Sf authors who got it right...so of.

Another topic was about SF authors who got things wrong. What about those who were aiming in the right direction?

Ray Bradbury made some extrapolations in F-451 that seem close to things today.

1. Wall size TVs in Montage's house -- Huge, flat screen plasma screens
2. Small communition device -- Blue tooth technology
3. The 'Family' that Montage's wife watched on TV -- Reality Television

I just finished The Two Faces of Tomorrow and for a book written in the late-70's, I thought James P. Hogan was pretty good at describing the internet (EARTHCOM) and cell phones (viewpads).

He also set his novel in 2040-ish, so who knows what else he was right about?

Political rants on another aisle, please.

1984 had the giant TVs that provided the citizenry w/ "informed consent" to their lives, and weren't the sets able to spy w/in the homes? (defn. need to reread - been way too long).

Bob, I think you're confusing 1984's televisor - which could see into the home - with Fahrenheit 451's wallscreens, which couldn't. The wallscreens gave the illusion of interactivity, though I don't recollect if that was in the novel or Truffault's film.

I am a little confused by kswolff being flagged. Is this because of her attack on Sarah Palin? Sarah Palin is a member? Really? What's in her library - The Moose-wood Cookbook?

#7 - Sarah Palin is a member? Really? What's in her library - The Moosewood Cookbook?

I doubt it. The Moosewood Cookbook is a vegetarian cookbook.

It does seem that the group is more likely to flag posts right now. I defended kswolff on another thread. I hope this bout of flagging is somehow tied to the current ruckus in the Fe Fi FOE Comes thread and isn't a sign that the group is just more thin-skinned than it used to be.

Why on earth has message three been flagged out of public view? It's not spam, the author is selling nothing. And it's not abusive, either to anyone on LT personally or anyone in general. The author is merely voicing their disapproval of the McCain-Palin ticket. What on earth is wrong with that?

Seriously, people. You want to disagree with what's being said, fine. I've no problem with that. Ignore it, enter in a dialogue, whatever. But he does have a right to say it!

Voltaire would be rolling in his grave right now...

Apparently I offended someone with my spot-on observations. Seriously, Handmaid's Tale -- Huckabee, Palin, etc.

Is this offensive or is politics barred from SF discussions? If so, why aren't the comments about 1984 flagged?

I guess that makes me an unperson.

Go back to reading your John Ringo and Terry Brooks.

10: Well, no, it doesn't make you an unperson, and it doesn't mean you should be flagged.

Your post does mark you as someone not to be taken seriously though.

#8: jseger9000 "I hope this bout of flagging is somehow tied to the current ruckus in the Fe Fi FOE Comes thread ... "

I suspect that's it. There has certainly been too much flagging in this group recently. We used to be considered more robust, e.g. here.

Never said I was a prophet, so I shouldn't be taken that seriously. Just wish those people in robes would stop chanting everywhere I go. Bloody annoying.

But how can one not find the parallels between Handmaid's Tale and Sarah Palin? Have you even read the book? Or heard a Palin speech?

Oh right, science fiction writers aren't meant to comment on contemporary events. Take a hike, Orwell and Huxley. Your kind aren't welcome here.

How is one taken seriously around here? A fawning adulation of such literary geniuses like George Lucas and Kevin J. Anderson? As if.

#12 - Thanks for the link to the Michael Chrichton thread. Ah, those were the days, no?

It's not that I want the threads here to seem hostile or unwelcoming, but it's often the extreme posts that spark a discussion. If we all 'play nice' and start flagging posts because they made us mad the group will become soft and boring.

Man, you should hear (read?) the abuse heaped on Asimov and his fans (I am one myself). Obviously I disagree with those posts and thought the posters were mean. But I'm not going to flag them or search out ways to see that they were indirectly making a comment on me.

I chose to follow the option described in #11.

If it really bothered me I feel I would be best served countering those opinions, not flagging the post that bugged me.

(Sorry to have derailed the conversation. I think SF authors who got it right is a great topic.)

"But how can one not find the parallels between Handmaid's Tale and Sarah Palin? Have you even read the book? Or heard a Palin speech?"

Yes, and yes. I've read the book, and heard her speak.

I "can not find the parallels" quite easily because I haven't gone crazy with paranoia about either political party. Anyone who thinks that Palin would try to impose (or even want to impose) anything resembling even remotely the society in The Handmaid's Tale is just engaing in ridiculous hyperbole coupled with silly alarmism.

