Obviously some will be good, and some I will like – but that is not the same thing. e.g. there is Fables, and then there is ‘let’s make Cinderella a twentieth century girl and that’s it,’ sort of thing. Deviations from basic story pretty much zero, or very minor. While they aren’t going to bump Hellboy off in one of those stories pretty obviously – same goes for most of those, too.

Creativity is pretty thin there, too. I am sure you have picked out some of those as ‘bests’ though?

Not everyone can subsist on a diet of 100% pure original. Most people crave, even if it’s only occasionally, something that harks back to the familiar and well-loved, where catch-phrases and names substitute for elegantly rendered text describing the new and unfamiliar.

Existing on “thin” alone would be a bad thing, of course, whether it’s putting food on your table or stories in your head. There’s a balance to be reached, and I guess it’s different for everyone.

Once upon a time, the star trek books were pretty darn nifty, written by pretty interesting authors. Uhura’s Song by Janet Kagan is amazing and I can think of a bunch of older ones written by good writers that did interesting and entertaining things.

Some questions:

And now? Not so much? Are there more of them? Has science fiction media become more popular, so rights holders are more interested in getting more merchandise/tie ins out? (and a lower quality as a result?) Are there more franchises now that there were in the 70s and 80s? (that’s pretty clearly a yes.) Does the incresing avilaiblity of fan fiction online mean that there’s also less demand for tie-in stuff? And I think as a mitigating variable I think that the falling price of book production (relative to 20 or 30 or 40 years ago) is really important.

But I agree fully about not caring very much about contemporary tie-ins…

The only thing I have read of that stuff (I think) is from his collection. While it was ok, I found it bland, uninvolving, predictable and lacking in maturity (perfectly understandable in a series aimed at younger readers, of course), depth, and good writing, so not exactly making me want to go further. I’ve flipped through a book, looks about the same to me.

Nothing in that that is in the class of any Hellboy work, in general (early Christopher Golden example aside).

Does comparing a novel series make sense here? That would be more comparing say Piccirilli or Hodge’s novels to the Hellboy variety. Because then we get Hellboy story to Perdido Street Station. Whereas a comparison to ‘Jack’, for example, is pretty reasonable. PSS of course trumps anything anybody in that anthology has written or ever will write, pretty much.

Doing a YB series you didn’t like would make all that reading worse, too. Ouch. Even if it looks good in the Super-Editor portfolio.

The Hellboy series is certainly upper-tier as far as Tie-Ins go, I think.

There’s not even a dozen of ‘em (three anthologies, all pretty good – Odd/Odder/Oddest). So not actually going to have the same problem as the legions of Star Trek/Star Wars books, etc.

Couple of movie books for them too of course, so one of those entertaining novel based on a movie based on a graphic novel things. The first one was by Yvonne Navarro, no slouch, either.

On the Nix and thinness – Garth is a good writer and he does a great job with both stories. I wouldn’t expect his story to be weaker than an original. So what do I mean by thin, if you take Garth as an example? Hmmm. Allowing that I wouldn’t choose Garth as an example I think there’s a greater textual depth to his Old Kingdom and Keys to the Kingdom work. It’s more engaging, more involving. Of course, that might just be me.

The Nix story in Dreaming Again and his Hellboy story is ‘thin’ compared to that, how? Or the vampire hunter one, etc.

Explain. :)

It is also possible you have little interest in/don’t like pulp horror as such, either? Speaking of biases, etc.