XPost: alt.usage.english, rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.books   
   From: robban@clubtelco.com   
      
   On 12/09/13 2:36 PM, Snidely wrote:   
   > on 7/25/2013, Steve Hayes supposed :   
   >> On Thu, 25 Jul 2013 07:37:58 +0800, Robert Bannister   
   >>    
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> I would have thought that most people who read SF&F are aware that   
   >>> FTL, time travel, telepathy, etc. do not work and cannot work. Back   
   >>> when I was twelve, these were all thought to be possibilities.   
   >>> Moreover, although only a few really knew the details of real science   
   >>> at the time, it was possible to understand the broad ideas, and   
   >>> Asimov and others spent a lot of time explaining them. Modern science   
   >>> is way beyond the imagination of those not involved.   
   >   
   > Hmmm.  I'm not sure that Stephen Hawking is that hard to read, at least   
   > in _A Brief History of Time_ and _The Universe in a Nutshell_.  I've   
   > only dabbled in George Gamow, but his books made an impression on the   
   > public, especially the public that was buying science fiction.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Perhaps you could say that there is a difference between SF that   
   >> focuses on   
   >> the technology as such, and that for which it is a mere literary   
   >> device for   
   >> moving people to an unfamiliar environment.   
   >   
   > There's a handful of stories that can do both.   
      
   This is a revival of a very old thread.   
   --   
   Robert Bannister   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)