESS ILLEGAL
than other forms of fan fiction.
Third -- we have never, in the 20 year history of this line, published more
than six original TOS books in a single year. This year we have published or
are publishing:
Assigment: Eternity
Vulcan's Forge (paperback)
Spectre
Avenger (paperback reprint)
Captain's Table book one
and in December
Brother's Keeper Books One and Two (with Three out in early January).
Fourth, as for TNG, even accepting that the X-men crossover and Best and the
Brightest were not TNG, we have or will publish:
Captain's Table #2
Q Continumm books 1-3
In October and November:
Dominion War Books 1 -and- 3
and in September Imzadi 2.
That's actually seven original TNG novels, more than ever before in any one
year. And that doesn't even include the novelization of ST:IX.
We can't please everyone -- no point in even trying. But fans as a whole seem
to like the NF line quite a lot.:)
John Ordover
Senior Editor
Star Trek Fiction
Pocket Books
For more Trek Book Info:
www.startrekbooks.com
ORDOVER
boycott. Captain Sulu should be the new series star-- he deserves it.
And it'd intro a whole new bunch of youngsters to *real* Trek. :><<
Oh, and one more thing -- when we did a Captain Sulu novel, sales plummeted.
There aren't very many Sulu fans out there -- just a small group that makes a
lot of noise.:)
KIRNEH
On 21 Jul 1998, ORDOVER wrote:
> Thought I'd jump in here, since so many people are putting words in my mouth.:)
>
> First off, NF is our most popular line. The order the books sell in is:
>
> NF, TNG, TOS, VGR, and then DS9. So there are a lot of readers who disagree
> with this thread about NF.:)
OK. Point understood. How about this, then?
(1) Re-edit the NF books so that there are fewer spelling/grammar
mistakes (and get rid of the Great Bird subplot-- the Great Bird of the
Galaxy is the late Gene Roddenberry, *not* some steroid-inflated
chicken with an Energizer battery diet!);
(2) Call another reader and rerecord the NF audio. I'm not sure if the
"Calhoun on Excelsior" mistake made it to the book or just the audio (I
brought all of the NF stuff back to the store and got my money back), but
readers who also write do notice these things.
Also, the pauses in Calhoun's lines make the tapes *exceedingly*
hard to listen to; he sounds worse than Shatner. I'd suggest Casper Van
Dien to voice Calhoun (he's supposed to be rather young, right?), but
that's just me. Besides, Casper isn't black, and neither is Calhoun;
James Earl Jones-as-the-voice-of-Darth Vader notwithstanding, I'm not
aware of any black voices who can really pass for white characters.
> We can't please everyone -- no point in even trying. But fans as a whole seem
> to like the NF line quite a lot.:)
They might like it even more after the obvious mistakes are fixed;
I know *I* would have. :> You could even release it as a Special Signed,
Numbered Leatherbound Edition for the fans who are into collecting those.
:> At, say, $100 each, S&S could clean up! :>
-- da laffin tlhIngan :>
SubTrek
Okay guys don't you think that they felt the same way when TNG came out. I
don't care for New Frontier but everyone has the right to read what they like.
I too would like to see more TOS and tng books. Even a few more Voyager ones.
However I think they need to go younger. The young kids need people to look up
to. They have no hero's in this day and age like we did. So iffn they want
New frontier let them have them.
Isn't that what STAR TREK is really all about.
Penny
Kasey Chang
<199807212009...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
>>>I'll tell you right now-- if New Frontier gets to the small screen, I'll
>boycott. Captain Sulu should be the new series star-- he deserves it.
>And it'd intro a whole new bunch of youngsters to *real* Trek. :><<
>Oh, and one more thing -- when we did a Captain Sulu novel, sales
plummeted.
>There aren't very many Sulu fans out there -- just a small group that makes
a
>lot of noise.:)
Touché! :-) Nice stab to the heart! :-)
--
Kuo-Sheng "Kasey" Chang / MIS Developer / DisCopyLabs / Fremont, CA
K S Y @ I C P . O Address coded
A E C D S O Y C M to foil spam
Laura Jacquez Valentine
From: Ord...@aol.com (John Ordover)
Newsgroups: alt.startrek.creative
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1998 02:51:09 GMT
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
On 21 Jul 1998 17:05:30 EDT, KIRNEH <Kir...@cris.com> wrote:
>OK. Point understood. How about this, then?
>
>(1) Re-edit the NF books so that there are fewer spelling/grammar
>mistakes (and get rid of the Great Bird subplot-- the Great Bird of the
>Galaxy is the late Gene Roddenberry, *not* some steroid-inflated
>chicken with an Energizer battery diet!);
Most of our readers -loved- the GBOTG, both as a plot device and as a
tribute to Gene. There are no more spelling mistakes in NF than in
any other random book from a major publisher.
Obviously, some people didn't. But it is true that you can't please all
the people all the time.
>>>
>(2) Call another reader and rerecord the NF audio. I'm not sure if the
>"Calhoun on Excelsior" mistake made it to the book or just the audio (I
>brought all of the NF stuff back to the store and got my money back), but
>readers who also write do notice these things.
> Also, the pauses in Calhoun's lines make the tapes *exceedingly*
>hard to listen to; he sounds worse than Shatner. I'd suggest Casper Van
>Dien to voice Calhoun (he's supposed to be rather young, right?), but
>that's just me. Besides, Casper isn't black, and neither is Calhoun;
>James Earl Jones-as-the-voice-of-Darth Vader notwithstanding, I'm not
>aware of any black voices who can really pass for white characters.<<
That attitude seems more than a bit racist to me -- did you also
complain that white actors have played Geordi on audios? Or does
Geordi not "sound black" to you? Calhoun is an -alien- remember. Do
you have any way of knowing exactly how Xenexians sound?
I don't agree with Kirneh's point about Calhoun, but he does have a
general point. In the United States, today, there are dialects which
are divided along racial lines. Many people in this country associate
certain kinds of voices and speech patterns with certain racial groups.
Some of my black friends were beat up in school by other black students
for "sounding white". Some white kids I knew were ostracized by other
white kids for "talking like niggers". It's a reality in this world
that even people will no particular racial bias or agenda are going to
hear certain things and associate them with certain physical
characteristics. For instance, most of the Asian-Americans I knew
growing up were immigrants or first-generation Americans. They spoke in
certain ways. Now I know a lot of Asian-Americans whose families have
been in the US over a century--and I am still startled by the way they
talk. To me, they "sound white". In any racially mixed society, you
will have these barriers. They can be quite difficult to overcome, and
dismissing them as "more than a bit racist" denies both their effect on
people and the worth of the person making the comment.
>
>> We can't please everyone -- no point in even trying. But fans as a whole seem
>> to like the NF line quite a lot.:)
>
> They might like it even more after the obvious mistakes are fixed;
>I know *I* would have. :> You could even release it as a Special Signed,
>Numbered Leatherbound Edition for the fans who are into collecting those.
>:> At, say, $100 each, S&S could clean up! :>
>
> -- da laffin tlhIngan :>
You know, there' s nothing wrong with voicing your own opinion, but
really - you don't speak for fans as a whole, or even in large part,
in your opinion of NF. Claiming you do makes you look silly.
Hold on, there. My old and dear friend claimed no such thing. He
pointed out that fans were likely to enjoy NF more if what he considered
sloppy mistakes were fixed. He may or may not be correct. But he
clearly stated it as an opinion, not as Gospel truth.
Furthermore, if you're going to treat people who give you dissenting
feedback like idiots, and if you're going to ignore reasonable requests
like "please fix the grammatical errors" you're going to end up with an
audience only of those with little discrimination and less
intelligence. If that's what you're going for, fine. But if that's
what you're going for, please, by all that's holy, refrain from public
self-congratulation. Intellectual masturbation is even more offensive
than public lewdness.
I like Peter David, and I like what he tried to do with NF. But the man
needs to change editors. We all know what happened to Bobby Heinlein
when people stopped editing his work, don't we? Or do I have to bring
up _I Will Fear No Evil_?
Be warned: my next post on this topic will invoke Godwin's Law.
--laura
John Ordover
>
>
>On 21 Jul 1998, ORDOVER wrote:
>
>> Thought I'd jump in here, since so many people are putting words in my mouth.:)
>>
>> First off, NF is our most popular line. The order the books sell in is:
>>
>> NF, TNG, TOS, VGR, and then DS9. So there are a lot of readers who disagree
>> with this thread about NF.:)
>
>OK. Point understood. How about this, then?
>
>(1) Re-edit the NF books so that there are fewer spelling/grammar
>mistakes (and get rid of the Great Bird subplot-- the Great Bird of the
>Galaxy is the late Gene Roddenberry, *not* some steroid-inflated
>chicken with an Energizer battery diet!);
Most of our readers -loved- the GBOTG, both as a plot device and as a
tribute to Gene. There are no more spelling mistakes in NF than in
any other random book from a major publisher.
>>>
>(2) Call another reader and rerecord the NF audio. I'm not sure if the
>"Calhoun on Excelsior" mistake made it to the book or just the audio (I
>brought all of the NF stuff back to the store and got my money back), but
>readers who also write do notice these things.
> Also, the pauses in Calhoun's lines make the tapes *exceedingly*
>hard to listen to; he sounds worse than Shatner. I'd suggest Casper Van
>Dien to voice Calhoun (he's supposed to be rather young, right?), but
>that's just me. Besides, Casper isn't black, and neither is Calhoun;
>James Earl Jones-as-the-voice-of-Darth Vader notwithstanding, I'm not
>aware of any black voices who can really pass for white characters.<<
That attitude seems more than a bit racist to me -- did you also
complain that white actors have played Geordi on audios? Or does
Geordi not "sound black" to you? Calhoun is an -alien- remember. Do
you have any way of knowing exactly how Xenexians sound?
The "Excelsior" glitch was only on the audio, over which I have no
control anyway.
ja_ch...@my-dejanews.com
al...@netcom.com (Aleph Press) wrote:
> Randy Landers (randyl...@mindspring.com) wrote:
> : Oh, and Baerbel, don't let my opinions ever stop you from either
> : creating your own fanzine or website or whatever. My opinions and 99
> : cents will get you a Biggie Fries at Wendy's.
>
> : One more thing: I suspect that PocketBooks (which already frowns
> : mightily on fanzines) might be more inclined to sue anyone doing a New
> : Frontiers zine.
>
> Ordover implied not. I'm fairly sure that what sells to the public about
> the New Frontiers stories is Peter david's name; an NF fanzine could not
> possibly sell enough copies to do Pocket Books any damage. Ordover said
> that as far as he was concerned, it's no more or less problematic than
> fanfic in general.
>
> However, I will also say this: you're probably better off with going
> directly on the web then trying to put out a fanzine, because NF fans (of
> which I admit I'm one; yeah, it's got problems, but I just love Peter
> David's writing style enough that for me, it works) are probably few and
> far between, and you're not likely to get enough of them to make a zine
> break even in sales.
Hey, I like New Frontier too, whatever kinks it may have. It's at least got
stuff going for it that the mainstream on-air trek doesn't. It has a f/f(m?)
pairing between a hermat which looks very female and a female vulcan AND a
man which implies kinky sex--did I say implies??? You have a kick-ass Captain
and a lot of really good characters which, I'll be the first to admit,
probably wouldn't have worked if not for the fact that Peter David is
brilliant. I'd love to see a series come from this. Hey, this is as close as
fanfic as I've ever seen--it reads like you got it off of ASCEM. If you
haven't read it, try brfore you scoff. Peter could make stereo instructions
interesting. If you are a Peter David fan, you can read his new novel IN IT'S
ENTIRETY on the net at http//www.bb.com . The name of it is "Knight Life",
and if you like fantasy, this one's for you.
