sf-lovers (12/19/82)
>From SFL@SRI-CSL Thu Dec 16 13:50:40 1982 Reply-To: SF-LOVERS at SRI-CSL To: SF-LOVERS@SRI-CSL SF-LOVERS Digest Sunday, 19 Dec 1982 Volume 6 : Issue 111 Today's Topics: Themes - sexism in Piers Anthony and SF, Time Travel, shrinking in HGttG Misc - HGttG in Nature, video game T.V. - recent "Aliens/ET" show, SF and lack thereof Movies - Star Trek, Airplane II, SW/TESB/ROTJ, Sir Alec G. alive ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 16 Dec 82 11:01:25-PST (Thu) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!burton at Ucb-C70 Subject: More Piers Anthony sexism I have just completed Piers Anthony's "Viscous Circle", which is altogether a fine book. However, I noticed how blatantly sexist Anthony is in his science fiction; prior to this novel, I had only read his Xanth novels, and so contributed his sexism to the genre in which he was writing. Now I can no longer use this excuse. Was it just my imagination? Was I being overly sensitive? I realize Anthony's sexism has been discussed on the net before, but has anyone discussed his attitudes with regards to science fiction novels? I recall such lines in "Viscous Circle" as: It is the nature of the [female] sex to not give love away, but to always use it to gain some advantage. There were many instances (which I can't remember well enough to quote) where Anthony makes statements (such as the one above) about various characteristics of the female sex, which I felt were at least a little, and in some cases greatly, demeaning. Has anyone else out there read "Viscous Circle" and gotten a similar impression? Doug Burton inuxc!burton ------------------------------ Date: 16 Dec 82 12:55:36-PST (Thu) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!CSvax.Pucc-H.Physics.els at From: Ucb-C70 Subject: Sexism in SF If you want REAL sexism, try the Gor series! I think it's every REAL man's duty to read these books(or enough of them to get the general idea) so that someday we can set things right and women can be free to take on their true role in life!!! (---left as an exercise for the reader: is this tongue-in-cheek, or is this for real! You'll find out after civilization falls!!!!!) els[Eric (the Barbarian) Strobel] pur-ee!pur-phy!els ------------------------------ Date: 11 Dec 82 1:50:06-PST (Sat) From: teklabs!tektronix!tekcad!franka at Ucb-C70 Subject: Re: time travel, ST, and AIRPLANE II Re: time travel - My favorite story about time travel is "The Time Hoppers" by Robert Siverberg. I know it's more of a story of the human costs of time travel rather than the technical, but I still think it's one of the best stories around. Re: City on the Edge of Forever - I have seen the TV show AND read the original screen play (published in the book, "Six Modern Science Fiction Plays" (I don't remember by whom)) and I find the original script by Mr. Ellison MUCH superior to the version shown on TV. The script definitely de- served all the awards it won (I wish I could say the same for the TV version...). I just got back from seeing "Airplane II: The Sequel". It is a fantastic movie (if you liked the kind of bad jokes and horrible puns in Airplane!). I won't tell you any more of the plot except that it takes place on the first lunar shuttle flight and that several of the cast are back. Also, in the closing credits it says, "Coming soon from Paramount (or whatever the hell company made it), "AIRPLANE III"! I heartily re- commend it to anyone who liked the first movie! Frank Adrian uucp: {ucbvax,decvax,chico,pur-ee,cbosg,ihnss}!teklabs!tekcad!franka CSnet: franka@tek ARPAnet: franka.tek@rand-relay ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 82 14:46:17-EST (Tue) From: David Axler <axler.upenn@UDel-Relay> Subject: Time Travel books (RE: Request from Rene Steiner for favorites on this topic.) There are just too many time travel books to pick one favorite easily. Silverberg's "Up the Line" and Laumer's "The Great Time Machine Hoax" are the funniest, while Poul Anderson's "Tau Zero" is probably the most hard-scientific, as the time travel occurs solely as the result of near-light velocity. ,but deals nicely with some of the paradoxes that others have avoided. One of my all-time favorites, though, is still Fritz Leiber's "The Big Time," plus his other stories of the Change War. Open question: Should alternate/parallel universe stories be considered as a sub-genre of time-machine stories, since so many of them are based on the [cliched] notion of the "effects" of changing one (just one...) event in the past? If so, then we'd have to count books like Dick's "The Man in the High Castle", and Len Deighton's "SS-GB". The latter, by the way, is actually quite well done alternate-history sf. Its basic premise is that the Allies lost WWII, and its main character is an inspector at Scotland Yard under the new regime. He's British to the core, but the Yard is now under the control of the British branch of the SS [whence the title..]