The Science Fiction Cliches, Post 2 of 6: The Severe Baloney
John VanSickle
certain story elements pop up over and over and over. Some of these
elements were actually pretty good ideas, and when handled well make for
a pretty entertaining story, but have become hackneyed from overuse by
the unimaginative. Others came into being through the deliberate effort
to avoid another cliché. Still other ideas were lame from the get-go,
and should have been dismissed from the author's thinking.
Clichés are not in themselves necessarily bad, but their overuse
shows that the writer has forgotten what separates the strong tale from
the hollow: "the human heart in conflict with itself," as Faulkner said.
Where there is this conflict, the tale stands; where the conflict is
absent, the tale falls flat, and in neither case does it matter how many
ships get blown up.
DISCLAIMER: The use of masculine/feminine pronouns and assignment of
gender roles is not intended to preclude a reversal of gender roles. It
is, however, intended to offend those who think that the Y chromosome is
the root of all evil. Nyah.
For this posting of the Cliche Lists, I have decided to break them
up according to the tolerability ratings. These ratings are somewhat
subjective, and so naturally I expect a degree of controversy over the
ratings.
This post contains the items that are marked with a yellow X in the
Web page version. This denotes that the item is scientifically on very
shaky ground, but can be saved if there is a supporting justification.
However, such justification is usually lacking.
The entire list is maintained at http://users.erols.com/vansickl/cliche.htm
1. Aliens travel a zillion miles to loot the earth of resources which
exist in far greater and much more easily recoverable quantities on
the many uninhabited bodies they pass on the way to earth.
2. Two hostile factions colonize a planet within walking distance of
each other.
3. The government ships criminals off to other planets.
4. Aliens invade earth in order to eat humans.
5. The alien invasion flounders because their technological advantage
is perfectly neutralized by their lack of resources, compared to
the humans.
6. Humans are seen as a menace to galactic society, having developed
technology over a few short centuries compared with the thousands
it took the other races.
7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
violently suppress it.
8. The story setting turns out to be a VR simulation.
9. An alien race's thinking is so different from ours that no
communication is possible.
10. Alien races differ from us only in skin color and/or facial
features.
11. Some alien races are incomprehensible to humans, but understand
humans perfectly.
12. Any given alien species is devoid of ethnic, religious, cultural,
philosophical or political variance, especially. Specifically, some
races consist entirely of:
a. Wise mystics
b. Stoic warriors
c. Pastoral innocents
d. Cowardly sneaks
e. Amazon babes
13. Some alien species have personality traits or cultural mores that
are invariable laws of nature.
14. An alien race packs its names with apostrophes for no apparent
reason.
15. The humans of the future will have no ethnic, religious, cultural,
philosophical or political variance.
16. The Hero is so emotionally stunted that he doesn't care about
close friends/relatives that die as long as he completes some
mission.
17. In futuristic societies, only the ultra-rich can afford quality
health care, and everyone else is reduced to selling their bodily
organs.
18. Beings of pure energy.
19. Creatures from our mythology (e.g., centaurs, dragons) occur among
the wildlife native to an alien planet.
20. An alien race's values and beliefs are indistinguishable from those
of an Oriental culture.
21. Future societies have relapsed into feudalism.
22. Palace guards are ineffectual due to ineptitude or inattentiveness.
23. Fantastic but non-viable creatures (men with tortoiseshell backs,
gigantic insects) are made possible by high levels of radiation.
24. Aliens can speak human languages without error, having taken no
pains to learn how.
25. An alien tongue is translated into perfect English, except for
gratuitious use of alien units of time and distance.
26. Alien races whose vocal apparatus is just like ours, so that they
can speak human languages with only a slight accent.
27. Omnipotent pacifist aliens impose their philosophy on us without
bothering to protect us from the races they have left alone.
28. Clones are inexplicably different from regular people in a
particular manner (mentally unstable, don't mind being used as
cannon fodder, etc.)
29. The vast majority of alien races consider 20 degrees C to be room
temperature.
30. There's a tank with a disembodied live brains living in it.
31. A beginning warrior hits everything he shoots at, and nobody seems
to notice that he's exceptionally good.
