From: quirk@pioneer.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk)
Subject: Re: Peter David, Diane Duane, MW Bonano (was re Da Books)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 00:48:46 GMT
Organization: Nit-Pickers for a Better Tomorow Afternoon

In article <Bw4qD6.512@acsu.buffalo.edu> v075q5fr@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Scott J Gorcey) writes:
>     As for Ms Bonano: DWELLERS, I admit, was pretty amazing. 
>     One of the best Star Trek novels.  But I didn't like a lot
>     of STRANGERS FROM THE SKY.  Some of it was very interesting -
>     like the Kelp farmers - but the most interesting aspects
>     needn't be Star Trek specific, and would be energy better
>     used on independant projects (as she did with the real gold
>     that was censored from PROBE - turned it into THE OTHERS and
>     its sequel).

I, for one, found _Dwellers_ overlong and somewhat lacking in focus.
(The fact that it brought *yet another* 'history' for the Romulan
Commander from "The _Enterprise_ Incident" diddn't help much.)
_Strangers From the Sky_ was a good read, but Parneb annoyed me to no
end.  (Mostly because there was little if any attempt to explain his
'magic' - I prefer my Trek to at least *try* to keep things within the
realm of plausability.)

I have not read any version of _Probe_, so I cannot comment there.

>     AC Crispin...  Well.  Ah.  Whatever.  She's okay.  Which puts    
>     her above the average-dregs of Star Trek author's talent.
>     I admit the books are as bad as they are MORE because of
>     Roddenberry's and Arnold's ridiculous "reign of terror" -
>     but that's over now, and Paramount seems like it will allow
>     more creativity, under a disclaimer, than in the last few
>     years - so I'm expecting the books to get better (especially
>     with the reutrn of Duane).

I found _Yesterday's Son_ routine.  _Time for Yesterday_, on the other
hand, was entertaining to read, and (more importantly) remains so.

>     Add to the list of "read anything by" - Vonda McIntyre, who
>     is another wonderful author (SUPERLUMINAL, DREAMSNAKE - both
>     Hugo and Nebula Award winners; STARFARERS, etc) in her own
>     right.  If she should return to the Star Trek staple - READ
>     HER (she also has a UseNet account, and reads rec.arst.sf.books
>     regularly.

_The Entropy Effect_ was a great book.  However, the final two thirds
of _Enterprise: The First Adventure_ was completely forgettable.  Her
novelizations of TWOK and TSFS were nicely done.  Her record Trek-wise
is 'good, but sometimes flakey'.

>>Also avoid: Diane Carey, Gene DeWesse, Marshak/Culbreath.
>
>     As you know, I agree with the Carey assessment: she's pathetic.
>     Gene DeWesse, even if he was good - which he's not - I wouldn't
>     read on basic "he's an asshole for what he done" principle.  But
>     then the same must go for Brad Whatshisname who wrote FLAG FULL
>     OF STARS.  

A minor nit-pick.  The final published version of _A Flag Full of
Stars_ is as much Brad Furgeson's as the final draft of _Probe_ is
Bonnano's.  The fact that the book was a decent read (the first time
only) still makes me wonder how the original draft would have been,
since I did enjoy his earlier book _Crisis on Centaurus_.


-- 
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk  (Known to some as Taki Kogoma)  quirk@pioneer.unm.edu
 I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
                          what I have now...
Newsgroups: rec.arts.startrek.current