Has anyone else noticed the grievous number of blatant errors in the “Captain’s Table” book series?

            In the segment told by Kirk and Sulu, the two storytellers make repeated reference to Chekov’s having been traumatized by the deaths of everyone aboard the Starship Reliant but him. However, in Star Trek 2: The Wrath Of Khan, it’s made clear that the only one who died was Captain Terrell. The rest of the crew (except for Chekov, obviously) had been marooned by Khan on Ceti Alpha 5. At the end of the movie, in fact, after the deaths of Spock and Khan, Kirk and company were on their way back to Ceti Alpha 5 to rescue that abandoned crew.

            By far the worst and most numerous errors were in Picard’s segment, so I’ll number them to help us keep track of them all.

(1)   The Federation supposedly took the attitude that the treasure known as Dujonian’s Hoard must especially be kept away from the Cardassians, that they must be denied the opportunity to purchase it. Excuse me, but the treasure was their property in the first place; they didn’t need to buy it; they already owned it. Unless the Federation had suddenly become a band of thieves, we had no right to stand between it and them. It was part of the legacy of the Hebitian Culture: the ancient civilization of Cardassia Prime. As a product of their world, it was their property, and our poor relationship with the Cardassian Union was irrelevant to basic right and wrong.

(2)   The treasure was found to be more than just ornamentation; it was also an impressive power source. Unfortunately, it had fallen into the hands of rebels of another universe, about whom we knew next to nothing. But did Picard quite properly insist that property of our universe must be returned to our universe, and to its rightful owners, and especially not be left where it would almost certainly upset the balance of power in another universe? No! The writer of this segment had Picard happily leave the treasure where it clearly didn’t belong.

(3)   Did the writer at least have Picard cite the Prime Directive in regard to the former Starfleet officer Richard Brant agreeing to help those nearly unknown rebels in their cause against another species of their realm? No! He had Picard agree to help them as well! I don’t know about the rest of you, but I have more respect for Picard than that; I know that he would not do such a thing!

(4)   Grammar: This writer succumbed repeatedly to the common-speech horror of misusing the reflexive pronouns (myself, yourself, himself, herself, ourselves, themselves). Readers shouldn’t have to endure that in professionally published books. Whenever the writer needed to say something like “So-and-so beamed down Worf and me,” he instead resorted to the gauche “So-and-so beamed down Worf and myself.” He even changed “Worf and I beamed down to the planet” to “Worf and myself beamed down to the planet.” Bad enough to insert “myself” where “me” belongs, but to even substitute it where “I” belongs is even more offensive. Where were the proofreaders??? Let me guess: the publishers resorted to relying on a computer’s grammar checker, a resource that I’ve long since found must have been programmed by a retarded illiterate.

            In Sisko’s segment, the error was in placing the Dominion in the Delta Quadrant, instead of in the Gamma Quadrant where it belonged. This error cracked me up: it had me envisioning Voyager tangling with the Dominion, and DS9 battling the Borg! Can you just picture the Cardassian Union allying itself with the Borg, and without being assimilated???
            In Janeway’s section, it was a spelling error: that of not knowing the difference between “till” the soil and ‘til: the abbreviation for “until.”
            In Calhoun’s segment, it was the language error of not knowing that the past tense of “spit” is “spat.”
            Finally, in Pike’s story, one error was in not knowing that the past tense of “sneak” is “sneaked,” not the very vulgar-sounding “snuck.” (That one absolutely makes me shudder). The other error was the pervasive modern grammatical problem of not knowing that “they” (and its alternate forms “them” and “their”) can never refer to a singular, but only ever to a plural.
            Those of us who are trying to get professionally published see this kind of fiasco in print, and get understandably bitter. Who are the ones that are letting these disgraces get published???

<Return to the COMMENTARY page>