. ------------------------------ Date: 15 Dec 1982 9:40-PST From: dietz%usc-cse@USC-ECL Subject: HGttG in Nature I noticed the following sentence at the beginning of a review in Nature of the book "Cosmology, Physics and Philosophy": "The anciencts considered the ultimate question of 'Life, the Universe, and Everything' to be part of philosophy even though they were not sure the answer was 42..." (Nature, 11/11/82, page 135) ------------------------------ Date: 15 Dec 82 19:38:59 EST (Wed) From: speaker.umcp-cs at UDel-Relay Subject: Shrinking in HHGttG Date: 30 Nov 82 17:28:22-EST (Tue) From: David Axler <axler.upenn@UDel-Relay> Subject: Shrinking in HHGttG I refer to is that dealing with the war between the V'l'hurg and the G'gugvunt [sp?], caused by Arthur's line "I've been having problems with my lifestyle lately" being sucked through a wormhole in space. When the combatants recognize that it's actually due to an ape descendant that they're fighting, they combine their fleets and send them off to destroy Earth. Alas, on arrival the entire fleet is swallowed by a dog! But wait no...hadn't the earth been destroyed by this time? Perhaps the wormhole extended back through time as well, only to reach the two armadas BEFORE earth's destruction? The TV version of this scene, by the way, has the battle set up as an arcade game -- a very nice touch. That really WAS good, with flashing scores and video game sounds and everything. - Speaker ------------------------------ Date: Tuesday, 14 December 1982 13:11-EST From: AGRE at MIT-MC Subject: *** Special Video Game Alert *** There is a rumor going about concerning a new video game called Communist Mutants From Space. Apparently there is a poster advertizing the game. I must have a copy. If anyone could point me at the manufacturer I would be most grateful. If I succeed in finding it, I'll send another message to sf-lovers for the curious. Thanks alot. - pHil ------------------------------ Date: 15 Dec 1982 0559-PST Subject: Recent "Aliens/ET" TV show From: WMartin at Office-8 (Will Martin) I hope that the readers of SFL had a chance to see the Robin Williams "Aliens/ET" special shown Tuesday, 14 Dec. Lots of good clips from numerous SF movies. One of them was especially interesting. There were two brief scenes from a movie identified as "George Pal's CONQUEST OF SPACE (1953)" [I may have the date wrong]. These scenes depicted some special effects of an orbiting ring-type space station and some EVA construction or similar activity. They seemed to be quite well done for that vintage; they were in color and looked fairly realistic, at least on a TV screen. I considered them to look as good as the "2001" space station shots also shown. This inspires me to wonder why I have not seen this movie before. If it is this good, why hasn't it made the rounds of the late-night SF movies on TV? Are these shots unrepresentative, being the only good scenes in an otherwise-poor film? Or is it, perhaps, a dull film from most viewers' viewpoints, emphasizing technical effects with no story [the title doesn't appeal to the normally horror-film-oriented TV programmer, I am sure!]. Or is the film tied up in one of those silly Hollywood legal snarls that restrict the availability of many films? That brief exposure left me wanting to see the whole thing, and I have no idea if I will ever be able to. Will Martin ------------------------------ Date: 17 Dec 82 09:51-EST (Fri) From: Robert (LISPer DM)Heller <heller.umass-coins@UDel-Relay> Subject: SciFi on the Tube (or lack thereof) One of the main reasons why science fiction serieses don't seem to last on TV, is simply that they are not very profitable, at least compaired with, for example, sit-coms. For the most part, most contemporary sorts of shows (ie cops&robbers, sit-coms, doctor&hospital¶-medic dramas, etc.) use props, costumes, & sets which are "off the self". If fact, most sit-coms, probably use costumes, props, etc. right out of Sears & Robuck! In the case of science fiction, everything (costumes, props, sets, etc.) must be custom made (Sears does not sell Klingon