32. An otherwise-normal person is always ready for intimate relations.
33. All genetically superior humans have an innate drive to rule,
conquer, or kill everyone else.
34. Alien vampires feed on brainwaves/life-force/exotic biochemicals/
psychic energies that can only be obtained from sentient life forms.
35. Alien monsters find humans edible, tasty, and non-toxic.
36. Sentient AIs communicate with other sentient AIs via their voice
synthesizer.
37. An androids with intelligence equal to an IQ of around 1000 can't
seem to figure out human emotions, humor, or verbal contractions.
38. An alien race has a trait that greatly complicates interacting with
them, but even after centuries of contact with humans they still
manage to keep it secret.
39. An alien race's language is not pronounceable by humans, but they
can still speak human langauges with relative ease.
40. The villain can infallibly predict how the protagonists will react
to a given turn of events.
41. Most aliens breathe oxygen, just like humans do.
42. Someone with a cyborg implant exhibits the benefits of his hardware
needlessly, just to relieve boredom or show off.
43. All of the spacefaring races have roughly the same level of
technology.
44. The Free Love Utopia, populated only by fabulously good-looking
people.
45. The untrained, average Joe can take on and defeat highly trained
and well-equipped operatives.
46. The city's main computer can be accessed from any of a number of
public-access terminals located conveniently throughout the city.
47. A teenage genius discovers an entire new field of science, and
builds practical devices that use it, in his bedroom.
48. A conspiracy involving lots of people remains secret for an extended
period of time.
49. The availability of firearms notwithstanding, swordfighting returns
as a significant method of combat.
50. Humans leave for the stars, forget all about Earth, and rediscover
it later.
51. No matter how slowly the monster shambles along, or how quickly the
victim runs, the monster is always right behind the victim when
he/she trips or encounters an obstacle.
52. A scientist develops an artificially intelligent computer system
that can understand natural language and draw inductive conclusions
from incomplete data, and uses it on projects far less practical
and/or profitable than such a computer would be.
53. The greedy businessman refuses to recognize that his dangerous
product/service will screw him over long before he can hope to make
a profit.
54. A technologically advanced race conquers a technologically inferior
race, and puts them to work doing things that the conqueror's
machines can do far more efficiently.
55. The aliens' plan to exterminate the human race is stopped at the
last moment when they notice a human exhibiting some virtue (love,
humor, etc).
56. The protagonists destroy the entire social structure and
governmental system of the society they encounter, and only a few
old fuddy-duddies complain.
57. No matter how large a ship is, any monster let loose on board will
learn its way around in an hour's time, enabling it to sneak up
behind its victims without fail.
58. A crewmember has a radical change of personality, but the few people
who notice don't seem particularily bothered by it.
59. Human spies are sent to inflitrate an alien society in order to
better understand it.
60. When the Evil Overlord dies, none of his surviving henchmen move
into the power vacuum; instead, his empire collapses.
61. Computer terminals display the current operation (e.g., "UPLOADING
VIRUS") in huge, flashing letters.
62. The patently obvious design flaws in a vehicle or weapon system go
uncorrected during the entire life cycle of the system in question.
63. Vehicles and/or weapon systems that are totally impractical for the
environment in which they are deployed (e.g., the forest chase scene
in Return of the Jedi).
64. Spacecraft have features which were pointlessly carried over from
water-borne designs.
65. Untested medical treatments that are 100% effective and have no side
effects.
66. A medical condition will be fatal in an amount of time expressed to
the tenth significant digit; the cure is found and applied in the
nick of time, enabling a 100% recovery.
67. A robot is shot and bleeds oil.
68. An item of technology is quickly reverse-engineered by a far less
advanced group of researchers
69. Spacecraft have no seatbelts, even though the crew gets tossed
around like rag dolls on a regular basis.
70. Clones think, act, and speak in a manner indistinguishable from the
cloned person.
71. Computers that exist in the far future or are alleged to be 'cutting
edge' demonstrate less functionality than a Commodore 64.
72. Hand-held weapons are significantly more complex to engineer and
costly to build than a twentieth-century firearm, but not noticeably
deadlier, longer ranged, or more accurate
73. Advanced robots that have difficulty negotiating stairs.
74. Tactical systems can only deal with targets visible to the naked
eye.
