This particular Star Trek novel is obviously a case of a self-indulgent fan-turned-amateur-author (presumably one of the first generation of Trekkies during and after the original series) using a Star Trek novel to publicly display her sexual fantasies about Spock, and must be understood in that context. As such, it's obnoxious and irritating, and I regret reading it (having had no idea). Doctor Who novels did the same thing at least once: in Kate Orman's Unnatural History, the Eighth Doctor's companion Sam attempts to seduce him (which, regrettably, was later duplicated on television with Amy Pond and the Eleventh Doctor).
What happens is basically that the Enterprise takes on a very attractive mission specialist who irrationally hates Vulcans for no obvious reason (McCoy eventually discovers that it's a psychological reaction to her Vulcan husband dying); she and Spock become trapped on a planet populated by hostile giant ants, and while defending themselves alone, mate (thereby positing that Vulcan mating is not restricted to the pon farr cycle).
Although I disdain this book for the above reason, I did find a character naming her cat "Fuzzybutt" highly amusing.
This isn't a book I've ever heard discussed--it's probably obscure now--but both my high school library and local public library did have a copy, and the title and caption on the cover (which shows a picture of Cousy looking very troubled, and says "Mr. Basketball thought winning was the only thing, until [something] on the edge of moral and physical collapse." I was intrigued, and although probably ten years passed of me seeing the book on and off before I decided to read it, I eventually did.
A number of NBA legends I know of were known to be absolutely ruthless, focused, and obsessed with winning their games--Michael Jordan was hardly the only one of them, just the most notorious and popular. Cousy was probably the first with this "Killer Instinct," and the book is about how it affected him as a player, coach and person.
I certainly admit that I haven't read many biographies of NBA players (in fact, Cousy's is probably the only one), but of these players with the Killer Instinct--these players who take winning so seriously that they will work up feelings of rage to motivate themselves and treat opposing players as enemies to be destroyed--Cousy is the only one I know of who wasn't corrupted by being hypercompetitive. As a player, Cousy had an extreme fear of failure (apparently the cause of his hypercompetitiveness, not the effect of it); it led to nightmares, sleepwalking, intense emotional reactions to losing, and eventual visits to a psychiatrist (who diagnosed him with panic attacks). After his playing career ends, he becomes a coach at both the college and NBA level, and his drive and intensity tempt him to cheat by making promises to his college recruits that he can't keep. He resists, but eventually tires of it and the strain his hypercompetitiveness puts on his health, and leaves coaching. For this, Cousy is one of the very few basketball players I know anything about that I respect. And did I mention that he strongly opposed racism in basketball in the 1960s?
The apodictical proposition cogitates the assertorical as determined by these very laws of the understanding, consequently affirming as a priori, and in this manner it expresses...
-Many gratuitious--and, frankly, stupid--puns and malapropisms that accomplish nothing but to confuse the reader.
-Linguistic and possibly ethnic stereotypes. I'm not familiar with the Welsh accent, but Shakespeare continually stereotypes it (in Hugh Evans) for humor. It's not funny. Much more annoying is Caius, allegedly a French doctor. His accent, a combination of stereotypes of French, German and Italian accents, is so absurd that I wonder whether Shakespeare had ever met a Frenchman or knew much about their accents. I can only suppose Caius is meant to be a stereotype, generating humor from audiences' possible disdain for the French. He might have entertained them, but not me.
-Falstaff. I have not read Henry IV yet, but I understand that the John Falstaff there is a famously witty and much-loved Shakespearean character. In The Merry Wives...not. This Falstaff, much older, is a sleazy satyr with a tendency to casually observe how fat he is (which probably made sense then because people saw obesity as indicating prosperity). There's nothing entertaining about him, only in the repeated humiliating pranks the two married women visit on him to teach him a lesson. (There are three incidents. There really should have been more, not so much because I like to see Falstaff humiliated as that punishing Falstaff for his lust toward married women is supposed to be the play's main focus.) Falstaff is even less entertaining than Caius, whom the reader can laugh at for being absurd.
-Jim Bakker's Praise the Lord ministry and its downfall, from his son Jay Bakker's viewpoint.
-Jay's life after the end of PTL, which was tortured enough due to his father's imprisonment but made much worse by most other Christians' giving the Bakkers the cold shoulder.
-His discovery of God's love and grace, which he knew nothing about due to having been neither taught about it nor shown it by any Christians he had known. His learning process continued even after he started a ministry for young people from subcultures that are typically shunned by conservative churches.