NCIEO Home Page (Map): Continuing Communications: Ask the Chief:

ASK THE CHIEF
3/13/98

(Also available from Starland mirror site)

I am, once again, in a rush today. Expect typos! First, some comments from previous columns . . .

Simon de Vet: The Ask the Chief articles all seem to imply that you want to write a bond guide, and it's automatically a nitpicker's guide. Some people suggest that without continuity, it would not work. Well, why limit yourself to Nit guides? You're a smart person, I'm sure you could have a lot to say about the movies (or any other topic) to write a book, without limiting yourself to Nitpicking. Sure it's your field of expertise, but why not aim at a bigger audience?

Phil: You have to factor in the "way things are" in the publishing business. The publishing business is really only concerned that an author keep doing what they have had some success in. The publishing business is very, very conservative. And frankly, they have to be because their profit margins are small it really is a loopy way to make money when you actually figure out how it's done. So, while it sounds simple to just say, "why limit yourself to Nit guides," the reality is that any other kind of book that I do will be a very tough sell. It would be like starting all over again at the very beginning with little chance of actually getting anything published, much like the situation I'm facing with my fiction. It has nothing to do with the quality of the work. It has to do with the way the "publishing business" works!

Jason Barnes: I also agree about the Bond Guide question. While I would buy it, you don't have to see one Bond film to understand another. They don't always tie into each other. In fact, Goldeneye and License To Kill were the ONLY films to make reference to past characters (Bond's wife and the male M (M is now female if you haven't seen it.)) You'd have to do them seperatly when finding the nits. At least, that's how I see it.

Aaron Dotter: I was reading some of the comments about how some think that once Voyager comes back to earth, the series would have to end, and the Maquis crew members would be thrown in prison. I don't think that would neccesarily happen. The Maquis crew members, I would think, would get out of any charges for two reasons: One, since the Dominion has virtually obliterated the Maquis (I think), and are trying to do the same to the Federation, the Federation will need every available, capiable person, for both during the war and to replace killed personnel after.(Is their a draft in the Federation, I wonder?) They have gotten so desperate that they are promoting cadets (Nog) and even allowing a Cardassian tailor to serve. Starfleet would be stupid to throw away valuable personnel. And the other reason is that I would bet that the Federation would see the situation that they were in as punishment enough for what they had done. Those reasons would be enough to keep the Maquis crew members on Voyager. (Besides, I bet Janeway would lobby to keep them)

Tom Elmore: As to why Voyager is not avaible in syndication, the answer is simple. UPN has instituted an "all or nothing" policy in regards to it's programming. In other words, if you want to carry Voyager, then you must carry all UPN programming. This basicly cuts off all CBS, ABC,NBC or Fox stations unless they do what my station here did and show UPN programs at 2 and 3 am in the morning over the weekend. (I don't know about other nitpickers, but I was not going to stay up till 2:30 am to see "Homeboys in Outer Space") However with the exception of Voyager, the station made more money off of infocommercials than they did the UPN line-up! Thus they dropped it, so they could show more of the latter, leaving us here without Voyager (but with re-runs of DS9 and TNG)

I can respect the"all or nothing" policy of UPN. Voyager was a very effective hook to get stations to sign on board, but since Voyager has proven to be nothing special, they need better bait, and The Love Boat: The Next Generation won't be it. As I said before, Viacom should just cut it's losses and syndicate Voyager, otherwise I fear it's voyage will be cut short

Also, this appeared on page D4 of "The State" newspaper here in Columbia SC today, 3/12/98. I think you and others might find it interesting.

David Bauder of the Associated Press writes that WB scored it's highest rating ever last week. He goes on to state:

"The WB has also beaten UPN, the rival network that began operation during the same month in 1995, for 14 weeks in a row. Many analysts aren't convinced that both networks can survive."

To me it looks like the handwriting is starting to appear on the wall.

Craig Sapp: Will UPN Sink Or Float? "Love Boat: The Next Wave" – what a name! UPN has started promoting its launch in mid-April. With three ship based series (Love Boat, Star Trek: Voyager, and Breaker High) I can imagine UPN’s campaign: This season set sail with UPN, and "come on aboard, we’ve been expecting you." While never a big fan of Love Boat, I did watch from time to time, it will be interesting to see how they have updated the floating primetime soap opera. The new "Love Boat" would appear to be only one of many reincarnations to come. Other TV classics reportedly in production are "Fantasy Island", "Charlie’s Angels", "S.W.A.T", "That’s Incredible", and a CGI version of "The Ed Sullivan Show". This season we got "L.A. Fame", and "Team Knight Rider" (neither will probably make it to season two). Two spin-offs being considered are "Young Hercules" and a new "Highlander" series. And let’s not forget the recently revamped "Star Trek: The Voyage Into Silliness" (Just kidding, I couldn’t resist).

Since UPN is loosing so many affiliates, why don’t they broadcast their network schedule (or atleast Voyager) over the Internet using a live webcast and/or any number of on-demand streaming video plugins. I realize the video and sound quality isn’t always that great but I’ll bet a lot of people would be happy to get it this way until another affiliate is found for their TV market.

Jason Barnes: Are you exclusivly limited to Dell on the Nitpicker Guides? It's strange that you can't write a Voyager Guide without their consent (sounds suspecious (sp?) to me) and considering that most of the information discussed in your ATC column is about Voyager. I understand sales of the DS9 Guide were low but hey, I bought one!! I like it. I can't say I diligently watch DS9 but I do like to watch it (work complicates this and so does the fact that TCI Cable and my VCR can't get along to tape different channels on my tv.)