---Jen
PS: Loved the last Magneto story Alara, ever think of doing something with the
White Queen???
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
John Ordover
> >(2) Call another reader and rerecord the NF audio. I'm not sure if the
> >"Calhoun on Excelsior" mistake made it to the book or just the audio (I
> >brought all of the NF stuff back to the store and got my money back), but
> >readers who also write do notice these things.
> > Also, the pauses in Calhoun's lines make the tapes *exceedingly*
> >hard to listen to; he sounds worse than Shatner. I'd suggest Casper Van
> >Dien to voice Calhoun (he's supposed to be rather young, right?), but
> >that's just me. Besides, Casper isn't black, and neither is Calhoun;
> >James Earl Jones-as-the-voice-of-Darth Vader notwithstanding, I'm not
> >aware of any black voices who can really pass for white characters.<<
>
>
> That attitude seems more than a bit racist to me -- did you also
> complain that white actors have played Geordi on audios? Or does
> Geordi not "sound black" to you? Calhoun is an -alien- remember. Do
> you have any way of knowing exactly how Xenexians sound?
>
>general point. In the United States, today, there are dialects which
>are divided along racial lines. Many people in this country associate
>certain kinds of voices and speech patterns with certain racial groups.
But, as I said, Calhoun isn't a human, he's an alien -- he's from the
planet Xenex, and while he's humanoid, he's not -any- human ethnic
type. Are you saying that black actors can't voice -light skinned
aliens?- Who knows how xenexians sound? Besides, Joe Morton speaks
standard middle american, and can change his voice to almost anything.
Extremely talented actor.
>
> You know, there' s nothing wrong with voicing your own opinion, but
> really - you don't speak for fans as a whole, or even in large part,
> in your opinion of NF. Claiming you do makes you look silly.
>
>
>Hold on, there. My old and dear friend claimed no such thing. He
>pointed out that fans were likely to enjoy NF more if what he considered
>sloppy mistakes were fixed. He may or may not be correct. But he
>clearly stated it as an opinion, not as Gospel truth.
>
>Furthermore, if you're going to treat people who give you dissenting
>feedback like idiots, and if you're going to ignore reasonable requests
>like "please fix the grammatical errors" you're going to end up with an
>audience only of those with little discrimination and less
>intelligence. If that's what you're going for, fine. But if that's
>what you're going for, please, by all that's holy, refrain from public
>self-congratulation. Intellectual masturbation is even more offensive
>than public lewdness.
There -aren't- a particularly large number of grammatical errors in
NF. "Your friend" wasn't saying "I didn't like thus and so" he was
saying the whole line should be cancelled because -he- didn't like it,
and was indentifying as errors things that the majority of fans
particularly liked. The goal is to please the majority of the fans.
That he didn't like something doesn't give him better taste than the
rest of our audience, just different. Personally, I can't stand
Hamlet -- meaningless play about a guy who takes -forever- to make a
simple decision. I'm unimpressed by the poesy and don't sympathize
with the main character's angst. Does that mean I'm more
descriminating than those who do like it?
I'm not saying Star Trek should be compared to Hamlet. The point is
that tastes differ.
I'm happy to listen to what fans have to say, pro or con, but tellling
me what the fans will and won't like is silly, once the fans have
already voted.
Laura Jacquez Valentine
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
> That attitude seems more than a bit racist to me -- did you also
> complain that white actors have played Geordi on audios? Or does
> Geordi not "sound black" to you? Calhoun is an -alien- remember. Do
> you have any way of knowing exactly how Xenexians sound?
>
>I don't agree with Kirneh's point about Calhoun, but he does have a
>general point. In the United States, today, there are dialects which
>are divided along racial lines. Many people in this country associate
>certain kinds of voices and speech patterns with certain racial groups.
But, as I said, Calhoun isn't a human, he's an alien -- he's from the
planet Xenex, and while he's humanoid, he's not -any- human ethnic
type. Are you saying that black actors can't voice -light skinned
aliens?- Who knows how xenexians sound? Besides, Joe Morton speaks
standard middle american, and can change his voice to almost anything.
Extremely talented actor.
I'm not saying that at all. However, voices do play a role in how we
"see" things mentally. Obviously, for at least one person, the way
Morton voiced Calhoun caused what's called "cognitive mismatch".
Cognitive mismatch can spoil otherwise good works.
> You know, there' s nothing wrong with voicing your own opinion, but
> really - you don't speak for fans as a whole, or even in large part,
> in your opinion of NF. Claiming you do makes you look silly.
>
>
>Hold on, there. My old and dear friend claimed no such thing. He
>pointed out that fans were likely to enjoy NF more if what he considered
>sloppy mistakes were fixed. He may or may not be correct. But he
>clearly stated it as an opinion, not as Gospel truth.
>
>Furthermore, if you're going to treat people who give you dissenting
>feedback like idiots, and if you're going to ignore reasonable requests
>like "please fix the grammatical errors" you're going to end up with an
>audience only of those with little discrimination and less
>intelligence. If that's what you're going for, fine. But if that's
>what you're going for, please, by all that's holy, refrain from public
>self-congratulation. Intellectual masturbation is even more offensive
>than public lewdness.
There -aren't- a particularly large number of grammatical errors in
NF. "Your friend" wasn't saying "I didn't like thus and so" he was
saying the whole line should be cancelled because -he- didn't like it,
and was indentifying as errors things that the majority of fans
particularly liked. The goal is to please the majority of the fans.
He has said that, yes. But he didn't say it in the post you responded
to. The only thing I can think of that he ID'd as an error that "the
majority of fans particularly liked" is the GBotG subplot, at least as
far as I can see. Personally, I thought it was cute, but could have
done without. I didn't find it necessary.
That he didn't like something doesn't give him better taste than the
rest of our audience, just different. Personally, I can't stand
I'm not implying that he has better taste. I am implying (or outright
stating) that when you ignore dissenting opinions you cut out part of
the picture. Dismissing marginal views has a long and shameful
tradition. There are ways to incorporate dissenting views without
alienating or even upsetting the main fan base. Star Trek has *always*
been good at this.
Hamlet -- meaningless play about a guy who takes -forever- to make a
simple decision. I'm unimpressed by the poesy and don't sympathize
with the main character's angst. Does that mean I'm more
descriminating than those who do like it?
Welcome, fellow Hamlet-hater. I think you're the only other person I've
encountered who dislikes that particular piece of literature. :)
I'm not saying Star Trek should be compared to Hamlet. The point is
that tastes differ.
I'm happy to listen to what fans have to say, pro or con, but tellling
me what the fans will and won't like is silly, once the fans have
already voted.
Is there a time period for these votes? Is someone's vote invalid
because it expresses a minority opinion? If this thread has told you
anything, it should have told you that *some* fans don't like NF, don't
like plot elements in NF, think Peter David has gotten too big for his
britches, and any number of other things. Not all fans. But *some*.
--laura
Look, I got all the way through that without mentioning Nazis...oops.
Unzadi
>because it expresses a minority opinion? If this thread has told you
>anything, it should have told you that *some* fans don't like NF, don't
>like plot elements in NF, think Peter David has gotten too big for his
>britches, and any number of other things. Not all fans. But *some*.
>
>--laura
Very, very true. While I personally prefer Peter David's early works to his
later ones, and while *I, personally* do not care for NF, does that mean that I
and others like me do not exist?
Nobody likes to hear that their product isn't universally adored, but the fact
remains that not all writers can please all readers (quote from the late aurhor
Eugenia Price) Why pretend it isn't so?
If fans who don't toe the "majority" line are talked down to and ignored, guess
what? They will not be fans any longer. Nobody wants to pay good money for a
book they know they will not enjoy, and that's their right. The solution?
Read another kind of book. That's what I do.
In the spirit of diversity, I do wish, and wish heartily, Pocket books all the
success in the world with their current ventures. Publishing is a Ferengi
little business (as a small publisher, I can say this) so it's only logical to
put out what brings in the money. Not necessarily bad, just different.
Thing is, the people who aren't spending their money on Pocket books now, may
sometime in the future, decide to check out some of the current offerings, to
see if things have changed. If fans who aren't in the majority are treated
like their opinions don't count, then it feels like Pocket can do just fine
without our money as well.
Didn't mean to get all fist-wavy here, but needed to speak my mind. I've got a
great deal of respect for anyone who can work hard enough and get a novel
published. Face it, most people don't read most of what's published out there;
it's just not possible. So, can't we just admit that and get along?
Anna
Aleph Press
: >>I'll tell you right now-- if New Frontier gets to the small screen, I'll
: boycott. Captain Sulu should be the new series star-- he deserves it.
: And it'd intro a whole new bunch of youngsters to *real* Trek. :><<
: Oh, and one more thing -- when we did a Captain Sulu novel, sales plummeted.
: There aren't very many Sulu fans out there -- just a small group that makes a
: lot of noise.:)
I *was* a Captain Sulu fan until I saw him in that episode of Voyager
with the flashback. A GI Joe action figure would have turned in a more
animated performance.
I'd have enjoyed seeing more novels based on him, but I don't want to see
George Takei act (or not act, as the case may be) in anything ever again.
Randy Landers
<<I *was* a Captain Sulu fan until I saw him in that episode of
Voyager
with the flashback. A GI Joe action figure would have turned in a more
animated performance. I'd have enjoyed seeing more novels based on
him, but I don't want to see George Takei act (or not act, as the
case
may be) in anything ever again.>>
Yeah, I agree completely. We were flooded with demands for a Sulu
zine, which we've announced (EXCELSIOR), prior to the airing of that
episode. Afterwards, we've got very few nibbles. Some, like you and I,
attribute the lack of interest to "Flashback," others to "The
Captain's Daughter." Frankly, we're going ahead with EXCELSIOR after I
finish CHEKOV'S ENTERPRISE (Chekov and the 1701-B), but I'm going to
be surprised if they sell more than 20 copies.
And that's why fanzines are so vital. We can offer the Sulu and Chekov
fans something special without worrying about the demands of the mass
market.
--
Randy Landers
ORION PRESS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
KIRNEH
On 22 Jul 1998, Unzadi wrote:
> >Is there a time period for these votes? Is someone's vote invalid
> >because it expresses a minority opinion? If this thread has told you
> >anything, it should have told you that *some* fans don't like NF, don't
> >like plot elements in NF, think Peter David has gotten too big for his
> >britches, and any number of other things. Not all fans. But *some*.
> >
> >--laura
>
> Very, very true. While I personally prefer Peter David's early works to his
> later ones, and while *I, personally* do not care for NF, does that mean that I
> and others like me do not exist?
Peter David is *great when he sticks to canon stuff (I laughed my
euphemism for donkey off when I read "How Much For Just the Planet?",
frinstance), and passable on the Doom books (who knew there was a plot
hidden in this game?), but adding whole new crews to canon can be quite a
problem because people are *used* to the "family" they already know. (I'm
in the process, with my good, talented friend Laura, of building just such
a new "family".).
Remember how NextGen was riddled with bad plots for the first two
seasons? :> It *did* improve, and as Ordover says, it's the most popular
book series.
Speaking for *myself* alone, if four books is considered the
equivalent of a season on TV, it'd take me at least one more season to get
into Calhoun (4 more books), but the writing and editing must improve.
> Nobody likes to hear that their product isn't universally adored, but the fact
> remains that not all writers can please all readers (quote from the late aurhor
> Eugenia Price) Why pretend it isn't so?