uniforms, etc.) The sets often need special gadetry in them (blinking console lights, computer readouts, etc.). In addition, all sorts of expensive special effects are needed. Another reason is that most of the people you run the TV industry (corp. exe.'s of TV studios, etc.) may not know very much about just what science fiction is - many of think that all you need to do is to take a typical western, and replace the techology - ie six-guns become lasers, horses become rocket ship fighters, indians become Klingons, etc. but with the same basic plot (ie the bad guys capture the girl, the good guys have a shoot-out with the bad guys, and free the girl, and the chief good guy rides off into the sunset with the girl....(yawn) -- or else they do things like Lost In Space, which was just a hybredization of Lassie (complete with June Lockhart!) & The Swiss Family Robbinson transposed into the 21st century... I have a sugestion for putting good science fiction on TV: instead of trying to run a one hour per week sort of show (Star Trek, Battlestart Glactica, etc), how about two to four SEPARATE serieses, each with a 2-hour movie format, once a month per series, ie sort of what one of networks did some time ago with McCloud, Columbo, MacMillin & Wife, etc. The could fill in the extra week movie slots with regular movies. This would give the producers of the shows more time to do a good job and spread out the money a little better (espcially if they only do two made-for-TV science fiction movies/month and use box-office-paid-for movies the rest of the time). Robert Heller heller.umass-coins@udel-relay ------------------------------ Date: 16 Dec 1982 0556-PST From: Henry W. Miller <Miller at SRI-NIC> Subject: How the Enterprise has changed Between the first and second movies, did you notice the differences in the Enterprise? 1) Kirk's quarters were much enhanced. (naturally, since Kirk just "took over" at the last minute in ST:TMP) But, in TWOK, it looked as though the stateroom was tailored to Kirk's whims. Although it was not stated, could the Enterprise be Admiral Kirk's flagship? 2) On the bridge: in the first movie, it was stand-up-and- be-shaken-apart-in-wormhole action. In TWOK, there were alcoves and workstations around the place. 3) Most important: In ST:TMP, to the right of the main engineering console, ther was a corridor that Kirk and Scotty ran out of to try to get to the transporter room to override a beamup. In TWOK, that corridor was replaced my the intermix reactor chamber in which Spock died(?) How much time did intervene between the two movies? -HWM ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 82 12:38:38-PST (Tue) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcewan at Ucb-C70 Subject: Re: Re: Luke's Failure in the Cave - (nf) If light sabers are powered by the force, this points to Han as the other, since he's the only non-jedi seen to use a light saber. Personally, I doubt it. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Dec 82 12:27:03-PST (Thu) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcdaniel at Ucb-C70 Subject: OB1 a liar??? - (nf) There have been two notes recently asserting that OB1 was lying about Luke's parentage (one in fa.sf-lovers). What people don't seem to be realizing is that there is a model for this story. It is known as the GOOD GUY/BAD GUY model. OB1, Leia, Chewbacca, Han, et cetera are GOOD GUYS. These people are kind (if kindness is returned), noble, honest, et cetera. They kill BAD GUYS. Darth is a BAD GUY. He kills for pleasure, lies, is deceitful. For example, he kowtows to the Emperor but later offers to help Luke kill him for their own benefit. He enjoys strangling people (a nassssty man, my precious . . .). BAD GUYS lie. GOOD GUYS tell the truth. OB1 says that Darth killed Luke's father. Darth says the he IS Luke's father. Now, who are you supposed to believe? Tim McDaniel (. . . pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcdaniel) ------------------------------ Date: 17 Dec 1982 09:46 PST From: Morrill at PARC-MAXC Subject: Luke's hand After seeing TESB, a friend of mine questioned the present where abouts of Luke's hand. If someone was to retrieve it before the tissue died, they could, in theory, clone it. If the other hope is a character that has not yet been introduced, perhaps its because the other hope has not yet been born (cloned). Toby p.s. A long time ago, our galaxey was far, far away. ------------------------------ Date: 18 Dec 1982 1748-EST From: DVW.SRB at MIT-OZ at MIT-MC