Look, there are a lot of reasons to think Palin wasn't a good choice to be Vice-President (her shocking ignorance of foreign affairs for example), but thinking she would want to (or even if she did want to, could) put in place some sort of theocratic regime is just goofy.

What abuot Asimov. I am thinking of the movie/novel where for a medical operation they shrink the team.

Now we don't have shrinking per se. But we are beginning to use pill camera's, we have noninvasive surgery by wires inserted into the groin.

The medical future is here. (But too damn costly)

And Shouldn't political discussions and opinions be elsewhere. Reality of politics to science fiction seems pretty far fetched. And for every gripe one has at a politico for one party, there is someone for the other side, and then as this is an international site, probably a great deal of people who are laughing themselves silly over all the fuss.

#16 - I love ol' Isaac, but alas, you are thinking of Fantastic Voyage. Unfortunately Asimov only wrote the film novelization. The story isn't his.

I wish I could be saying that he got it right about robotics. I so badly want a Three Law robot of my own!

Science Fiction Fans is not the place for posts that can be seen as bashing the supporters of the Republican presidential ticket, which if I recall correctly (too lazy to google it) received around 45% of the popular vote. I'm sure LT has groups to discuss politics. There's no need to belittle the supporters of other side to voice your opinion.

Thank you jseger9000, yes, I know the Moosewood Cookbook is a vegetarian cookbook but I said Moose-wood cookbook (sic). It's a pun you see. Because she cooks moose-burgers. Up in Alaska. When she's not on the phone with BushCheney (sic) plotting to overthrow the constitution.

Sorry, Landshark5. Didn't see your post before I posted the above. Are you saying that SF has nothing to do with politics? Or that any discussion beyond reliving adolescent fantasies of shooting up alien bad-guys and falling into the arms of buxom, adoring and subservient femmes is out of place in this forum? A big chunk of SF has been satire or commentary on existing political situations Zamyatin's We, 1984, Brave New World. Wasn't Heinlein's Puppet Masters a support of McCarthyism, Starship Troopers an attack on peaceniks?
Wasn't John Norman's Gor series an attack on the feminist movement (as well as an outlet to his own kinks)? Asimov's Robot series an attack on racial prejudice?
Yes, this discussion has wandered away from the main thread but that was caused by the unmerited flagging of kswolff who in no way infringed on the terms of use. Reading Landshark5's post (#18) I get the impression that he believes that anyone who criticizes a politician criticizes their supporters as well. That is not the case. No Republican, other than those running for office, has been harmed in the making of this thread and no ad hominem attacks have been made on anyone in this thread. kswolff seems to have been attacked and censored solely for his political beliefs, I thought we had left that behind us. Apparently not.

#18

If someone sees parallels between say The Handmaid's Tale and say the choice of Sarah Palin then they should say so. I see that as fair comment. After all the world in The Handmaid's Tale didn't come about because someone stood up and said "you know what, all these women should be put in their place" at the outset. It was a slippery slope. Now you may not agree with the point, or the exaggerating for effect that kswolff takes part in, but it is quite clearly not bashing individuals here so shouldn't be flagged.

To follow up my own post (bad form I know).

However I do not want to see a great deal more such posts because it will probably result in tribal warfare - with political slagging off from all sides, and posts on all sides flagged into their hidey-holes.

#19 - I said Moose-wood cookbook (sic). It's a pun you see.

Sorry for trying to play along.

I was recently struck by Ray Bradbury's short story The Murderer, in which the protagonist becomes fed up with his inability to get a moment's peace because of the all the technology by which he's surrounded. Although written in the 1950's, all you have to do is tweak the descriptions of some of the devices and you can easily see parallels with many modern day workers bitching about their cell phones and blackberries.

I got this off a web review, so I can't be sure it's a completely accurate quote from the text but it gives the idea:

What is there about such 'conveniences' that makes them so temptingly convenient? ... Convenient for my office, so when I'm in the field with my radio car there's no moment when I'm not in touch. In touch! There's a slimy phrase. Touch, hell. Gripped! Pawed, rather.

#23 My apologies for misconstruing your response.

We engage in very stout political discussion in other groups without descending into incivility. I've seen more flagging in this group in the last month than in the politics groups in the last two years.