True for me as well. *But* I don't jump down someone's throat and
do a cardiectomy-without-anesthetic if they spot a mistrake. I grab the
mistake, fix it, and send it back out to play. :>
>
> If fans who don't toe the "majority" line are talked down to and ignored, guess
> what? They will not be fans any longer. Nobody wants to pay good money for a
> book they know they will not enjoy, and that's their right. The solution?
> Read another kind of book. That's what I do.
Yeah-- me too :> Thankfully, (rare) dull ST has led me to great
alternatives: Octavia E. Butler, Patricia Anthony, Harlan Ellison, Joanna
Russ, James Morrow, Parke Godwin, C.J. Cherryh, Rudy Rucker, Neil Gaiman,
H. P. Lovecraft, Tanith Lee, Arthur C. Clarke, Isaac Asimov, Robert
Silverberg... and that's a *few* I like just in SF/F. :>
'nother example. I *love* hamburgers. But McDonalds, the most
popular hamburger in the world, makes me sick. So I go to Burger King and
other places. Squillions of other people may love McD, but my stomach
says "no" so I listen. NF is McDonalds Trek, or the New Coke of Trek
books. Some people can stomach it. Fine. :>
> In the spirit of diversity, I do wish, and wish heartily, Pocket books all the
> success in the world with their current ventures. Publishing is a Ferengi
> little business (as a small publisher, I can say this) so it's only logical to
> put out what brings in the money. Not necessarily bad, just different.
Agreed. The other Trek books will still get my money (I have yet to
check out the Q books). :>
> Thing is, the people who aren't spending their money on Pocket books now, may
> sometime in the future, decide to check out some of the current offerings, to
> see if things have changed. If fans who aren't in the majority are treated
> like their opinions don't count, then it feels like Pocket can do just fine
> without our money as well.
Very true. :>
>
> Didn't mean to get all fist-wavy here, but needed to speak my mind.
Me too. I don't *like* griping, but if something looks broken, I
call an expert to fix it if I'm unable to do it myself. Ordover seems to
be the online expert on NF, so it's up to him to fix it if he chooses to.
:>
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
KIRNEH
On Wed, 22 Jul 1998, Aleph Press wrote:
> ORDOVER (ord...@aol.com) wrote:
> : >>I'll tell you right now-- if New Frontier gets to the small screen, I'll
> : boycott. Captain Sulu should be the new series star-- he deserves it.
> : And it'd intro a whole new bunch of youngsters to *real* Trek. :><<
>
> : Oh, and one more thing -- when we did a Captain Sulu novel, sales plummeted.
> : There aren't very many Sulu fans out there -- just a small group that makes a
> : lot of noise.:)
>
> I *was* a Captain Sulu fan until I saw him in that episode of Voyager
> with the flashback. A GI Joe action figure would have turned in a more
> animated performance.
Not all captains have to run marathons to command well. If Clark
Terrell hadn't died, he'd've made a good recurring Starfleet presence. :>
>
> I'd have enjoyed seeing more novels based on him, but I don't want to see
> George Takei act (or not act, as the case may be) in anything ever again.
I'll be sure to use that line next time I see him. :>
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
Sean Clark-McCarthy
>
>
>
> I'm happy to listen to what fans have to say, pro or con, but tellling
> me what the fans will and won't like is silly, once the fans have
> already voted.
>
Well i'm happy to say that i LOVE the NF series i think you have got a great
concept going.. i hope you produce many more..
And, personally, i don't CARE about the spelling/grammatical errors. The point of
writing a book is not to have it printed perfectly. The point of writing a book
is to get your ideas to reader/fans, and i think that Peter David has done a
wonderful job.
BTW: I also read Voyager and DS9's Captain's table.. They were AWESOME.. Voyager
was my favorite but you would have probably guessed that from my signature!! : )
hee hee.
Sean Clark-McCarthy
Webmaster - Welcome To Voyager
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/5004/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I'm moving! The Welcome To Voyager site will
be moving to http://voyager.tasam.com/ If
you would like to be notified when the move
is complete. Please E-Mail me.
Laura Jacquez Valentine
From: miss...@aol.com (MissElise)
Newsgroups: alt.startrek.creative
Date: 23 Jul 1998 00:13:58 GMT
Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
> Peter David is *great when he sticks to canon stuff (I laughed my
>euphemism for donkey off when I read "How Much For Just the Planet?",
He wrote that? I thought that was someone else...
It was. John M. Ford.
--laura
A. LANGSDORF
On 22 Jul 1998, KIRNEH wrote:
>
> Peter David is *great when he sticks to canon stuff (I laughed my
> euphemism for donkey off when I read "How Much For Just the Planet?",
Hate to burst your bubble, but wasn't Ford the author of "How Much For
Just the Planet"?
Which is a great, funny (in the Terry Pratchett style) TOS book, btw...
AnneL
KIRNEH
Hmmmmmmm...
Coulda sworn it was Peter David. I'll make a note to look it up. :>
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
>
> AnneL
>
>
>
s11...@student.gu.edu.au
>
>
>On 22 Jul 1998, Unzadi wrote:
>
>> >Is there a time period for these votes? Is someone's vote invalid
>> >because it expresses a minority opinion? If this thread has told you
>> >anything, it should have told you that *some* fans don't like NF, don't
>> >like plot elements in NF, think Peter David has gotten too big for his
>> >britches, and any number of other things. Not all fans. But *some*.
>> >
>> >--laura
>>
>> Very, very true. While I personally prefer Peter David's early works to his
>> later ones, and while *I, personally* do not care for NF, does that mean that I
>> and others like me do not exist?
>
> Peter David is *great when he sticks to canon stuff (I laughed my
>euphemism for donkey off when I read "How Much For Just the Planet?",
That Particular Book Was written by John M Ford - and yes it rules
RedTurtle
Ann Zewen
>And, personally, i don't CARE about the spelling/grammatical errors. The
point of
>writing a book is not to have it printed perfectly. The point of writing a
book
>is to get your ideas to reader/fans, and i think that Peter David has done
a
>wonderful job.
>
I've stayed out of this thread thus far because I haven't read either of
these series simply because I'm not interested in them, but I have no
objections to their being published if that's where the market is.
However, the above comment was one I couldn't let go. Books have many
*points* for their existence: getting your ideas out, entertaining your
readers, telling your stories are among them. But, for me, there's always
been another reason for reading. I happen to *love* the English language. I
love to see it used properly, to read works by writers who know how to paint
pictures with their words and create images that stick with me. Peter David
has a wonderful talent for doing that in the realm of humor, and I've always
enjoyed his writing for that reason.
However, the mechanics of writing are very important as well. And that
includes both grammar and spelling. Since I haven't read the NF books, I
only have second-hand information as to the frequency of mistakes, so I
don't know whether they're any more common here than in other books. Perhaps
not. But the frequency of mistakes in professionally published books has
become far too great in recent years in my opinion. And I think that is one
of the biggest failings of the publishing industry of late. They're doing a
lousy job of editing/proofreading manuscripts. And there is *no* excuse for
it. I work for a daily newspaper, and we manage to find time to have every
story edited/read by at least 3 city editors and then one news editor, and
then every page is proofed. True, a few errors sneak by us -- but we're
getting this paper out in less than a day's time. Book publishers don't have
that excuse, and I'll match my paper's accuracy on spelling and grammar
against that of professionally published books any day.
There's been a lot of talk in recent years about the dumbing down of
America, about how kids are graduating from high school without the basics
of literacy. Well, the publishing industry (along with advertising and
television) are major contributors to that dumbing down. Kids don't learn
grammar and spelling just in school. They learn it from what they read and
hear, and what they're reading and hearing these days is bad grammar and
incorrect spelling.
Again, I don't know if the NF books are any worse in this arena than the
rest of what's being published, but I do know that I have noticed an
increasing number of grammatical and spelling mistakes in the books I
read -- and that includes the Star Trek books. I tend to read a lot of
books, and at one time the Star Trek books were among them. However, I read
very few Trek books anymore. I'm willing to overlook occasional errors of
grammar and spelling if the book is compelling enough, both in content and
in writing style. Unfortunately, that no longer is true of Trek books for
me.
I will note a couple of exceptions: First, the Shatner books, because they
tend to have the best characterization of anything being written. And, even
more importantly, the novelization of "Far Beyond the Stars." I congratulate
everyone who had a hand in publishing this book. I enjoyed the episode, but
I found the book even better. This one absolutely blew me away. I'd like to
see more like it, but I fear its the exception that proves the rule when it
comes to Trek books. I want stories that are *about* something -- something
more than space battles and action sequences, stories that explore the
philosophy as well as the technology of science fiction. And I want
characterizations that are true to the characters I know and love.
Give me that, Mr. Ordover, and I'll resume reading your books. But every
time I check one out to see if things have gotten better, I find they
haven't -- with the occasional exception like FBTS.
--
Ann
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." _ Dennis Miller
Katie Redshoes
<Kir...@cris.com> wrote:
[snip]
>
> Peter David is *great when he sticks to canon stuff (I laughed my
>euphemism for donkey off when I read "How Much For Just the Planet?",
>frinstance), and passable on the Doom books (who knew there was a plot
John Ford wrote "How Much For Just the Planet," not Peter David.
--
Constable Katie Collecter/Formatter, ASC Archive team
ASC archive: http://archive.nu or http://www.jovian.net/~ascindex
Submissions: submissions# webamused.com
Corrections: rlerret# sprintmail.com
Remove "NOJUNK" or replace # to reply
.
<an...@mindspring.com> writes
>There's been a lot of talk in recent years about the dumbing down of
>America, about how kids are graduating from high school without the basics
>of literacy. Well, the publishing industry (along with advertising and
>television) are major contributors to that dumbing down. Kids don't learn
>grammar and spelling just in school. They learn it from what they read and
>hear, and what they're reading and hearing these days is bad grammar and
>incorrect spelling.
>
This is something that always amazed me. I am a German and when I moved
to England I learned very quickly how terrible the spelling of native
English speakers often is. And now that I also read messages on the
Internet, this impression got even stronger. Also, most people here in
England don`t speak a second language at all.
I am certainly not perfect, especially concerning the fineries of
grammar, but it makes me wonder when my husband, who is British, asks ME
how this or that is spelled correctly!
Something has to be done about this!
>Again, I don't know if the NF books are any worse in this arena than the
>rest of what's being published, but I do know that I have noticed an
>increasing number of grammatical and spelling mistakes in the books I
>read -- and that includes the Star Trek books. I tend to read a lot of
>books, and at one time the Star Trek books were among them. However, I read
>very few Trek books anymore. I'm willing to overlook occasional errors of
>grammar and spelling if the book is compelling enough, both in content and
>in writing style. Unfortunately, that no longer is true of Trek books for
>me.
>
So far I only saw more spelling mistakes than usual in New Frontier 6
but all the other books look all right to me. Yes, sometimes I find a
mistake here and there but I don`t think that Star Trek books have too
many. That doesn`t mean that the people responsible should not try to
get rid of all of them.
But more important is that kids learn to use English properly at school.
>Ann
Baerbel Haddrell
J. Juls
were
>great Trek heroines--prior to NF. Once PD got his mitts on them, they
turned
>to trash.
Were they in it? I managed to read up to a part where some Keystone
Kop-type Kadet climbed onto a train track, then fell off. That was enough
for me!
Julie
J. Juls
point of
>writing a book is not to have it printed perfectly. The point of writing a
book
>is to get your ideas to reader/fans
But the ideas can get across much more easily without spelling/grammatical
errors. I'm not speaking of New Frontier only, but most paperback books
lately. I think my fanfic has fewer errors--and I don't check it too many
times.
