Wednesday, 14 November 2012

The Nasat reviews Forgotten History

The Original Series is my least favourite of the Trek shows, so books built around it are always a tougher sell for me than those set in other eras. An exception to my lesser interest is non-Kirk centric novels like the Vanguard books, which flesh out the backdrop and make the 23rd century hold together with greater consistancy (in my mind, anyway). But I’ve mentioned before that I love Christopher Bennett's books, and his take on TOS is one I enjoy, probably because his novels are always above and beyond when it comes to consistancy - how the plot holds together, in terms of character motivation and development, and how they effortlessly tie continuity details and aspects of the established universe into a tapestry that makes a great deal of sense. The general silliness of some of TOS and TAS often puts me off, but somehow it all seems reasonable when Bennett re-examines it. Forgotten History is really convincing as an explanation for how Kirk's various time travel experiences fit into something other than a string of episode ideas and it further links that string of incidents into Federation legal, political and scientific history with great success. The result is just very, very satisfying, even before we get into the details of the writing or characterization, or even the plot.

I suppose I’ll just mention a few things I particularly liked.

I liked the Vedala; I don't recall them being used before (other than in the original TAS episode and, presumably, its novelization). I particularly appreciated the Vedala representative's satisfied response to "peace and long life" - "that is most likely". Oh, to be a contented space-kitty. I get the feeling they appreciate the gesture, but only in terms of what it shows about T’Nuri, the Vulcans and the Federation, not for its intended purpose as a bridge between two individuals (or societies). After all, the Federation is not the equal of the Vedala, it’s a “child civilization”; it seems to be developing nicely but it’s not anything they’d want to associate with. So I liked the slight sense of miscommunication, as though something didn’t quite connect there, but we can see why given the Vedalas’ general attitude. A give and take that ended up being a give and a "we acknowledge your give", but not a take. Never mind. It’s good that Kirk, Spock, T’Nuri, et al are too secure in themselves and/or humble to take offense. I get the impression that the Vedala would respond with scorn if they tried the “I can haz respect?” angle.

As ever, the Betelgeusians were fun, for what little we see of them. T’Viss’ scandalized reaction to “nice juicy secrets” made me chuckle. ‘Geusians are a memorable creation, for all that they’re rather simple in concept. They remind me of possibly my favourite alien race in sci-fi, which oddly enough is the Drazi from Babylon Five. They have a similar ultra-competitive view of life that’s refreshing in its cheerful capacity for causing trouble while remaining unconcerned with, indeed relishing, the outcome. Of course, ‘Geusians are posturing predators obsessed with status and pack hierarchy, not brawlers who fight from the belief that they’re affirming themselves in a directly spiritual sense, but the comparison floats around in my head nonetheless.

I suppose this is as good a time as any to note that I always enjoy the humour of Bennett's books, particularly when it relates to alien races and their quirks. It’s not played for broad comedy (the aliens are portrayed too seriously - shall I say respectfully? - at least "good heartedly" - for that), but instead develops naturally from what’s established about their perspectives and racial psychology. There were other comical moments interspersed through the novel, which again were nicely understated. The offhand mention of T'Viss' alternate identity is a good example.

If I'm talking about aliens and T’Visses (T’Vissii?) I should mention that the Vulcan characters’ POV were highlights, which is another common response I have to Bennett's Trek works. I mentioned in my BBS review thread for Storming Heaven that I imagine Vulcans must be challenging to write; they’re so frequently used that there’s even more need than usual to explore Vulcan individuals rather than have their race define the characters; despite that, they have to work within the rich framework of culture that’s been developed for Vulcans. The Vulcan POV and Vulcan discussions always seem fresh and engaging in Bennett's novels, this being no exception.

As a final point regarding aliens and cultural identity, I liked how Mars had a Tellarite councillor, not a human one. And that he’s apparently personally invested in exploring the historical role of his planet’s Tellarite population. That’s a nice detail to reinforce the complexity of the Federation. It’s not just an alliance of multiple worlds and species, but of all the little cultural microclimates that result when they interact with each other in any one of a million ways. They should all intersect, albeit some more than others. So it was nice to see Martian Tellarite added to the Federation’s complement.

On the character angle, I like how Delgado and Grey’s relationship and shifting motivations occurred “off camera”. I know that’s to maintain the surprises inherent in their final characterizations (I’ll get to that in a bit), but it came across as something more. It contributed to the sense that this is a fully realized universe we just happen to be intersecting for a particular story; it gives the impression that people have lives outside of the main plot or the purview of the reader. I suppose that reinforces too that I’m a fan of the universe itself and not just the stories, and that the best novels give the impression of worlds largely than those we see.

As for the conclusion, I liked how Kirk’s status as the bogeyman of the DTI is now almost official. That it's close to being the acknowledged, deliberately constructed role his memory plays in their mythology. I thought it quite fitting that Lucsly faced the revelation that things weren’t as he insisted, while also finding new justification for retaining his original attitude, which he now expresses as a knowing fiction (semi-fiction?). We were given a little character development for Lucsly, but of a sort that results in his reaffirming his routine behaviour. The more things change, the more they stay the same. And I suppose that nicely sums up Lucsly’s aims in life, doesn’t it, in more ways than one? Adapting where needed, but towards a goal of keeping everything as it is and avoiding disruptive change. Holding chaos at bay – or, if that doesn’t work, being selective in your own perceptions so you can ignore chaos until it goes away and you’ve only got order to work with. It’s self-delusional and almost distastefully stubborn, but that’s not unwise for a DTI agent, as we’ve been reminded several times.

