Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 03:39:33 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: drifter@stratos.net Cc: eivind@yes.no, mellon@pobox.com, tlambert@primenet.com, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: internationalization Message-ID: <199806150339.UAA09731@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <19980614020737.A4548@stratos.net> from "drifter@stratos.net" at Jun 14, 98 02:07:37 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Not all science fiction is trashy literature, but I think > Anatoly has a point. It seems to me that much of SciFi (or SF, or > whatever the hell you wanna call it) falls under one of several themes. > 1) the "sensawunda" Eivind was talking about. Nothing wrong > with that, but nothing I can get really passionate about either. > 2) cliche "woe-is-mankind-with-all-this-technology" plotlines. > 3) in the year 2345, when there are no wars, no greed, no > disease, and everybody recycles. Read Greg Bear, Robert Forward, Bruce Sterling, or any of a hundred others I will name for you if you insist. Let me know beforehand if you specifically want wonderous prose, one single technological trend projection, or whatever. Most of the SF I read is of type: 4) What will people's reactions/lives be like if this trend continues. > Science fiction -- if not just a technological flight-of-fancy -- > is often a tool for the author's social or political agenda. As is all other literature. Lewis Carrol's "Through the Looking Glass" is a trieste on the British Monarchies political policies. > I was a columnist for my college newspaper a few years > ago, and was no stranger to getting on political soapboxes :) But, > something about having ficticious characters speaking on behalf of > the author, rather than the author coming right out and saying what's > on his mind just annoys the hell out of me. I would recommend avoiding "The Federalist Papers", then, what with the fictional "Publius"... ;-). > Admittedly, many of the best (usually) non-science fiction authors > historically have done this too. George Orwell comes to mind. > But somehow, non-science fiction writers pull it off better, possibly > because the characters are often more believable -- more real. I can > care about them and even identify with them. George Orwell was a science fiction writer. 1984 was a future history, which is about as cliche a science fiction plot device as you can get. The book is still a classic, however, because the important point was to suspend disbelief over the plot device. > Often, science fiction characters chase each other around > banks of blinking lights armed with phaser guns. That doesn't mean > science fiction won't cut it. I just personally prefer that > the technology should be the backdrop for good character development. I think you are watching SF, not reading it. ;-). Read Greg Bear's "Slant" or Phillip K. Dick's Novella "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep". Or read Richard Preston's "The Cobra Event" or Bruce Sterling's "Holy Fire". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806150339.UAA09731>