tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27426598.post65961006122032003..comments2023-12-14T08:48:46.577-05:00Comments on Pyr-o-mania: Has It Really Been So Long Since "Who Shot JR" ?Lisa Kayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14578593003811737367noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27426598.post-57848687549928457752008-07-05T16:51:00.000-04:002008-07-05T16:51:00.000-04:00I think it may have to do, in part, with science f...I think it may have to do, in part, with science fiction's golden age portrayal of the <I>scientist as hero</I>. And sensitivity to Hollywood media and other portrayals of the "mad scientist." So SF began with clean cut, smart, emotionally-together guys saving the world with their slide rules and rationality, whereas the mystery began with neurotic consulting detective drug addicts and alcoholic PIs with gambling debts.Lou Andershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00694362734492222851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27426598.post-72222404578459868922008-07-05T11:38:00.000-04:002008-07-05T11:38:00.000-04:00Quote: "But I find myself wondering why we seem to...Quote: "But I find myself wondering why we seem to have such a hard time with flawed protagonists in SF. Our sister genre, mystery, is practically built on the adventures of broken human beings you might want on your case but wouldn't necessarily enjoy having a beer with, loaning money to, or dating."<BR/><BR/>Hmmm. I'm halfway through Infoquake, so my thoughts may change 180 degrees by the time I'm done with MultiReal but anyway try this on for size.<BR/><BR/>Mystery books have been around forever - I'm not sure how long science fiction has been. So, readers are used to (and comfortable with) their characters being broken human beings. But not so with science fiction, especially since the "heroes" have been just that - heroes, perfect in every way. Fortuneatly (in my opinion) we are started to see broken human beings in science fiction.ceshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02228169390182512752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27426598.post-39470788719675738512008-07-03T16:22:00.000-04:002008-07-03T16:22:00.000-04:00Absolutely. The Simpsons and Futurama share exactl...Absolutely. <I>The Simpsons</I> and <I>Futurama</I> share exactly the same brand of humor and some of the things that occur in <I>The Simpsons</I>, no - <I>most</I> of the things that occur in <I>The Simpsons</I> - are pretty bizarre, but they are grounded in the idea that the series occurs in a contemporary suburban environment, rather than the year 3000 AD, which is why one show got canceled and now has a niche audience, while the other has been on for over a decade.Lou Andershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00694362734492222851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27426598.post-80498939347574820602008-07-03T16:02:00.000-04:002008-07-03T16:02:00.000-04:00"I'm just interested in the notion of protagonist ...<I>"I'm just interested in the notion of protagonist as role model because a few other people came away with similar sentiments from the first book. [...] But I find myself wondering why we seem to have such a hard time with flawed protagonists in SF. Our sister genre, mystery, is practically built on the adventures of broken human beings you might want on your case but wouldn't necessarily enjoy having a beer with, loaning money to, or dating."</I><BR/><BR/>It might have something to do with the way many people read sf/f--projecting themselves into the world via some character (usually the protagonist). Getting into the world in a mystery is less difficult because we can mostly remember it rather than having to build it up in our minds as we go. So in familiar worlds we can stand in the world and work on appreciating the complexity of characters, but in an unfamiliar world we depend on the character (maybe too much) as a fixed point in an shifting and not-fully-understood environment.<BR/><BR/>Not sure if any of this is making much sense...James Engehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01959690088080326476noreply@blogger.com