A clever hook can get readers to pick up your book, but what makes them want to read it again years later? For authors trying to build a lasting readership, that distinction matters, especially when chasing the latest trend can seem like the quickest way to attract attention. There are few franchises as enduring as Star Trek, and some of that longevity can be traced to the rules originally imposed on its writers. This week, we\u2019re looking specifically at Star Trek\u2019s The Next Generation (TNG) and how its approach to storytelling can help authors give their books similar staying power.<\/em><\/p>\n As Ginger explains, the heart of the TNG approach was the mandate to create drama without relying on disputes between the main characters, which pushed the writers to build compelling storylines that embraced the science fiction heart of the show. Comparing that approach with the more novelty driven episodes of Star Trek\u2019s Strange New Worlds, he explores how clear storytelling rules can encourage creativity while still giving audiences a consistent and satisfying experience. Whether you write science fiction, romance, or mysteries, this approach offers a useful way to think about what your stories promise readers and what will keep those readers coming back, even to revisit a tale they\u2019ve already been told.<\/em><\/p>\n I\u2019ve got a lot going on right now. My father recently passed away, my wife got diagnosed with cancer, my mother-in-law with dementia is living with us, and everything costs twice or three times as much as it did five years ago.\u00a0<\/p>\n That means I\u2019ve been leaning heavily on the essentials of \u201cself care\u201d to cope with the mental strain of it all, like putting on my favorite TV shows in the background while I\u2019m cooking dinner or doing the ironing.<\/p>\n My go-tos are the original Fraiser<\/em> and Star Trek: The Next Generation<\/em>. They\u2019re shows that are reassuringly familiar to me, but there are so many episodes that I can\u2019t remember all of them (so I\u2019m not literally mouthing the memorized script like I do when I re-watch James Bond movies.)<\/p>\n Of these two, TNG has been giving me the most to think about. I grew up on a farm in England, and I was only about ten years old when I discovered Star Trek: The Next Generation.<\/em> I\u2019d grown up a big fan of Doctor Who<\/em> and reading my father\u2019s countless science fiction paperbacks, so it was a natural fit to what I was interested in and appreciated.<\/p>\n However, the only way I could watch TNG (until a few years later, when it finally hit British TV screens) was by renting individual VHS cassettes from the rental store in Alton, our nearest town. My indulgent mother allowed this about once a week.\u00a0<\/p>\n Each tape held two episodes, and I had no control over which ones showed up on the shelf or when. As a result, I watched TNG completely out of order for years, picking up whatever the rental shop happened to have in stock that week.<\/p>\n But here\u2019s the thing\u2026 it didn\u2019t matter! As a show designed for syndication, Star Trek: The Next Generation <\/em>was built so that you could drop into almost any episode, in almost any order, and understand exactly what was going on.\u00a0<\/p>\n Every episode was self-contained. The Enterprise<\/em> would encounter something strange, the crew would work through it using science, diplomacy, and character, and by the end credits the problem was resolved. No cliffhangers to chase, no homework required. Just a complete story, every week, whether it was episode three or episode thirty-three.<\/p>\n To this day, TNG remains my comfort food television, and the older I get, the more I appreciate that this wasn\u2019t an accident. It was a design choice, and a disciplined one.<\/p>\n Star Trek\u2019s creator, Gene Roddenberry, had a famous mandate for TNG\u2019s writers room. There was to be no interpersonal conflict among the main cast. The crew of the Enterprise<\/em> were supposed to be evolved, professional, and fundamentally in harmony with one another.\u00a0<\/p>\n Today, that might sound like a recipe for boring television. Where\u2019s the drama if nobody\u2019s fighting? But that constraint is exactly what made the show work.\u00a0<\/p>\n Because the writers couldn\u2019t generate tension from crew members bickering, they had to generate it from somewhere else, and that\u2019s where the science fiction came in. Each week there was a new problem, a new alien culture, or a new moral dilemma dropped into the lap of a cast the audience already knew and trusted.\u00a0<\/p>\n Instead of Riker being irritated at Worf, you got the entire, stable ensemble<\/em> facing something genuinely new together. The characters were the constant. The scenario was the variable. That\u2019s a formula, and once you understand it, you can see it running underneath episode after episode. (Unsurprisingly, it\u2019s the same formula for truly effective science fiction.)<\/p>\n Here are a few episodes that stand out for me as the ideal execution of that formula.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Measure of a Man\u201d<\/strong> puts Data on trial to determine whether he\u2019s Starfleet property or a sentient being with rights. It\u2019s a courtroom drama, but it\u2019s really a philosophical argument about what sentience even is, staged using characters we already know and love.<\/p>\n \u201cHome Soil\u201d<\/strong> is about a terraforming crew on a lifeless planet that turns out to be not so lifeless after all. This might be the episode that actually introduced me to TNG, as it was shown to us in middle school science class, back when I was wee bairn. It\u2019s actually perfect for that, because the episode does real work defining\u2014scientifically\u2014what separates \u201calive\u201d from \u201cnot alive.\u201d That\u2019s a science fiction premise doing actual pedagogical labor\u2014the definition of \u201cedu-tainment.