 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2009/10/why_i_hate_star_trek.html
This pretty much says why I consider science fiction to only be that where
you couldn't write the story without the technology. Could Star Trek be
written as a western or a Spanish Armada kind of story? Yes. Could
Ringworld? Not hardly.
If you can still tell the story without the technology, it's not SF. Oddly
enough, most of the original Star Trek series that people liked the best
(say, the one with the Horta) were ones where you couldn't take out the tech
and tell the same story.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote in message
news:4ad4c199$1@news.povray.org...
> http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2009/10/why_i_hate_star_trek.html
>
> This pretty much says why I consider science fiction to only be that where
> you couldn't write the story without the technology. Could Star Trek be
> written as a western or a Spanish Armada kind of story? Yes. Could
> Ringworld? Not hardly.
>
> If you can still tell the story without the technology, it's not SF. Oddly
> enough, most of the original Star Trek series that people liked the best
> (say, the one with the Horta) were ones where you couldn't take out the
> tech and tell the same story.
>
Couple o' things... technology isn't science, it's an application thereof.
Arguably the most visible application, to be sure, and most SF stories take
place in some sort of future where technological enhancements are almost
inevitable. However, I think there's some wiggle room there.
Also, I'm not sure "Devil In The Dark" is the best example of the point...
the only important technology to the plot were A) what the miners were
digging for, and B) the silicon cement used to bandage the Horta. If the
creature were found in a Welsh coal mine in 1872 and one of the government
folks sent in to investigate were a telepath, you could tell the same story.
I think if you gave a logical enough explanation for how a silicon based
life form could exist (and in Wales, no less) and let the telepathy go as an
unexplained-but-taken-for-granted miracle (as it is in Star Trek) it would
be still be science fiction. No gadgets, but still scientific.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
He's got a point. But BSG and Babylon 5 are still very worthy of
praise, despite having about as much science as Star Wars... :)
I've not followed much Star Wars besides some of the original series and
quite a few episodes of TNG. Good fun, in the same league of Charlie's
Angels... :)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/13/09 13:06, Darren New wrote:
> http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2009/10/why_i_hate_star_trek.html
>
> This pretty much says why I consider science fiction to only be that
> where you couldn't write the story without the technology. Could Star
> Trek be written as a western or a Spanish Armada kind of story? Yes.
> Could Ringworld? Not hardly.
What about something like Asimov's Foundation?
I've watched very few of the Star Trek series, but have seen all the
movies. Can't remember all the plots, though, but technology certainly
plays a major role in some of them.
What about stories where they talk about different races (aliens) whose
behavior is quite different from ours (due to genetic makeup or
whatever), and a big part of the story is exploring how their culture
evolved differently from ours? It's hard for me not to consider them as
SF. Or about aliens who live in planets where, due to the type of
geography, results in quite a different culture, and the story is
exploring that difference (e.g. Asimov's Nightfall, or Heinlein's Universe).
Some stories use technology as a tool for the plot in the above. Such
as genetic manipulations of humans to achieve those effects. Or
artificially generated biospheres. But that's really as good as looking
at an alien species in another planet. The technology isn't really
necessary. Yet, most people would consider them as SF stories.
--
Ground yourself, THEN hug your motherboard!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Captain Jack escreveu:
> Also, I'm not sure "Devil In The Dark" is the best example of the point...
> the only important technology to the plot were A) what the miners were
> digging for, and B) the silicon cement used to bandage the Horta. If the
> creature were found in a Welsh coal mine in 1872 and one of the government
> folks sent in to investigate were a telepath, you could tell the same story.
> I think if you gave a logical enough explanation for how a silicon based
> life form could exist (and in Wales, no less) and let the telepathy go as an
> unexplained-but-taken-for-granted miracle (as it is in Star Trek) it would
> be still be science fiction. No gadgets, but still scientific.
That's why many advocate for "speculative fiction" rather than scifi.
Also copes with pure fantasy works...
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan escreveu:
> SF. Or about aliens who live in planets where, due to the type of
> geography, results in quite a different culture, and the story is
> exploring that difference (e.g. Asimov's Nightfall, or Heinlein's
> Universe).
BTW, Nightfall sounds eerily like a 1950's portrayal with funny names
and bits here and there, until the 3 sun disposition is revealed to the
reader. The science BTW is just a catalyst for the strange situation,
but the real drama comes from a very cliché terror setting... still, a
wonderful short story.
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Captain Jack wrote:
> Also, I'm not sure "Devil In The Dark" is the best example of the point...
> the only important technology to the plot were A) what the miners were
> digging for, and B) the silicon cement used to bandage the Horta.
Well, my point was that you couldn't tell the story without an alien
creature that lives in solid rock. Granted, you could set such a thing in an
old coal mine, but you couldn't substitute a person for the Horta and tell
the same story.
> I think if you gave a logical enough explanation for how a silicon based
> life form could exist (and in Wales, no less) and let the telepathy go as an
> unexplained-but-taken-for-granted miracle (as it is in Star Trek) it would
> be still be science fiction. No gadgets, but still scientific.
Sure, that works too. The point is whether you can tell the same story in a
mundane setting, not whether it's "science" or "technology" that does the
trick.
Most of Star Trek wasn't about the technology and how it affected people. I
suppose the episodes of the holodeck taking over or something would be hard
to tell without the holodeck. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:4ad4e933$1@news.povray.org...
> Most of Star Trek wasn't about the technology and how it affected people.
> I suppose the episodes of the holodeck taking over or something would be
> hard to tell without the holodeck. :-)
I definitely agree with that one. :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> What about something like Asimov's Foundation?
Parts of it would be hard to tell without it being in the far future, yes.
Altho you could probably tell a very similar story in the midieval times, if
you have a psychic or something. Hard to tell it without the psychic, tho.
Note that I count Conneticut Yankee as SF, tho, and even Singing in the Rain
if I remember the story right.
> I've watched very few of the Star Trek series, but have seen all the
> movies. Can't remember all the plots, though, but technology certainly
> plays a major role in some of them.
Some, sure.
> What about stories where they talk about different races (aliens)
> whose behavior is quite different from ours (due to genetic makeup or
> whatever), and a big part of the story is exploring how their culture
> evolved differently from ours? It's hard for me not to consider them as
> SF. Or about aliens who live in planets where, due to the type of
> geography, results in quite a different culture, and the story is
> exploring that difference (e.g. Asimov's Nightfall, or Heinlein's
> Universe).
Sure. Don't read *too* narrowly into it. :-)0
> Some stories use technology as a tool for the plot in the above.
> Such as genetic manipulations of humans to achieve those effects. Or
> artificially generated biospheres. But that's really as good as looking
> at an alien species in another planet. The technology isn't really
> necessary. Yet, most people would consider them as SF stories.
Yeah. The point is that SF is an exploration of the affect of something
other than personalities upon personalities and society. If it's just the
affect of a crazy guy with a blaster instead of a crazy guy with a pistol,
it's uninteresting.
Indeed, I'd even put some of the Discworld stories involving Sam Vines as SF
stories, like the one with the Gunn, whatever that was called.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> This pretty much says why I consider science fiction to only be that where
> you couldn't write the story without the technology. Could Star Trek be
> written as a western or a Spanish Armada kind of story? Yes. Could
> Ringworld? Not hardly.
Out of curiosity: Do you consider Terminator and Terminator 2 to be SF?
Do you consider them to be good SF?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