75. Alien artifacts still work after being abandoned for a million
years.
76. Huge, expensive spacecraft are used to transport inexpensive goods
in tiny quantities.
77. The solution for a problem solved four weeks ago is thrown away and
never seen again.
78. A space vessel is sent out on missions before its systems are fully
operational.
79. When a computer is working on a difficult problem, the increased
power requirements cause the room lights to dim or flicker.
80. Robots, despite their size and function, are always designed with
exactly the same features as a human (two arms and legs, ten
fingers, two eyes, same joint system, etc).
81. The plans for a complicated device can be downloaded onto a 1.44 Meg
floppy.
82. The sewers/ventilation ducts provide easy access throughout the
city/ship/castle.
Know of any more? E-mail me!
Regards,
John
--
As all around the milling crowd confuse themselves with raging
sounds and their loves forgetfulness abounds.
Robert Pearlman
[snip]
> 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
> violently suppress it.
As we correspond, French farmers are beseiging any uses they can
identify of gene-modified vegetables.
--
Pearlman
Robert Pearlman
>17. In futuristic societies, only the ultra-rich can afford quality
> health care, and everyone else is reduced to selling their bodily
> organs.
Sounds like a combination of New Jersey (whence I write) and India.
Surely the future will have access to just as much stupidity as the
present.
--
Pearlman
Dan Goodman
>> violently suppress it.
>
>identify of gene-modified vegetables.
That's not "a large portion of society" by my standards.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Gareth Wilson
John VanSickle wrote:
>
> 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
> violently suppress it.
>
GM food, anyone?
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Gareth Wilson
Christchurch
New Zealand
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vegard Valberg
>
> John VanSickle wrote:
>
> >
> > 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
> > violently suppress it.
> >
>
Yes, the European people is VERY much against it, the reason why the
government is stopping it is because if they did not they would be
strung up from the lamp posts (not that anyone would buy them if they
were allowed). However I can see their worry, GM foods strikes me as one
of the greatest health risk of the 20th Century (allergies, migration of
altered genes, etc, etc).
---
--
- Vegard Valberg
My e-mail adress is <vval...@online.no>,
that is two v's, not one W.
John VanSickle
>
> Gareth Wilson wrote:
> >
> > John VanSickle wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > violently suppress it.
> > >
> >
>
> Yes, the European people is VERY much against it, the reason why the
> government is stopping it is because if they did not they would be
> strung up from the lamp posts (not that anyone would buy them if they
> were allowed). However I can see their worry, GM foods strikes me as
> one of the greatest health risk of the 20th Century (allergies,
> migration of altered genes, etc, etc).
How great are the risks?
Vegard Valberg
>
> Vegard Valberg wrote:
> >
> > Gareth Wilson wrote:
> > >
> > > John VanSickle wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > violently suppress it.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > Yes, the European people is VERY much against it, the reason why the
> > government is stopping it is because if they did not they would be
> > strung up from the lamp posts (not that anyone would buy them if they
> > were allowed). However I can see their worry, GM foods strikes me as
> > one of the greatest health risk of the 20th Century (allergies,
> > migration of altered genes, etc, etc).
>
> How great are the risks?
Who can tell?
Seriously though the tests are still ongoing, but already we see signs
that this might lead to allergic reactions (what if you are allergic to
a certain plant or animal, and DNA from that plant or animal was
transplanted into other products), sickness (Creutzfeld-Jacobs anyone?
Something similar could easily come from GM food, scrapy and Mad-Cow
disease came from grinding up dead sheep and using them for food, DNA
manipulation can very well lead to something similar), and so forth (for
instance DNA transmigration which could lead to some new problems). The
point is that it is a risk, it's like playing Russian roulette without
knowing how many bullets or chambers there are in the revolver.
By the way if the US would only comply with EU request that all GM
foods be clearly labelled as such then I would have no problems with GM
foods (of course the US knows that the European consumer would never buy
it). Crazy part is that the EU government wanted to bring in GM food,
but the people are very opposed to them.
