John writes:

> As an example, at the time of writing, "1984" was complete fiction.
>  Indeed the technology included in the book hadn't even been thought
>  of.

If you focus on the gizmos in 1984, you've missed the point. Science fiction
is rarely about science; most normally the best of the genre are simple
morality plays placed in an alternate "reality".

"1984" was that form of a morality play, but it was also much more than that.
It was a political tract, just as "Animal Farm" was, a statement of Orwell's
revulsion with the excesses of totalitarianism, particularly Stalinist
Russia. "Farenheit 451" was Bradbury's very similar statement about
authoritarianism and potential rise of a police state. And Kubrick's (not
Clarke's) "2001" was a profound exploration of the nature of God and whether
we could actually ever detect him/it/they.

While most people do unfortunately focus on the gizmos in these stories, they
are only secondary to the story itself and are no more than the stage on
which the tale is told. But other vehicles could and have been used to tell
the same story.

These stories rise to the level of literature because they say something
profound about the nature of humanity, but that isn't true for the vast
majority of escapist fare that is "science fiction" and it's very important
to be able to discern the difference.

Wirt Atmar
"People, get a life! Move out of your mother's basement and experience
reality!" -- William Shatner, 1987 Saturday Night Live skit, speaking to a
faux Star Trek convention, when irritated by the participants, in which
Shatner himself was being completely serious.

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *