We have a rule in my house. If you buy a book and then get rid of it and then end up buying it again for whatever reason, it’s earned a permanent place on the shelves and will never be donated again. “Shadows On The Sun” by Michael Jan Friedman will now be on my shelves for the long haul. It was the unfortunate victim of a massive book purge seven to eight years ago and then at the recommendation of an rp partner, I ordered another copy. I can’t honestly tell you why I got rid of it in the first place. It was a Star Trek first edition hardback by one of my favorite authors featuring a character I love and adore. Because I didn’t keep it originally, I’m not including it in my “Fictionally Speaking” series.
But here it is. And what a fantastic book is it. “Shadows On The Sun” is told in three parts and with the exception of the first, each could almost be standalone stories. Set post-Star Trek VI, on their way to be decommissioned, the crew of the Enterprise is sent on one last mission. They’re sent to Ssan, where the top governors have recently been assassinated. Their mission: To negotiate with the assassins. Along for the ride is a diplomatic envoy consisting of Leonard McCoy’s ex-wife and her current husband. There’s some interesting clash of culture scenes (which seem to be a repeating theme in Friedman’s books) and some philosophical debates revolving around those differences but the real story lies with Leonard McCoy. “Shadows On The Sun” is an opportunity for Bones to come to terms with his relationship with his ex-wife Jocelyn and in many respects come full circle, back to Ssan where he was first assigned and back into the arms (so to speak) of Jocelyn, whom he never stopped loving.
My absolute favorite part of this book actually comes in the acknowledgements before the story ever begins. Friedman comments on the character of Leonard McCoy in a most exceptional way. “It wasn’t until I got older that I realized the mark DeForest Kelley and his character had left on my psyche. Not because McCoy was a doctor necessarily, but because he was a human being in the finest sense of the word. Fallible, ill-tempered on occasion, contrary, and far too vulnerable, but also devoted, tenacious, an courageous… I see these qualities in the best people I know – people who stubbornly hold on to their ideals, people who remain true to a higher principle when they could get away with a lot less.”