Kirk’s partial begrudged redemption/renewed demonization in the eyes of the DTI also carries with it an important thematic point about how people relate to one another across distance, which is one way of describing what history in fact is. The impression Kirk ended up leaving on the DTI, or the impression Lucsly and co winded up with, assists the DTI as an invaluable part of their professional code of conduct. He shapes their actions and the idea of him influences them for the better – their own “better” and that of the galaxy. Kirk’s legacy helps to preserve the timeline, which I’m sure is exactly what he would have wanted had he known his memory would become yoked to the day-to-day realities of temporal investigations. The important point is that this is the case whether they understand him or not; indeed, despite the fact that Luclsy’s idea of him is distorted, and that he’s being used as a “Donny Don’t”. He is what they make him, at least in terms of what actually matters to them. That’s a big theme here, or at least I decided it was (I can reinforce that decision by pointing to the writing that led me to that decision! Round and round goes my reasoning, becoming stronger and more stubborn with each cycle!). People want to be understood for who they are and what truly motivates them, but others aren’t always going to give you that; they may well get a good view of you, so to speak, but they’ll still go away with a sense of you that’s filtered through their own perceptions, and those perceptions are clouded by basic emotional and psychological needs. It doesn’t mean that in accepting this you’re turning your back on truth, it’s just that part of that truth is the fact that you are the centre of your own perceptions (I’m reminded now of Ilia’s father in Ex Machina, who wrote something along those lines in the usual gentle “humans are the noble savage” manner. And I think also of the Vulcans, who often refuse to accept that logic demands they take into account their emotional biases).

But more importantly, knowing that the picture someone has of another person is always unavoidably tinted by their own subjective perception means also that the “you” they perceive might inspire them in ways you can’t imagine; might help them or guide them in their own lives in a way you wouldn’t have thought. The disappointment of not being “seen” 100% accurately must be measured against this knowledge. That’s what Kirk brings to this. And the disappointment in later discovering that someone isn’t what you thought they were - when new insight or knowledge, or new interaction, leads to the invalidation of your previous subjective idea of them, is what Grey brings. Because Grey and Kirk are the two figures that define Lucsly, at least for our purposes. Lucsly wants Grey to be what he wanted her to be, and has to face (with Dulmur’s encouragement) the fact that instead she was her own person with her own collection of motives, needs, successes and mistakes, many of which are out of his grasp, in terms of his knowledge. But the idea of her still aided Lucsly. And that is the real her to some degree, but it’s also an incomplete and distorted version of her. It’s always good to know – and pursue - the truth, always good to truly understand people as they are, but we have to remember that those are ideals and we’ll usually fall short of them. And we should perhaps be wary of thinking that this is always a curse. On the subject of history, we need to balance our desire to see truth with the idea that we'll be seeing a distorted image twisted for our own purposes, often without intention - but that while we must acknowledge that this is happening, it doesn't necessarily invalidate our responses.

In fact, I might say that throughout the book there are many examples of people failing to be what other characters - or the reader - want or expect them to be, instead revealed in new lights provoking a change in perception...but not necessarily invalidating the importance of the first idea we or the characters had of them:

Lucsly’s hero isn’t squeaky clean and his devil isn’t the menace he thought, but those myths are valuable and valid in their own way. Grey the saint and Kirk the demon did indeed shape and aid the DTI, and Lucsly's life, even if actual Grey and Kirk don't fit those images.

Admiral Delgado looks like the standard “antagonist admiral” figure who’ll be behind all the plotting, but rather than become zealously consumed by the sense of destiny which he reflects on several times in the book, he turns over a new leaf...but he is in fact still the mastermind behind the problem, despite this. He was initially every bit as manipulative and single-minded as he appeared...but that was only one side of him, and a different side comes to the fore when he faces a moment of crisis that forces a re-evaluation. Yet he still fulfils the expected role of “rogue admiral behind the problem”, while not being what we expected from someone playing that role.

Grey wasn’t manipulated into helping him as we might have thought; she helped him due to her genuine care for him while quite aware that in the past he’d tried to play on her. Yet she herself acknowledges that she has an empty social life and responds to his charms, even if she knew what he was up to back before V’Ger. And she indeed ended up compromised because of her interactions with him just as we might have expected...but not in the way we might have expected.

T’Pring is known to us as an unpleasantly selfish and manipulative individual, but that doesn't describe the alternate T’Pring at all. Spock’s initial misgivings about her - a woman that he knows isn't the woman he knows, so to speak - are thus unfair and illogical – but are they invalid, given that he’s been shaped by his experiences with his timelines’ T’Pring, that those are inevitably a part of him? No, those misgivings aren’t invalidated, even if Spock understands he must overcome them and judge this T’Pring on her own merit – and she indeed is worthy of his trust. That of course is Spock's character post-V'Ger anyway, as Bennett writes it - learning to accept the validity of emotions and emotional responses while ensuring they don't overshadow his logic and reason.

All in all, I clearly found the novel very rich in terms of the ideas and potential themes it explores. So that's very good, of course.

Also, I just realized: The first director of the DTI was named Grey. This is also very good.

No comments:

Post a Comment