Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why are Our Imaginations Retreating from Science and Space, and into Fantasy?
The Globe and Mail (Canada) ^ | Monday, September 8, 2003 | SPIDER ROBINSON

Posted on 09/08/2003 10:49:45 AM PDT by anymouse

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-184 next last
To: lafroste
>>>I think its an excellent story. <<<

Since it's not doing anything, why not put it on the web and see if you can generate some interest? Maybe someone will option a screenplay ;).
41 posted on 09/08/2003 1:23:48 PM PDT by MalcolmS (To Boldly Go Where No Man has Gone Before)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: anymouse
I love softballs.
This one is a slam dunk.

Science requires intellectual effort and costs money.

Fantasy costs little or nothing, and it requires no intellectual effort whatsoever.

42 posted on 09/08/2003 1:41:38 PM PDT by Publius6961 (californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anymouse
I love softballs.
This one is a slam dunk.

Science requires intellectual effort and costs money.

Fantasy costs little or nothing, and it requires no intellectual effort whatsoever.

43 posted on 09/08/2003 1:41:57 PM PDT by Publius6961 (californians are as dumb as a sack of rocks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anymouse
Hard science fiction is growing less popular than fantasy because (A) science stopped telling people what they wanted to hear, (B) science started being seen as the cause of problems rather than the solution, (C) as science advanced, it started to eliminate more possibilities than it created, and (D) science has advanced beyond the ability of most sincle people to comprehend or stay on top of. Science stopped being a friend and started being an enemy so people have retreated from it into the more friendly world of fantasy, where anything is still possible and, at the wave of an author's pen, things can work exactly the way we'd like them to.

Of course Spider Robinson should complain. From what I've seen, he's a social liberal and they currendly exceed just about any other group in their hostility towards science and spending on things like space travel. All those feminists reading fantasy novels about unicorns and warrior women are not Republicans.

44 posted on 09/08/2003 1:45:40 PM PDT by Question_Assumptions
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anymouse
Spider is a good writer and very entertaining but simply isn't in good shape to be judging reality. Hello, sci-fi channel anyone? Stargate ring a bell? Farscape? Battlestar Galactica remake? Even outside of there, Matrix, the comicbook movies. And in less speculative but still science based look at all the crime shows on CBS. Sci-fi is doing fine. Interest in science is doing fine. VCRPlus died so people must have finally learned to program their VCRs.
45 posted on 09/08/2003 1:47:56 PM PDT by discostu (just a tuna sandwich from another catering service)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill
......'The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever'......

You too?

In all honesty, I got through 5 of the 6 books, started the last one, opened it..........and then never read it! THAT is the sum total of my enthusiasm for the thing.

My impression was that Donaldson got togeather with a bunch of friends and they all dropped LSD and went on a marathon session of Dungeons & Dragons; the 'catch' being that the weeklong trip/game was audio taped and afterward he transcribed the story from the tapes. It was incoherent; I hated the hero; I hated the plot; I hated the characters; I hated the premises; it meandered; the hero was an 'anti-hero', which I can no longer stand; and after awhile, I just DIDN'T care anymore.

This book is an abysmally bad piece of crap. I learned nothing from it and took nothing away, except for a bad taste in my mouth (mind). I kept waiting for the 'payoff' and finally gave up! I can't say enough bad things about this book since I was (as noted before) a BIG SciFi buff before reading this rotten aimless drek.

If SciFi wants to save itself, destroying ALL copies of this book would go a long way in redeeming itself.

46 posted on 09/08/2003 1:49:10 PM PDT by DoctorMichael (TAG! You're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MalcolmS
The reason for this is that it is simply impossible to develop new stories that have not already been told within the confines of the hard SF genre.

I beg to differ. I believe the reason for this decline is that most of the people who write fantastic fiction -- and all but one or two of the people in publishing houses who buy it -- are liberal arts majors who are very good at writing and editing stories about human characters and their relationships, and very, very bad at math, engineering, or having any understanding of how real science is done.

The few writers I know who have some real background in the sciences -- Michael Crichton, David Brin, Greg Bear, and Bob Metzger come to mind -- never seem to have trouble coming up with new ideas.

As for the rest of the dreck out there: blame Clarion.

47 posted on 09/08/2003 2:01:11 PM PDT by brbethke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MalcolmS
Orson Scott Card rendered a passionate defence of SF Literature as one of the few forms of literature that allows us to examine the constructs of our societies.

Right. Sci-Fi has always been social fiction. Change the backdrop so the social issues stand out clearly.

48 posted on 09/08/2003 2:02:20 PM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Law of the Excluded Middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tokhtamish
Of course it is - that's why I posted the article. Whereas I was never a big sci-fi fan, I do see this trend away from a hopeful future to a genre of nihlistic fantasy future in sci-fi as having a negative effect on kids' ability to dream up new solutions, rather than just mope in self-pity or frivolous escapism.
49 posted on 09/08/2003 2:06:51 PM PDT by anymouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DoctorMichael
Thanks. I thought I was the only one who thought "Thomas Covenant" was unreadable crap. My wife loved the series, though
50 posted on 09/08/2003 2:08:35 PM PDT by SauronOfMordor (Java/C++/Unix/Web Developer === (No longer unemployed, praise the Lord))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Question_Assumptions
I seem to recall a thread about a year or two ago where Spider eviscerated the environmental movement. He may be liberal but you wouldn't have gotten it from that column he wrote.
51 posted on 09/08/2003 2:37:14 PM PDT by xp38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: DoctorMichael
I gave up on Sci-Fi years go due to 1) the boring McCaffrey/feminist 'dragonriders' crap and all its incarnations, 2) the Oregonian, communist sentiments in the equally fetid scribblings of Ursula LeGuinn and, 3) the general entrapment of writers into penning formualic junk for the Star Trek/Star Wars franchises (I've NEVER read one of these novels and refuse to) so Lucas et al. can afford that new 10,000 sq.ft. addition onto their mansion.

