Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site oberon.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!uscvax!oberon!tli From: tli@oberon.UUCP (Tony Li) Newsgroups: net.startrek Subject: Re: The Novels are Great !! Message-ID: <81@oberon.UUCP> Date: Sun, 14-Jul-85 05:21:41 EDT Article-I.D.: oberon.81 Posted: Sun Jul 14 05:21:41 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 17-Jul-85 12:58:35 EDT References: <623@panda.UUCP> Reply-To: tli@oberon.UUCP (Tony Li) Distribution: na Organization: U. of So. Calif., Los Angeles Lines: 26 Xref: tektronix net.startrek:03888 Summary: In article <623@panda.UUCP> plw@genrad.UUCP (Pete Williamson) writes: Some people have recently mentioned that most of the Star Trek novels are either bad or "simply not Star Trek". I'm wondering if I'm alone ... for the most part I think the novels, especially the Timescape Series [1..22], are very good. Compared to the TV episodes, I think the ratio of good to bad is higher. The depictions of Alien cultures and customs are more detailed in the novels. The Star Trek characters are generally more vivid, especially characters like Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty. Any comments ?? Well, I'm forced to disagree. There are good and bad episodes and good and bad novels. The novels do tend to have a higher ratio of good to bad, but in return, the bad novels *REALLY* smell. The quality of the shows just seems more consistent to me. Of course, that consistent quality isn't quite as high as we'd all like it. Live long and prosper, -- Tony Li ;-) Usc Computer Science Uucp: ...!{{decvax,ucbvax}!sdcsvax,hplabs,allegra,trwrb}!sdcrdcf!uscvax!tli Bitnet: tli@uscvaxq, tli@jaxom, tli@ramoth Csnet: tli@usc-cse.csnet Arpa: tli@usc-ecl.arpa