 |
|
BlackCat
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuciwalker
Except that every thread in the archives is closed. |
And what should prevent them from reopening ?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Verto
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zkribbler
Semantical arguments can be made where other matters fall. For example: Are space operas a category of science fictions or do they deserve their own subgenre? |
Maybe the main qualifying factor should be: is the story, when told with its scientific/technological aspects removed, still the same, or does it actually suffer? For example:
Twenty-thousand Leagues Under the Sea: This book is all about the submarine, and the technology that powers it, that makes Nemo's underwater empire possible.
Fahrenheit 451: Remove what scientific/technoligical aspects are present in this book, and you are left with...the entire theme that Bradbury sought to convey.
etc.
Many books/movies use "Sci-Fi" as decoration, a backdrop for political discourse, satire, humor, etc.
Maybe I got sidetracked and never answered your post, but oh well. There is certainly a wide spectrum of science fiction upon which books can fall: the original science fiction of Jules Verne and H.G. Wells; hardcore science fiction, in which the former(science) is emphasized over the latter (fiction) - great detail, with the author trying very hard to convince the reader the technology is plausible, realistic, etc - IOW, closer to Verne, than to Wells. Star Trek and other sci-fi shows would fall under this category, along with Asimov, etc.
Other categories:
"Mainstream" Sci-Fi : the story told takes place in space, in the future, etc; advanced technology is present, but mainly used as tools to advance the storyline of the main characters. Ex: Star Wars
Alternate History: self-explanatory. I would say this is to us, what Jules Verne was to his time; whereas the readers of the 19th century looked forward at what could be, many of us today look back at what might have been. Space perhaps no longer holds us in such gripping fascination; perhaps with all our modern, every-day technology, our travels into space, many people can better escape from reality when reading about a world in which America had never unified, than space colonies on Mars. (Note: This is not to say space is no longer interesting to people, just a rambling opinion).
Last edited by Verto on 11-07-2005 at 06:30
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:20
|
|
Just finished Ender's Game.
Disturbing, in a way.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:20
|
|
I haven't read much science fiction before, just Cosm, as mentioned earlier in one of these threads. So I can't compare Ender's Game to any other science ficiton book. All by itself it was a good read, intriguing and easy to put yourself into the main actor's point of view. This seems to be a downpoint of some, it being too easy to read, I really don't know what's your point. Was it a short read? It took a few days, and I've been through books of this size quicker before.
I find the concept of children that age acting like that highly unrealistic. There can be no argument about this; they might be overly intelligent, but their acting is not only characterised by their intelligence, but also implies certain physical developments that just aren't there at that age. For example, the author always emphasizes how zthey always walk around naked, lay on their beds naked etc. That's not an attitude to nudeness I would expect fo 6-10 year olds, more of 16+, and not by maturity or anything, but by awareness of physical development that a 10 year old simply cannot claim. They might just be acting adult you might say, but no no....
It wasn't too easy to emphasize with Ender as an isolated being, not only my social manipulation on the teachers' behalf but also by natural inability. I mean the guy isn't a cleevr geek wearing glasses, he exercises, has leadership ability and all that, yet no friends? Hard to accept. I can see though how this part makes it easy for some of you to understand this book 
And yes, when it comes to the end, the pattern begins to become clear. I mean that old man TELLS him the ships would arrive at enemy worlds within days, and about how the farther away they are, they older and more outdated they'd be too. So when he fights that last battle and uses very obsolete ships, it's about clear. I already had my suspicion during much earlier phases too, not about him already fighting, but with fighting being exactly the same kind of environment for him.
All in all it was quite nice. "Disturbing" because of all the issues Ender has and how they are portrayed. He should just kick his brother in the nuts if he's so srong. Oh yeah, that part of the 2 siblings taking over it all is quite unreal, but that's a book from the mid 80s, he couldn't know the nets wouldbe loaded with millions of clever kids like those. And how unimportant a single writer on the net really is.
The book offers enough hints if not cliffhangers about how the story could be continued, with parts of the story being told from different points of view: Valentine, Bean, even Anderson and Graff... So why do you all hate Bean so much after reading those sequels? Not planningto do so myself, I wasn't quite sucked into the matter enough. A good standalone read. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:20
|
|
Indeed. I'm not going to have all that typed for no reason. Debate.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Richelieu
|
|
Gatineau
Dec 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
I agree with everything you posted.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-07-2005 07:42
Kinda obvious, wasn't it?? 
|