Open Letter by Della Van Hise Regarding "Killing Time"

Open Letter
Title:	no official title
From:	Della Van Hise
Addressed To:
Date(s):	April 1986
Medium:	print
Fandom:	Star Trek: TOS
Topic:
External Links:
Click here for related articles on Fanlore.

Killing Time was a Star Trek pro book written by Della Van Hise.

It is notable in fandom for the supposed subtle K/S elements in the first edition, an edition that was quickly pulled by the publisher and replaced with a slightly different version.

The book fueled much fannish discussion in many letterzines and elsewhere, and continues to be a topic of interest. See Killing Time for more.

The author commented on her book in October/November 1985 in Datazine #38, and again April 1986 in an open letter to Interstat #102.

Van Hise's Comments in 1985

In October/November 1985, the author explained why there may be different versions of the novel:

Friends, First of all, I would like to thank everyone who has written with comments on my recent professional STAR TREK publication, KILLING TIME. I will be trying to answer all who have written personally, but wanted to take this opportunity to clear up some of the rumors and misunderstandings about the book itself.

There have been a variety of rumors concerning KILLING TIME, most of which are quite amusing. As many of you know, KT was temporarily unavailable in many areas. There are several reasons for this, none of which are quite as exciting as the rumors have made it sound.

In a nutshell, the unedited manuscript was inadvertently put into print. As most writers are probably aware, a book goes through many different stages in pre-production, and this is especially true with anything which bears the STAR TREK trademark. KILLING TIME had at least three different editors at the publishing house, plus an addition editor at Paramount, plus the copy-editor. Each of those editors is responsible for certain aspects of the publication, and each has a contribution to make to the final product which appears on the shelf.

To my understanding, what happened was that an earlier version of the manuscript went into print -- a version which did not reflect the changes requested by one or more of the editors. After the book was in print and headed for the Best Seller's list, the error was discovered.

What happened then was that the book had to be re-edited, and it my understanding that it has now been re-printed and is available in many bookstores.

Regarding the rumor that it was 'pulled because of questionable material,' to my knowledge, this simply isn't accurate. I've also heard that it was pulled because the plot was too close to the fourth movie -- a rumor which is among the funniest to date. In my personal opinion, and not to reflect upon the views of Paramount, Pocket Books or anyone other than myself, there is 'questionable material' in any publication -- as well there should be. If all writing was done by formula and told us what we already know, then nothing is done to advance the characters or the imagination or the readers. In addition, I would also like to point out that most people see exactly what they want to see. If someone went looking for 'questionable material,' in KILLING TIME, they could find it. But the same can certainly be said most works of literature throughout the ages. Just as beauty is in supposedly in the mind of the beholder, so is questionable material.

I hope this clears up some of the rumors and gives everyone a better understanding of what's been happening with KILLING TIME. Again, thanks to everyone who has written. I really do appreciate your input. Peace in IDIC.

Van Hise's Comments in 1986

Her April 1986 open letter to Interstat #102:

Ghods, am I honored to be the center of so much attention! At this point, it seems that more speculation,
 controversy, heresay and comment has been printed regarding KILLING TIME than on any other Star Trek publication in professional history! In fact, more pages have been written about the book than there are pages in the book. It's nice to know that a lot of people have devoted hours of "close study" to both versions in an effort to understand "what's going on." (Quotes reflective of statements by A.C. Crispin in last month's INTERSTAT.) Unfortunately, a lot of what's been written is not only amusing, but downright erroneous. What further amuses me is that no one has bothered to ask me about any of this before making seemingly authorized statements. As I have never met Ms. Crispin, I find it somewhat funny to read her letter which tells "the truth about KILLING TIME." While some of her statements are basically correct as to what occurred with the foul-up in printing the unedited manuscript, her subsequent conjectures are absolutely false. (Of course, I've met a few people who still believe John F. Kennedy is still alive and living in the basement of the White House — because they "heard it from a reliable source.") So it's easy to see how rumors start and are fueled.

As to "the truth about KILLING TIME," it is simply this: The wrong manuscript was published, yes. And there are several reasons as to why this happened. As some of you may know, KILLING TIME was with Pocket Books for over four years before it was eventually put into print. And a lot can happen in four years. World governments can change power several times during that time span. So can editors and editorial assistants. And, in all that confusion, manuscripts have a tendency to be shuffled around, pages can be lost, entire chapters can be sent to Libya instead of Paramount Pictures, and the writer could be involved in 87.006 other projects by the time the book goes into active production. KILLING TIME had 4 different editors from start to finish. And a different editor is at Pocket Books now. At any rate, when I received the corrected manuscript from Karen Haas, her accompanying letter stated: "If there is anything crossed out in black, it was in some way objectionable to Paramount and should be edited accordingly." The key word is "If". I read through the manuscript, and found one seemingly irrelevant passage crossed out in such a fashion — a reference to Kirk's face reddening because of some statement McCoy made. My immediate reaction upon completing the read-through was, "Hmmmm. Paramount let the crack about the Red Shirts get through, and maybe we're finally going to see more books where the characters can talk like real people instead of using expletives like, 'Oh, darn,' or 'those horrible, nasty Klingons,' and so on." Since there was the one thing crossed out, I had no reason to assume that anything was amiss. Nonetheless, I commented to Karen about this, wanting to be sure. Her reaction was about the same as mine. And I must point out that Karen came into this well after KT had been in the editing stages. The former editor (Mimi Panitch) had done the initial edit on the book, and when she left, Karen came into an existing situation.