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe First Duty\u201d<\/strong> sends Wesley Crusher into a cover-up after a training accident kills a fellow cadet. It\u2019s fundamentally a story about a teenager choosing between loyalty to his friends and telling the truth, which is about as universal a coming-of-age dilemma as exists. Picard\u2019s line to Wesley, that the first duty of every officer is to the truth, has stuck with me since I was a kid and it\u2019s an episode I showed my own children to demonstrate how important making the right choices can be.<\/p>\n None of these episodes needed a gimmick. They needed a strong cast, a clear ethical or scientific question, and the discipline to let the story do the work.<\/p>\n I say all this as someone who genuinely enjoys the new Star Trek shows, especially Strange New Worlds<\/em>. The cast is about as good as Trek casting has ever been, the visual effects are gorgeous, and the writers clearly love the franchise. But watching Season 4, I\u2019ve noticed the show drifting further and further from the TNG formula, and I think all aspiring authors could benefit from examining why that hurts the storytelling.<\/p>\n The latest season, for example, leans very hard into the \u201cconcept episode.\u201d There\u2019s a black-and-white film noir episode. There\u2019s a puppet episode, created with Jim Henson\u2019s Creature Shop. There\u2019s an episode that borrows its entire structure from The Hangover<\/em>, in which Ortegas and Scotty wake up with no memory of the night before on a planet where the atmosphere gets everyone drunk. That last one doesn\u2019t just bend Roddenberry\u2019s no-interpersonal-conflict rule, it makes conflict between two crew members the central engine of the episode!<\/p>\n And I want to be clear, these episodes are fun. The swings are bold, and the craft on display is real. But fun isn\u2019t the same as durable. A noir pastiche or a puppet episode is a delight the first time you watch it and a novelty every time after that. It\u2019s built to be talked about, not necessarily rewatched. Compare that to \u201cThe Measure of a Man,\u201d which holds up on the fifth (or twenty-fifth) viewing because it\u2019s not resting on a stunt. It\u2019s resting on a question worth sitting with.<\/p>\n If you write and sell your own books, you\u2019ve felt the pull of the gimmick. Maybe it\u2019s chasing whatever subgenre is spiking this month: romantasy, dark romance, or whatever comes next. Maybe it\u2019s a high-concept hook designed to be screenshot-able\u2014the literary equivalent of the puppet episode. Chuck Tingle<\/a> has built an entire, very funny career on leaning all the way into the gimmick and it works for him precisely because he knows that\u2019s what he\u2019s selling.<\/p>\n But if you want a book with legs\u2014something readers come back to and recommend for years to come\u2014gimmicks are the wrong foundation. Trends date a book the moment the trend passes. A puppet episode is a puppet episode forever; it can never be anything else.<\/p>\n What actually gives a story staying power is closer to what Roddenberry imposed on his writers: a set of rules. Decide what your book is always going to deliver. Create strong, consistent characters readers trust. Present them with a clear kind of question or conflict at the center of every scene, and write with a voice that doesn\u2019t chase whatever\u2019s trending. Then, let those rules combine to generate a story instead of a hook.\u00a0<\/p>\n Still watched by millions every year, Star Trek: The Next Generation <\/em>continues to prove that you can tell wildly different stories (exploring an android\u2019s rights, the definition of life, or a teenager\u2019s moral crisis) and have them all feel like they belong to the same show, because the rules beneath them never changed.<\/p>\n A gimmick will get you noticed once. Rules like these are what result in a book with the potential to be reread time and time again. It\u2019s the difference between F. Scott Fitzgerald\u2019s The Great Gatsby<\/a> and Chuck Tingle\u2019s Pounded in the Butt by My Hugo Award Nomination<\/a>.<\/p>\n Or, at least that\u2019s how I feel about it. What about you? What\u2019s a book or show that you go back to again and again? Not because of a clever hook, but because the characters and the storytelling rules just work? I\u2019d love to hear about your recommendations in the comments.<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t Ginger is also known as Roland Hulme – a digital Don Draper with a Hemingway complex. Under a penname, he’s sold 65,000+ copies of his romance novels, and reached more than 320,000 readers through Kindle Unlimited – using his background in marketing, advertising, and social media to reach an ever-expanding audience.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n \t\t\t\t\t<\/p><\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A clever hook can get readers to pick up your book, but what makes them want to read it again years later? For authors trying to build a lasting readership, that distinction matters, especially when chasing the latest trend can seem like the quickest way to attract attention. There are few franchises as enduring as […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7074800,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[106515,106516],"tags":[4297,1752,817,11412,235478,21169,2456],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-7074799","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-for-authors","category-writing-craft","tag-authors","tag-books","tag-star","tag-teaches","tag-tng","tag-trek","tag-writing"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Rule That Made It Work<\/strong><\/h2>\n
When the Rules Loosen<\/strong><\/h2>\n
What This Means for Your Books<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Share this blog<\/h3>\n
![\"Our](\"https:\/\/www.hiddengemsbooks.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/ginger.jpg\")
<\/p>\n