Star Trek

I saw the movie before I read the book. I will really have to listen to Quinto's narration sometime, because everyone who's heard it has been swept away by it. But for my first run-through I wanted the story, not the drama, and so resolved to read it myself.

As many have indicated, Foster hasn't fleshed much out beyond what the movie provides. This is good in some ways - the novels were never considered canon so the fact that he hasn't deviated from the script any keeps things mostly in-universe. On the other hand, the expansion of characters has traditionally been the driving focus for many novels, which gives this book something of an action movie feel.

i'm not complaining too much about this. The whole reinvention of Star Trek has had that; expanding the exploration remit by providing the younger and perhaps more modern-looking audience with action and adventure within the boundaries of today's special effects, rather than those of the 1960's. having seen the film, it's evident that this influence is that of the screenplay, and that's what the writer had to work on, of course. Foster cannot be held accountable for the reboot, and in fact has admirably managed to tie character traits we know and love into a new, fresh take on the Star Trek universe.

On to the story itself, then. my biggest major gripe is the way in which Kirk manages to relieve Spock of duty. before he gets marooned, he tries the line "I'm citing you as being emotionally compromised and therefore unfit for continuing in the position of captain of a Federation vessel." All well and good, but Spock denies this, as is typical for the stoic Vulcan. kirk returns and gets the crap beaten out of him, and only then does Spock turn to mccoy with "Doctor. By order of Starfleet Regulation Six-nineteen I hereby relinquish my command on the grounds that I have been - emotionally compromised."

I don't have a problem with this scenario per se, but the idea that Kirk tried something, failed, then pretty much used a similar technique (but threw in a few insults and threats) and had it work the second time around rankles. I don't remember his first attempt being in the movie, which makes it all-the-more believable when the second Spock suggests it. if Kirk had tried to outwit Spock the first time around, logically, then came back with the emotional guns a blaze, I'd have been happy. but you cannot have it all.

my only other quibble is the ranks. others have noted the alarming way Kirk is propelled from cadet to captain, with official backing at the end. Unless I've failed to understand the military, people generally proceed through the ranks. even the gifted ones. that, and the fact that Kirk has Lieutenant's stripes even without any formal duties makes me wonder just what Starfleet command are thinking.

Of course the argument for all this is that with the introduction of the Narada in 2233, a new time line is created. From that moment on, anything that happens is part of the "rebooted" universe, in which this book (and naturally the movie) is set.

A neat explanation, except it doesn't really count for anything. new time line or not, the federation had only encountered the Narada twice - first in 2233 (as per the opening scenes of the film and the first few chapters of the book), and then in the year 2258 (25 years on), where the remainder of the book takes place. After the first encounter, the federation is one starship down but James Kirk is only a kid. After the second encounter, Kirk has pretty much single-handedly been the one to face the Narada, all-be-it backed by a very good crew.

But herein lies the problem: is one mission enough to skip someone from the lowest rank in Starfleet's arsenal all the way to captain? Even his crew are left in their assumed senior positions. In fact, the whole theory of the entire Federation fleet being occupied whilst some dangerous catastrophe befalls a core Federation world, resulting in a fleet of cadets being sent to deal with the situation, is quite frankly laughable.

People said the same thing about Picard and crew being the only ones capable of going back in time to stop the Borg. the difference is that we already had a movie, not to mention seven series of television shows and ample Borg history to back up the choice. If Kirk and company have really been reinvented and the time line really is completely new, separate and distinct, then we have no basis on which to say "oh, yes, he's qualified. he's cheated at his latest test and has no actual field experience, but what the hell, we'll send him anyway. throw in a few of these cadets while we're at it."

yet again, I have to reiterate that this isn't Foster's fault. he wrote a novel from a script and had to incorporate everything in that script. in fact, I quite liked the novel. I enjoyed the movie too, of course, but missed out on the visuals that have earned it such praise. For me, a novelisation will always take the top seat, because I can absorb it as well as anybody, blindness or no. the whole Star Trek world has been reset. Rebooted. Started again from scratch (or at least from the 2230's onwards). it's a new playground, with familiar characters but open vistas of possibility. As one of the first written fiction works set herein, I'd say that I am duly impressed.