Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

lareviewofbooks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 130 posts

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#101

Post by micheljones »

eesmith wrote: post #16
micheljones wrote: post #4

Because it became saddled with SJWism and PC culture.

This is completely counter to the thesis in the article. For example: > Looking back from two decades later, Next Generation (1987–94), Deep Space Nine (1993–99), and Voyager (1995–2001) feel like a single continuous 1990’s moment, a moment that began in a renewed liberal optimism for multiculturalism and progress and the general advancement of humanity. Where is the SJWism and PC culture which saddles the latest ST…

I am guilty of the original sin. I have made my provocative comment before reading the article - I assumed it's about SF in general, primarily written SF based on the domain name.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#102

Post by eesmith »

metaphorm wrote: post #90
eesmith wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling for a safe spaces? "Trump demands safe space for Mike Pence after he was booed at Hamilton" - https://news.avclub.com/trump-demands-safe-space-for-mike-pe... ("The Theater must always be a safe and special place.The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!") Trying to ruin someone's career? "Donald Trump Casually Threatens To ‘Destroy’ The Career Of State Lawmaker"…

Trump is deliberately using the language and tactics of his political enemies against them in a kind of counter-trolling demagoguery. This is ugly stuff. The discourse has descended to the level where the media is dominated by two different groups of extremist trolls taking potshots at each other using the language of outrage and grievance. The rest of us are caught in the middle and our society is becoming deranged…

How can you tell? Perhaps he's using the language because he really thinks it's meaningful?

How do you know there isn't only one group of extremist trolls?

If two groups disagree, they don't have to be balanced yin and yang.

If two groups disagree, the real answer doesn't have to lie in the middle.

In the 1850s US, there were pro-slavers and anti-slavers. Who was in the middle, and were they right?

But hey, I watch Democracy Now, 'cause I think the the real problems are corporate owned media and media centralization. At the very least, DN doesn't dominate the media.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#103

Post by IncRnd »

krisdol wrote: post #18
occultist_throw wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just attributed it to standard SJW virtue signalling. It's meaningless aside to others who understand the same lingo, and agree with it. Edit: Ah, the usual SJW refrain. Silence any criticism via flags, -1's and other tools available, instead of discussing why the quote is right/not and what it means.

Can you rephrase what you said? Whenever I see "SJW" or "virtue signaling" in a post, I immediately stop reading and move on. Those terms are meaningless to those who don't subscribe to the groupthink of a devout cult of sheltered sexists.

Can you rephrase what you said? Whenever I see "devout cult of sheltered sexists" in a post, I immediately stop reading and move on. Those terms are meaningless to those who don't subscribe to the groupthink that you mentioned.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#104

Post by eesmith »

micheljones wrote: post #101
eesmith wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is completely counter to the thesis in the article. For example: > Looking back from two decades later, Next Generation (1987–94), Deep Space Nine (1993–99), and Voyager (1995–2001) feel like a single continuous 1990’s moment, a moment that began in a renewed liberal optimism for multiculturalism and progress and the general advancement of humanity. Where is the SJWism and PC culture which saddles the latest ST…

I am guilty of the original sin. I have made my provocative comment before reading the article - I assumed it's about SF in general, primarily written SF based on the domain name.

Or reading the comments. I wrote https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15332868 precisely to prevent that mistake from happening.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#105

Post by dragonwriter »

ashark wrote: post #77
slachance wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question. I'd say that the ties back to imperialist days on Earth are there because (1) it's a popular idea to hate this part of history, and (2) despite having lead characters who are asian and black, the show is still implied to be "white enough" for the comparison to be justified. The claim is that Star Trek 's premise is a problem because it makes the flawed assumption that one culture can be better than ano…

Yeah, I glossed over that part with an "uh, yeah, kinda, sure" for the Uhuru and Worf things (the put-upon not-terribly-competent "service worker" in TOS is clearly Nurse Chapel, if it's any named recurring character, and Worf gets punched a helluva lot less than one might think given his role and demeanor—Picard is more often both the physical and emotional punching bag, I'd think), an "I guess..." for the Sisko bit…

> the put-upon not-terribly-competent "service worker" in TOS is clearly Nurse Chapel, if it's any named recurring character

Surely, Yeoman Rand...