Phil: I have no doubt that Steve and I could get a smaller publisher interested in a Voyager Guide. I'm just not sure it would sell! And I don't mean to give you all the impression that *nobody* bought a DS9 Guide. I'm very appreciative of all the DS9 Guide that were sold. But a Guide takes me at least six months to write and then chews up at least another month or two as we edit and do the production. So I have an investment of between seven and eight months in every book that I do. Since I do this for a living, I need to make enough on the book that I can justify spending the time on it. Without sufficient sales to do so, it doesn't make sense for me to do the book! It's very simple and it's very ruthless and that's the way it is when you're self-employed. ;-) In addition, in the book publishing business, you're really only as good as your last book because *everyone* in the book publishing business has a very, very short memory. If you make them money, they like you. If you don't, they take their toys and go home! So, not only do I want to do a Guide that will make me money, I want to do a Guide that will follow the X-phile Guide in an upward direction--a guide that has the potential to sell *more* copies than the X-phile Guide and, at this point, it looks like a Star Wars Guide is the best bet, *especially* with the release of the first prequel in 1999!

Murray Leeder: There was someone to see Citizen Kane when he died. When the paperweight shatters, the nurse is visible in the reflection. HOWEVER (and herein lies the mistake), later in the film the Butler said that he heard "Rosebud", when he wasn't there.

Robert J. Woolley: Well, I've viewed and re-viewed the comet dust in the DS9 opening an embarassingly large number of times now, and my conclusion is that the Nitpicker's Guild has indeed come up with something: the very first 24th century Rorschach test! Those faces are no more objectively there than are the animal shapes children see in cloud formations.

Mike Deeds: I would like to add my comments to the DS9 discussion. In my humble opinion, DS9 is clearly the best ST series yet. It has the best overall storyline, realistic characters, and an interesting setting. Next Gen (although I do like it) always made me wonder if the characters were asexual. I mean, how come no one ever got married on the show? Trust me, I noticed in my time in the military that soldiers tended to marry other soldiers. Don't most people meet their spouses in school or in the workplace?

ST fans have been unfair to DS9. As Harlan Ellison has pointed out, the so-called Star Trek "formula" has become a strait-jacket. Just look at Voyager! Give the producers credit for attempting something different. Didn't you ever wonder what happened in other parts of the ST universe (besides the starships)? How many shows can they make with this "formula" without repeating themselves? I guess, in the Star Trek universe, the only interesting events all happen to a starship named Enterprise. This type of reasoning is silly to me. Let me use an analogy. The Empire Strikes Back is a lot different than Star Wars. In TESB, the rebel base is destroyed, Luke screws up throughout the entire movie, Vader defeats Luke, and the heroes just barely escape with their lives! Compare that to the original! Did Lucas change the "formula"? Yes! Are they both great movies? Yes!

Regarding your comments on Morn, let me offer my opinion. Obviously, Morn is just a running joke similar to Wilson on Home Improvement. I think you were taking things a little bit too seriously with the Morn story.

Phil: Well, we're dealing with opinion here and everyone has a right to their own opinion so we'll go round and round with this because those who like DS9 will be able to find all sorts of "reasons" why they like it and why it's better than anything that's gone before it. And those who have less affinity for DS9 will still shake their heads and not get it. Specifically though, I'm not sure the Star Wars analogy works for me. A better analogy would have been if Lucas did the Empire Strikes Back and he didn't include Luke, Leia, Han, Chewie, Artoo-Detoo, See-Threepio or anyone else in the movie and simply made a film about two grunts working in the spice mines on Kessel. Sure . . . it's called "Star Wars" but hey, the spice mines are a part of the Star Wars universe so therefore it's Star Wars even though you don't see any stars and there are no wars! (Okay, I hope you realize I'm just having a little fun with you! ;-)

As for Morn, the creators can do anything they jolly-well-please with any character they want. I stand by my comments last week, however. I would be *stunned* if prior to "Who Mourn For Morn," five out of 100 DS9 fans thought Morn was anything more than a loveable barfly but the creators chose to take the character off in a tangential direction. Okay, fine. That's their prerogative. It just doesn't lock well with my brain, that's all. And, I have a right to my own opinion! ;-)

Shane Tourtellotte: A response to Scott McClenny's question about Dorn/Mays in "Far Beyond the Stars":

Dorn/Worf can't be Willie Mays, for two reasons. One, Dorn wears #15 on his uniform, and Mays wore #24. Two, the action ocurs in 1953(from Stalin and H-bomb test references), and Mays was in the army that year.

John Latchem: I still think you are being a bit harsh about the nature of DS9 and would like to offer these alternative viewpoints.

If you aren't comfortable with MORN, I don't see how you could have a problem. He isn't even a main character! No, I see what you are saying. Morn represents to you that the writers aren't dealing with characters consistantly. But as far as Morn goes I think you're less than objective, considering you had another Morn story in mind. I know the feeling when you see something on Trek that you had in mind and you just knew you could do it better. Personally I like all of the characters, each has a well developed personality and a well flushed out backstory. I think these characters may be better realized than TNG, including Worf. A friend of mine told me he thought Worf was the weak link of TNG, but now is a cool character.

And I've never been swayed by anything JMS has said. Sounds more like sour grapes to me if anything. B5 has NEVER appealed to me. The only thing it had going for it was that it was just one long story arc, which to me presented a problem. It meant the show was about the plot, and thus every time I watched it seemed the characters were driven by the overall plot. The individual character didn't matter and could be easily replaced in order to fit the requirements of the overall plot. And this actually happened on more than one occasion.

Plus the plot itself didn't appeal to me. I never was convinced that the Shadows were convincing villains. And to end the war over a STERNLY WORDED SPEECH by Sheridan? Sure this leads to what the show is really about I guess, the war for Earth, but to move the plot along like that is weak.

Now, of course DS9 has to be different than the previous Trek formulas. TNG was still on the air! What's the point of a new Trek series if it isn't going to be differnt? The space station approach was one of a few options to take, and maybe the most logical, but any of the possibilities would be a divergence. DS9 was doing what Star Trek does, but differently. It explored different characters and cultures, developed them. It isn't like they were confined to the station. They had the runabouts.

TNG in the last few years began to stray from the Trek formula too. I think I have to point out that you and I have different opinions about what "Star Trek" is. TOS was about the "planet of the week." The plot was simple to figure out every week: find new planet, beam down, find aliens. Aliens threaten crew, crew escapes with new knowledge. Simple and to the point. No long term story arcs.

TNG started like this for a few years as well. Towards the end of TNG stories began to focus more on long term stories involving the Klingons and the Romulans and the Cardassians, and the Maquis. Personally I think these are some of the best episodes produced.

So when I see the words "Star Trek" I don't get locked into a set pattern. To me the words identify the universe in which the series takes place, and the show explores that universe. TOS explores a largely unknown universe. TNG shows this same universe later on, still somewhat unknown. And I think DS9 is focusing the known universe, exploring that. It is still about exploring the unknown, but the unknown this time is "the future." Voyager tries to get back to TOS style exploration but the characters and writing just aren't as original, and it isn't as good.

Now, where you say the creators tried to reverse things by giving the crew a ship. I didn't see much of a difference here, just that the creators needed to expand the focus of the show. With TNG gone it fell to DS9 to continue with the stories about the established Trek universe. The Defiant was a logical step. Stories like "Meridian" could still have been done with a runabout, and main characters could still leave the station. Now they could do it with some style. Besides it wasn't as if the characters didn't just fly away from the station to continue with the long term Trek plot. The writers did a smart thing by introducing the Dominion. This allowed them to focus the Trek plot through DS9, as the wormhole played a huge part in this. So what you see as calculated manipulation, I see as a well developed story, perhaps shaped by production needs.

I do agree with some points of yours. The layout of OPS is somewhat confusing. I still don't quite get it either. Of course DS9 does have the well developed promenade. And the characters do just get up and take off once in a while on a whim, as if the station is kind of an excuse for the writers to just put the characters in the same place to develop them. I guess the stories and characters, for me, have been good enough that I can look past these problems. Even the best episodes have nits, remember. But I will say that while DS9 has been more consistantly high quality, TNG had more knockout episodes. By this I mean DS9 might have 5 episodes, on on a ten point scale they'd rate: 8, 9, 9, 8, 9. While TNG would have 5 episodes that rate: 7, 7, 10, 8, 7. So DS9 wins in average, but TNG has that 10 which means that everything's clicking, and its all coming together. DS9 is missing that appeal that allows it to cross into the pop culture realm that TNG and TOS crossed in to. I don't quite know what it is, but I know it isn't there.

That said I must say I'm a little concerned that DS9 might be running out of ideas. I mean, resorting to the "Incredible Shrinking" plot? Of course, it was pulled off pretty well. And then "Honor Among Thieves" was basically "Donnie Brasco." (SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER AHEAD) But I think the real reason I say this is that the writers have apparantly set themselves in the path to kill of Jadzia just for the story possibilities. Well, at first I was interested in seeing what would come of this, but after seeing what Worf did in "Change of Heart," I think killing her off would be unfair to Worf. I mean, this guy puts his career in park so he can save his wife, and she's going to die later anyway? Poor Worf. Sure this adds another dimension to the Jadzia death story but still. I guess we'll have to see how things turn out.

Having said what I have about DS9 fitting in to Trek, and seen your response, I'm curious as to your opinion of Voyager. According to your definition of Star Trek, I imagine you don't have as much trouble watching it was you do DS9. It has the ship, the travelling from planet to planet. It follows the TOS formula more closely (doesn't have the title sequence monologue though). What do you think?

For me Voyager has irked me more than DS9. According to my definition, Star Trek is the universe, not the formula. So the first few years of Voyager I tuned in wanting to see Romulans and Klingons and Cardassians and instead got the Kazon. Of course when Voyager saw that the new aliens weren't working out they dumped them and brought in the Borg and the Q, and this bothered me because Voyager handled them wrong too. Do you not agree that "The Q and the Grey" seriously damaged the Q character? Instead of intergalactic freelancing menace he's know discussing the finer points of child care over tea with Janeway! And then the Borg are brought down a notch with 8472. And Neelix, who is the epitomy of the new races encountered on Voyager, is the most annoying character on the show. Personally I think 7 of 9 was just the medicine the show needed, shaking everything up a bit, providing a good foil to the Starfleet cast. For the most part I think they are handling her fine from a character standpoint, but from a plot standpoint they've set her up as the cure all for all their problems, much like Maquis tactics were used earlier, but this is worse. Instead of thinking to solve their problem like DS9 writers usually do, the Voyager writers drag out Seven's borg technology as the cure all for anything, and this is a very dangerous trend to get caught up in. It detracts from the show. Not that it is much of a change, this show has ALWAYS delved into the realm of technobabble to solve their problems. This really hurts the characters. They are so reliant on technology that they have lost part of their humanity, and only when compared to the robotic 7 of 9 do they seem human and interesting. Never while watching DS9 do I doubt that these characters are living, breathing, thinking individuals who are not at the mercy of their technology.

Phil: Honestly--and you'll have to take my word for it--I do believe that even if I hadn't come up with a script idea for Morn, I would have gone, "HUH?!" when I saw "Who Mourns for Morn." But . . . as I said above, the creators get to do whatever they want! They are the creators!

As for B5 and JMS and his relationship to DS9, I really shouldn't have brought it up last week but I was in a rush and typing like mad. The fact is: We'll never know the facts (and that's why some of you send in comments that didn't show up this week but it's all just speculation and I should have gotten into it in the first place. Sorry.) As far as B5 itself goes, however. I do *very much* appreciate the thought and planning that has gone into the show and am constantly amazed at how well everything fits together. They are definite and obvious weaknesses in spots of the mythology and the end of the Shadow War was a glaring one for me but that guy has done some amazing work in that series. Once again, however, everyone is going to have a different opinion about these things and everyone--as far as I'm concerned--has a right to their opinions!