You're going to want to try some Gregory Benford - a working physicist, writing about the politics of science as actually practiced. He also has some nonfiction articles periodically in "Reason".

52 posted on 09/08/2003 2:54:38 PM PDT by BlazingArizona
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #53 Removed by Moderator

To: MalcolmS
>Since the 1930's, we have, in our literature explored the near planets, the galaxy to its boundaries and infinite uncounted dimensions.

Since our science is better than in the 30' or 50's, it is no longer possible to even fantasize that Mars and Venus are double earths they way Heinlen or Bradbury could. Venus is not a warm, rainy earth (The Illustrated Man) and there are no ancient Martian cities to explore (The Martian Chronicles).

Space is vast and emtpy and takes huge amounts of resources just to get a little way. In an age of chemical rockets and bound by a speed of light barrier, space it not the source of infinite possibilities like Star Trek made it seem(which is hardly a good example of hard science fiction).

54 posted on 09/08/2003 3:03:54 PM PDT by Dialup Llama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: BlazingArizona
I gave up on Sci-Fi years go due to 1) the boring McCaffrey/feminist 'dragonriders' crap and all its incarnations, 2) the Oregonian, communist sentiments in the equally fetid scribblings of Ursula LeGuinn and, 3) the general entrapment of writers into penning formualic junk for the Star Trek/Star Wars franchises (I've NEVER read one of these novels and refuse to) so Lucas et al. can afford that new 10,000 sq.ft. addition onto their mansion.

I cut my teeth on SF too. I think I read "Childhood's End" by Arthur C. Clark when I was 9. I bit off a little more than I could chew.

I recently picked up Farmer's "Riverworld" series and was astounded at just how awful it was. While some of the theories were interesting, the secular humanisim made the book stink like yesterday's diapers. I find a lot of that rubbish in books written during the 60's and 70's. What is WITH those authors?

As for SCIFI, I blocked it on my dish since they canned Farscape. They can take their "Tremors" worm and shove it up Vivendi's collective rump.

I am a bit optimistic. If NBC buys Universal, which includes SCIFI, then they need to be reminded that in the 60's they launched a little science fiction series that only lasted three years. Perhaps you've heard of it? ::wink wink!::

There are a handful of authors I read regularly -- David Duncan, Lois McMaster Bujold (ANYTHING Miles, ALL THE TIME!), Julie Czerneda (her Web Shifters is wonderful) and Terry Pratchett. Pratchett's humor in this day and age is priceless.

55 posted on 09/08/2003 3:04:01 PM PDT by Kieri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: MalcolmS
The reason for this is that it is simply impossible to develop new stories that have not already been told within the confines of the hard SF genre.

The whole point of a hard sf is to develop NOVEL takes on space exploration and science. Each book or series needs a new 'mcguffin'.

Good point. It was strange to see how the centuries of technological research and of adventure ended up with the "holodeck" in the Star Trek cosmos. In other words, future man has nothing better to do than pursue the kinds of fantasy that we now indulge in via movies, video, computer games, the Internet, and the beginnings of virtual reality.

Technological progress comes over us very quickly nowadays, but what comes has so often been predicted and examined by SF writers generations ago. Our capacity for imagination seems to have run far beyond real technological developments. Looking at the failures of world's fairs in recent decades, someone commented that the Internet is already a permanent kind of "world's fair" of information, novelty, and amusement. If SF is in a malaise, the reasons are similar.

Fantasy is hard-wired in humanity, but space exploration will require a major external stimulus to justify spending the money necessary, especially since we already have been making those journeys for a long time in virtual media.

56 posted on 09/08/2003 3:35:44 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: js1138
My very first, in sixth grade, was Heinlein's Tunnel in the Sky. I still reread it now and then.
57 posted on 09/08/2003 3:40:11 PM PDT by BRO68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: js1138
I really like most of what I have read by Heinlein, except that I think he very much caught up in the sexual issues of his generation and he always seemed to be trying to make Kinsey's case(which we now know was fraudulent) by weaving it into his stories in his later years.

But other than that, and despite that, I really liked a heap of what he wrote. I even remember a short story I read when I was a kid, And He Built a Crooked House written by him.

I think Stranger in a Strange Land was his best, though. Mainly because it was just a really good literary idea: "What if a human came into our culture as a complete psychological alien?"

58 posted on 09/08/2003 3:56:51 PM PDT by Yeti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: discostu; All
Spider is a good writer and very entertaining

Did he write one about 10-15 years back about hippies in Canada and time-travel?

59 posted on 09/08/2003 4:05:15 PM PDT by Yeti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
......My wife loved the series, though.....

Well, in THAT case, I hope I was diplomatic enough in my appraisal of this tome.

;-)

60 posted on 09/08/2003 4:37:44 PM PDT by DoctorMichael (TAG! You're it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-184 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson