Re:Why Futurism Has a Cultural Blindspot (2015)
by TeMPOraL on Sunday October 14, 2018 @03:32AM
(#18211797)
Depends on what you focus. What makes it an intelligent story may be the consequences of ships traveling months, or consequences of UBI. What makes it both intelligent and sci-fi is why ships travel months, how do they travel, what particular technologies are imagined and how they solve the problems of space travel, why UBI is needed, that UBI is UBI and not slavery, etc.
Interpreting sci-fi stories as just normal stories with fantasy props robs them of half of their value.
Re:Why Futurism Has a Cultural Blindspot (2015)
by posterboy on Sunday October 14, 2018 @07:04AM
(#18212348)
as I said, ship travel on earth makes the same difference. The ship's propulsion is in the realm of fantasy, even.
Re:Why Futurism Has a Cultural Blindspot (2015)
by TeMPOraL on Sunday October 14, 2018 @07:10AM
(#18212366)
Except everything about that travel is different. Distances, mode of travel (continuous thrust, flip&burn), time-lag for communication, range and length of combat - all different.
If you don't consider object-level descriptions as valuable in itself, then I don't think you'll find much enjoyment in science fiction (especially of works on the harder end of the scale).
Or even modeled after age old stories. Like most writing recycles and reinterprets old material. I started to wonder what historic metaphors the Expanse relies on, what with ship travel taking months, pirates, colonies, the plague - but the opposite of slavery, with unconditional basic income. The gang "the Golden Bough" is a hint at Virgil's Aeneid, I learned today by coincident. It's not hard sci-fi at all. The sci-fi is kept to a minimum as much as the fantasy. That is, the fantastic elements should be kept to a minimum. Now I wonder what that thing (not to spoiler) represents. Just a deus ex machina for sake of the story or a ring of ancient overlords?