Now, let me just offer a word or two about "Meridian." What you see as a natural extension of the show, I see as a flailing attempt to get viewers! The creators want to do a show on a space station and have all the trouble come to them. Okay, fine. Then, the creators decide that they need a fierce enemy to add tension. Okay, that's good. I like the Jem'Haddar. They're cool! Then, the creators decide to have a killer cliff-hanger and have the Jem'Hadar tell our crew that they better stay out of the Gamma Quadrant. Okay, that was interesting! What are our heros going to do now? Then the creators decide that they need a hot little ship to get the NextGen fans interested. Okay, fine. Then, we get through "The Search" part one and two and *nothing* gets resolved with the Dominion. Okay, that's still okay because there's plenty of places to grow with this and *unbeknownst* to us, the Dominion likes to be sneaky and erode its enemies from within. That's cool. I get that! But there is no mention that Starfleet knows this about the Dominion. As far as we the viewers know this is the way Starfleet assesses this situation: There are some really, really bad guys on the other side of the worm hole. The bad guys have told us to stay out. Anytime they want, they might come pouring out of the wormhole. We have a station at the mouth of the wormhole and it has a hot little ship called the Defiant and that's the only defense we're going to provide for Bajor (this in itself seems a bit strange to me). Now . . . given that set-up, the creators gave us the episode "Meridian" which features Bajor's only true defense against the Dominion (such as it is) and the entire command staff of DS9 tooling around in forbidden territory just to do some mapping! And this is what my brain does: Tilt, tilt, tilt, tilt, tilt . . . ;-) (I'm not saying that there might not be some reason that we might be able to come up with to justify this it just seems out-of-phase . . . to me!)

By the way, I would agree that NextGen began drifting in it's latter seasons. Personally, I think, overall, the third season was the best.

And as far as DS9 winning on average with the quality of show: You may be very much correct. Unfortunately, it is a sad fact of life that one killer-episode hides a multitude of less-stellar episode. If you can get some really good episodes, fans will put up with a lot of junk! Roddenberry recognized this a long time ago and it really is the way it works. You can please everybody all the time but you can please some of the people some of the time and when you please them if you really, really, really please them, you've got a winner!

And let me insert here that I thought "Change of Heart" was a good episode. I have almost always connected to Ron D. Moore's writing. I'm wired for it. Personally, I thought it would have been a *great* episode, if the creators had left out the tongo subplot. Just about the time the tension began ramping in the Worf/Dax story line, they would cut away to the comic relief and everything would dissapate (at least for me.) (SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER AHEAD) And, if Jadzia is actually going to die, there is *SO* much the creators will be able to exploit in terms of emotional content that *that* episode had better be a real tear-jerker.

(Just looked at my watch! Argh! Gotta go, gotta go, gotta get this column done!) As far as Voyager goes, it may be closer to the "Star Trek formula" and I'm still watching it but it doesn't really ring my bell either!

Devon Freeny: A long-silent Nitpicker reporting in! I've been lurking on your excellent website for years now, but your recent comments on DS9 finally compelled me to put in my two cents.

First, I don't think JMS's allegations of plagiarism on the part of DS9's creators really hold water. (Note from Phil: Devon, sorry about cutting the rest of your comments but as I said above, I shouldn't have brought this up in the first place!)

Then there's the issue of whether DS9 is "really" Star Trek, or if it's deliberately anti-Star Trek. My opinion: it's both. And IMHO, that's definitely a good thing.

I'll happily agree that DS9 is a sort of deconstruction of the Star Trek universe. It's darker and grittier, and has far more interpersonal conflict. It pokes all sorts of holes in the "we're so evolved" ideals of the Federation. And it doesn't deal with "boldly going," but the trials of staying in one place. But I don't think that's bad. After years of TNG's cruise-ship cleanliness and self-assured sterility, it was time to look at the dark side of Roddenberry's vision. Not to mock his vision or try to one-up it, but to see what really made it tick, to take it apart and look at its pieces under a magnifying glass.

In this way, I think that DS9 fits in perfectly with the two Star Trek series that preceded it. TOS was the foundation, the rough-and-tumble Cowboy Diplomacy that created and sustained Gene's brave new world. TNG was the dream realized, the exaltation of Gene's grand vision in all its glory. And DS9 is the trial by fire, the challenging and the testing of that dream by the harsh reality of the universe. And when DS9 is over, Gene's dream of a better future will emerge, battered and bruised from its ordeal, but stonger than ever before.

Because DS9's core moral isn't, "Gene's dream is unattainable. Here's how we think things would really be." DS9's real message is, "If you want Gene's utopia to be a reality, you have to WORK for it, and you have to keep working for it your whole life." And that's a message I can respect.

Anyway, those are my rather extensive thoughts on the subject. Keep up the good work, Chief!

Phil: I can see your viewpoint! And certainly, the creators have every right to take the shows in any direction that they want just as viewers has every right to decide whether or not they want to watch! ;-)

Mac Thomason: Re Heather Smith's comments on the character Nana Visitor played in "Far Beyond the Stars"... If I remember correctly, she was shown as being married, or at least connected, to Alexander Siddig's character. Husband-and-wife SF authors -- if that's the case, then while DC Fontana might have been partly an inspiration, another was probably Catherine Moore, "C.L. Moore", a top SF magazine writer of "olden times", both alone and with her husband Henry Kuttner. Most female SF writers of the day used their initials or a pseudonym as a matter of course.

Vince Hamilton: Concerning your opinions about DS9 as a Star Trek series. I completely agree with everything you said! It feels really good to know that I'm not the only one who has trouble with DS9 having the words "Star Trek" thrown across it. I'm not saying that DS9 is a bad show, but in MY mind, it's a far cry from the wonderful writting of TNG. I too think that DS9 should be called Bajor: Terok Nor. This would be similar to what has been done with "Earth: Final Conflict" which has gotten a lot of hype from merely having Gene Roddenberry's name on it. Although I don't think that "Earth: FC" has been all that great. Amazingly enough, Star Trek caught lightening in a bottle twice, so I'm not surprised that things have become a bit...um, questionable. I guess it's like it's been said before, they can't all be winners.

