b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 8469923 (Thread)

# my next one to read is Moorcock
i'm working on a victorian style novel at the moment and i'm trying to getting to that sort of scientific romance mindset
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:23, archived)
# yeah, it's really cool reading early sci fi
back when they are called 'scientific romances' or something.

i'm reading Flatland soon, 1884 it was
it's more maths-fi though
i doubt that's a real genre name...
it's a story about maths though!
well... geomtery.
but still.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:26, archived)
# geometry is just plain awesome
and thats a fact.

hypercubes ftw
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:31, archived)
# basially
it consists of 90% awesome and 10% deposited awesome solids.

i tell you what annoys me about sci-fi though
there's so much stuff out there, where they have a pretty cool idea, like Cube (or Cube 2: Hypercube.. actually basically the whole series) for example. but the scriptwriters just obviously have NO clue about how real people work, so the characters and plot developments are so... ugh.

i always find jules verne like that.
all his books seem to consists of are him reaming of a list of random facts he knows, a bit of semi-interesting plot, and then some wild fabrication of his.
impressive predictions sure, but as a story, and especially Now. yawn.

Orson Wells on the other hand. mo' like AWESOME WELLES!
i wish that was my joke there and then :(
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:37, archived)
# I'd say that's true of writers in general, not just science fiction and fantasy.
It's just no-one seems to mind when dramas are so cliched and poorly written than you want to shit your eyes out.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:39, archived)
# it's probably because
drama is usually a bit more subtle, so there's never really any ridiculous premise to pull it all apart.

not that there's anything wrong with ridiculous premises of course, as long as you keep it consistent.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:44, archived)
# I think the worst character I ever saw in anything ever, was Anakin's character in Revenge of the Sith.
The writing in that was really apalling, it wasn't as if he even got lured in by an elaborate and cunning Monte Cristo style plot he just suddenly went evil.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:53, archived)
# come to the dark side anakin!
ok
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:55, archived)
# Shit I should really finish that 16th century Star Wars play I was writing...
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:59, archived)
# i swear to god you and my mate chris are the same person
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:03, archived)
# Why, does he hate you too?
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:05, archived)
# he thinks the world will validate him if he pretends to hate it
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:06, archived)
# Is he clincally insane by any chance?
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:09, archived)
# cyclically insane would describe him better
he's currently writing a jacobean league of extraordinary gentlemen
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:13, archived)
# That just sounds pointless.
Surely the Victorian times was enough of a dislocation from the usual standards of superhero sagas, I can't see what making it Jacobean would add.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:16, archived)
# caliban, the revengers etc
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:27, archived)
# But surely that's just having the exact same idea as The League of Extrodinary Gentlemen but just changing the time period and cast slightly.
I can't much see the point in copying Alan Moore's idea in such a fashion.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:31, archived)
# then why do a 16th century star wars?
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:32, archived)
# Because I wanted to rewrite the Anakin and Obi-wan partnership breakdown and eventual turn well, instead of terribly and inplausbily as in the film.
For some reason I decided on the idea as a play, and I couldn't just have it exactly the same as the original star wars so I removed the future and made it one of the renaissance era wars in Italy to fit with the fact that it was a play better. That's pretty much it. I only ever wrote about one scene and then buggered off to do something more interesting, but the idea is still there.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 3:37, archived)
# this is true sadly. i think verne needs to be read when you're young and not concerned with characterisation too much
H.G. Wells strikes the balance right though i find.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:40, archived)
# there's this little quote from the epilogue of war of the worlds where he writes
'[i wrote some detailed something] that would scarcely be of interest to the casual reader'

which is so perfectly true.
verne just seems to be showing off his technical knowledge, and forgets he's not writing a Big Book of Boys Facts, he's writing a Story.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:43, archived)
# this is what i love Wells for
"by a happy mingling of reasoning and intuition perculiar to her success she struck gold almost immediately. But the whole story of her submarine mining, intensely interesting though it is, must be told at some other time"
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:48, archived)
# My book was like that until I realised the additional information was disjointed and pointless really.
So had to rein loads of the stuff in and just add them as amusing asides.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:48, archived)
# pratchett style footnotes or what?
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:49, archived)
# Nay, I just tried to tie the actual information into the speech, plot or whatever is going on.
When previously it was either only tenuously relevent or just came completely out of nowhere. And I just made the stuff more concise and to the point generally.

If it does ever get published and subsequently carries on to the potential series, I think I'll just have to put out a compendium of miscellania which has all the unfunny stuff in, like evolutionary paths, the creation of some of the weirder escher worlds and so on.
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:51, archived)
# Yay for maths...
Old MacDonald had a form: ei /\ ei = 0


/gets coat
(, Tue 17 Jun 2008, 2:31, archived)