Subject: Vader=Luke's father One viewpoint that no one has mentioned yet is that maybe Vader really is Luke's father, and Obi-Wan was speaking metaphorically when he said that Vader killed Luke's dad. That is, if the Vader personality was sufficiently different from the Skywalker personality, Obi-Wan may very well refer to Skywalker being dead, since the person he would call Skywalker has ceased to exist. I tend to think this a bit unlikely though, since I don't believe Lucas would get into anything so complex. One other point about the scene on Dagobah: at one point Yoda says to Obi-Wan, in reference to Luke, "He is full of anger, just like his father..." Also, today's ridiculous suggestion for the other is Dudley Doright. After all, despite appearing totally mindless, Dudley always gets his man. What better way to hide than to appear to be a mindless jerk? ------------------------------ Date: Saturday, 18 December 1982 17:56-EST From: Vince Fuller <VAF at CMU-CS-C> Subject: Food for thought...........TESB, the 'other, etc. Date: 14 Dec 82 11:13:37-PST (Tue) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!CSvax.Pucc-H.Physics.els From: at Ucb-C70 To: SF-LOVERS at MIT-MC Re: Food for thought...........TESB, the 'other, etc. . . . There are certain hints that Han is somewhat adept in the Force: . . . The points made in this message are rather intriguing and lead me to a slightly strange conclusion: Solo does have some mastery of the force, but has obviously never had any training in it and doesn't seem to have any deep mastery or understanding of what he does - he is an 'idiot savant' wielder of the force. I think he instinctively uses parts of the force which are sensible enough to believe in - he is incredibly 'lucky', but remember 'in my experience, there is no such thing as luck', so luck is probably just an everyday manifestation of the force, which some people happen to be blessed with an ability to control (well, sort of...). What do others think of this slightly off-the-wall conjecture? --vaf ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 82 20:31:10-PST (Tue) From: decvax!cwruecmp!ccc at Ucb-C70 Subject: Alec Guiness >From: Clayton M. Elwell [...!decvax!cwruecmp!ccc] The reports of Alec Guiness's death have been greatly exaggerated. ------------------------------ Date: 16 Dec 82 8:09:48-PST (Thu) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!inuxa!claus at Ucb-C70 Subject: Re: THE OTHER I've been reading arguments on who the 'OTHER' is for the last month and would like to ask a general question. Have all nine parts of the Star Wars series(three sets of trilogies) already been outlined by George Lucas, or is he just making this up as he goes along? If someone else takes over the production of the next movie in the series will this result in inconsistenties? And, if the outline for the entire story does exist, how difficult would it be to obtain it? Well I guess I asked three questions instead of one, but I am really interested in what anyone thinks about this? Thanks in advance. Dave Claus BTL/ABI Indy ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 82 15:35:24-PST (Tue) From: harpo!ihnp4!ixn5c!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!mcewan at Ucb-C70 Subject: Re: SW twenty times - (nf) I've got to have my eyes checked -- I could swear I just saw an article that said someone saw Star Wars TWENTY times!!!!!!! It must have been a typo. It's obvious that everyone in this newsgroup has seen SW at least 200 times. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 82 17:28:32-PST (Tue) From: decvax!utzoo!watmath!csc at Ucb-C70 Subject: Re: SW twenty times I was *REALLY* into Star Wars in my younger days...And I have seen it twenty-seven (27) times. Reminiscing about 90 cent movies... Jan Gray ...watmath!csc ------------------------------ Date: 14 Dec 82 15:58:15-PST (Tue) From: decvax!microsof!uw-beave!ubc-visi!majka at Ucb-C70 Subject: SW too many times A projectionist at a theatre in Halifax, Nova Scotia was taken out of the theatre in a straight - jacket after he ran screaming out of the projection room and attacked the screen. SW/ANH had been showing there for three months. Marc Majka. ------------------------------ Date: 13 Dec 82 0:28:08-PST (Mon) From: harpo!duke!unc!mcnc!ncsu!jcz at Ucb-C70 Subject: Re: SW other again References: cwruecmp.321 How did the Princess get the 'droid that belonged to Obi-Wan? The 'other hope' is R2D2!! --jcz ------------------------------ End of SF-LOVERS Digest ***********************