While this trilogy was written about 10 years ago, just after the end of the series, it’s surprising to note how little my impressions have changed over the years. Back then, I was hungry for more story in the “Babylon 5” universe, and the story of Centauri Prime was a definite draw. And I was familiar with the ability of writer Peter David, who had written for the series before and had shown a unique ability to meld tragedy and comedy without overdoing either.
There are certainly those moments in this story. Moments that hinge on the kind of gallows humor that Londo Mollari’s personal fate demands. But there were also many points in each book, particularly the final volume, in which the constant attempts to lighten the mood or portray confident or witty banter came across as grating. It also didn’t fit very well with the “Babylon 5” universe. Far more time was spent on the banter and setting up punchlines than, say, a solid character arc for Vir Cotto as a resistance leader or the Alliance politics leading into the end of the Centauri crisis.
Just as inexplicable was the array of silly names and historical analogies that littered the trilogy. I groaned the first time I read the words “Tower of Power”, and it wasn’t any more palatable this time around. The name Castig Lione was distracting, because it was clearly an attempt to be clever for clever’s own sake. And the Prime Candidates might as well have been called the Nazi Youth.
The best novel is the first volume, focusing on the days just after the end of the fifth season of “Babylon 5” and the rise of the Drakh and Durla, the puppet that eventually forces Londo into the role of figurehead. For the most part, the events in this novel are fairly believable. The second novel begins to introduce some of the more questionable plot points and lapses in logic, and third novel makes it impossible to take the Drakh seriously. The Drakh have more than enough information to recognize that Vir is the leader of the Legions of Fire, years before the decisive moment arrives in 2278, but they do nothing (because, of course, the plot demands such).
Another problem is the treatment of David Sheridan’s role in the climax of the story. David is never given much of a personality, and his issues as the famous son of the most powerful couple in the galaxy are mentioned mostly in passing. His eventual role in the Drakh plan doesn’t make much sense. The idea, it seems, was to use the Centauri to ravage the Alliance, with Sheridan and Delenn victims of the plot. The inevitable backlash on the Centauri would weaken everyone to the point where David would stand as a figure to unite the remnants. Thus, using David as their puppet, the Drakh would be in control.
At least, that’s what I believe the Drakh design amounted to; it was never adequately explained in the trilogy. Nor were the Drakh particularly fleshed out as the villains of the piece. Instead, they remained aloof and ominous, perfectly mysterious, so that every action they took (however odd and seemingly contradictory) would seem reasonable within the context of their evil ways. At no point does the reader have the impression that the Drakh see themselves as truly justified based on any consistent rationale or philosophy (unlike the Shadows or even the Vorlons).
It’s hard to determine how much of this is the fault of Peter David. The story was, after all, based on an outline by JMS, the mastermind of the “Babylon 5” universe. The outline would have needed to pull together all the known scenes and information about the events on Centauri Prime, and it’s hard to imagine that the author had much latitude. But a great deal of the trilogy fits the typical Peter David mold, and many of the choices of prominent characters seemed to be the author’s preference.
But when characters like G’Kar seem to come and go in the story without a logical basis, only given a general blanket motivation towards the end, it hurts the overall story. Sheridan and Delenn go where the story needs them to go. Coincidence and convenience are as critical to plot progression as established motivation. Characters like Lyndisty, who should factor into the story given Vir’s rising prominence, are not even mentioned!
The end result is a story that tells a much-desired story, but leaves the reader just as eager for a much better telling of it.