Robert Patrick Meyer
> Something similar could easily come from GM food, scrapy and Mad-Cow
> disease came from grinding up dead sheep and using them for food, DNA
> manipulation can very well lead to something similar),
How? Some of the other points you made regarding GM foods are pretty
valid, but those were prion diseases.
--
------------
RobM...@resnet.gatech.edu
" Dude, at this point, I'll take a walk with her, if
that's all I can get. " -overheard in my building
Mark Blunden
>John VanSickle wrote:
>>
>> Vegard Valberg wrote:
>> >
>> > Gareth Wilson wrote:
>> > > GM food, anyone?
>> >
>> > Yes, the European people is VERY much against it, the reason why the
>> > government is stopping it is because if they did not they would be
>> > strung up from the lamp posts (not that anyone would buy them if they
>> > were allowed). However I can see their worry, GM foods strikes me as
>> > one of the greatest health risk of the 20th Century (allergies,
>> > migration of altered genes, etc, etc).
>>
>> How great are the risks?
>
> Who can tell?
> Seriously though the tests are still ongoing, but already we see signs
>that this might lead to allergic reactions (what if you are allergic to
>a certain plant or animal, and DNA from that plant or animal was
>transplanted into other products), sickness (Creutzfeld-Jacobs anyone?
>Something similar could easily come from GM food, scrapy and Mad-Cow
>disease came from grinding up dead sheep and using them for food, DNA
>manipulation can very well lead to something similar), and so forth (for
>instance DNA transmigration which could lead to some new problems). The
>point is that it is a risk, it's like playing Russian roulette without
>knowing how many bullets or chambers there are in the revolver.
Also, IIRC, a study was done in Britain - and then quickly discredited by
the government - in which lab rats were fed on GM food, and their immune
systems deteriorated, making them highly susceptible to disease. Personally,
until I see some proper independent scientific studies, I'll be avoiding GM
foods myself.
--
Mark.
mar...@cwcom.net
To e-mail me, remove the 'spamoff.' from my e-mail address.
* People are too unreliable to be successfully replaced by machines
Vegard Valberg
> > disease came from grinding up dead sheep and using them for food, DNA
> > manipulation can very well lead to something similar),
>
> valid, but those were prion diseases.
Something similar in effect if not in cause. However said prions came
from organic sources (e.g the ground up sheep), therefore they can be
generated naturally. So if we pick the wrong genes to transplant (e.g
the genes that lead to certain diseases) then said disease could migrate
to the people who eat it (similar to how if you eat animals or people
with certain inherited diseases most specifically Creutzfeld-Jacobs, you
might contract the disease or something similar yourself). We have cases
where eating animals (or people, in the case of some cannibal tribes
IIRC on Papua New Guinea) with inherited diseases has led to people
getting those diseases themselves.
However I will admit that I can be wrong (am not a doctor) although I
don't think so, but that does not invalidate my other points. Personally
I am not one of those people who thinks anything genetic or atomic is
bad, I do however think that it should be tested quite extensively and
used responsibly (and clearly labelled so the consumer may choose).
Robert Patrick Meyer
> foods be clearly labelled as such then I would have no problems with GM
> foods (of course the US knows that the European consumer would never buy
> it).
Of course, when the request was originally made, U.S. fields were mixed
with G.M. and non-G.M. foods. There was no immediate way to seperate the
two. So we could look forward to European extremists ripping American
food products off shelves in some warped parody of the current McDonald's
episode in France if the policy was effected immediately.
> Crazy part is that the EU government wanted to bring in GM food,
It did? I had heard from Europeans that the EU initally tried to block
the shipment of GM foods. Correct me if I'm wrong.
France grows quite a bit of G.M. food. I still think the EU is trying to
pull a fast one. They just retreated to labelling when they couldn't
shaft the U.S. in the open.
And this is part of a trend, like the E.U.'s metric-only policies. The
U.S. cannot ship products dual-labelled with both Anglo-American ( even
if the Brits don't use them anymore ) measures and metric measures.
Instead, products shipped to Europe must be labelled with _only_ metric
measures. Which entails pointless cost to American manufacturers for
relabelling the goods.
Why is Europe so hardline about this? This seems to be a rather pissy
attempt to influence the U.S. to switch to the metric system, which is
none of Europe's business.