Julie
J. Juls
>comes to Pocket Books. And I do *not* consider the X-Men crossover to
>be TNG. Sorry, Mr Ordover. I just don't.
Bleee! I read that whole dang book, and it was more about the X Men than
Star Trek. I think there was about 1 or 2 pages with Data in it.
Julie
KIRNEH
On Thu, 23 Jul 1998, Ann Zewen wrote:
> Sean Clark-McCarthy wrote:
>
> >And, personally, i don't CARE about the spelling/grammatical errors. The
> point of
> >writing a book is not to have it printed perfectly. The point of writing a
> book
> >is to get your ideas to reader/fans, and i think that Peter David has done
> a
> >wonderful job.
> >
>
>
> I've stayed out of this thread thus far because I haven't read either of
> these series simply because I'm not interested in them, but I have no
> objections to their being published if that's where the market is.
>
> However, the above comment was one I couldn't let go. Books have many
> *points* for their existence: getting your ideas out, entertaining your
> readers, telling your stories are among them. But, for me, there's always
> been another reason for reading. I happen to *love* the English language. I
> love to see it used properly, to read works by writers who know how to paint
> pictures with their words and create images that stick with me. Peter David
> has a wonderful talent for doing that in the realm of humor, and I've always
> enjoyed his writing for that reason.
This is exactly why I brought up the spelling nit. I learned
basic reading and spelling before I could walk, and to see painfully bad
spelling/grammar in a book genre that so many people read is a real shame.
STAR TREK should be at the forefront of good spelling/grammar to show
others how important it is. I'm surprised that Ordover lets such bad
spelling pass.
>
> However, the mechanics of writing are very important as well. And that
> includes both grammar and spelling. Since I haven't read the NF books, I
> only have second-hand information as to the frequency of mistakes, so I
> don't know whether they're any more common here than in other books. Perhaps
> not. But the frequency of mistakes in professionally published books has
> become far too great in recent years in my opinion. And I think that is one
> of the biggest failings of the publishing industry of late. They're doing a
> lousy job of editing/proofreading manuscripts. And there is *no* excuse for
> it. I work for a daily newspaper, and we manage to find time to have every
> story edited/read by at least 3 city editors and then one news editor, and
> then every page is proofed. True, a few errors sneak by us -- but we're
> getting this paper out in less than a day's time. Book publishers don't have
> that excuse, and I'll match my paper's accuracy on spelling and grammar
> against that of professionally published books any day.
:>
>
> There's been a lot of talk in recent years about the dumbing down of
> America, about how kids are graduating from high school without the basics
> of literacy. Well, the publishing industry (along with advertising and
> television) are major contributors to that dumbing down. Kids don't learn
> grammar and spelling just in school. They learn it from what they read and
> hear, and what they're reading and hearing these days is bad grammar and
> incorrect spelling.
Talking specifically about ST here, a friend of mine told me that someone
she knows picked up one of the older books, red-penciled every mistake she
found, and sent it back. :>
>
> Again, I don't know if the NF books are any worse in this arena than the
> rest of what's being published, but I do know that I have noticed an
> increasing number of grammatical and spelling mistakes in the books I
> read -- and that includes the Star Trek books. I tend to read a lot of
> books, and at one time the Star Trek books were among them. However, I read
> very few Trek books anymore. I'm willing to overlook occasional errors of
> grammar and spelling if the book is compelling enough, both in content and
> in writing style. Unfortunately, that no longer is true of Trek books for
> me.
To me, the only halfhearted excuse for *really* bad spelling is if the
character itself is uneducated, and trying to write something (example--
Charlie Gordon from "Flowers for Algernon").
>
> I will note a couple of exceptions: First, the Shatner books, because they
> tend to have the best characterization of anything being written. And, even
> more importantly, the novelization of "Far Beyond the Stars." I congratulate
> everyone who had a hand in publishing this book. I enjoyed the episode, but
> I found the book even better. This one absolutely blew me away. I'd like to
> see more like it, but I fear its the exception that proves the rule when it
> comes to Trek books. I want stories that are *about* something -- something
> more than space battles and action sequences, stories that explore the
> philosophy as well as the technology of science fiction. And I want
> characterizations that are true to the characters I know and love.
>
Beyond the references to Shatner's personal life ("shatnerisms"),
I agree. Now if we could only get Alan Dean Foster and Bjo Trimble to
write more Trekfic... :>
> Give me that, Mr. Ordover, and I'll resume reading your books. But every
> time I check one out to see if things have gotten better, I find they
> haven't -- with the occasional exception like FBTS.
Agreed. :>
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
Jake Landrum
. wrote:
> In article <6othj5$sb9$1...@camel29.mindspring.com>, Randy Landers
> <randyl...@mindspring.com> writes
> >Secondly, I don't necessarily think the basic plot (a disintegrating
> >star
> >empire needs a Federation presence to protect its interest) is flawed.
> >If
> >the Romulan Empire fell apart, it seems clear that the Federation
> >would have no choice but to put a few patrol vessels in the affected
> >sectors to protect its interests.
> >
> >The characters of New Frontier do interest me with one exception:
> >Calhoun. I find him unbelievably superhuman. The physical injuries he
> >suffered should have killed him outright, and I've never cared for
> >psionics in my leads. My heroes are Human, and, while this may be a
> >bias on my part, superhuman and alien lead characters bore me.
> >
>
> After reading all these very negative comments in this newsgroup I
> wonder if it is such a good idea for me to join in. But anyway, I would
> like to remind people that New Frontier also has its fans like me. New
> Frontier is even my favourite Star Trek series and there are many people
> who like it. It is the best selling Star Trek novel series in the USA
> and also in Britain.
>
> I am also entitled to my opinion - no flaming please!
>
> I could read in the Pocket Books website that quite a few fans asked if
> New Frontier stories would also be allowed in the Strange New World
> contest. Therefore I am quite confident that there would also be
> interest in New Frontier fanzines. I would definitely buy them!
>
> Recently I looked into the Orion Press website for the first time (It is
> very good in my opinion) and I could see that you are not accepting
> fanfiction for this series. I hope you will change this in spite you are
> not a fan of New Frontier.
>
> Anyway, I would also like to use this opportunity to tell you that I
> think you and your team do a great job with Orion Press! I will
> certainly order more fanzines in future. I am only quite broke at the
> moment.
>
>
> >Randy Landers
> >ORION PRESS
> Baerbel Haddrell
I tend to agree. The main reason it isn't liked is because it's new.
That is unfortunatly a problem w/us trekkies. Everytime a new series (book
or show) comes out, everyone hates it for about a year, then people warm up
to it, and eventually it becomes a beloved classic. It happened with all the
last 3 ST series. Besides, the NF books just came out. Give it a chance,
people!
Tyralak,
Illustrious Preator of the Romulan Star Empire
Jake Landrum
. wrote:
> In article <6p6t6v$oci$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>, Ann Zewen
> <an...@mindspring.com> writes
> >There's been a lot of talk in recent years about the dumbing down of
> >America, about how kids are graduating from high school without the basics
> >of literacy. Well, the publishing industry (along with advertising and
> >television) are major contributors to that dumbing down. Kids don't learn
> >grammar and spelling just in school. They learn it from what they read and
> >hear, and what they're reading and hearing these days is bad grammar and
> >incorrect spelling.
> >
>
> This is something that always amazed me. I am a German and when I moved
> to England I learned very quickly how terrible the spelling of native
> English speakers often is. And now that I also read messages on the
> Internet, this impression got even stronger. Also, most people here in
> England don`t speak a second language at all.
>
> I am certainly not perfect, especially concerning the fineries of
> grammar, but it makes me wonder when my husband, who is British, asks ME
> how this or that is spelled correctly!
>
> Something has to be done about this!
>
> >Again, I don't know if the NF books are any worse in this arena than the
> >rest of what's being published, but I do know that I have noticed an
> >increasing number of grammatical and spelling mistakes in the books I
> >read -- and that includes the Star Trek books. I tend to read a lot of
> >books, and at one time the Star Trek books were among them. However, I read
> >very few Trek books anymore. I'm willing to overlook occasional errors of
> >grammar and spelling if the book is compelling enough, both in content and
> >in writing style. Unfortunately, that no longer is true of Trek books for
> >me.
> >
>
> So far I only saw more spelling mistakes than usual in New Frontier 6
> but all the other books look all right to me. Yes, sometimes I find a
> mistake here and there but I don`t think that Star Trek books have too
> many. That doesn`t mean that the people responsible should not try to
> get rid of all of them.
>
> But more important is that kids learn to use English properly at school.
>
> >Ann
>
> Baerbel Haddrell
You must realize that English is a very widespread, complicated, and
irregular language. The New Frontier books are written in the U.S., which means
that the spelling may differ from that of England's English. The two dialects
are very close, but still have notable differences in spelling, phrasing and
grammer. Some words don't even mean the same thing. This might account for most
of the discrepancies. But you are right. Most people who are native English
speakers don't spell all that great. However, our language has more exceptions
than rules, so it can be confusing, even for us. :)
Tyralak
Julia A M Simon
MissElise <miss...@aol.com> wrote:
:> The spelling has been really sloppy as of late. Astonishing for "professional"
:> publications.
:> How does a final spell check work? I assume it is not by computer, for it
:> seems the computer would catch the errors.
I haven't read the books you're talking about, so I don't know exactly what
kind of misspellings you mean; but there is a type of spelling error a
computer won't catch. Try spelling "bee" instead of "be" or "eye" instead
of "I", or "fro" instead of "for", and your spellchecker probably won't
complain, because you accidentally ended up with words that do exist,
misplaced as they may look in your sentence...
To quote from the "Spellchecker Song" hanging over my desk:
I have a spelling checker.
It came with my PC.
It plane lee marks four my revue
Miss steaks aye can knot see.
... and it only gets better. ;-)
To catch this kind of error you need either a grammar checking program or a
human proofreader.
(Not to mention common errors like using "successor" instead of
"predecessor" and the like. But I digress.)
CU,
Julia 8-)
(whose spellchecker will catch every single one of
these errors, plus many more that really aren't
errors, because it was designed for the German
language ;)
--
Julia Simon Hypp"a"aj"at"ar Sprachen-Freak vom Dienst
email: si...@cc.helsinki.fi, sil...@coli.uni-sb.de
snailmail: Akanapolku 2 L 401, 01370 Vantaa, Finland
homepage: http://www.lingsoft.fi/~simon
Where linguists gather, madness abounds ( - the story of my life)
.
<tyr...@enetis.net> writes
>
> You must realize that English is a very widespread, complicated, and
>irregular language. The New Frontier books are written in the U.S., which means
>that the spelling may differ from that of England's English. The two dialects
>are very close, but still have notable differences in spelling, phrasing and
>grammer. Some words don't even mean the same thing. This might account for most
>of the discrepancies. But you are right. Most people who are native English
>speakers don't spell all that great. However, our language has more exceptions
>than rules, so it can be confusing, even for us. :)
>
>
English is certainly widespread and I think this is the main reason why
people in English speaking countries don`t tend to learn another
language.
But complicated and irregular? Compared to German or French English has
a very simple grammatic structure. I also don`t think that the
difference between British and US-English is so dramatic. Some words are
different and there are a few exceptions concerning spelling but in
essence it is the same language.
>Tyralak
Baerbel Haddrell
John Ordover
joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.
On Thu, 23 Jul 1998 21:14:23 -0400, "Randy Landers"
<randyl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Tyralek says
><<The main reason [New Frontiers] it isn't liked is because it's
>new.>>
>
>No, sir. I don't like it because it needs editing and work on its
>characterizations. I don't like it because of the Great Bird of the
>Galaxy joke. I don't like it because I don't care for Captain Calhoun.
