by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:15 pm
by Auze » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:18 pm
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:22 pm
Auze wrote:Clickbait. You didn't go insane and that was a little too short for a rant.
by Farnhamia » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:23 pm
by Las Palmeras » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:23 pm
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:28 pm
Las Palmeras wrote:One of the wonderful things about sci-fi is that it often needs to have some kind of sense of historical or contextual consciousness to base its fictional setting off of, to imagine a future -which varies in how feasible it is depending on how "hard" the science is. Granted, this isn't all sci-fi.
Though, my personal hunch is that its just as capable of mythifying and idealizing a past, or a desire to return to said edenic past. I actually want to make my undergrad thesis on how the Paleocontact Hypothesis and ancient astronauts sci-fi shows a lot of the post-war problem of modernity/progress instead of an actual desire to understand antiquity.
by Farnhamia » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:31 pm
Internationalist Bastard wrote:Las Palmeras wrote:One of the wonderful things about sci-fi is that it often needs to have some kind of sense of historical or contextual consciousness to base its fictional setting off of, to imagine a future -which varies in how feasible it is depending on how "hard" the science is. Granted, this isn't all sci-fi.
Though, my personal hunch is that its just as capable of mythifying and idealizing a past, or a desire to return to said edenic past. I actually want to make my undergrad thesis on how the Paleocontact Hypothesis and ancient astronauts sci-fi shows a lot of the post-war problem of modernity/progress instead of an actual desire to understand antiquity.
So essentially, because history plays a part in literature, it leads to people studying history and deciding their minds eye version is better then modern reality?
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:33 pm
Farnhamia wrote:Internationalist Bastard wrote:So essentially, because history plays a part in literature, it leads to people studying history and deciding their minds eye version is better then modern reality?
Sure, why not? I know that my version of history is considerably better than what people like to call "reality."
by The South Falls » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:36 pm
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:39 pm
by Aeritania » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:41 pm
Internationalist Bastard wrote: a long rant
by Valentine Z » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:42 pm
♪ If you are reading my sig, I want you to have the best day ever ! You are worth it, do not let anyone get you down ! ♪
Glory to De Geweldige Sierlijke Katachtige Utopia en Zijne Autonome Machten ov Valentine Z !
(✿◠‿◠) ☆ \(^_^)/ ☆
♡ Issues Thread ♡ Photography Stuff ♡ Project: Save F7. ♡ Stats Analysis ♡
♡ The Sixty! ♡ Valentian Stories! ♡ Gwen's Adventures! ♡
• Never trouble trouble until trouble troubles you.
• World Map is a cat playing with Australia.
by Farnhamia » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:43 pm
by Las Palmeras » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:47 pm
Internationalist Bastard wrote:Las Palmeras wrote:One of the wonderful things about sci-fi is that it often needs to have some kind of sense of historical or contextual consciousness to base its fictional setting off of, to imagine a future -which varies in how feasible it is depending on how "hard" the science is. Granted, this isn't all sci-fi.
Though, my personal hunch is that its just as capable of mythifying and idealizing a past, or a desire to return to said edenic past. I actually want to make my undergrad thesis on how the Paleocontact Hypothesis and ancient astronauts sci-fi shows a lot of the post-war problem of modernity/progress instead of an actual desire to understand antiquity.
So essentially, because history plays a part in literature, it leads to people studying history and deciding their minds eye version is better then modern reality?
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:47 pm
Farnhamia wrote:Internationalist Bastard wrote:True, but does that make it escapism or utopian thinking?
My first impulse is to ask "What's the difference?" but I think it depends on whether the author intends the story to put forward a philosophical or political theory, or intends to entertain. Of course, this can't really be a hard and fast rule, because Robert Heinlein, in his later works, was very much putting his libertarian political ideas forward in books that are very entertaining. One might cite Thomas More's Utopia as being on the less entertaining side, though there is a narrative framework (and, of course, 21st century readers will find that 16th century prose fiction lacks something).
