tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post94494235919724544..comments2024-03-18T20:22:06.331-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: Open Friday: "Outdated" Science FictionJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger80125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57090586892595253442012-05-16T05:02:13.185-04:002012-05-16T05:02:13.185-04:00IMO this is the "Wells vs Verne" issue.
...IMO this is the "Wells vs Verne" issue.<br /><br />One kind of Science Fiction author sticks to the "Plausible" science of the time, and usually is more popular in it. But over the years becomes back dated and even silly/cliche. The "Steampunk" escapist retro stuff now owes much to Verne.<br /><br /><br />On the other hand, you have H.G. Wells who while unusually popular in his own time, his "Science Fiction" (or Scientific Romances, whatever) was not considered up to snuff. He knew less than Verne who curiously also didn't know how to launch people in a bullet without turning them to jelly, but his stories were about humanity and society. War of the Worlds was about the British empire and all empires that crush weaker societies, spurred on in a fit of rage by the genocide of the Tanzanians. The Time Machine was a call for man to unify, that if we kept a divided society by class forever it would negate man's true potential. The island of Dr Moreau was about the control of religion as much as about the misuse of science.<br /><br /><br />Lots of movies have been made of Wells work, most butchered of his profound messages. But one stands out, one he had a hand in.<br /><br />"Things to Come" aka "The Shape of Things to Come" - You can watch it via Google/YouTube.<br /><br />It's the form of Science Fiction almost extinct, the "Future History" namely that the "Future" comes sooner than the writer expects and it's not that... And it was not well received in it's day. It was actually booed out of theaters in 1936, showing another world war, even the White Cliffs of Dover crossed by Aeroplane... And it's a dark movie, the world enters another world war and mankind is reduced to savagery. Then a world government of super scientists bring order out of the chaos and create a utopia. But their constant strive to advance man leads to a backlash that forms an anti-technology cult that seeks to destroy all they've built just as man is preparing to go into space.<br /><br />The "Real" world history changed after the prediction of WW2. But in many ways it was an exaggerated version of the 40s, 50s, 60s onwards. IMO, that's probably why it got shown on tv and an early video recording enthusiast recorded it, otherwise it'd be a "Lost" film. I saw it on tv late night in a motel room when my parents were on vacation and it frankly changed me.<br /><br /><br />It also probably changed the course of WW2. The public backlash was strong, including that they showed chemical warfare being used. Some officials actually talked with Germany over that movie to "Prove him wrong" and got a promise signed by none other than Hitler himself that if they did somehow go to war, neither side would use gas. Hitler, for all the other bad things said about him had been a soldier and not a cushioned officer. He'd been hit by mustard gas...twice. He said "no soldier should ever endure that kind of suffering". So he kept his promise through the war and didn't gas...well enemy soldiers in combat...And his mad scientists did make Nerve gas and stuff. Conceivably they could have done an "Unparalleled Invasion" and just had a wave of Blitzkrieg wipe out France and England and Russia and then just invade when it settled. <br /><br /><br />The movie itself has been called "Perfectly realized". While many early science fiction films suffered from the burden of the cost (and limits by technology) of "Special Effects" this movie was made with good knowledge of what could and could not be done. It could be re-made with today's technology and be no better. Some aspects drag on a bit, early cinema assumed the audience had patience, but otherwise should be one of the all time great movies.<br /><br /><br />Still, even the "Retro" can be fun, and like Wells who knows what the future will really bring. The stuff that endures does so because it's a good story, and also some of it is a bigger story than just the surface.Iaminnocenttheblood Ofthisjusthttp://www.facebook.com/people/Iaminnocenttheblood-Ofthisjustmanyouseetoit/100002857705077noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-36075464424627071442012-05-13T01:39:34.720-04:002012-05-13T01:39:34.720-04:00Yes, but remember I am talking about *direct* hits...Yes, but remember I am talking about *direct* hits here, not near misses. And also often against /unshielded/ vessels. See Star Trek II, Star Trek III, Star Trek VI, and lord knows how many different episodes of the various series. Indeed, see ST:TOS episode "Balance of Terror" and note that a "near miss" from a nuke knocks the Enterprise out of action. And while I do agree about the "handwavium" it still looks like they did not really think it through.cagaddanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-88820979493007583562012-05-12T18:55:27.418-04:002012-05-12T18:55:27.418-04:00It's sometimes a factor. I've got the Comp...It's sometimes a factor. I've got the Complete Venus Equilateral here and the second story really killed me; we spend 25 pages trying to contact a spaceship traveling between Mars and Venus, as if that should have been a real problem. It didn't help that the first story boiled down to "hur, hur, bureaucrats are stupid and should be replaced by engineers".