Don't use flags to keep discussion on topic. Most topics don't support more than a handful of posts by themselves. Branching out is the lifes blood of these kinds of discussion. If it gets away, speak up, otherwise suck it up, grow up, and move on.

I almost wish Tim would make available a list of the people who flag messages along with their reasons. Flagging kswolff above is just chicken shit.

Okay so politics is a no go area. Let's stick to something safer

So, in the light of Pope Benedict's re-instatement of a holocaust denying Pope and promoting a Bishop who believes Katrina is God's punishment for homosexuality, does anyone believe that Pullman may have got it right in The Golden Compass

#27 "Pullman may have got it right"

He got the church right, but he wasn't speculating on the future, so it's topic drift.

There are a few Science Fictions from a Roman Catholic priest, that i even have in my library but right at this moment I can not remember his name, who was very prolific, and very popular in the 70's and 80's.

Religion may be even less safe then politics.

I think the point is that certainly science fiction can emulate history. A whole sequence in the Foundation trilogy appears to me to be about Napoleon, but I think I can state that without hurting a large amount of sensibilities, though if I called the Mule, what we want Senator/Candidate for US President XXX as the same I know I would be opening a can of worms, that would not be taken as satire, or comedy, or something Letterman or 30 Rock should handle more appropriately.

Interesting theory. Why not Hitler rather than Napoleon?

I always thought the Mule was Napoleon... Is the Mule Hitler?

I always thought it was his neck around which Johanna hung her binoculars.

# 31 I was just asking why you thought that and not say Hitler. Or why not some Roman emperor since it's based on The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.?

Ack. That's the problem with posting online and late at night, intention isn't always communicated properly. Discussions of politics is certainly acceptable if they tie into science fiction. I think you have to be very careful in how you express that opinion. Politics and religion engender strong reactions. If you are for or against a group or happy they won or lost, you are entitled to your opinion. If the various posts can be construed as belittling the supporters of a ticket or position, I think that crosses the line. I'm as guilty as the next guy, but if you are going to post on a controversial topic like politics or religion, you should read and reread your posts to make sure they don't come across wrong. I got a very negative and snarky vibe from kswolff's posts and I'm sure actual supporters of Palin felt it even more strongly.

I didn't realize I would start such a firestorm when I started this topic. All the talk about flagging reminds me of a book by Nat Hentoff called Free Speech for Me--But Not for Thee: How the American Left and Right Relentlessly Censor Each Other.

Sinner (I like that better than addressing you as Justified ;-)

I had an ahha moment so many years ago when reading the books that I said to myself, self, that's Napoleon. It seems in my dim memory that the Mule was a short man, perhaps that is why. But it has been nearly/over 30 years since I read this so perhaps my ahha is subject to interpretation.

It's been a long time since I read it too. I vaguely remember him being regarded as deformed but this was only a rumour he put out to disguise himself.

So sad that some things in Timescape by Gregory Benford
are coming true - the acid rains, the enormous algae blooming in the seas.

Extrasolar planets.

SF authors predicted we would go to Moon. They never predicted we wouldn't be back. Maybe once we discover oil or cheap housing prices, there might be more impetus to head back to Ye Olde Green Cheese Satellite.

There are probably a lot of years ahead of humanity. Plenty of time to establish colonies on the moon.

DW, I wouldn't count on it.

Gene, have you been reading those armageddon stories again? If we launch all the nuclear missiles now, how many science fiction predictions would that make true? BUt then would anyone be around to really appreciate the irony?

The cockroaches and Keith Richards. And the Last Cylon, who may or may not be Keith Richards ;)

You know, ks, The Stones sometime in the seventies played a concert as The Cockroaches in an attempt to get back to playing small venues, which they missed. They let a few people know what was what and let the word of mouth flow. I know one of these concerts was in Atlanta, where I was living at the time. At the Fox.

So, I guess my point is Keith would survive both as a cockroach and as a stone.

My question is who is/was Gaeda?

James Lovelock reckons we'll to down to 1 billion by the end of the century. From a population peak of 8-9 billion in 2030-2050. With nearly 9 in 10 dead how much of a spacefaring civilization would be left?

What kswolff said about Palin seemed plausible. Another example of getting it right was Stranger in a Strange Land by Heinlein. He predicted the religious right and political conservatives would merge into one political party. That was spot on for the evolution of the GOP. Considering that he published it in 1961 during the first year of JFK's administration, it is kind of impressive.