So, I dunno, would you read Utopia for escapist fun? Would you read The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress for the philosophy?
by Mushet » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:48 pm
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:48 pm
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:50 pm
Aeritania wrote:Internationalist Bastard wrote: a long rant
In my humble opinion, I just think certain historical periods are interesting. I'm not going to romanticize anything. *shrug*
More to your point, I think it's all recently become more popular because of famous works in these genres becoming more prevalent: Look at all the hullabaloo over the second Blade Runner movie (classic cyberpunk), and the (unfortunate) enduring success of Star Wars, which must be quintessential "castlepunk". There are no castles, sure, but there's a princess, a knight, and wizards up the space wazoo.
Also, I wouldn't take the "-punk" part so seriously; "-punk" genres have always been more aesthetics than actual genres.
by Farnhamia » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:51 pm
Internationalist Bastard wrote:Farnhamia wrote:My first impulse is to ask "What's the difference?" but I think it depends on whether the author intends the story to put forward a philosophical or political theory, or intends to entertain. Of course, this can't really be a hard and fast rule, because Robert Heinlein, in his later works, was very much putting his libertarian political ideas forward in books that are very entertaining. One might cite Thomas More's Utopia as being on the less entertaining side, though there is a narrative framework (and, of course, 21st century readers will find that 16th century prose fiction lacks something).
So, I dunno, would you read Utopia for escapist fun? Would you read The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress for the philosophy?
I can get that. Sorta like, I love starship troopers in spite of the er, connotations
But why this specifically?
by Farnhamia » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:52 pm
Mushet wrote:Wouldn't this fit in better in A&F?
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:55 pm
Las Palmeras wrote:Internationalist Bastard wrote:So essentially, because history plays a part in literature, it leads to people studying history and deciding their minds eye version is better then modern reality?
Ehh, well, I have to clarify my idea...which really doesn't reflect on all sci-fi.
I consider that sci-fi's plausibility opens up the public opinion to what can and can't be possible, or at least that was the case for the Golden Age of Sci-Fi. Y'know, Amazing and stuff. And that the mid 20th Century's technological developments gave sci-fi, or fictional elements of it, some bit of credibility.
BUT, the big fat issue was that ethical progress was lacking after the world witnessed WW2 and its horrors, and technical progress only caused more unease as it only expanded the capacity for destruction and not just well-being. Hence, the need to idealize or criticize in fiction.
...
I'm just using the idea of precursor aliens as an example on how archetypes are used to idealize. After the war, a lot of stories about not only technically superior, but also spiritually and morally superior ETs began to pop up, reflecting this crisis of modernity. Add in the Space Race craze and guys like von Daniken who seemed to take elements from sci-fi and misapplied scientific hypothesis...Internationalist Bastard wrote:True, but does that make it escapism or utopian thinking?
Well, depends on how it can be analyzed. I tried using Bajtin to do a project on Asimov's Foundation series this semester and ended up using Bruno Latour.
Interesting. The present is seen as wrong, so highlight the past. Go to a time technology meant people traveling further faster and not when it was an arms race
But if you consider narrativity to be lineal or structural, it leads to implying that a lot of fiction is "eschatological" to use the term generally, that's sorta helped by the basic "Conflict-Climax-Resolution" way of laying things out. So the return to a mythical golden past is a really ingrained thing.
by Internationalist Bastard » Mon Nov 26, 2018 7:58 pm
Farnhamia wrote:Internationalist Bastard wrote:I can get that. Sorta like, I love starship troopers in spite of the er, connotations
But why this specifically?
Why what? Heinlein and More were the first people who popped into my head. I did think of Plato's Symposium, which has a narrative framework, too, the drinking party after Agathon's victory at the Dionysia of 416 BCE. I suppose it's the intersection of what the author intends and what the reader takes away from the work.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ethel mermania, Jetan, Likhinia, Philjia, Singaporen Empire, The New York Nation
Advertisement