<br /> <br />cagadda : To quote http://www.fas.org/nuke/intro/nuke/blast.htm: "As pictures of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and of the test structures erected <br />at the Nevada Test Site in the 1950's amply demonstrate, the blast and <br />shock waves produced by nuclear explosions are the principal means for <br />destroying soft targets. Ground shock from a low-altitude, surface, or <br />underground burst may be the only way to destroy hardened underground <br />structures such as command facilities or missile silos." Given the lack of atmosphere in space, the blast and shock waves of a nuke will probably be minimally effective. Also, 3200 m. range of greatest destruction for a fairly small nuke is just not that far in space. An external hit from a nuke in space on a hardened target like a starship is not trivial, but the Star Trek universe employs enough handwavium that all sorts of super-science alloys and force fields could help it survive and not be at all out of place in the universe.David Starnernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-88099462595846835042012-05-07T22:28:11.740-04:002012-05-07T22:28:11.740-04:00I think what I dislike is when a given sci-fi nove...I think what I dislike is when a given sci-fi novel or game has equipment that does not even meet *current* technology, or does not seem to reflect an understanding of current tech.<br /><br />Example 1: In Star Trek, it has been indicated that photon torps are superior to nukes, yet while they are destructive, I fail to see how a small starship can survive a direct hit from something supposedly more powerful than a more "primitive" device that can vapourize cities...<br /><br />Example 2: in the game Universe, and in other games as well, many of the "far future" weapons lack the capabilities of then current technology. For example, the rifles they had, and even many laser type weapons, appear far inferior to even a Great War vintage Browning Automatic Rifle, let alone some more exotic modern designs.cagaddanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-4702495367711182892012-05-07T10:14:05.120-04:002012-05-07T10:14:05.120-04:00I think sci-fi does get outdated, in a way that fa...I think sci-fi does get outdated, in a way that fantasy doesn't. And the reason for this is simple: sci-fi is always about the present, whereas fantasy tends to aspire to myth which, by definition, is timeless.SPQRataenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-37437663373989370622012-05-06T11:27:59.842-04:002012-05-06T11:27:59.842-04:00I agree on that last point. It's interesting t...I agree on that last point. It's interesting to me that so many people run down "cyberpunk", for instance, when we seem to be living in a world that resembles "cyberpunk" very closely. Sure, we don't have brain-computer interfaces, but we are actually very close to something like that (they've managed to get a monkey to control a robot arm over the internet using something similar). We have mechanical limbs. The world is, arguably, under the excessive domination of large corporate interests. And so on. Meanwhile, the things that pass for transhumanist futures seem… unlikely at best.Faoladhnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57261687591322640242012-05-06T06:32:55.702-04:002012-05-06T06:32:55.702-04:00As science progresses, it changes. We move from fe...As science progresses, it changes. We move from fewer, bigger discoveries towards more, smaller discoveries. (Well, I don’t think that quite expresses it right, but that’s the best I’m coming up with at the moment.) So, science-fiction—if we’re talking about fiction that concerns actual science rather than some broader and looser category—is going to change along with it. You simply can’t tell the same stories against today’s scientific background that you could against, e.g., the scientific background of the 1950s. So, I think it makes a lot of sense that “retro-futurism” has been cropping up regularly since science-fiction began.<br /><br />Another thing for me is that I find some “modern” science-fiction tropes even less plausible than some of the older ones that many people discount today.Robert Fishernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-51597404534262328912012-05-06T02:25:15.552-04:002012-05-06T02:25:15.552-04:00Back in the 80's, I wrote up rules and a few s...Back in the 80's, I wrote up rules and a few scenarios for a similar type of RPG. I called it (as generically as possible) "Space Patrol"--and it was designed mostly to replicate things like Commander Cody, etc. <br /><br /><br />I remember some of the quirkiest rules...like how female characters had mandated low combat scores and a "panic table" to see if they would scream or faint in the face of danger, male characters had to choose from careers separated into "hero", "comic relief" and "expendable technical support" and classic cigar shaped spacecraft were powered by "atomic lunchboxes". And the rules assumed that all characters would die at the end of every scenario, saving the Earth, but would be available for the next scenario without explanation.