Europe hasn't been winning too many friends in the U.S. with their trade
policies, so you'll forgive us USian's if we are a bit paranoid about the
intentions behind the whole G.M. thing.
> but the people are very opposed to them.
Sure, particularly the more loony Greens who are willing to stupid
things to get them off the shelves. That does wonders for the perception
in the U.S. of European credibility on what are very reasonable concerns.
Labelling would be a fair compromise, if Europe would realize that it
takes a hell of a lot of work and money to seperate out fields and
suchlike. It's not just going to happen overnight because someone in
Brussels or wherever waves a magic wand and pronounces that America must
label their foodstuffs. That sort of thing leads to trade wars.
" I'm afraid of Americans, I'm afraid of the world,
I'm afraid I can't help it, I'm afraid I can't-"
-David Bowie
" God is a American. "
- David Bowie
Robert Patrick Meyer
> Something similar in effect if not in cause. However said prions came
> from organic sources (e.g the ground up sheep), therefore they can be
> generated naturally.
> So if we pick the wrong genes to transplant (e.g
> the genes that lead to certain diseases) then said disease could migrate
> to the people who eat it (similar to how if you eat animals or people
> with certain inherited diseases most specifically Creutzfeld-Jacobs, you
> might contract the disease or something similar yourself).
OK, so it was a analogy. Now it makes more sense.
But I thought DNA and RNA were ripped back to their consituent components
when they were absorbed through eating by most organisms, so that they
could be used for the other organism's DNA as base pairs, sugars,
phosphorus stuff, and the like. They would then be too broken down to be
"infectious".
Right?
> We have cases
> where eating animals (or people, in the case of some cannibal tribes
> IIRC on Papua New Guinea) with inherited diseases has led to people
> getting those diseases themselves.
Distorted proteins distorting other proteins until they're as bad as they
are. Joy of Joys.
Prions are sorta like the juevenile deliquents of the biochemical world.
Just keep on messing up other proteins that come into their influence,
until they're a new deliquent.
> However I will admit that I can be wrong (am not a doctor) although I
> don't think so, but that does not invalidate my other points. Personally
> I am not one of those people who thinks anything genetic or atomic is
> bad, I do however think that it should be tested quite extensively and
> used responsibly (and clearly labelled so the consumer may choose).
Well, that's a relief. Luddites are no fun.
--
Otto
>In article <37e42963...@news.pipeline.com>,
>Robert Pearlman <rpea...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>>John VanSickle <vans...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>> 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
>>> violently suppress it.
>>
>>As we correspond, French farmers are beseiging any uses they can
>>identify of gene-modified vegetables.
>
>That's not "a large portion of society" by my standards.
Indeed. Frenchmen are often quite short, and (as we can guess) very
health-concious.
Commodore Otto
Otto
<vans...@erols.com> wrote:
>Vegard Valberg wrote:
>>
>> Gareth Wilson wrote:
>> >
>> > John VanSickle wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > > 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
>> > > violently suppress it.
>> > >
>> >
>> > GM food, anyone?
>>
>> Yes, the European people is VERY much against it, the reason why the
>> government is stopping it is because if they did not they would be
>> strung up from the lamp posts (not that anyone would buy them if they
>> were allowed). However I can see their worry, GM foods strikes me as
>> one of the greatest health risk of the 20th Century (allergies,
>> migration of altered genes, etc, etc).
>
>How great are the risks?
Well, we THINK they're great, and if we do a THOUGHT experiment we can
see that the effects of this could be very bad.
Note the common thread here.
Commodore Otto
Vegard Valberg
but there was such a public outroar that they were forced to backpedal
with immense speed. It is *NOT* the loony Greens that want this, it is
the vast majority of the people of Europe. BTW many European businesses
actively advertise that their products are clean of GM foods, they would
not do this unless they knew that so many people are so opposed to GM
foods.
David Johnston
> 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
> violently suppress it.
I can think of a few real life examples. But I shall not name them.
> 27. Omnipotent pacifist aliens impose their philosophy on us without
> bothering to protect us from the races they have left alone.
I have never encountered this cliche. Examples?
> 41. Most aliens breathe oxygen, just like humans do.
