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