>Being new has nothing to do with it. When TNG came out, we had the
>first zine to publish TNG fan fiction (ERIDANI). When DS9 came out, we
>had the first zine to publish DS9 fan fiction (OUTPOST). When VOY came
>out, we had the first zine to publish VOY fan fiction (DELTA
>QUADRANT). When NF came out, I said, "Nope. We ain't goin' there."
drago...@my-dejanews.com
> > Peter David is *great when he sticks to canon stuff (I laughed my
> >euphemism for donkey off when I read "How Much For Just the Planet?",
>
> He wrote that? I thought that was someone else...
>
Yeah, that was John M. Ford (it's one of my favourites, so I remembered).
Peter David wrote a TOS novel called "The Rift", which was not too bad, but I
don't know if he wrote any other TOS. I love his TNG stuff, which is saying
something, 'cause I'm not usually a TNG fan at all.
Now that I said that, I can't remember any of his TNG titles. I was thinking
"Exiles", but that was Howard Weinstein.
--DragonGrrl
Laura Jacquez Valentine
From: Jake Landrum <tyr...@enetis.net>
Newsgroups: alt.startrek.creative
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 16:57:26 -0600
Organization: E-Net Information Services
You must realize that English is a very widespread, complicated, and
irregular language. The New Frontier books are written in the U.S., which means
that the spelling may differ from that of England's English. The two dialects
are very close, but still have notable differences in spelling, phrasing and
grammer. Some words don't even mean the same thing. This might account for most
of the discrepancies. But you are right. Most people who are native English
speakers don't spell all that great. However, our language has more exceptions
than rules, so it can be confusing, even for us. :)
English has rules?
--laura
(B.S. English; currently going for an M.A.)
Laura Jacquez Valentine
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.
*BONG* Start again.
By this logic, there's nothing wrong with AOL or McDonalds.
--laura
"You know how dumb the average person is? Well, by definition, half of
'em are dumber than *that*."
KIRNEH
On 24 Jul 1998, Laura Jacquez Valentine wrote:
>
> From: Ord...@aol.com (John Ordover)
> Newsgroups: alt.startrek.creative
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 07:49:17 GMT
> Organization: MindSpring Enterprises
>
> But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
> joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
> You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.
Joke? It was written semi-seriously, right? If it was a joke, the bird
wouldn't be real, and the Baloneyans would still have the planet, yes?
>
>
> *BONG* Start again.
>
> By this logic, there's nothing wrong with AOL or McDonalds.
Or Micro$lut, or Concentric Network (my ISP), or OJ Simpson, or Clinton,
or Limbaugh, or Newt Gingrich, or Catharine McKinnon/Andrea Dworkin, or
Brussels sprouts, or Berman/Piller/Taylor, or... need I go on? :>
[Hmmm... I wonder what Mrs Roddenberry thinks of this weak joke in her
late husband's face...]
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
"Money will buy a pretty good dog, but it won't buy the wag of his
tail"-- Josh Billings
Carol 27 R
>Date: Fri, Jul 24, 1998 03:49 EDT
>Message-id: <35b83c0c....@news.mindspring.com>
>
>But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
>joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
>You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.
This is specious logic. Millions of people like the Jerry Springer show; that
doesn't mean that there's nothing wrong with it. (Or the people who enjoy it,
for that matter.)
Carol
Randy Landers
<<Compared to German or French English has a very simple
grammatic structure. I also don`t think that the difference between
British and US-English is so dramatic. Some words are different and
there are a few exceptions concerning spelling but in essence it is
the
same language. >>
Yes, as someone who can speak French as fluently, I've got to insist
English is far easier. Besides, the French never cared much for my
heavily-Southern-accented version of their language. :)
Randy Landers
<<But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.>>
Uh, John, actually that's a funny ad populem. Just because you sold
hundreds of thousands of books doesn't mean that the folks who bought
them liked them. Heck, I still buy just about all the Star Trek
paperback books, and I like less than half of them. Besides hundreds
of thousands of people also watch every episode of Jerry Springer, and
there's definitely something wrong with _them_. :) IMO, of course.
Randy Landers
<<This is specious logic. Millions of people like the Jerry Springer
people who enjoy it, for that matter.) >>
Oh wow... Talk about great minds thinking alike...
Randy Landers
<<But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
them.
You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.>>
Laura says
<<*BONG* Start again. By this logic, there's nothing wrong with AOL or
McDonalds.>>
Not to mention that hundreds of thousands of people smoke, thereby
committing themselves to a slow and painful death...
Randy Landers
fallacies...)
Unzadi
><<This is specious logic. Millions of people like the Jerry Springer
>show; that doesn't mean that there's nothing wrong with it. (Or the
>people who enjoy it, for that matter.) >>
>
>Oh wow... Talk about great minds thinking alike...
>
>Randy Landers
>ORION PRESS
And alike. Following this logic, there's nothing wrong with practically any
behaviour, so let's all go for it and watch the world disintegrate...but we'll
have such a good time... uh, no.
Also following this logic, there's nothing wrong with those of us who do NOT
like NF, the current crop of Trek novels, yellow rain slickers, broccoli, or
signing our rent checks in invisibile ink (no, I do not do that, just making a
point...besides, it's late.)
Since when did someone's taste in fiction make them a good or bad person? I
thought IDIC was one of Trek's main tenets. Or does that not apply to the
fans?
Anna
Unzadi
>hundreds of thousands of books doesn't mean that the folks who bought
>them liked them.
Ahh, Randy my friend, a point we have not yet taken into consideration. I've
bought a lot of Trek books in my time, will probably buy a few more in the
future...if the plot, characterisation, writer's style, etc appeal to me...just
like every other kind of book I read. Some I've liked, some I've loved, some
I've loathed.
Not everybody is going to like everything. That's why there's diversity in the
world. I kind of like it that way. Nothing wrong with that, is there?
Anna
John Ordover
to buy a new line in large numbers, they must be enjoying some aspect
of 'em -- especially when it's the same author and the same
characters.:)
Are you saying that people who like things you don't like are wrong?
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 17:56:31 -0400, "Randy Landers"
<randyl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>John says
><<But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
>joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
>You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.>>
>
>Uh, John, actually that's a funny ad populem. Just because you sold
>hundreds of thousands of books doesn't mean that the folks who bought
>them liked them. Heck, I still buy just about all the Star Trek
>paperback books, and I like less than half of them. Besides hundreds
>of thousands of people also watch every episode of Jerry Springer, and
>there's definitely something wrong with _them_. :) IMO, of course.
>
>--
>Randy Landers
>ORION PRESS
John Ordover
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 17:49:32 -0400, "Randy Landers"
<randyl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Baerbell says
><<Compared to German or French English has a very simple
>grammatic structure. I also don`t think that the difference between
>British and US-English is so dramatic. Some words are different and
>there are a few exceptions concerning spelling but in essence it is
>the
>same language. >>
>
>Yes, as someone who can speak French as fluently, I've got to insist
>English is far easier. Besides, the French never cared much for my
>heavily-Southern-accented version of their language. :)
>
>
John Ordover
Since the idea is to please the greatest number of fans, a "better"
Star Trek novel is one that more fans like. The larger the group of
fans it appeals to, the better the book.
Essentially, just like television, Star Trek novels are a pure
democracy where people vote with their attention and dollars. The
fans may not like what some people want 'em to like -- just as some
people are so upset at the ratings Jerry Springer gets -- but it's my
job to give them books they -actually- like, not books others think
they should like.
On Fri, 24 Jul 1998 17:56:31 -0400, "Randy Landers"
<randyl...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>John says
><<But Randy, see, if hundreds of thousands of people do like the GBTG
>joke, and the characterization, then there's nothing wrong with them.
>You just don't hapeen to like 'em. Not the same thing.>>
>
>Uh, John, actually that's a funny ad populem. Just because you sold
>hundreds of thousands of books doesn't mean that the folks who bought
>them liked them. Heck, I still buy just about all the Star Trek
>paperback books, and I like less than half of them. Besides hundreds
>of thousands of people also watch every episode of Jerry Springer, and
>there's definitely something wrong with _them_. :) IMO, of course.
>
Randy Landers
<<Are you saying that people who like things you don't like are
wrong?>>
Not at all. I'm saying that you're assuming that just because they're
buying them that they must like them, which is fallacious.
I don't like 'em myself, but I do own six of the NF books.
Ann Zewen
John Ordover wrote:
.
>Actually, let me be more explicit.
>
>Since the idea is to please the greatest number of fans, a "better"
>Star Trek novel is one that more fans like. The larger the group of
>fans it appeals to, the better the book.
>
No, John, you are completely wrong here. A "more popular" Star Trek novel is
one that more fans like, not a "better" one. Of course, you're going to
publish the books that sell the best. That's your job, and it's your
company's goal -- to make money. If I don't like them, I just won't buy
them, which for the most part is what I do. Unfortunately, my taste doesn't
tend to follow that of the masses. That's not necessarily a bad thing --
except when there's only one source for the material, which is why we read
and write fan fiction. Our smaller groups' likes can be met here while you
require readership in the millions to publish. That's not wrong, just what
is.
>Essentially, just like television, Star Trek novels are a pure
>democracy where people vote with their attention and dollars. The
>fans may not like what some people want 'em to like -- just as some
>people are so upset at the ratings Jerry Springer gets -- but it's my
>job to give them books they -actually- like, not books others think
>they should like.
>
>
I love the Jerry Springer analogy. Surely you don't argue that Springer is
"better" television than, say "Law & Order" or "Homicide" or even the two
Star Trek series? Again, it's not "better." It's just "more popular."
And even when something is more popular, it still doesn't necessarily
survive -- depending on the demographics involved. Look at "Dr. Quinn." As
for why certain Star Trek novels are more popular than others, I don't begin
to understand the reasons. Maybe it's just that the people who buy them buy
lots of books of this type. I read most of them for a long time until they
began to take up most of my reading time without giving me reading pleasure,
so I quit, unless a description particularly intrigues me or, even more
likely, someone recommends a particular book and their reasons for doing so
intrigue me. Such was the case with "Far Beyond the Stars." That *was* an
excellent book, even better than the episode in my opinion. It had
*everything* I look for in science fiction in general and Star Trek in
particular: a scifi theme, characters who are well written and *in*
character, actual character development, and a philosophical theme that
truly means something. Give me more books like that one, and I'll buy them.
But I suspect that most of your readers are looking for other things in
their Trek books and, since you must target the largest possible audience,
I'm unlikely to encounter manybooks like FBTS. So, as I said, I'll stick
with fan fiction, where writers like BEKi and Holly Trueblood are tackling
the tough subjects I like and doing them well. Or I'll read fiction in
another genre or even nonfiction. (I just finished John Sandford's "Night
Crew" and I'm now reading Carl Sagan's "The Demon-Haunted World." Next on my
list is the long-delayed "Midnight in Garden of Good and Evil.")
Again, I'm not asking you to stop publishing what sells. That's your job. I
do ask that professionally published material be properly edited -- both for
spelling and grammar and for continuity/accuracy. (I still remember reading
a TNG book some years ago that called Worf Lt. J.G. Worf rather than Lt.j.g.
Worf. Mistakes like that are unexcusable. It completely ruined the book for
me (one of the few times in my life that I literally threw a book across the
room; the other was when I read in a non-Trek book about people in Tampa
going into their basements to escape a hurricane) and I couldn't finish it.