Strikes me as not necessarily being unrealistic. Could be combined
easily enough with the comfortable temperature cliche.
>
> 43. All of the spacefaring races have roughly the same level of
> technology.
One notes that assuming any trade in commodities is going on, technology
would tend to equalise.
> 60. When the Evil Overlord dies, none of his surviving henchmen move
> into the power vacuum; instead, his empire collapses.
Give the Star Wars universe credit there.
> 70. Clones think, act, and speak in a manner indistinguishable from the
> cloned person.
I have never in fact encountered that cliche except in the form of
clones created complete with the memory of the cloned person which are
a cliche in their own right.
> 72. Hand-held weapons are significantly more complex to engineer and
> costly to build than a twentieth-century firearm, but not noticeably
> deadlier, longer ranged, or more accurate
However, all such weapons invariably contain an effectively unlimited
number of shots, which is something.
John VanSickle
>
> John VanSickle wrote:
> >
> > Vegard Valberg wrote:
> > >
> > > the government is stopping it is because if they did not they
> > > would be strung up from the lamp posts (not that anyone would buy
> > > them if they were allowed). However I can see their worry, GM
> > > foods strikes me as one of the greatest health risk of the 20th
> > > Century (allergies, migration of altered genes, etc, etc).
> >
> > How great are the risks?
>
> Seriously though the tests are still ongoing, but already we
> see signs that this might lead to allergic reactions (what if you are
> allergic to a certain plant or animal, and DNA from that plant or
> animal was transplanted into other products), sickness
> food, scrapy and Mad-Cow disease came from grinding up dead sheep and
> using them for food, DNA manipulation can very well lead to something
> lead to some new problems). The point is that it is a risk, it's like
> playing Russian roulette without knowing how many bullets or chambers
> there are in the revolver.
My problem with this is that it hypothesizes the existence of a risk
with *zero* evidence to support said hypothesis. It could be this,
it could be that. It could also be a cure for cancer. It could also
slow the onset of aging. It could also raise everyone's IQ by 50
points. It could make all fertilizers and pesticides unnecessary.
It is by no means irrational to exercise caution, but to reject the
benefits of a new technology merely because one is frightened of risks
that have not been proven to exist is the epitome of irrationality.
> By the way if the US would only comply with EU request that
> all GM foods be clearly labelled as such then I would have no problems
> with GM foods (of course the US knows that the European consumer would
> never buy it). Crazy part is that the EU government wanted to bring in
> GM food, but the people are very opposed to them.
If the GM foods are cheaper to produce, causing the price tag to be
lower, the producers of the regular kind will demand a tariff to make up
the difference.
William December Starr
John VanSickle said:
> 60. When the Evil Overlord dies, none of his surviving
> henchmen move into the power vacuum; instead, his
> empire collapses.
I might file this uder "dramatic baloney" rather than "severe
baloney"... it depends a lot on the circumstances, I think,
especially whether the Evil Overlord was the local government
or just a mega-criminal operating _against_ the government.
In the latter case, I can easily see the henchmen deciding
that it's time to execute Plan B-for-Bugout rather than stick
around to greet the forces of good and/or law-enforcement when
they come rolling in. (Sort of a Prisoner's Dilemma variant:
if they _all_ stick around to keep the operation going then
they might pull it off, but as soon as a significant number
of them -- possibly just one -- gets cold feet, it's over.)
-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>
Vegard Valberg
> Well, we THINK they're great, and if we do a THOUGHT experiment we can
> see that the effects of this could be very bad.
>
> Note the common thread here.
>
> Commodore Otto
As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray it on
bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant women",
or "Heroin is much less addictive than morphine", or "Cigarettes are not
at all unhealthy", or "Red meat is good for you, it is one of the four
food groups".
These are all statements made by reputable scientists, they were all
proven wrong, not all to the same extent but they were all proven wrong.
People laughed at the ones who objected to the statements above, until
the tragic consequences became all too clear. Look I have seen far too
many studies and horror scenarios to try GM foods until they have been
thoroughly tested (each and every new product mind, not just the things
that are around now). Tests are still pending, but untill they are
complete I fail to say how anyone can claim that GM foods are safe.