At any rate, after being assured that there was no problem, I promptly went on with other projects until the galleys arrived nearly a month later. I did the required proof-reading of the galleys, searching for continuity problems, missing chapters or paragraphs and so on. Everything seemed in order, and all of the changes which had been made on the edited manuscript were reflected in the galleys. I had been assured that KT had been seen by Paramount twice already — once under Mimi's editorship and again when Karen took over. (It seems that the Paramount-edited manuscript had been "misplaced" during the change of editors, and Karen had to send it to the studio yet again — delaying publication by a few months. KT was originally scheduled for an April release, and was pushed back to June/July.) So, for all I knew, KT had made the coast-to-coast trip twice. After the book was in print, it wasn't until it was #4 on the Best Seller's List that the problem was discovered. And it was a week after that before I found about about it — quite by accident, when my agent phoned to inquire as to the status of another book she had with Pocket Books. And, despite Ms. Crispin's statement "So, no matter how she personally felt about the editing, Ms. Van Hise obviously agreed to the changes," I was at no time consulted after the foul-up was discovered. I was, quite simply, informed that there was a problem, and that the book was being put on hiatus until it could be re-edited by Paramount and Pocket Books, respectively. I agreed to nothing, for the simple reason that I wasn't asked.

I point this out primarily to enforce my feelings that no writer is qualified to speak for another, and is certainly not authorized to make public statements. I'm perfectly capable of speaking for myself and for KILLING TIME, and am simply surprised and amused that no one bothered to ask me what happened before putting heresay into print.

As to my "feelings on the editing," I really don't care. Star Trek is the property of Paramount Pictures. The contract which all professional Star Trek writers sign says so in plain, simple English. Paramount has the final say, and is therefore qualified to make whatever changes they deem fit. Period. I understood that when I signed the contract, and my understanding hasn't changed.

And as to the "edited-out" material, it was a lot of things. Personally, I am too involved in other professional writing commitments to "make a close study of both versions," though I know from close acquaintances who have made such a study that some of the edited-out material was nothing more than 4-letter words, any references to Kirk and Spock touching (though I still fail to understand how a mind-meld can be accomplished by a touch-telepath without touching), and word changes which made little difference one way or the other. (For example, the words "slim waist" were changed to "slender build." Not much difference, really.)

As to the "infamous sentence on the first page" (quote reflecting [Linda S's] comments), I would like to state that this and a lot of other sentences are reflective of the editor who originally contracted for KT. Personally, I thought that sentence was enough to choke any self-respecting horse, as it was the culmination of three different sentences being thrown together. I did argue with the original editor over some of this, but was told something along the lines of: "It has such a greater impact the way we did it." Well...the results are obvious.

Fortunately, KT was written over 5 years ago, and my writing has hopefully improved a lot in that time. I view KT as a beginning which any professional writer has to have somewhere. (While it wasn't the first professional sale, KT was my first pro novel.) I would strongly encourage all writers to simply keep at it. Unlike those insecure souls who say, "It can't be done, you can't write for the professional Trek market," I think there's adequate proof that fans can and should be actively involved. After all, if Jean Lorrah or Jacqueline Lichtenberg had listened to the "You-can't-do-it" faction, fandom would be without a lot of fine publications and wonderful ideas.

Finally, I hope that all Trekkers will hold onto their dreams — will go back and reassess the feelings which originally led them to Trek in the first place. By doing so, perhaps it will be possible to recapture the concept of IDIC (Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations). By adopting this attitude, I think that long-winded controversies would be reduced to their proper perspective, and we could all get on with what Trek should be, what Gene Roddenberry originally envisioned. If Trek is meant to represent the future, maybe we would all be well advised to leave our bitterness, our anger, and our controversies in the past.

Reactions and Reviews

Michele A (May 1986):

It was great to have the record set straight in last issue regarding KILLING TIME. I wondered how and why someone else was speaking for Delia Van Hise a couple issues back; the fact that the author of the letter ran right out and bought a dozen copies to sell at a profit was very telling though. Of course, I was as curious as the next person about what really happened concerning the publishing of that book, but I'm much more appreciative of the information coming straight from the source instead of someone not even involved. Also, thanks to Della for her kind words at the end of her letter to all of us folks still trying to hold on to the Trek "dream."

A.C. Crispin (May 1986) comments on comments Crispin made in the February 1986 issue of Interstat:

I never made any "veiled negative comments" about the quality of KILLING TIME. I made no comment, for precisely the reason stated. Whether it's in front of con audiences, or in INTERSTAT, I don't comment on the other pro Trek novels. (I believe I may have said I enjoyed THE VULCAN ACADEMY MURDERS, because Jean is a personal friend and "enjoy" is a pretty inoffensive term.) I don't comment not because I don't necessarily like them, but because I don't think it's right to do so in a public forum. I generally keep my opinions, both positive and negative, to myself, unless I'm speaking directly to the writer involved. I want to publicly apologize to Della Van Hise. I didn't realize you were an INTERSTAT reader, or I would have kept silent. The version of the KT story I recounted was told to me by Karen Haas, and, as you say, was apparently correct as to the bare facts. But you are right, of course — I shouldn't have theorized as to your motives, thoughts, or actions. The only reason I said anything was to make the point that your book had not been subject to censoring by Paramount after it had already been published. What happened was obviously just one of those things, and I reiterate my sincerest apologies and wish you the best of luck with further books, in or out of the Trek universe. I hope we meet someday, so I can beg your forgiveness in person.