I don't even remember what book it was now, but several people told me it
was one of the best TNG books at the time. It didn't matter. It was ruined
for me and I never could finish it. As a matter of fact, that marked the
turning point for me when I stopped buying *every* Trek book published and
started skimming them first and eventually waiting for recommendations from
other people.
--
Ann
"Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." _ Dennis Miller
.
<Ord...@aol.com> writes
>English is the easiest language to learn and the hardest to master.
>
As I already said, I agree to the first part. But why is it the hardest
to master?
Baerbel Haddrell
John Ordover
buying books you don't like, that other people do the same, and that
if people are buying things in large numbers, they can't possibly
-like them more-, they must all have some other reason. Again, seems
silly to me.
John Ordover
exceptions to its own rules -- for instnace --
"I before E, except after C, or when aid "Ay" as in Neighbor or
Weigh."
All fine and dandy. Where does "Science" fit in?
Or this kind of thing:
Sing sang sung
Ring Rang Rung
Bring Brought Brought
and so on.
OTOH, English is very simple in some ways -- consider conjugating the
verb "To Run"
I run
You Run
He/She/It Runs
We Run
You (pl) Run
They Run
Compare that to the French, or Spanish stanard conjugation. Much
simpler.
On Sat, 25 Jul 1998 19:39:26 +0100, "." <Em...@trekdata.demon.co.uk>
wrote:
Jess inEngland
In article: <35ba4bf5....@news.mindspring.com> Ord...@aol.com
(John Ordover) writes:
>
> And you're assuming that just because you are silly enough to keep
> buying books you don't like, that other people do the same, and that
> if people are buying things in large numbers, they can't possibly
> -like them more-, they must all have some other reason. Again, seems
> silly to me.
John, what you're leaving out of your calculations are all the people
who stopped buying the books after a series of particularly poor
examples. If the New Frontier are as popular as you say they are, you
would have had all the old readers *together* with all the new fans.
As it is, I know I am faaaar from the only person who gave up after
wasting good money on poorly edited hack work.
Take the last book I did buy, as I reviewed if for a now extinct
letter zine.
First Frontier -
by Diane Carey and James I Kirkland
Well, I've had a lot of reactions to the pro-novels but this is the
first one I've ever read that made me angry.
The Enterprise is testing a new type of shield, something goes wrong
and while the ship is outside normal space the entire universe
changes, not only has the rest of humanity disappeared, humans have
never existed and folks, it looks like we'd be sorely missed.
Someone has been mucking around with earth's evolution and it's up to
our heroes to put things right.
This book had the potential to be one of the better TOS novels. The
plot is interesting, the characterisation, especially of the big
three, is excellent and although there is too much technobabble, at
least it's dinosaur technobabble which makes a change. Ms Carey does
an excellent Kirk, although lumbering him with a poisoned foot before
the book starts struck me as a bit much, she even manages a Spock who
is calm but not heartless and a McCoy who functions as a scientist as
well as a bundle of emotional responses. For once they all come across
as professionals doing their jobs and doing them well, working as a
team with humour and intelligence.
So why am I complaining? I'll tell you why - this book has been
neither proof-read nor edited. I know I've moaned about the "attack of
the spell-checker" before but this book goes way beyond that. It
contains not one or two but literally dozens of errors. 'Vilified'
does not mean 'hate';'malaise' is not a verb meaning to complain;
there is no such verb as 'abey"; how the hell does someone 'cloy to
their work'; what is a 'surfeiting nod' and (my particular favourite)
'shriven' is not a combination of 'riven' and 'shrivelled' - I am
prepared to believe a lot about a dead dinosaur but not that it went
to confession before its untimely demise.
Why use a host of unsuitable alternatives for 'he said' including :-
he bolted, he impugned, he clipped, he resigned, he purged and even
(saints preserve us) he under-girded! Since when has asylum had
3 s's? There is a difference between forgotten and forgiven,
uninterest and disinterest, passive and impassive. Anybody care to
guess what a "rascal wire-puller" is and why does a crewman suddenly
acquire twenty-foot arms? If Uhura's voice is described as
pedal-toned" - when did she become a basso-profundo? Why in Kahless'
name is a Klingon gazing at Kirk with "roguish languor"(!)? I could go
on and on and on, there is literally an error every three or four pages.
A decent proof-reader could have dealt with all these, a decent editor
would have demanded a plot that didn't rely on the entire universe
altering a during the only 4.5 minutes the Enterprise is outside the
space/time continuum and on two Klingon prisoners who escape not once,
not twice but three times. The palaeontology should have been cut by
half and at least one entirely extraneous dinosaur fight removed.
Frankly I think Pocket Books have a nerve sending a book out in this
condition and I am angered by the suspicion that they've decided we'll
buy their stuff no matter how poorly it's presented.
5/10 because the mistakes are so distracting, would have been 8 or 9
Jess
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Jess inEngland
DataLaur
>(John Ordover) writes:
>> And you're assuming that just because you are silly enough to keep buying
John - some of us try very hard to like the new authors/new series, and buy
several times, thinking 'it's got to get better' and then get so disappointed
that we can't stomach any more. Also, I can't be the only one who buys
multiple books at a time. So six books? That's one trip, at most two trips.
Jess:
>John, what you're leaving out of your calculations are all the people who
stopped buying the books after a series of particularly poor examples. If the
New Frontier are as popular as you say they are, you would have had all the old
readers *together* with all the new fans. <Snip of excellent post, and
commentary on a book>
Please, John - I'm glad you're selling books but Jess is *right*, you'd be
selling MORE books if the editing (not to mention content!) was better. When I
see frequent spelling errors and word misuse, there is almost always a similar
lack of quality in the plot and the characterizations. A good author (and
editor) attends to all these things.
I used to buy *every* Trek book I saw. Then I got a disappointing batch. And
then, another disappointing batch. So I started getting the books at the
library instead, and was still disappointed. I took one last chance and
bought a few more last fall, and that was it.
Now, I rarely buy any (unless one is recommended), and I don't bother to go to
the library (not for the Trek books, anyway). I come to asc and ascem because
I get better characterization, more interesting plots, more just plain fun,
etc. Not every story is good, mind you... but it's a high enough percentage to
keep me coming back. That's more than I can say for the published ST works.
Please at least consider the advice you've been getting. I'd *love* to be able
to walk into a bookstore and dish out $$$ for lots of good Trek reads!
Please, please, make me a customer again!
laur
Randy Landers
out there, and the dozens of others who've created their own starship
and crews in their fiction. We've even published William Vodrey's THE
KEARSARGE CHRONICLES which was set aboard another starship and
featured a different crew. And danged if we don't get four or five
sims groups a week in this newsgroup clamoring for new members. One of
them I noticed recently was basing itself on NF.
Randy Landers
if people are buying things in large numbers, they can't possibly
-like them more-, they must all have some other reason. Again, seems
silly to me.>>
I've made no such assumptions, John. Some people, like Baerbel, do
like NF, others, like myself, don't. I make no assumptions about WHY
there are such a large number of this book sold or that book sold. YOU
are making assumptions about WHY they buy the book.
In fact, I suspect that the real reason NF is a "best seller" (if it
is indeed such--I remember when the Trek books made the best seller
lists all the time; nowadays, it's a rarity when they do) has more to
do with the fact that Peter David is the author. David has written
some really good Star Trek stuff in the past, and the sales may be
resulting from HIS NAME rather than the genre, NF.
Besides, I'd also like a comparison of the sales of each single book
in NF. I suspect the first one sold more than the second, which
probably sold more than the third, which probably sold more than the
fourth, which probably sold way more than the fifth and sixth
(especially given the Flying Chicken of the Universe joke).
BTW, I'm not silly. I'm a collector. The set will be more valuable in
the long run if I have all the series rather than just the first four.
Of course, maybe they'll be less valuable at the present rate of
decline of quality.
KIRNEH
On 26 Jul 1998, PJBall wrote:
> I used to be a collector; I gave up collecting the TOS books, not because of
> the quality of the books, but because TOS started to bore me...but I still
> bought all the TNG books. I don't any more. They just aren't interesting
> enough to me to spend my money on. And I've never been interested enough in
> the VOY and DS9 characters to read fiction about them (though I do still watch
> the shows).
>
> What has annoyed me is the trend towards "series" books...the Captain'sTable
> books (the TNG one of which I bought...started to read, and just haven't been
> able to get into) and the Q series). It seems to me that it's a gimmick that
> Pocket has beat into the ground...and I wish they'd go back to the individual
> novels pronto. It appears to me that the series only exist to con the reader
> into buying multiple books, even if they don't end up reading all of them.
I know what you mean-- sort of like the story arcs on B5.
I agree with you about series books-- I frinstance LOVE most of
Stephen King's stuff but I specifically avoided the Green Mile set because
I figured that most stories that don't end in one book are not worth
reading. I took chances on Dreadnought/Battlestations! (which I love
because it has a set of believable, not-overly-alien or overwritten
protagonists taking the lead), the Invasion series (rather thinly veiled
Doom references yet still enjoyable, because I like Doom :> ), Day of
Honor (why they needed TWO Voyager books still escapes me) and NF. NF is
the only set that failed for me, because, somehow, it's not substantial
enough. The crew could be interchangeable with anyone, the subplots are
soapy, the in-jokes are painful, and the backstory of Calhoun is
elephantine enough to take up its own whole book, yet it's drowned by
everything else (please note that all of this is my opinion and should not
be taken as neutronium-hard fact).
In a way, though, NF has proved something to me. Nothing-- not
even ST-- is entirely without fault. If it becomes a fully sanctioned
offshoot series like the others, others can buy it. I'll wait for
something better to come along while I'm buying the canon series (and I'll
keep anticipating ST: Excelsior :> ).
--da laffin tlhIngan :>
Gavilan
entertainment industry is a business. When there is a discontinuity between
what people say (you don't like the books) and what they do (you buy them
anyway), then the deciding factor is ALWAYS money -- you buy the books,
therefore you like the books.
If, as Mr. Ordover says, they sell more than any other Trek franchise, then
what possible reason would they have to justify not publishing them?
Bottom line, you don't like the series, spend your cash on something else --
buy an extra copy of an Original Series novel -- anything...
If all the people you think really don't like New Frontier actually stopped
buying the books, then the publisher would get the message real quick and it
would fade away. Otherwise you just have to accept that the majority of the
book-buying fandom doesn't happen to agree with you.
Randy Landers wrote in message <6pd5gr$oti$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>...
Randy Landers
<<. It appears to me that the series only exist to con the reader
into buying multiple books, even if they don't end up reading all of
them.>>
Exactly. What does it matter about the quality of writing and editing,
just as long as we sell 'em, right?
*shakes his head in disgust*
In my work, we create a product. Anyone in town can create that
product. But what makes our customers choose us for their product?
Quality of product, quality of service. Simple competition forces us
to constantly be vigil for this. PocketBooks has no competition,
therefore they have no reason to give a damn about the quality of the
product.
That also leads us to the notion that "sales are good, so we must be
doing it right." Nevermind that there's a quality control problem as a
result of the lack of any competition. I wish Bantam and Ballantine
were still publishing Trek as well as Pockets. You'd have the
editorial teams of all three publishing houses working hard at
creating a quality product. I remember when the Ballantine Star Trek:
LOGBOOKS adaptations by Allan Dean Foster came out of the animateds
and how SUPERIOR they were (and still are) to most of the pro fiction
produced by Bantam and PocketBooks.
The only thing that could bring about change is, of course, a boycott,
and I don't think that's likely. Folks like you, Priscilla, will
simply buy less and less, and then sooner or later, the powers that be
will issue "Star Trek Is Dead," and you know what? Zines will still be
there... Oh, the novels won't be, but the zines will be.