Gareth Wilson: I was interested by your comments on DS9 and it's rating struggles. You said you would be more comfortable with the program if it wasn't promoted as "Star Trek". The official DS9 book seems to imply Paramount considered making a non-Trek SF series. They rejected this because they wanted the pulling power of the Trek name.

Phil: Eee-yup!

Joshua Truax: Chief... I'd just like to set the record straight (or at least straighter) with regard to the role J. Michael Straczinski may have played in the origin of Deep Space Nine, which you mentioned in your last column. (Note from Phil: Sorry, the only people who will ever know the truth are the people who were in the meetings and we weren't so there's not much pointin discussing it! I apologize again for bringing it up.)

JC Fernandez: Just a quick reply to one of your statements about Deep Space Nine, which I thoroughly enjoy because of its wonderfully well-developed characters (as opposed to the other shows which featured only two or three real characters and a half-dozen cardboard cut-outs). And I agree with you: I doubt very much that DS9 would still be around without the Star Trek label. But I think the same can be said about Voyager, any of the movies, and even TNG which had a rocky start.

Rene Charbonneau: When I said that the first two seasons of Next Gen were terrible...I meant as a whole. Sure, there have been some good individual episodes in the first two seasons...but, especially in the first season...I doubt the show would have survived beyond the first season if it had not been called "STAR TREK : The Next Generation".

And I agree with you that DS9 would not have survived beyond the first season if it didn't have Star Trek in it's title. (Voyager is in it's 4rth season and it's still a terrible show...but it's still on the air).

My problem is that, there are many episodes of DS9 from the past three seasons that could take on some of the best TNG has to offer.

Also, about Tony Trimboli comments comparing DS9's "One Little Ship" to TNG's "Rascals", there is one big difference that makes the DS9 episode better. In TNG's episode, the Flagship of the Federation, the most powerful ship in the Federation, was almost conquered by the Ferengi. But, in DS9's episode, The Defiant was almost conquered by a worthy adversary...the Jem'Hadar.

Mary Frances Folz Donahue: Was just buzzing around your website and I found that your DS9 guide sold poorly. Well, I didn't buy it because while the TNG guides are just great, classic, can't praise 'em more, your TOS guide...sucked. Full of errors, missed a lot of nits. You really researched that book to fast. Also, not that many people watch DS9 as watch TNG, or X-files. I don't watch it much because it has been very inconsistant, I'm sick of the "under alien influence, the crew begins copulating with random people" episodes, the situation with the Dominion, and the fact that B5 has taken DS9's place for me, well , permanently.

But good luck with your future books. I'm sure any upcoming v'ger guide will be a real scream.

Phil: See . . . there's even a variety of opinion about the Guides! ;-) (Personally, I've always been partial to the Classic Guide!)

Craig Sapp: I read somewhere, that older and test starship models, both Federation and alien, where used to construct the graveyard footage at Wolf 359 in TBOBWII - TNG and the shipyard footage in "Unification, Part I" (or was it Part II) -TNG. I also read that TPTB decided that the Constitution class design should never be used as an intact vessel other than Enterprise because of the emotions its stirs in STO and STO Movie fans.

Mike Cheyne: The Princess Bride, Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and Jose Chung's From Outer Space are some of my favorites too.

Phil: Well rats, no one volunteered to explain M:I so it's fallen to me and I'm out of time. Okay, here's what I remember. Tom Cruise was the good guy. Peter Graves used to be a good guy in the television series but the creators made him a bad guy sell-out and he was even willing to get a lot of agents killed just to line his pockets.

Matthew Patterson: The only difference I can tell [between the picture in the NextGen Guide and the picture in the Classic Guide] is that the picture was flipped horizontally in the Classic Guide. As for the reason why, I have no idea! I bet it was just a little in-joke or something. Or maybe just to drive the nitpickers crazy...

Phil: Or maybe it was an homage to the fact that Classic Trek often grabbed footage and flipped it to fill in reaction shots! ;-)

Craig Sapp: Real reason: For STII:TWOK, the bridge set was first reassembled as the Reliant’s then remodeled back into the Enterprise(R)’s. Three or four of the stations were moved, the chairs were recovered in a different color, and subtle design changes were made – like adding the turbo lift decals and the textured plates on the bare walls. Also, parts of the set had to be replaced due to theft and damage that occurred while in storage.

Star Trek reason: While ST:TMP was the only major refit of the original Enterprise, she underwent several minor refits. The first one being between ST:" The Cage" and "Where No Man Has Gone Before" - STO. The second is after Enterprise under Kirk’s command returns from the Galaxy’s edge in WNMHGB - STO. During STO, Enterprise’s Engine room and warp nacelles are overhauled at least once. She is overhauled again after STO, before Star Trek: The Animated Series (STA) begins (I know its not cannon - Roddenberry decided he didn’t like the series but D. C. Fontana has said that it should be - she considers it to be the last year and a half of STO’s five year mission. Roddenberry didn’t want parts of STV:TFF and STVI:TUC to be cannon either). After the ST:TMP refit, she was overhauled again sometime before, during, or after the second five year mission (Star Trek: Phase II - not cannon but a lot of work product exists from it). When we see her in STII:TWOK, she has been a training vessel for a couple of years. I always speculated that the ST:TMP vessel wasn’t completely finished during the movie, so Kirk had them move the bridge stations back to a configuration he was more comfortable with - more like the STO’s.

On a final note, the Enterprise seen in STV:TFF and STVI:TUC is another Constitution class vessel that underwent a second major refit after being redesignated Enterprise -A, you can see its STII:TWOK style bridge at the very end of STIV:TVH (They just threw a bridge together for this movie, later completely redesigned for STV:TFF).

Danny Wiese: Regarding Robert J. Woolley's question about why the lights on Voyager always dim when they go to red aleart. I have alway wondered about this myself, if you I was going to go into battle I could not think of anything more distracting then the lights diming, alarms sounding, red lights flashing, no wonder why it always takes them forever to get a shot off.

