Talk:Science fiction/Related Articles: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Aleta Curry (more considerations) |
imported>Hayford Peirce (a couple more suggestions) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::As long as I'm making up words anyway, ''radionistas''? | ::As long as I'm making up words anyway, ''radionistas''? | ||
::[[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 17:37, 22 February 2008 (CST) | ::[[User:Aleta Curry|Aleta Curry]] 17:37, 22 February 2008 (CST) | ||
:::How about "Precusors" for Shelley, Cyrano de Bergerac, etc, and "Pioneers" for Verne, Poe, etc. Naw, Gene is much too modern to be a pioneer (see above) -- how about something like "Groundbreakers" or "Important figures" -- geez, I wish I could have gotten some of the WP crowd who *really* know their S.F. to contribute to CZ -- a couple of them joined but haven't done anything, I dunno why. I myself am far too lazy to get involved in a complete S.F. article -- except to say, in passing, that *most* true S.F. fans, writers, aficionados, etc., *detest* the term "sci-fi". I myself couldn't care less about it, but it truly upsets a large number of people, so it's probably best to avoid it unless it's clearly being used in some sort of context. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 17:58, 22 February 2008 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 17:58, 22 February 2008
"Architects" hmmm...well, I would use in in context. And I'm still not hip to "googling it" as a solution to anything. But, moving right along, another solution would be simply to title the section "Science fiction pioneers", which I think would cover more than "science fiction creators", and then subtititle "Cineasts", "Authors", perhaps even "Actors". What's the word for radio people? Aleta Curry 17:09, 22 February 2008 (CST)
- Well, I *did* think for a moment about using "pioneers", as you say, but then decided that Madeleine L'Engle, for instance, is by no means a pioneer. If we use "pioneers", it's gotta be only for people like Verne, Gernback, Wells, Poe, etc. Even St. RAH himself, the god-like Robert A. Heinlein, although certainly a pioneer of *modern* READABLE science fiction, shouldn't be called a pioneer, as that word has very strong connotations that we don't need to google, hehe. "Radiodramatist"? Hayford Peirce 17:18, 22 February 2008 (CST)
- Yeah, good point about "pioneers". Okay, do we want to separate out "pioneers" and "contributors"? I thought "contributors" too weak, as we don't want any of tens of thousands of contributors. Where do we place precursors, like Mary Shelley? Is Frankenstein bona fide science fiction? And on what level "pioneer"? If you consider that Flash Gordon was how many generations before Star Trek, is Gene Roddwenberry a pioneer? On the other hand, what he started was ground-breaking in a lot of ways, social commentary, inclusionism, again, not new, but novel in that time, generation and genre.
- As long as I'm making up words anyway, radionistas?
- Aleta Curry 17:37, 22 February 2008 (CST)
- How about "Precusors" for Shelley, Cyrano de Bergerac, etc, and "Pioneers" for Verne, Poe, etc. Naw, Gene is much too modern to be a pioneer (see above) -- how about something like "Groundbreakers" or "Important figures" -- geez, I wish I could have gotten some of the WP crowd who *really* know their S.F. to contribute to CZ -- a couple of them joined but haven't done anything, I dunno why. I myself am far too lazy to get involved in a complete S.F. article -- except to say, in passing, that *most* true S.F. fans, writers, aficionados, etc., *detest* the term "sci-fi". I myself couldn't care less about it, but it truly upsets a large number of people, so it's probably best to avoid it unless it's clearly being used in some sort of context. Hayford Peirce 17:58, 22 February 2008 (CST)