PJBall
a gender as do languages like Spanish and French.
I have no way of knowing whether or not English is a hard language to learn,
being a native speaker, but it isn't the easiest language in the world to spell
for sure. And they don't seem to have emphasized that in schools (at least
judging by the efforts one sees posted on the Internet).
PJBall
new TNG novel at the bookstore. I even had it pegged to a couple of specific
bookstores that seemed to receive/display the books before all the others and
I'd drive miles out of my to go there. I don't do this any more.
I used to be a collector; I gave up collecting the TOS books, not because of
the quality of the books, but because TOS started to bore me...but I still
bought all the TNG books. I don't any more. They just aren't interesting
enough to me to spend my money on. And I've never been interested enough in
the VOY and DS9 characters to read fiction about them (though I do still watch
the shows).
What has annoyed me is the trend towards "series" books...the Captain'sTable
books (the TNG one of which I bought...started to read, and just haven't been
able to get into) and the Q series). It seems to me that it's a gimmick that
Pocket has beat into the ground...and I wish they'd go back to the individual
novels pronto. It appears to me that the series only exist to con the reader
into buying multiple books, even if they don't end up reading all of them.
Priscilla
Aleph Press
: Sorry, but I have to work with the assumption that if people continue
: to buy a new line in large numbers, they must be enjoying some aspect
: characters.:)
: Are you saying that people who like things you don't like are wrong?
I have to agree-- while lots and lots of people buying something doesn't
*necessarily* mean it's good, it's a fundamentally better indicator than
*one person*, or even ten people, thinking it's bad. Everyone's entitled
to their opinion, and I often think the masses are idiots too. :-) But
New Frontier books *should* be working at a huge disadvtage, as they are
largely about characters we don't know or who are minor. I find that most
fanfic about all-new characters is unreadable (says the person who's
writing a fan novel where the only recognizable charactger is Q...) But I
enjoy New Frontiers. I like all the characters. I find the plots to be
far more engaging than the plots of the pro novels. I find the writing
better than the pro novels. I find the grammar and spelling errors no
*worse* than the pro novels. So when I want to read some Trek pro novels,
I'll turn to New Frontiers because it's a good, fun read, the characters
are allowed to evolve and change (which they are not in the regular
stuff), the stories are character-driven, and it doesn't bore me.
Unless Q is in it or a writer I really respect wrote it, I don't purchase
any other pro Trek novels, and I only get a handful of the big hardcovers
out of the library. But I thoroughly enjoyed "The Best and the
brightest", about an oriignal cast of Academy cadets, and I like New
Frontier, because they do what I have wished for ten years the novels
would do-- explore aspects of the Trek universe that the TV show *can't*.
And they do so with characters I enjoy, unlike most of the fanfic that
features new characters.
So anyone can have an opinion, but just because you disagree with ten
thousand people doesn't mean you're right and they're wrong. It just
means, you disagree.
--
Be good, servile little citizen-employee, and pay your taxes so the rich
don't have to.
--Zepp Weasel
Alara Rogers, Aleph Press
al...@netcom.com
All Aleph Press stories are at http://www.mindspring.com/~alara/ajer.
Ann Zewen
>I have to agree-- while lots and lots of people buying something doesn't
>*necessarily* mean it's good, it's a fundamentally better indicator than
>*one person*, or even ten people, thinking it's bad.
As I said before, it doesn't indicate anything about quality, just
popularity. They're two entirely different things, not necessarily mutually
exclusive, but not mutually inclusive either.
*snip*
>
>So anyone can have an opinion, but just because you disagree with ten
>thousand people doesn't mean you're right and they're wrong. It just
>means, you disagree.
Absolutely accurate here. I couldn't agree with you more.
Again, to repeat myself, I have no quarrel with PocketBooks for publishing
the New Frontier books or any other books. I *wish* they would publish more
books that appeal to me, but I recognize that's unlikely, and I'm resigned
to the fact. My only real complaint is with the lack of proper editing and
proofreading. JessinEngland's fantastic post/review of one of the books is
an excellent case in point. I still say there's no excuse for this kind of
sloppy editing/proofreading. I recognize that it is not exclusively a
problem with the Trek pro novels. In fact, it is growing throughout the
entire publishing industry, and that both saddens and angers me. As someone
who has loved reading for my entire life, devoted my professional life to
writing and editing news and invested many, many hours of *spare* time to
writing and editing fan fiction, I am absolutely appalled at the condition
of the publishing industry today.
John Ordover
In some other field, in some literary world, then yes, quality and
popularity are not the same things.
But let's take a look at the world of Trek fandom.
The definition of a good Trek book is one that pleases the most fans.
There really can't be any other definition. If 90 out of 100 fans
hate a novel, then it's Bad Book (and trust me, they'll let me know
that). If 90 out of 100 fans like a novel, then it's a Good Book (and
some of them are nice enough to let me know that, too).
Majority rules. What fans like -determines- quality, by defintiion.
Unless you are saying that the fans as a whole are wrong to like what
they like, that they have no taste, that something that the majority
of fans like can still be a bad book? In which case, you have to take
it up with them, not me. That your taste differs doesn't make your
taste better.
If I publish something, or a kind of something, and sales go up for
it, then I'm clearly doing something more fans liked than what I was
doing before. For instance, the votes are in on the series books --
they sell 2-3 times what one-at-a-time novels sell, and people like
'em a lot. Is it a sales gimmick? Absolutely -- but fans also seem
to like the notion of telling a story that strecthes throughout the
entire Trek universe, makes it feel connected into a whole. Something
can be a sales gimmick -and- a good novel. In the case of the series
books, fans seem to appreciate that we're doing something the shows
can't, linking the Trekpast with the Trekpresent.
As for New Frontier, fans sampled it and came back for more in huge
numbers. That means they like -something- about it or they would
spend their money elsewhere. Are you really saying that the sales
of something are not connected to the number of people who want to buy
it?
I will happily acknowledge that some people buy only to fill out
collections, and that some may be buying only, as someone said, "In
the hopes that it might get better." But either way, they have to be
getting something out of it, either completeness of their collection
or simply the pleasure of coming on boards like this and kvetching
about the books.:) But that's a very, very small percentage of my
sales.
Randy, it comes down to this: You aren't my target audience. That
doesn't mean my target audience is wrong to like what it likes.
On Sat, 25 Jul 1998 20:31:27 -0700, "Gavilan" <gavi...@null.net>
wrote:
>Hate to break this to you, but publishing is a business, just like the
>entertainment industry is a business. When there is a discontinuity between
>what people say (you don't like the books) and what they do (you buy them
>anyway), then the deciding factor is ALWAYS money -- you buy the books,
>therefore you like the books.
>
>If, as Mr. Ordover says, they sell more than any other Trek franchise, then
>what possible reason would they have to justify not publishing them?
>
>Bottom line, you don't like the series, spend your cash on something else --
>buy an extra copy of an Original Series novel -- anything...
>
>If all the people you think really don't like New Frontier actually stopped
>buying the books, then the publisher would get the message real quick and it
>would fade away. Otherwise you just have to accept that the majority of the
>book-buying fandom doesn't happen to agree with you.
>
>Randy Landers wrote in message <6pd5gr$oti$1...@camel19.mindspring.com>...
>>John Ordover says
>><<Are you saying that people who like things you don't like are
>>wrong?>>
>>
Patti Vickers
wrote:
>And you're assuming that just because you are silly enough to keep
>buying books you don't like, that other people do the same, and that
>if people are buying things in large numbers, they can't possibly
>-like them more-, they must all have some other reason. Again, seems
>silly to me.
>
They do have another reason - to complete a collection which many of
them started years ago. I know a lot of people who continue to buy
the books monthly for this reason, even though they have generally
been incredibly dissatisfied with the quality of the latest books.
There have been some exceptions -- people have emailed me or called me
and mentioned that they really enjoyed a particular book.
As avid readers and Trek fans, my friends and I do discuss this when
we discuss the other books we read. We regularly visit the Star Trek
books website to see what's coming up and see what we have to look
forward to, especially by our favourite authors.
And, like I said, many keep buying them waiting for the next pleasant
surprise.
Patti
Ann Zewen
>
>In some other field, in some literary world, then yes, quality and
>popularity are not the same things.
>
In *all* fields, quality and popularity are not the same things. That
doesn't mean you can't *enjoy* something that's of lesser quality. Film
critics call these *guilty pleasures*. There are movies I enjoy, *really*
enjoy, and have watched on several occasions, even though I know that those
movies weren't really very good, having numerous plot holes, bad dialogue
and only mediocre acting. But for some reason, the movies hit something in
me that responds. So I *like* them despite their many flaws. That still
doesn't make them good or of high quality -- just entertaining on a certain
level. You don't expect the same level of quality from every endeavor. But
even if you accept a lesser quality because of the entertainment value, that
doesn't mean that you don't recognize that it's of lesser quality -- or that
you wouldn't enjoy it even more if the quality were raised a notch.
Or take music. I happen to like Jimmy Buffett. Is he really good? Well, as
music goes, not very. But he entertains me, so I enjoy listening to him. The
fact that I (any many, many more people) like him will never put him in a
class with Placido Domingo, but he entertains us and that makes him money,
so he's doing his job.
As are you.
>But let's take a look at the world of Trek fandom.
>
>The definition of a good Trek book is one that pleases the most fans.
>There really can't be any other definition. If 90 out of 100 fans
>hate a novel, then it's Bad Book (and trust me, they'll let me know
>that). If 90 out of 100 fans like a novel, then it's a Good Book (and
>some of them are nice enough to let me know that, too).
>
>Majority rules. What fans like -determines- quality, by defintiion.
>Unless you are saying that the fans as a whole are wrong to like what
>they like, that they have no taste, that something that the majority
>of fans like can still be a bad book? In which case, you have to take
>it up with them, not me. That your taste differs doesn't make your
>taste better.
>
No, no, no, no, no, John. Majority may rule, but it doesn't determine
quality, only success. You're measuring your books by their success (which
again is your job), but that *doesn't* necessarily equal quality. If 90 out
of 100 fans like a novel, then it's a successful book, maybe a good one, but
not necessarily so. All of the millions of people who watch Jerry Springer
will never make it a good show, just a successful one. And all of the
millions who watch *professional* wrestling will never make that good
athletics either. Nor will the millions of people who read Jackie Collins
trash novels make them quality literature. All of these ventures are
successful. How good they are is another issue entirely.
I'll say it one more time: Keep publishing New Frontier books so long as
they sell. You should, along with anything else that sells. If I personally
don't like them, I'll find something I do like. That doesn't mean that the
fans who buy the books are wrong for buying (or even enjoying) them; just
that their standards and expectations for these particular books are a bit
lower than mine. Or to put it another way, they're more tolerant of stupid
mistakes within their books than I am so long as they enjoy the story. But
please, please, please, please, make the Trek books at least one area of the
massive fiction publishing world where good grammar and spelling and
continuity count for something. Increase your vigilence in editing and hire
a couple of *good* proofreaders to catch the basic errors. Note the points
JessinEngland made from that one book. Look at future Trek books with a
critical eye and make damned sure you have a good, qualified line editor as
well as someone who considers whether the book is likely, overall, to please
your target audience.
You still probably won't sell me a lot of books, but when I do buy and read
one, I won't be groaning every few pages over the multitude of grammatical
and spelling and continuity errors. I'll enjoy those books I do buy a lot
more, and I'll gladly recommend them to others. Publish the same books on
the same topics by the same authors telling the same stories -- but *edit*
them properly. Correct the grammar and spelling, catch the errors of fact.