Gareth Wilson
Vegard Valberg wrote:
>
> As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray it on
> bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant women",
> or "Heroin is much less addictive than morphine", or "Cigarettes are not
> at all unhealthy", or "Red meat is good for you, it is one of the four
> food groups".
Or "Silicone is a totally inert substance that is perfectly safe to use in breast
implants."
Wait a second, that was actually right, wasn't it? And the only people who
disagreed were bloodsucking lawyers and the women they managed to con into suing.
Maybe the Evil Scientists sometimes get things right....
Vegard Valberg
>
> Vegard Valberg wrote:
>
> >
> > As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray it on
> > bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant women",
> > or "Heroin is much less addictive than morphine", or "Cigarettes are not
> > at all unhealthy", or "Red meat is good for you, it is one of the four
> > food groups".
>
> Or "Silicone is a totally inert substance that is perfectly safe to use in breast
> implants."
> Wait a second, that was actually right, wasn't it? And the only people who
> disagreed were bloodsucking lawyers and the women they managed to con into suing.
Yes of course, all those stories we hear about women who get their life
and health ruined by them are just stories made by unscrupolous lawyers!
Hmmmm, maybe not.
> Maybe the Evil Scientists sometimes get things right....
Sure they do, but they also get things wrong, that is why I like to see
some real tests being done before something is introduced to my food
supply.
Robert Pearlman
>In article <37e42963...@news.pipeline.com>,
>Robert Pearlman <rpea...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>>John VanSickle <vans...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>> 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
>>> violently suppress it.
>>
>>As we correspond, French farmers are beseiging any uses they can
>>identify of gene-modified vegetables.
>
>That's not "a large portion of society" by my standards.
As John didn't specify more closely, I feel your standard would be ex
post facto. In fact, there are lots of farmers in France, in large
part because they've applied their political influence to keeping
farming lucrative. Their political influence of course arises in
large part because there are plenty of them. And so we go on.
--
Pearlman
Gareth Wilson
Vegard Valberg wrote:
> >
> > Or "Silicone is a totally inert substance that is perfectly safe to use in breast
> > implants."
> > Wait a second, that was actually right, wasn't it? And the only people who
> > disagreed were bloodsucking lawyers and the women they managed to con into suing.
>
> Yes of course, all those stories we hear about women who get their life
> and health ruined by them are just stories made by unscrupolous lawyers!
> Hmmmm, maybe not.
I'm not disputing that they had health problems. But it's more likely that they got
those diseases through being cursed by witches than their implants.
Richard Horton
<vval...@online.no> wrote:
> Yes of course, all those stories we hear about women who get their life
>and health ruined by them are just stories made by unscrupolous lawyers!
>Hmmmm, maybe not.
In this case, apparently, as far as scientific studies can tell, yes.
--
Rich Horton | Stable Email: mailto://richard...@sff.net
Home Page: http://www.sff.net/people/richard.horton
Also visit SF Site (http://www.sfsite.com) and Tangent Online (http://www.sfsite.com/tangent)
Otto
<rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>John VanSickle wrote:
>
>> 7. A technological innovation prompts a large portion of society to
>> violently suppress it.
>
>I can think of a few real life examples. But I shall not name them.
>
>> 27. Omnipotent pacifist aliens impose their philosophy on us without
>> bothering to protect us from the races they have left alone.
>
>I have never encountered this cliche. Examples?
The Organians in Star Trek, or at least the ones in the novels.
>> 41. Most aliens breathe oxygen, just like humans do.
>
>Strikes me as not necessarily being unrealistic.
But so few alien races _don't_ apparently breathe oxygen that the few
exceptions are notable in themselves. And it's very seldom that
anyone bothers to comment on this fact in SF--it's just taken for
granted.
>> 43. All of the spacefaring races have roughly the same level of
>> technology.
>
>One notes that assuming any trade in commodities is going on, technology
>would tend to equalise.
Except that why should there necessarily be any trade between
communities? i.e. the various "space nomad"-type shows which feature
a set cast and/or starship visiting a different place each episode.
>> 70. Clones think, act, and speak in a manner indistinguishable from the
>> cloned person.