47
I remember reading Stranger in a Strange Land in the mid 60s (all my friends in Military School were reading it), I was probably 15 or 16 and it was the first sci-fi book I ever read. I loved it. I actually remember thinking about the merger of the political right wing religious group that no way that will ever happen, not in the U.S.A. where we have separation of Church and State. RAH got it right or at least a lot closer to right than I did.

You make me sad.

I read a trilogy back in 1999 called The Tenth Planet by Dean Wesley Smith and Kristine Kathryne Rusch. In the series, people wear multi-function watches that remind me an awful lot of smart phones.

"I wish I could be saying that he got it right about robotics. I so badly want a Three Law robot of my own!"

Does that come with its very own Will Smith?

#24 Bradbury had just come out of the Goebbels era, from whence all modern marketing flows.

#29 It's been mooted many times that, in Foundation, Asimov was re-visiting the crumbling, fall and re-emergence of world-girdling empires (Roman to W. European).

After Spain, the loci this influence quickly moved north and had to include France's First Citizen who crowned himself emperor of Europe. This is incontrovertible fact, nothing vaguely politically sensitive.

#41 Yes, and then will we find that the moon is a harsh mistress indeed?

#46 pioneers have always been the hardiest souls, surviviors.

#48 Without being in any way, shape or form political, RAH also wrote Revolt In 2100, a 1953 collection of related shorts:

"The short novel, "If This Goes On—", describes a rebellion against an American theocracy and thus served as the vehicle for Heinlein to criticise the authoritarian potential of Protestant Christian fundamentalism.

The work is not an attack on religion in general, however, as he has a Mormon community take part in the anti-theocratic revolt.

The short stories, "Coventry" and "Misfit", describe the succeeding secular liberal society from the point of view of characters who reject it." Wikipedia

#53: Tamaal "It's been mooted many times that, in Foundation, Asimov was re-visiting the crumbling, fall and re-emergence of world-girdling empires (Roman to W. European)."

He suggested it himself in one of his humorous poems: "Take an Empire that was Roman". I can't remember the rest, or where I saw it, but he also mentions Gibbon.

I thought he'd actually said the book was based on Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Which makes it not in the least bit moot.

The idea that a civilization must fall, and when it crumbles so much from internal decay, is a clear following of Gibbons. For how many large empires had been studied and had fallen from the things that Gibbon cited and Asimov paralleled. But that was the fall of the empire. The psycho history study wasn't in Gibbons, the rise of the Mule.

The Mayor and the rebirth of civilization from the edges.

The period of our history in the west after the fall of the Fuondation seems to have similar moments such as the Mule, whom I also thought of as Napoleon, but these are codified elsewhere and not in Gibbons. Foundation is the history of man replayed in the telling.

#51 - Does that come with its very own Will Smith?

Good Lord, I hope not. That would sour the deal for sure.

> According to Wikipedia the Mule has parallels with Attila the Hun, Charlemagne and Augustus although I don't really see it myself. I would have thought him more like Claudius if anyone.

Wow, all of history is science fiction. What will science fiction not claim?

The future?

I've seen recent evidence suggesting SF is thoroughly ensconced in the future, already.

I am pretty sure that we are just stuck in a time paradox. You know that the rome really didn't fall. The Great Martinus Padway is back there even now saving us from barbarians, Mohammed and the decrepit Eastern half of the Empire. The time ripples will hit any day now.

It will probably mean no internet and LT will disappear, but then too, so will Gibbons.

#65

Been reading Dick, have you? The Empire never fell, you know.

L Sprague deCamp

As any good British person (and any fule) kno the Roman Empire changed it's name to the British Empire and has continued unabated tho it's incognito now.

Shortly to emerge as the Second Empire in the myriad where the american christian Right are still in concert with political conservatives and military industrial complex.

Jesus would be so proud!

Since Asimov was of Russian descent, perhaps the asiatic push to send the Vandals and Visigoths and Huns to destroy the Empire from without, that later led to the Mongols and Cossacks, perhaps mixing some bloodlines into Asimovs heritage...

Really we find that the foundation was set up in Kiev and that all along it has been Russian that has been taking us to the new age...

Maybe Putin is the Mule? (and Asimov is a latter day Nostradamus).

No, it's all just psychohistory (or psychobabble).