I'd be interested to know if the rest of the world took to killing each other BEFORE the West interfered.
Are you kidding? Being a product of American Public Schools, my familiarity with non-Occidental history is.. spotty, at best. However, some examples I am aware of include:
The Rape of Nanking - Japanese troops slaughtered everyone in a fairly sizable Chinese city - without mercy, without compassion, almost without provocation.
The Emperor Chin (chen?) -,who built the Great Wall of China. Also killed rival's families, burned literally every book he could find, and used up a large number of human resources on the Wall itself.
Where do you think the 'Mongol hordes' came from?
The Aztecs of South America were an people of great cultural advancement, with a beautiful, complex society.. which required the occasional human sacrifice.
I hardly mean to exonerate the West in any way by this -- I just wish to point out that It Ain't Racial -- It's Special (i.e. species-wide). Human beings, by and large, are savage and brutal and cruel. It's what we are. It's a fact that we should accept the way we accept that we will all die -- not with joy, but with a calm acceptance that we cannot purge this from ourselves; we have to live with it, a rational determination to ameliorate the consequences as much as possible, and a certain appreciation for the fact that we have a choice in the matter.
Ooh, I've got one.. Security cameras in the rocket's nose intercept the path of a secret Russian morph ray, and they all turn into plasma lasers and immediatately begin firing, instigating an instant fusion reaction in whatever matter they strike. The world is consumed in a fiery ball of orange flame, the explsion can be heard as far a Barsoom, (who promptly expels us from the Interplanetary League of Galactic Ubergotts.) The only remnants of earth are Moscow and Washington DC, which are doomed to chase each other forever throughout the galaxy, both encased in ultra-super-top-secret Venerian force fields.... Hrm... I guess the lesson is this: We should view the possible uses of any and every technology with the maximum possible pitch of fear and disdain. I just wish I could have explained it as emotionally as you did. -Jon
Perhaps I am unique in this, but there seems to be a profound difference in (ahem)..style between book-type fans and those who think that there has ever existed a "sci-fi" Television program in which realism*entertainment. There are two primary sub-genres of science fiction: 1.) "Hard" - The driving ideas are technological or natural. A large amount of understanding/creativity concerning physics, chemistry, astronomy, et. al. exonerates the author for less-than-blazingly-insightful depictions of human beings, especially if the world of the story is imaginatively constructed and well-formed. (i.e. Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov) 2.) "Soft" - Almost solely responsible for the "SPECULATIVE fiction, please" camp, this type of writing is driven by the immersion of the reader more into the characters than into the world surrounding them. An extensive grasp of hard science can be forgiven if powerful statements are made about the nature of human beings. (i.e. Orson Scott Card, Theodore Sturgeon) Thanks for listening. I say all that to say this: While it's perfectly alright to have areas of a story that are somewhat underdeveloped, there MUST be something else about the story that makes it worth being told. With a crap/total content ratio approaching unity, what passes for science fiction on television is and has always been the most unbelievable, uninspiring, tyrannically ridiculous waste of electrons that the world has ever seen. The _only_ exceptions I can think of are: Babylon 5: Neither the science nor the psychology got too far out of hand (thanks to Creative Consultant Harlan Ellison - damn fine writer.) Most importantly, NOT EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE SPOKE AMERICAN IDIOMATIC ENGLISH! Star Wars: This is perpetually maligned because the driving force is so huge as to be difficult to see: It's mythology. MST3K: Because it treats crap LIKE crap - and is funny about it.
Slashdot Mirror
I seem to have let my passion for this particular topic manifest itself as.. ahem.. not the nicest post I've ever made.
Please accept my aplogies. ----
"Ah reckon they gon' hafta use propane fer that, Bubba."
-----
Are you kidding?
Being a product of American Public Schools, my familiarity with non-Occidental history is.. spotty, at best. However, some examples I am aware of include:
I hardly mean to exonerate the West in any way by this -- I just wish to point out that It Ain't Racial -- It's Special (i.e. species-wide).
Human beings, by and large, are savage and brutal and cruel. It's what we are. It's a fact that we should accept the way we accept that we will all die -- not with joy, but with a calm acceptance that we cannot purge this from ourselves; we have to live with it, a rational determination to ameliorate the consequences as much as possible, and a certain appreciation for the fact that we have a choice in the matter.
Ooh, I've got one.. Security cameras in the rocket's nose intercept the path of a secret Russian morph ray, and they all turn into plasma lasers and immediatately begin firing, instigating an instant fusion reaction in whatever matter they strike. The world is consumed in a fiery ball of orange flame, the explsion can be heard as far a Barsoom, (who promptly expels us from the Interplanetary League of Galactic Ubergotts.) The only remnants of earth are Moscow and Washington DC, which are doomed to chase each other forever throughout the galaxy, both encased in ultra-super-top-secret Venerian force fields.... Hrm... I guess the lesson is this: We should view the possible uses of any and every technology with the maximum possible pitch of fear and disdain. I just wish I could have explained it as emotionally as you did. -Jon
Perhaps I am unique in this, but there seems to be a profound difference in (ahem)..style between book-type fans and those who think that there has ever existed a "sci-fi" Television program in which realism*entertainment. There are two primary sub-genres of science fiction: 1.) "Hard" - The driving ideas are technological or natural. A large amount of understanding/creativity concerning physics, chemistry, astronomy, et. al. exonerates the author for less-than-blazingly-insightful depictions of human beings, especially if the world of the story is imaginatively constructed and well-formed. (i.e. Robert Heinlein, Isaac Asimov) 2.) "Soft" - Almost solely responsible for the "SPECULATIVE fiction, please" camp, this type of writing is driven by the immersion of the reader more into the characters than into the world surrounding them. An extensive grasp of hard science can be forgiven if powerful statements are made about the nature of human beings. (i.e. Orson Scott Card, Theodore Sturgeon) Thanks for listening. I say all that to say this: While it's perfectly alright to have areas of a story that are somewhat underdeveloped, there MUST be something else about the story that makes it worth being told. With a crap/total content ratio approaching unity, what passes for science fiction on television is and has always been the most unbelievable, uninspiring, tyrannically ridiculous waste of electrons that the world has ever seen. The _only_ exceptions I can think of are: Babylon 5: Neither the science nor the psychology got too far out of hand (thanks to Creative Consultant Harlan Ellison - damn fine writer.) Most importantly, NOT EVERYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE SPOKE AMERICAN IDIOMATIC ENGLISH! Star Wars: This is perpetually maligned because the driving force is so huge as to be difficult to see: It's mythology. MST3K: Because it treats crap LIKE crap - and is funny about it.