Jason Barnes: I agree with the question that was asked in this week's column. There are only three Star Wars movies. Does George Lucas really consider ALL of the sources you mentioned canonical?? I'm sure you are aware that not everyone who has seen Star Wars has read the novels, comics, and other things. Sounds like you're heading into a black hole when you justify a nit by saying "in this book it says" and "according to the comic book." People will say "huh? That wasn't in the movie. And as a comic collector, some back issues will be hard or impossible to find and using some of the earlier comics that are no longer available will drive people crazy. No longer can they watch the movie/episode and say "you know, he's right." That was always something I liked. I could read the nit, watch the episode and find it myself. Maybe I'm ranting here. No, I AM ranting.

Phil: Trust me . . . it will come out okay! And if it doesn't, I'll pay the price. As I've said before in previous columns, Lucasfilms has created another category that doesn't exist in Trek. There's is canonical and non-canonical. But there is definitely also some kind of wierd quasi-canonical thing happening with the novels from Bantam and the comic collections from Dark Horse.

Murray Leeder: So how are you going to nitpick a book? Obviously, the same plot oversights and changed premises apply, as well as equipment oddities to some extent. Will you also comment on grammatical and spelling mistakes?

Phil: Probably won't do much on spelling mistake. Not very intereting to read. But, I will probably comment on oddities like strained analogies. The novelization actually describes one of those little bridges on the Death Star that spans a tall shaft as a "starched thread glued to a glowing ocean." (This is when I started snickering.)

Rene CharbonneauAbout your plans to make a Star Wars Guide...well, another book I won't be buying. I have never seen X-Files (and get annoyed everytime you compare X-Files to DS9) and therefore never bought your guide and...well, I have never seen Star Wars or any of the Sequels. Couldn't you stick to Star Trek. (Considering DS9 has been signed for a 7th season, the ratings can't be as bad as you claim!)

Phil: Have to support my family! Have to make the decision that I feel will best do that.

Bryan Foster: I recently purchased your X-Philes Guide (being the faithful Nitpicker that I am) and was very impressed with it. So far I have all your Nitpickers books except for the DS9 Guide. I get my books through the Scifi book club and they too have all your books, save the DS9 one. Do you have any say so in this or is that Pocket's area of expertise? Anyway just wanted to say thanks for doing what you do and keep it up!

Phil: I included Bryan Foster's note for a simple reason. The SciFi Book club has snapped up all the Nitpicker's Guide *before* they were published. All of the them . . . except the DS9 Guide. Believe me friends, it's not just the DS9 Guide. From what I understand it's the merchandising of DS9 all across the board. Sci-Fi Book Club had already decided something about DS9 books before the DS9 Guide came along. (These kind of things give an author pause! ;-)

John Latchem: As to the Star Wars novels, will you include the Del Rey books "Splinter of the Minds Eye" and the Han Solo Adventures (Stars End, Corporate Sector. Not the current Han Solo Trilogy) and the three Lando Calrissian Adventures. These were printed in the early 1980s but the newer books do reference them sometimes. The new Han Solo books reference the older Lando books a lot, and there are mentions of the Corporate Sector in a number of sources.

Also what comics are you planning to use? Obviously not the marvel ones. I would think Dark Empire, Dark Empire II, and Empire's End, which are the most referenced in the novels. Then there are the complete Tales of the Jedi. Also the X Wing series which is now at issue 28, the Droids series, the Boba Fett series, the Jabba Series. There is also the Dark Forces Illustrated Novels which are hardcovers in comic size.

And what about the Droids and Ewoks Animated Series and the Holiday Special? The Holiday special is only available in bootleg format because Lucas would rather it be forgotten it was so bad, so it isn't canon. But as for the two animated series there are two cassettes Lucas is selling which feature a few episodes from each series.

Also will you be doing both the films and the novelizations of the films? And what about the radio dramas? Many novels refer to the films, but some also refer to information in the novelizations, and others reference the radio dramas. The radio dramas have the battle of Derra IV which are mentioned in the X-Wings novels.

Phil: Here's the list as of today:

******* TENTATIVE TABLE OF CONTENTS **************

>> SECTION 1 - THE MOVIES

Will include plot summaries and nitpicking in standard format for episodes IV, V and VI of the Star Wars Saga ("A New Hope," "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi")

Sources will include: The original scripts, the original movies, the special edition movies, the radio plays, the novelizations and the Dark Horse comic book adaptations.

>> SECTION 2 - THE ADULT BANTAM NOVELS

Will include plost summaries and nitpicking in standard format for all available adult novels from Bantam Spectra either in order of released date of chonological listing. These include (in chronological listing) for a total of 31 novels:

HAN SOLO : THE EARLY YEARS (Three novels)
TALES FROM THE MOS EISLEY CANTINA
TALES OF THE BOUNTY HUNTERS
SHADOWS OF THE EMPIRE
TALES FROM JABBA'S PALACE
THE TRUCE AT BAKURA
X-WING (Five novels)
THE COURTSHIP OF PRINCESS LEIA
HEIR TO THE EMPIRE
DARK FORCE RISING
THE LAST COMMAND
THE JEDI ACADEMY TRILOGY
THE CALLISTA TRILOGY
THE CRYSTAL STAR
THE BLACK FLEET CRISIS (Trilogy)
THE NEW REBELLION
THE CORELLIAN TRILOGY
THE HAND OF THRAWN - Specter of the Past

>> SECTION 3 - THE YOUNG READER STAR WARS NOVELS

Will include plost summaries and nitpicking in standard format for all available children and young adult novels from Bantam Spectra either in order of released date of chonological listing. These include (in chronological listing) for a total of 35 novels:

GALAXY OF FEAR [11 Children books]
THE LOST CITY OF THE JEDI Trilogies [6 Children books]
JUNIOR JEDI KNIGHTS [6 Children Novels]
YOUNG JEDI KNIGHTS [12 Young Adult Novels]

