Re:Samuel Delany and the Past and Future of Science Fiction
by WaxProlix on Thursday July 30, 2015 @04:57PM
(#9978047)
It could be interpreted as a noun-noun compound; "machismo adventuring" would be akin to "cave spelunking" or "ego exploring".
Probably a typo.
Re:Samuel Delany and the Past and Future of Science Fiction
by AdeptusAquinas on Thursday July 30, 2015 @04:56PM
(#9978041)
The final comments also support the theme: Some of the more conservative authors presently complaining are doing so, Dulaney thinks, because they fear the growing presence of a more diverse community and a wider acceptance of the same. Trends which will continue to grow into the future.
I think this might be attributing too much malice to the author in question though; Larry C seems more like a somewhat thoughtless writer annoyed that his low-brow entertainment books are not considered to have the same merit as Dulaney's stuff, backed up by an echo chamber online community.
Re:Samuel Delany and the Past and Future of Science Fiction
by linksnapzz on Thursday July 30, 2015 @07:26PM
(#9978949)
Perhaps Larry C. could raise his profile with the New Yorker by joining NAMBLA. I'm sure that it was an innocent oversight on Bebergal's part to omit that detail about Delaney from the piece.
Re:Samuel Delany and the Past and Future of Science Fiction
by JadeNB on Thursday July 30, 2015 @08:41PM
(#9979252)
None of the following is a defence (his attitude on NAMBLA is deeply squicky to me); but, as far as I know, Delany (not Delaney) was never a member of NAMBLA. The closest that some quick Googling finds is the famous quote:
> I read the NAMBLA [Bulletin] fairly regularly and I think it is one of the most intelligent discussions of sexuality I've ever found.
Will Shetterly has a conversation with Delany on the subject at http://shetterly.blogspot.com/2014/07/a-conversation-with-sa... .
Re:Samuel Delany and the Past and Future of Science Fiction
by MaysonL on Thursday July 30, 2015 @09:13PM
(#9979373)
Re that, see: http://shetterly.blogspot.com/2014/07/a-conversation-with-sa...
An email conversation about NAMBLA and sexuality with Samuel Delaney.
For example, here are quotes where the past:
> Delany came of age at a time when the genre [of science fiction] was indeed characterized by gee-whiz futurism, machismo adventuring, and white, heterosexual heroes.
is contrasted with the present:
> In the contemporary science-fiction scene, Delany’s race and sexuality do not set him apart as starkly as they once did.
EDIT: Actually, I hesitate to presume on the legendary New Yorker proofreaders / fact checkers, but shouldn't it be 'macho' (an adjective), not 'machismo' (a noun), 'adventuring'?