Subject: Re: Bigotry and SF
> Nicola stated in another thread:
>> What else should a reader find in a story if not what the
>> author put in it, Eric? It's the author that wrote it, not
>> the reader!
> Surely, you jest, Nicola, or else it was a kneejerk
> response. We each bring such varied experiences to the
> reading of any work, that we each find different things in
> any serious work of merit, different themes or ideas or
> feelings that resonate with varying degrees of intensity--
> whether or not the author intended to produce those
> particular responses.
No, I wasn't jesting, John. I might allow for a kneejerk
response, but I wasn't doing that either.
Whatever you say you find in a book in addition to what the
author (consciously or unconsciously) put in it is to be found in your
mind instead. You only (and mistakenly) *think* it is in the book. It is
a difficult mistake to avoid.
========================
Subject: Re: Clarke, the farout author .... far, farout.
>> Maybe now that they think they've discovered that life was
>> on Mars a few million years ago, we'll send a man to Mars
> <Wait I second while I climb on my soapbox.>
> Don't you mean "we'll send a _person_ to Mars"?
Small technical details!
========================
Subject: Re: Shift to "family" movies
>> Yet another example of "affirmative action" that hasn't
>> any relation
> Ok, could some US-based member please explain what
> affirmative action is?
My own opinion, Umberto, is that freedom is ok for the promoter
of the "affirmative action" but not for everybody else.
Per�, non sono americano.
========================
Subject: Re: Clarke
>> Does a discussion of Arthur C. Clarke's sexual orientation
>> really fit into the concept of what belongs on this list?
> This time I agree with you, Ben.
> When an author overtly discusses, questions, "uses" the
> theme of homosexuality, like Delany does, it's right to
> connect it with his/her personal choices.
> But "gayness" is not a main theme in the world of a novelist
> just because he/she is gay. In Clarke it is a rather
> unimportant aspect of his world, isn't it?
Questione di opinioni. (=Matter of opinions.)
Anyway, in his fiction, Clarke seems to show a great tolerance
for any kind of sex behavior (homosexuality explicitely, and probably for
other kinds implicitely), provided they don't do harm to anybody. It
might be therefore allowed and interesting to speculate (however idly)
about his sexual orientation.
========================
Subject: Re: Discontinuity and biological SF
>> We both agree that modern fantasy and the more
>> ancient medieval romances and the still more ancient greek
>> and roman epic are two different things, Umberto, but I
>> suspect that the verse/prose difference is more a cosmetic
>> difference than a real one. And a technical one; verse is
>> *much* easier to remember by rote than prose.
> Well, Nicola, sad to disagree because usually I agree with
> your messages (I am not so fond of Clarke, but as you
Oh well, you can't win 'em all... :::philosophical shrug:::
If I remember correctly what I was thinking at the time of this
thread, I was considering only the comparation between medieval romance
and current fantasy. In this particular context, the fact that the first
use verse and the second prose is probably only a cosmetic difference. I
may be wrong, though.
> probably know tutti i gusti sono gusti, diceva quello che se
> magnava le saponette--yuk yuk!), but prose and poetry are
> much more different than that.
Buon appetito! disse quello che si ciucciava i calzini.
> (btw, do you know that lovers of sorcery, occultism,
> mysteries, etc. argue that the Grail is buried under a
> church in Turin, Italy?).
Eek, even worse than the Sacra Sindone! Che Dio ci scampi e
liberi! (=May God help us all!)
> Both were indeed terribly serious, though probably they were
> also endowed with an outstanding capability to entertain.
> (Personally I have not found in modern fantasy something
> more beautiful and moving than the Parsifal legend)
The Lord of the Ring, Umberto, is worth a gazillion times all
other today's fantasy...
> (But why is the title of this thread "discontinuity and
> biological Sf"? where the heck did we start from?)
And who remembers? Probably in a posting of mine, way back then
(15-20 days ago! <G>)
========================
Subject: Re: Whither SF
> I could add that we have a technology far surpassing our
> political ability to govern it. The story of the Apollo
> project and the thread we had some time ago discussing US
> space policy could be a sad comment on this bitter truth.
I believe, Umberto, that the invention of fire, wheel and, most
important of all, writing and arithmetics, surpassed the political
ability to manage them, and changed the history forever, for the better
or the worse.
========================
Subject: Re: Bigotry and SF
>> By pure random statistical chance, your friends should be
>> about 10% gay, 10% black, 7% latino, 5% asian (I could be
>> off on the asian/latino stats), 50/50 male/female, and
>> overwhelmingly lower-middle class. Bet they're not.
> Does anybody have to feel guilty because of that? (just
> asking)
Neither you nor I, Umberto. Here in Italy, these statistics don't
apply.
========================
Subject: Re: More story identification
> This sounds like James Blish's "Surface Tension" (originally
> "Sunken Universe" (1942) published ("in part" says the
> copyright page) in _Galaxy_ (1952). It is now incorporated
> into _The Seedling Stars_ (1957). My copy is published by
> Signet NAL Canada, 1964).
It's a wonderful story, indeed.
Too bad that there are two major flaws: #1) no living being that
small contains enough cells to support a brain big enough to be really
intelligent; #2) it doesn't "really" take in account the surface forces
and the brownian movement so predominant on that scale. Have you noticed
how still human-size is the protagonists' environment? I'd have expected
a much more alien environment.
========================
Subject: Re: Nihil humanum tag
> "Nihil humanum alienum puto"
> It's a quote from a play of Terence (a writer of Latin
> comedies which aren't funny in the least): the speaker is an
> interfering old bore who has just been told to mind his own
> business ('Nothing human is not my business').
> I admit that it's now used to mean that anything human is
> something that I can (and should?) relate to.
Thanks, Stephen! I had thought it was Terenzio, but my high
school memories are quite foggy. I was then as bad a student as my
professors were bad as teachers.
========================
Subject: Style
Hmm, Eric, I guess that I have no idea how to defend my position,
anymore.
As I keep liking a plain style, I guess I'm dumb; it's not a
pleasant discovery, after about 20 years of such a liking in fiction.
--
Respectfully,
Nicola Gebendinger
Thy merchants chase the morning down the sea
Their topmasts gilt by sunset, though their sails be whipped to rags
Who raced the wind around the world go reeling home again
With ivory, apes, and peacocks loaded, memories and brags
To sell for this high profit: knowing fully they are Men!
(Flecker and Sanders)
|