>> Section 4 THE DARK HORSE COMIC BOOKS

Will include plost summaries and nitpicking in standard format for all available comic books in compilation form from Dark Horse Comics either in order of released date of chonological listing. These include (in chronological listing) for a total of 13 comic books compilations:

TALES OF THE JEDI - The Golden Age of the Sith
TALES OF THE JEDI - The Fall of the Sith Empire
TALES OF THE JEDI - The Original Series
TALES OF THE JEDI - Dark Lords Of The Sith
TALES OF THE JEDI - The Sith War
DROIDS - The Kalarba Adventures
DROIDS II - Rebellion
DROIDS II - Season Of Revolt
JABBA THE HUTT
SHADOWS OF THE EMPIRE
DARK EMPIRE
DARK EMPIRE II
BOBA FETT

Other possibilities in this section include (some are difficult to find):

TALES OF THE JEDI - The Freedon Nadd Uprising
TALES OF THE JEDI - The Redemption of Ulic Qel-Droma
TALES FROM MOS EISLEY
RIVER OF CHAOS
SHADOW STALKER
X-WING ROGUE SQUADRON: The Rebel Opposition
X-WING ROGUE SQUADRON: The Phantom Affair
X-WING ROGUE SQUADRON - Battleground: Tatooine
X-WING ROGUE SQUADRON - Warrior Princess
X-WING ROGUE SQUADRON - Requiem for a Rogue
X-WING ROGUE SQUADRON - In the Empire's Service
HEIR TO THE EMPIRE
DARK FORCE RISING
THE LAST COMMAND
EMPIRE'S END
CRIMSON EMPIRE

>> Section 5 FUN APOCRYPHAL STUFF

This is just goofy stuff that has been include in the Star Wars phenomenon that might be fun to touch. It is not considered canonical! This will depend on time.

EWOK ADVENTURES [2 Films]
The STAR WARS Holiday Special
SPLINTER OF THE MIND'S EYE [Novel]
The LANDO CALRISSIAN Adventures [3 Novels]
The HAN SOLO Adventures [3 Novels]

Phil: Rats, rats, rats! Somebody wrote me something on this subject and I misfiled it! Let me know, I'll get to it next week.

SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS, SPOILERS . . .

Martin McMahon: Was the rumor that Dax was going to die, or Jadzia? The unique thing about that character is that she can be logically recast with no problem. Finding a new host for the Dax symboint would amount to a few good 7th season stories, especially if the new host is male. How do you think Worf would react then?

Phil: It was Jadzia.

Brian Bell: This last piece of information comes from an Australian magazine I bought just after Christmas which also includes previews of other sixth season shows and reviews of fifth season shows. The magazine had a brief article saying that Terry Farrell may be leaving DS9 at the end of the sixth series.

Scott McClenney: Ok,I was just rethinking a bit of what I said earlier about who the new Dax could be if Terry Farrell decides to leave the show after this year.It got me thinking of wheter or not that would actually be a good idea to have another person playing the role after Terry has been doing it for so long.I mean would fans accept someone other than her as our favorite Trill? It's a question that ought to be considered before anything else happens. I mean instead of having a new Dax how about bringing in another familiar character like Troi for the 7th season. Having Troi on would satisfy fans who would love to see her and Worf back together,but it is just a thought.Who knows what TPTB really have in mind. Maybe they'll do it where Avon didn't actually die and the ending of the final episode was all a dream that Vila had(oops....wrong series...got confused with Blake's 7 there).:) Well you never know what is going to happen,do ya? Scott

Vicki Strzembosz: I heard Steven Furst speak at a convention in Chicago last year. He did explain the drastic change in his appearance as being due to diabetes. He lost an incredible amount of weight between season 3 and season4 but during season 4 it was hidden by choice of wardrobe and as the season progressed it was hidden less and less. Although he does look incredibly skinny, especially compared to his previous appearance, he does not look as though he is in good health.

Lisa Shock: About the cookbook - it's a great idea, and I believe the last one was the 1978 paperback, which is now very rare. (worth $75) Sometimes when I have parties I cut cookies into trek shapes (most popular is the "delta shield" shape emblem from classic uniforms) and I have painted a few cakes with ships in space. I have served Romulan Ale on occasion, as well.

With all this talk about new guides, I really think the cookbook would be real winner!

I think Laurel Iverson should serve hot fudge sundaes as dessert; Troi would approve.

Brian: Nope [no Star Trek cookbook], but I have seen a Pern (Anne McCaffery (Mmmm. Wonder of she's related to the Broncos Ed Mc-) cookbook. Weird enough for ya'

Corey Tacker: Soon... Pocket will publish a Star Trek cookbook this year or next by Ethan Phillips (Neelix) and Bill Birnes. This info is at the Star Trek books webpage, www.simonsays.com/startrek/editor/.

Dick Kennis: If your guests don't want to drink Earl Grey tea, go for the drink of warriors, Prune juice, in honor of Worf

Lisa Shock: Try writing to the advertisers on Trek. Tell them that Trek is being cut short and they may not be getting all of the insertions they are paying for while other ads are run in their place. Get a couple of friends to do this as well, but write letters on your own so they don't look form letters. Be polite, mention the Gallup poll stat that 54% of Americans consider themselves to be Trek fans, and mention that you appreciate their commercial support of Trek - and that you use/like their product. I've had some success with this in the past, be patient, it can work! (I was one of the original Sci-Fi Channel Fan Club Chapter presidents.)

On to the questions, I am way, way behind this morning! . . .

Brian: I was searching Republican web sites (I was desperate! I was running out of Right Wing jokes!) and guess what? The Guild is on the Republican hit list! Along with DeBeers (I don't know why), the cast of Seinfeld, Ted Turner, the President, and many more liberal or semi-liberal groups and persons! What did you do to them Phil?

Phil: Beats me! I thought I was fairly a-political. Anybody else know anything about this?!