<br /><br />The first scenario was based on the actual b-movie I saw when I first wrote the game (the name escapes me) but a space rocket is returning to earth with a green fungus attached to the hull and soon crew members are turning into angry, possessed-by-space-fungus, plant-man monsters. <br /><br />Playtested it a few times and it worked as a nice beer & pretzel game to give a long running D&D campaign a break.<br /><br />Wish I knew where the hand-typed rules were now. Probably in a cardboard box somewhere with my notes on a Mercenaries, Spies & Private Eyes campaign I ran back then...Peter Greyyhttp://www.seattlecomedy.net/petergreyy.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-45129714326881977092012-05-05T11:25:26.274-04:002012-05-05T11:25:26.274-04:00Happily, outdated technology has never interfered ...Happily, outdated technology has never interfered with my ability to enjoy older science fiction. Any imagined technology may or may not become outdated, but all of it is still fodder for speculation.Gordon Coopernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27831679626173356012012-05-05T11:20:31.875-04:002012-05-05T11:20:31.875-04:00I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Cold Wa...I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the Cold War chic of the recent Battlestar Galactica reboot. I think that worked very well self consciously retro styled future.Brendanhttp://untimately.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-74979826836837186922012-05-05T10:47:34.471-04:002012-05-05T10:47:34.471-04:00 They were called "atomic blasts" in Fou... They were called "atomic blasts" in <i>Foundation</i> and "blasters" in the later books, starting with the second, I believe.Gordon Coopernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-49270961195005352962012-05-05T10:41:08.595-04:002012-05-05T10:41:08.595-04:00I've never really had a problem with outdated ...I've never really had a problem with outdated science. When I played Traveller, I can recall one of my buddies asking our GM at the time about the paradox of huge computers, and how that wasn't realistic. His response was something along the lines of, "I just assume that at some point in the future, they discovered that with computers getting smaller and smaller, allowing for more and more memory and computational power, that's when the problems with rogue AIs started, so the larger computers are a buffer to a future of rogue AIs running amok". I like that.<br /><br />As for games like Cyberpunk 2020, I just find myself contanly redating the timeline in my head, and tweaking the hostoric events, to make it fit. One of the things I would like to see is Mike Pondsmith rereleasing CP2020 (or redoing the campaign setting for CP2020) to update it to take into account modern events, to see how it would change the setting. The reason I stopped being interested in CP3rdEd (or whatever the hell they called that disaster that came out after Cybergeneration was called) was setting became too "out there" for me. Even CyberGen started to lose me. I loved CP2020 because it was so much closer to the real world, with a veneer of unreality laid over it.The Badger Kingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-24887505665123898442012-05-05T10:26:24.658-04:002012-05-05T10:26:24.658-04:00I guess that's were terms like "cyberspac...I guess that's were terms like "cyberspace" are born from.doreshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-33370850740510616012012-05-05T10:25:02.937-04:002012-05-05T10:25:02.937-04:00gunpowder guns are for losers ;)gunpowder guns are for losers ;)doreshnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-13699411702204529022012-05-05T09:04:28.635-04:002012-05-05T09:04:28.635-04:00No, that strangely makes sense to me ...
... it w...No, that strangely makes sense to me ...<br /><br />... it was the Space Pirate, in the Library, with the Slide Rule.Michael Kleinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-22053506584582509612012-05-05T08:33:36.082-04:002012-05-05T08:33:36.082-04:00Nowadays, I revel in older conceptions of science ...<em>Nowadays, I revel in older conceptions of science fiction and often find them much more enjoyable than whatever's trendy these days.</em><br /><br />I don't think this has anything to do with things being 'trendy,' unless you count liberalization as trendy.<br /><br />When you extrapolate current technology, properly speaking you ought to do the same with culture (culture is tech-driven, tech is cult-situated, etc.). It's very taxing to maintain fidelity to actual tech/culture in their massive complexity -- and there's ego-danger there.<br /><br />Extrapolating from older technology (here's looking at you, 'steampunk' wankers) means a little more implicit freedom to work with older cultural norms -- since you're trying to evoke the 'feel' of past tech, you end up relying partly on the feel of old culture(s). Which serves nostalgic ends, incidentally, but also (the bigger deal) serves <em>conservative</em> ones more broadly.<br /><br />In other words, especially for non-technologists, the appeal of old tech is partly the appeal of old fashion. Not exactly a pretty impulse.Wally Hollandnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-49317180104125001392012-05-05T08:25:45.825-04:002012-05-05T08:25:45.825-04:00Add:
Paper
PencilAdd:<br /><br />Paper<br />PencilAndy Staplesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-42591280027801553092012-05-05T07:02:42.897-04:002012-05-05T07:02:42.897-04:00 Radium, atomic, quantum, inversing the deflector ... Radium, atomic, quantum, inversing the deflector polarity...pretty much, yes.<br /><br />P.S. I'm reading the Barsoom stories right now: radium guns, radium pumps, ... ;-) Jochen Wenzelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-22268615043826152712012-05-05T05:39:41.805-04:002012-05-05T05:39:41.805-04:00If the science fiction is specifically based on so...If the science fiction is specifically based on some specific theory, invention or mechanism, then the story can get dated quite fast, especially once the idea is disproved. However most good (and especially good old) SF is about people not mechanisms. For example I still love the fiction of Eric Frank Russell, even if his rocket ships are powered by feeding a specific gauge of radioactive wire into the engines. That's just the Macguffin used to push the actual story about a man and a bird exploring a really strange place. [I heavily recommend his short fiction to anyone that hasn't tried it.]<br /><br />[Interestingly. I think short stories date a lot less quickly than longer works of fiction, mainly because a short story has to be succinct and to the point and therefore is focused more on the story and less on peripheral matters that may pluck the readers suspenders of disbelief. For example Arthur C Clarkes short fiction is still highly enjoyable and as applicable today as yesterday (try <i>Superiority</i> if you doubt me).]<br /><br />Realism in SF is a strange thing; consistency is far more important. Make one change, and have everything flow from that change. But some paradigm shifts are impossible to extrapolate across. For example, one of my favourite episodes of the old 1950 Buck Rogers serial when their rocket ship is hit and Buck and Wilma are forced to bail out. Wilma grabs the ant-grav chutes (two silver boxes roughly the size of a pack of cigerettes), whilst Buck grabs the huge locker-sized radio in both hands. Because the writers knew the audience knew how big a radio had to be, whereas antigrav chutes were magic. Transistors had yet to cross the writer's horizon and they had no idea what it would do to the size of electronics.<br /><br />Since we are already breaking reality anyway (say, by introducing FTL travel), then it doesn't take much more of an effort of mind to accept that the inertialess drive works as the author says it does, rather than as it should if it were truly inertialess. [For example, in "reality" removing something's inertia would make a perfect defence, since even lasers would just push the object out of their way.]<br /><br />Actually it is the society that dates far more readily than the technology, and that's not really noticeable in a lot of SF (it really isn't old enough to have seriously dated in this way). Even the SF of the late 1800s is still frequently enjoyed.<br /><br />So I'm keeping my H Beam Piper, Eric Frank Russell, CL Moore, EE Doc Smith, and the rest.<br /> Reverance Pavanenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-50661887962487146572012-05-05T04:38:24.531-04:002012-05-05T04:38:24.531-04:00I love out of date scifi. I never understood the ...I love out of date scifi. I never understood the abandonment of it. Heck, the odd aesthetic it has by modern standards helped inspire steampunkturkishproverbhttp://slidingscales.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-58371866133458234922012-05-05T03:20:48.522-04:002012-05-05T03:20:48.522-04:00If I ever wrote science fiction I think I'd de...If I ever wrote science fiction I think I'd deliberately use outdated technology (so I suppose it wouldn't really be SF).<br /><br />Firstly, cutting-edge modernism tends to date more quickly than anything else (cyberpunk).<br /><br />Secondly, there's sure to be someone who says "Wait, how are they lost? Wouldn't the onboard computer have GPS?" <a href="http://www.cracked.com/article_19325_6-technologies-conspicuously-absent-from-sci-fi-movies.html" rel="nofollow">This Cracked article</a> has some good examples. So I'd rather it made sense that these things didn't exist.James Hutchingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-75553776875969412672012-05-05T03:07:50.310-04:002012-05-05T03:07:50.310-04:00Is anyone here involved with Star Wars fandom? If ...Is anyone here involved with <i>Star Wars</i> fandom? If so, can they answer whether <i>Star Wars</i> fans try to justify or rewrite its 50s-like science, or just roll with it?James Hutchingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-35602975714911151732012-05-05T03:02:07.046-04:002012-05-05T03:02:07.046-04:00Another funny thing is that if you look at the ori...Another funny thing is that if you look at the original artwork of <i>Space: 1889</i> it seems like they really wished they were doing Indiana Jones instead.James Hutchingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-88545545077476396752012-05-05T02:59:54.191-04:002012-05-05T02:59:54.191-04:00 I think at one point 'radium' and 'at... I think at one point 'radium' and 'atomic' were commonly used to give a 'futuristic' feel without the authors or readers really knowing what they did.James Hutchingsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57519773261952281122012-05-05T00:21:22.447-04:002012-05-05T00:21:22.447-04:00I'd love to see a resurgence of that old schoo...I'd love to see a resurgence of that old school type of scifi. I was working on a short story recently and was aiming for that vibe. When I read science fiction, I don't really care that much if the science is accurate, just as the story is fun to read.Jasonnoreply@blogger.com