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#106

Post by [deleted] »

eesmith wrote: post #82
wildmusings wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no other word to describe the groups behind the wave of petty but vicious activism in the last decade or so. The people calling for "safe spaces" and trigger warnings, literally shaking from micro-aggressions, trying to ruin people's careers for holding common opinions, and always claiming to be the victims of some -ism. What would you call them?

Calling for a safe spaces? "Trump demands safe space for Mike Pence after he was booed at Hamilton" - https://news.avclub.com/trump-demands-safe-space-for-mike-pe... ("The Theater must always be a safe and special place.The cast of Hamilton was very rude last night to a very good man, Mike Pence. Apologize!") Trying to ruin someone's career? "Donald Trump Casually Threatens To ‘Destroy’ The Career Of State Lawmaker"…

[deleted]

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#107

Post by [deleted] »

occultist_throw wrote: post #81
DanBC wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I just skip over the rest of the text. You could also skip over the step of posting in comment threads.

You're indeed right. I could. But this stuff is everywhere, whether you want to read it or be part of it, or not. 1. Donglegate. Told a dongle joke, got fired. 2. Meritocracy Rug, Github. 3. "CodeOfConduct.md" 4. GamerGate 5. Throwing fits about pronouns: https://www.dailydot.com/news/github-gendered-pronoun-debate... 6. NodeJS leadership splitting at the seams https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/72dff4/nod…

[deleted]

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#108

Post by TeMPOraL »

cicero wrote: post #83

> deeply racist portrayal of its Klingons This struck me as strange. The Klingons started off as the violent bad guys in TOS. Then in TNG and DS9 there was an attempt to make them more admirable. In Discovery, I got the impression that the Klingons will be made more sympathetic in that we will be given more of a picture of their perception of the Federation, and why they perceive the Federation as a threat. Yes, Burn…

Let's hope not. The first two episodes have indeed portrayed Klingons in a pretty sympathetic light. That they're a race of warriors bound by honor and tradition is a well-established thing in Star Trek canon. But if you look beyond that, the show establishes a pretty clear reason for them to feel threatened by the Federation

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#109

Post by outsidetheparty »

micheljones wrote: post #99
outsidetheparty wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That totally makes sense. The original Star Trek, of course, was completely unconcerned with issues like race relations, social justice, equality, multiculturalism, and all that other socialist garbage. If only we could go back to those long-ago days of the 1960s when nobody ever talked about these terrible newfangled hippie-dippie ideals!

Dear Sir, thank you for your valuable snarkasm. You have proven me wrong on all accounts. The neoreligion of SJWism and PC culture that you subscribe to cannot be wrong in any way, and is always 100% right. I have seen the error of my ways and humbly accept my punishment.

Yes, I can definitely tell you're interested in having a serious and thoughtful discussion about these issues, and can see that it would really be worth my time to engage with your nuanced opinions on the matter.

Re: Why did science fiction stop moving forward?

#110

Post by busterarm »

metaphorm wrote: post #84
busterarm wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never really agreed with this tacit assumption everyone makes that ST was this super-progressive show. If you're really paying attention, and with the exception of DS-9, almost all of the heroes are white and educated (or their sidekicks) and all the villains are dark and barbaric. Seems straight up racist to me.

Romulans are emphatically not dark and barbaric, they're "evil" Vulcans, and aesthetically modeled on various European Imperial iconographies with lots of Eagle/raptor symbolism. Ancient Roman (it's in the name already) or even 20th century Fascist seems like the reference points. The Cardashians seem to be based on Totalitarian Communist regimes. They have grey skin, which isn't dark, but is also not a human skinton…

They look different than us and follow different societal norms, right?

Forest. Trees.

Post reply on HN