Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site uwmacc.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!lll-crg!seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!oyster From: oyster@uwmacc.UUCP (Vicious Oyster) Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers Subject: Re: Star Trek novels Message-ID: <1588@uwmacc.UUCP> Date: Thu, 24-Oct-85 11:45:17 EDT Article-I.D.: uwmacc.1588 Posted: Thu Oct 24 11:45:17 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 26-Oct-85 07:59:24 EDT References: <153@caip.RUTGERS.EDU> Reply-To: oyster@maccunix.UUCP (Vicious Oyster) Distribution: na Organization: UWisconsin-Madison Academic Comp Center Lines: 52 In article <153@caip.RUTGERS.EDU> eyal%wisdom.bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA writes: > >The authors are Sondra Marshak and Myrna Culbreath. > >I'm in the middle of it now (so you needn't be afraid of spoilers :-), >and it is definitely worth reading. It has a great plot, it really >brings to life the characters of Kirk and Spock, and it is also >thought-provoking on more than one level - it deals with the >"duplication" problem, and also raises interesting questions about the >validity of the "Directive of Non-Interference". > >I read one review which claims that the Star Trek novels by Marshak and >Culbreath are among the best SF novels written in recent years, and are >better than the TV series in terms of profound, thought-provoking >ideas. Other Star Trek novels by the same authors are The Fate of the >Phoenix, Triangle, and The Prometheus Design (which, according to the >reviewer, is not as great as the other three, but still very good). I >bought all four novels in a recent visit to the USA, and now finally >got around to reading them. > And now a dissenting opinion: An ST-bedazzled friend of mine (Hi, Rob... I'll return the books someday) lent me several ST books by the above-mentioned authors, knowing full well that I didn't particularly care for that type of thing, saying "But you'll *like* these! They're *good!*" Well, I've read three of them, and, after a 4-5 month hiatus, will give them just one more chance by reading "The Fate of the Phoenix" (currently on my nightstand, having just finished "The Image of the Beast", a must for Phil Farmer fans). I rate them on par with "The Sword of Shannara". Yeah, that's kinda harsh, but it's like they were books that I finished, but had no real desire to keep reading. Furthermore, I may have missed something of deep philosophical import, but it seemed that the same plot line was carried from book to book, with a few characters changed here and there. "Well, a beautiful woman with superhuman capabilities? Gosh, Kirk is falling for her? What? His duties to his ship come between them? Oh, he's wrestling with his conscience *again*?!" Sure, I'm reducing the plot line to a single idea, and ignoring the all-important (set sarcasm mode) treatment of walking the fine line of the Non-interference Directive, but face it: how many times can the same story be written by an author or authors before it gets stale? Once is enough for me. Call me an Art-Snob (though dht would disagree), but I prefer being confused by whatever it is that Delaney is saying in "Stars in my Pocket..." than rereading the same adequate story several times. - joel "vo" plutchak {allegra,ihnp4,seismo}!uwvax!uwmacc!oyster Can you say "opinion"? I *knew* you could! P.S. Rob and I now have an agreement: he won't try to make me read any more Star Trek books if I don't try to make him read Brust.