A Pocket Full Of Kryptonite: Science Fiction & Science Fact (Trees And Things)

rEvolution inAction: Re: Amateurs Out?

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 21:27:32 EST

Enough SF writers do the second already :) I do like the idea of the first one, that's rather entertaining.

thefadd: Re: Amateurs Out?

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:44:33 EST

My gf (who's a bigger sci-fi fan than me) and I always joke about making one of those books today. Like one set in the "future" of 2005 or maybe even one set in the way distant future of 4372 were everything is just exactly the same. Sort of a one

rEvolution inAction: Re: Amateurs Out?

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:39:39 EST

To be fair, 1998 was an ominous year. It'd be fun to try to write a novel that would always be ahead by 20 years.. of course the science part of it would have to be jettisoned... date everything as '20 years from now' have everything operate off of post-Qu

uncarved block: Amateurs Out?

Thu, 26 Apr 2007 13:03:58 EST

Another problem, I think one that was addressed in a Plastic story, was how much the field of "futurism" had faded, and I think a lot of it has to do with the pace of technology. Back in the 20s and 30s, you could be a tinkerer and stil

rEvolution inAction: Re: Fact and Fiction, one and the same

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 17:58:50 EST

It is the fantasy level that I associate mostly with vintage SF. The newest SF has been stuck on cyberpunk themes for awhile now. Ok, you do have Card but he mainly struggles with philosophy. Maybe it's just the books I've been reading. I've seen a lack of

port1080: Re: Heinlein

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:19:59 EST

Yet his worlds and his concepts of future technology are amazingly indellible.

I agree with much of what uncarved block wrote above, but another factor in this, I think, is that Heinlein, Asimov, and a lot of their predecessors (the 1910

uncarved block: Nature Of The Beast

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:56:54 EST

His characters are cardboard cut-outs

This seems to me an unavoidable part of the genre's early years. When the world, or setting, is a character- perhaps the main character- the amount of play, of variation, in the rest of the work

thefadd: Heinlein

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:08:56 EST

It's amazing how influential Heinlein has been really. His characters are cardboard cut-outs and he's work is barren of philosphy that has any depth to it. Thus his relative obscurity compared to outright wackjobs like Orson Scott Card or Ayn Rand. Yet his

joshv: Re: Fact and Fiction, one and the same

Wed, 25 Apr 2007 09:50:48 EST

I really don't see any difference between the old and the new. Science fiction has always extrapolated the science of the day into the speculative realm, and sometimes beyond that into fantasy.

Robots and flying cars were the extrapolation of incr

rEvolution inAction: Fact and Fiction, one and the same

Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:59:06 EST

This sub shows one of the great divides between old school science fiction and the newest of the genre. Old science fiction was always looking at new science and new ideas, flying cars and robots, new science fiction is looking at what we have today and tr