And then I'll agree that you're publishing *quality* Star Trek books,
whether they appeal to me or not. Because then it truly will be only a
matter of taste.
Lawrence Sparks
In 1987 pocket books changed the submission guidelines for Star Trek books.
I can't say if the books before then were good or bad but I enjoyed them
more then I do the ones after 1987
This is why I have high hopes that Strange New Worlds does well
and other experiments that have the chance to build back stories.
Have people come back in later books.
as an example how many of you remember when the Horta, ensign Nerat was
promoted to lieutenant? The history of Romulus that was put into the books.
Or the history of Vulcan that has been put into books.
I can understand wanting to try to get non fans to read the books.
This is just an old thing that gets under my skin. I will shut up now.
Lawrence
John Ordover
responsible for the grammar and spellling in books. That's another
function, called "copyediting," handled by an entirely different
department. As more books are done more quickly, throughout the
publishing field, copyediting suffers. Star Trek books are no worse
than any other book line when it comes to this. It is also very, very
hard to find copyeditors who know not to change "hypo" to "hypodermic"
and other trek lore, and who also live in NYC.
We're always looking for more CEs, who work on a freelance basis. If
you're interested, drop me a line for our CE test.
Second, when it comes to Star Trek novels, there is no distinction
between popularity and quality. The -goal- is to please the -most
fans-. A good book is one that does this. It is really impossible to
apply -any other- definition to the limited subject of Star Trek
novels. Are you sayijng there could be a great Star Trek novel that
most fans hated?
It's like being a stand-up comic -- the good jokes are the ones that
make the audience laugh, the bad ones are the ones that don't make the
audience laugh. Nothing else really matters.
If my books are popular, then they are being done right.
On Sun, 26 Jul 1998 10:39:07 -0500, "Ann Zewen" <an...@mindspring.com>
wrote:
JWinterCNA
>to master?
Simple. English allows you to break a lot of rules and still be understood
better than in most languages. That makes it easier to learn. However,
because you can break a lot of rules, it also makes it hard to master. Why?
Because even native speakers can pick up a lot of bad grammar habits and, since
people overlook them when the hear or read them, they say nothing. Also,
theree are so many exceptions to the rules of the lanuage that when one thinks
they're saying something correctly, they may very well be mangling the
language. That's the up and the down side to English's flexibility.
I have a friend from Germany whose accent is only noticeable when he's stressed
or tired, He says he prefers English to his own language because in German,
like most languages, a noun is forever a noun and a vern is forever a verb. In
English, a word can be anything the speaker wants.
And that's my two cents worth. (Or for our european friends, pence. Dialect
is also a big problem for non-native speakers.)
J Winter,
Backup FAQ Maintainer
Alliance author
Troll stalker
SPAM slayer
Subversive element of the radical centrist movement
Randy Landers
<<If my books are popular, then they are being done right.>>
By your reasoning, McDonalds is a gourmet restaurant.
<<when it comes to Star Trek novels, there is no distinction
between popularity and quality>>
By your reasoning, Ford and GM are superior to Mercedes and Ferrari,
after all, they sell more.
By your reasoning, New Frontiers must be the best Trek book series of
all time, and I hate to burst your bubble, it ain't.
<<Editors are not responsible for the grammar and spellling in books.
That's another function, called "copyediting," handled by an entirely
different department. As more books are done more quickly, throughout
the publishing field, copyediting suffers. Star Trek books are no
worse
than any other book line when it comes to this.>>
Actually, John, I've pretty much determined that the problems arise in
the Star Trek TOS books when you change the setting of the novel. For
example, you'll publish a book written for the TOS 5 year mission
timeline and revise/edit it into a book set after ST:TMP. That's why
you have the ol' changing rank problem. Or someone will arbitrarily
change the name of the ship, but not catch it at every point. As far
as being "no worse than any other book line when it comes to this," I
would disagree. I don't find this problem very much outside of the
Star Trek books.
<<It is also very, very hard to find copyeditors who know not to
change
"hypo" to "hypodermic" and other trek lore, and who also live in
NYC.>>
Hmmm. Let's see, the ORION PRESS editors live in Denver, Mobile, New
York City, Albany, Baltimore, Houston, Israel, Miami, Cincinnati,
Saugus, and Atlanta. It's amazing, but until last year, I had never
even met most of our editors. Hell, I still haven't met some of them.
I wouldn't think that in today's age of telecommunications that living
in NYC should be a job requirement.
You say that NF is your best selling series of all time. and therefore
(by your reasoning) it must be the best quality books of all time.
Fine. What are the numbers for NF compared to other books by Peter
David? What are the numbers for NF compared to the Trek books prior to
1987?
ORDOVER
In 1986, Gene Roddenberry (remember him?) created a new Star Trek show called
STAR TREK: THE NEXT GENERATION. At that time he also laid down the new novel
designing rules Pocket has had to live by since then.
It was his decision, for instance, that characters were not to be allowed to
continue from book to book, that the "Rihansu" Romluan backstory had to be
dumped, that fleshing out the lives and the backgrounds of the characters was
not to be done, and so on.
This wasn't Pocket's doing, Pocket's choice, or Pocket's selection. It was
Gene's. We had have to live with those rules since then, although it recent
days they've loosened up a little.
So I'll take the heat for a lot of things, but not that.:)
John
John Ordover
Senior Editor
Star Trek Fiction
Pocket Books
For more Trek Book Info:
www.startrekbooks.com
ORDOVER
>Priscilla says
><<. It appears to me that the series only exist to con the reader
>them.>>
>Exactly. What does it matter about the quality of writing and editing,
>just as long as we sell 'em, right?
>
>*shakes his head in disgust*
Gosh, seems to me you guys think that except for you, Star Trek fans are real
idiots who can be conned into buying things they don't like and won't read.
After all, if -you- don't like them, they can't be any good, right? So those
who do like them must be sheep-like idiots who I can lead by the nose into
anything I want, right?
It's clearer and clearer the more I read this: Your problem isn't with the
novels, its with fans who like them:)
Ann Zewen
>First off, let me correct a common misconception: Editors are not
>responsible for the grammar and spellling in books. That's another
>function, called "copyediting," handled by an entirely different
>department. As more books are done more quickly, throughout the
>publishing field, copyediting suffers. Star Trek books are no worse
>than any other book line when it comes to this. It is also very, very
>hard to find copyeditors who know not to change "hypo" to "hypodermic"
>and other trek lore, and who also live in NYC.
>
I am well aware of the difference, John. You're responsible for choosing the
books and determining whether the content is what you want and whether any
conceptual changes are needed. The copyeditor (I think I actually used the
term line editor, because I think fans less familiar with the field would
understand what I meant there better.) edits for spelling and grammar. And
then there should be proofreaders at the end to read through the galleys and
find whatever the copyeditors missed -- the typographical errors, etc. I'm
very familiar with the process, both as a fan and as a professional. As a
fanfiction editor, I fill all 3 roles, as a professional journalist I do
both copyediting and proofing -- not to mention layout and design -- and
under a hell of a lot more deadline pressure than you can ever imagine.
And I acknowledged that the Trek books are no *worse* than other
publications. I still challenge you to make them *better*.
>We're always looking for more CEs, who work on a freelance basis. If
>you're interested, drop me a line for our CE test.
>
Given the amount of time I spend editing at work (overtime nearly every day)
and my efforts to do some fiction writing on my own after hours, I have
little time to consider any freelance work. However, I am having some work
done on my house (a new air conditioner and a new roof among other things),
so if the pay is good enough, I might consider it on a shorttime basis. What
do you pay? :-)
>Second, when it comes to Star Trek novels, there is no distinction
>between popularity and quality. The -goal- is to please the -most
>fans-. A good book is one that does this. It is really impossible to
>apply -any other- definition to the limited subject of Star Trek
>novels. Are you sayijng there could be a great Star Trek novel that
>most fans hated?
>
No, I'm still saying that, even with *your* definition of a good book, they
could be made better -- without changing the authors, stories or plots --
simply by proper *copy*editing and proofreading. And to say your books are
no worse than anyone else's is pure copout. I know. I've worked for a
newspaper that took that attitude, and it reflected in our product. We
changed management, acquired a different goal as to quality, and the quality
has improved about 1,000 percent. I'm still there, although many people
aren't. The difference for me? Instead of just doing my job to the best of
my ability and being proud of what *I* accomplished, I can now be proud of
the entire product. It's a good feeling.
>If my books are popular, then they are being done right.
>
But they still could be done better!
Ann Zewen
ORDOVER wrote:
>Gosh, seems to me you guys think that except for you, Star Trek fans are
real
>idiots who can be conned into buying things they don't like and won't read.
>After all, if -you- don't like them, they can't be any good, right? So
those
>who do like them must be sheep-like idiots who I can lead by the nose into
>anything I want, right?
>
>It's clearer and clearer the more I read this: Your problem isn't with the
>novels, its with fans who like them:)
>
That might be true with some people, John, but it isn't with me. I don't
criticize people for their tastes in reading, nor do I criticize them for
accepting a lower quality when it comes to things like grammar, spelling and
continuity because they happen to like the story. Most people are more
tolerant of such things than I am. As a professional, it grates on my nerves
when I see stupid errors in books -- and seriously bothers me when I see a
lot of them. But most people *aren't* professional copyeditors and aren't as
bothered by such things. However, many people I know who do read and like
the books do tell me that they like them, but ... And the buts nearly
always relate to sloppy copyediting/proofreading. As I said, it's not only
Trek books with this problem. But why can't you at least acknowledge that
there's a problem in this area and commit to making an effort to overcoming
it instead of just saying you're no worse than the next guy?
Aleph Press
: an excellent case in point. I still say there's no excuse for this kind of
: sloppy editing/proofreading. I recognize that it is not exclusively a
: problem with the Trek pro novels. In fact, it is growing throughout the
: entire publishing industry, and that both saddens and angers me. As someone
: who has loved reading for my entire life, devoted my professional life to
: writing and editing news and invested many, many hours of *spare* time to
: writing and editing fan fiction, I am absolutely appalled at the condition
: of the publishing industry today.
Me, too-- and it isn't even necessarily the editors' fault. I did
freelance editing for White Wolf's roleplaying game line, and I like to
think I did a good job. I was meticulous, I went through the manuscripts
two or three times, and I know how to spell and correct grammar. But I
was working from original manuscripts, not the galleys for production,
and I found to my horror that ridiculous errors would creep in *after* I
had handed in the manuscript-- like the last two paragraphs of a section
would suddenly disappear-- and my name was on the credits as editor! The
copy on the back cover would have errors-- they never ran that copy past
me. My story, in their anthology "When Will You Rage," suffered from a
global search-and-replace which changed the word "homid" (which has a
specific meaning, that I was using, in the context of their Werewolf
game) to "human" (which made nonsense of some of my sentences.) They also
deleted my last paragraph and changed some of my wording (in one place,
rendering a sentence nonsensical by inserting a "not"), and never showed
me galleys.
Now, I have to say that Pocket Books sent me galleys. They sent me a
picture of the back cover and asked for my input on spelling my name
(which was good because they'd spelled it wrong); they showed me galleys
of my "About the Author" section I'd submitted; they gave me galleys of
the story itself. They are *much* more professional than White Wolf was
in the days when I worked for them. But still, the errors creep in. if I
was writing a novel for Pocket, I'd hire one o my editor/proofreader
friends to go over the galley with a fine-toothed comb, because I would
not expect Pocket's own editors to catch any errors I had made. I should
not have to do that. Pocket must be making enough money that they can
hire additional proofreaders. I think they *don't* because they don't
have to. People will buy the books anyway. But pride in work is
important, even when one's job is to feed the bottom line.