Shirley Kolb: I was wondering if you happen to know of any reputable Star Trek fan magazines that print fiction. I've written a short story I would like to get published but I don't know where to submit it. If you don't know maybe some of your legions of nitpickers do? Please make sure it is a reputable magazine & not one of the ones that print R-rated stories. (I've heard that those kind exist but I'm not interested in being involved in anything like that.)

Phil: No idea! Anybody?

Heather Smith: Patrick Stewart was a guest on Rosie O'Donnell today, and was promoting his new TV movie -- Moby Dick! Our beloved Captain stars as none other than Captain Ahab himself, obsessed with killing the whale (the borg?) Isn't this fun and ironic, considering all the talk of it in First Contact? I hear it's on the weekend of March 15 on the USA network, and it's a two-parter. I'll be watching for sure!

Phil: Stewart's a fabulous actor. I'm sure it will be great!

Rob van Hulst: I have a Question about Seven of Nine. I understood that she replaced Kes 'because of low viewing figures in the group Males 18-24'.So? Have the ratings for Voyager improved since she's in it? I have only seen the first 4 episodes of the 4th season, so i can't say much about her yet, but another thing i wondered about; are young American males really that shallow? Do they say: "WOW, look at that gorgeous new bird in Voyager, i'm gonna watch that show from now on"?

Phil: I haven't heard the latest on the ratings so I'm not sure but this *is* the country that created Bay Watch so . . .

Pamala Knowlton: What episode of ST: Next Generation did Stephen Hawking appear in?

Phil: I believe it was the very beginning of "Descent."

Robert J. Woolley: When you get a few minutes, I'd appreciate hearing your thoughts on how you think your thesis in "Whose Truth Is Out There" stands up under the latest two X-Files episodes. Or, asked another way, do you think the creators are deviating from the characterizations they've developed for 5 years?

Phil: I think the creators are right on track! Mulder is a subjectivist so whatever he thinks is truth is truth. If he decides it's been a government conspiracy all along then he will believe that with everything in him and will disdain anyone who doesn't. And I think Scully is struggling to fit her experience into some sort of framework that account for all the facts as she perceives them. These characters feel like real people to me. Over the course of my life I have developed mechanism that allow me to understand the motivations of my fellow human beings (women included). Mechanisms that actually work and help me get along with practically everybody. Surprisingly enough, I can actually apply these mechanisms to Mulder and Scully and predict how they will react in the situations that they face. It's what makes the show so interesting to me. Especially when the creators do an episode that on the face of it looks like they have violated their own character maps. I was thinking, "yes, yes, yes, yes, yes" all the way through "Revelations"! (And really, that episode was the one that finally convinced me that the creators *really* knew their characters.)

Joshua Truax: Chief... Is it just me, or have the creators done a complete 180-degree reversal in their portrayal of marriage and family life among Starfleet officers in the years since TNG ended?

As you may recall, when TNG began Gene Roddenberry and company placed a great deal of emphasis on how greatly life as a Starfleet officer had changed in the years between the TOS and "modern" eras of Star Trek. One of the most highly touted changes was the presence of the crew's spouses and/or children living aboard starships such as the Enterprise-D. Families remained part of the Enterprise culture throughout TNG and obviously in Generations as well (hence all those children in the evacuation scene). Family life was also emphasized in the early years of DS9, with two regular Starfleet characters (Sisko and O'Brien) either currently or formerly married, each with one child.

In the past three years, however, I've noticed that the pendulum has swung back the other way. That is, the creators have shown increasing apathy and even antipathy in their attitudes toward Starfleet families. A few cases in point:

1) No families portrayed aboard the Enterprise-E (at least not yet), and only one aboard Voyager (and that one's just a mother and daughter)...

2) Keiko O'Brien's school, formerly one of the major facets of the DS9 series, closed down early third season...

3) Jake Sisko, not even a teenager when the DS9 series began, was suddenly 18 years old by fourth season (see "The Visitor") and had his own quarters by fifth season -- as if the creators wanted to get him out of his father's household with all haste...

4) O'Brien's wife and kids don't even live with him on the station any more. Yes, there is a good reason for this (the Dominion war), but their absence nonetheless continues the trend away from families on Star Trek...

5) Worf's son Alexander was conspicuously absent during Worf's first two seasons on DS9. In "The Way of the Warrior", Worf made the lame excuse that Alexander was still living with Worf's adoptive parents on Earth. Then, when the creators temporarily reintroduced Alexander in "Sons and Daughters", they gave him a change of heart about becoming a Klingon warrior, thus going against his character as established on TNG (where he wasn't particularly interested in doing so). The only reason I can see why the creators would do that would be to ensure that he stays out of Worf's way. (Indeed, several months ago on some Website I read a quote from one of the DS9 writers saying that the creators considered Alexander "a liability" to Worf's character. I wish I had the entire quote available to me, because it pretty much sums up the whole point I'm making here.)

6) Last, but certainly not least, the issue that prompted me to write this in the first place. In "Change of Heart" [DS9], Worf abandons a mission in order to tend to his wounded wife Dax, resulting in a death. Starfleet disapproves of his actions, and rightly so, but this development further reinforces the message conveyed by the above examples: that Starfleet careers and marriages and/or family lives don't mix after all.

As an avowed bachelor I may not be one to talk, but based on these and other examples, it seems to me that in recent years the creators have either forgotten or made a conscious effort to de-emphasize, if not altogether dismiss, Roddenberry's ideas regarding marriage and family among Starfleet characters. Either way, it flies in the face of Roddenberry's vision of 24th-century life. What's your take on all this?

Phil: I'm really sorry but I have no take this week! I'm swamped. I'm sure others will have an opinion! ;-)

Chad: Do you know of any movies where defibrillators are used on women? Thanks!

Phil: Nope, but some here might! Anybody?

Have a great weekend, everybody!

If you would like to submit a question or comment, send it to: chief@nitcentral.com with "Ask the Chief" or "Question" in the Subject line. (Remember the legalese: Everything you submit becomes mine and you grant me the right to use your name in any future publication by me.)

Copyright 1998 by Phil Farrand. All rights reserved.