>
>I have never in fact encountered that cliche except in the form of
>clones created complete with the memory of the cloned person which are
>a cliche in their own right.
You're saying the same thing in a different way.
Commodore Otto
Otto
<vval...@online.no> wrote:
>Otto wrote:
>
>> Well, we THINK they're great, and if we do a THOUGHT experiment we can
>> see that the effects of this could be very bad.
>>
>> Note the common thread here.
>>
>> Commodore Otto
>
> As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray it on
>bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant women",
>or "Heroin is much less addictive than morphine", or "Cigarettes are not
>at all unhealthy", or "Red meat is good for you, it is one of the four
>food groups".
Were these statements made based on the results of rationally- and
methodologically-conducted studies? Or are they just as much based on
hearsay, speculation, and personal prejudice as
"Genetically-engineered food will cause severe health problems in
anyone who eats it, without fail or exception"?
Commodore Otto
David Johnston
Who the heck says that?
Vegard Valberg
>
> Otto wrote:
> > Were these statements made based on the results of rationally- and
> > methodologically-conducted studies? Or are they just as much based on
> > hearsay, speculation, and personal prejudice as
> > "Genetically-engineered food will cause severe health problems in
> > anyone who eats it, without fail or exception"?
>
> Who the heck says that?
Indeed, I have never said anything like that, all I am saying is that
GM foods are a huge risk, that there have not been enough tests to show
they are safe, and that there have been some tests that could indicate
that they are dangerous (in Britain rats were found to have their immune
system impaired after ingesting GM foods). I am not playing Russian
Roulette with my life.
Matt Ruff / Lisa Gold
>
> John VanSickle wrote:
>
>> 43. All of the spacefaring races have roughly the same level of
>> technology.
>
> One notes that assuming any trade in commodities is going on,
> technology would tend to equalise.
This assumes cliche #473: "Despite the vast distances involved, travel
and trade between star systems is no more difficult than travel and
trade between countries."
-- M. Ruff
J.Bland
David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> Otto wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 00:05:53 +0200, Vegard Valberg
> > <vval...@online.no> wrote:
> >
> > >Otto wrote:
> > >
> > >> Well, we THINK they're great, and if we do a THOUGHT experiment we can
> > >> see that the effects of this could be very bad.
> > >>
> > >> Note the common thread here.
> > >>
> > >> Commodore Otto
> > >
> > > As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray
> > > it on bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant
> > > women", or "Heroin is much less addictive than morphine", or
Thalidomide is safe to give to pregnant women *in one optical isomeric form*.
There's 2 optical isomers of it, one is good, one is *bad*. If this had been
known at the time the problem with thalidomide wouldn't have happened, the
lab tests were on the good one while the mass produced version had both in
it, that's how the problem arose. But it did have positive benefits in the
good form.
It's a lesson in testing your product thoroughly, not that all man-made
products/chemicals are inherently bad.
Anyway, what's this got to do with sci fi films?
Shrike
--
John Bland Webmaster and Ph.D. Research Student,
M.Phys (Hons) Grad.Inst.P Condensed Matter Physics Department,
J.B...@liv.ac.uk The University of Liverpool
http://www.sliced.uk.eu.org/~shrike http://www.liv.ac.uk/~olmsg01/physics/
"The Sleeper Must Awaken" - Dune Messiah
Andrew Shepherd
<vval...@online.no> writes
>David Johnston wrote:
>>
>> Otto wrote:
>> > Were these statements made based on the results of rationally- and
>> > methodologically-conducted studies? Or are they just as much based on
>> > hearsay, speculation, and personal prejudice as
>> > "Genetically-engineered food will cause severe health problems in
>> > anyone who eats it, without fail or exception"?
>>
>> Who the heck says that?
>
> Indeed, I have never said anything like that, all I am saying is that
>GM foods are a huge risk, that there have not been enough tests to show
>they are safe, and that there have been some tests that could indicate
>that they are dangerous (in Britain rats were found to have their immune
>system impaired after ingesting GM foods). I am not playing Russian
>Roulette with my life.
>
GM food, so no GM foods used, the chemical used to spike the spuds was
known to cause problems in the immune system ...
--
Right, you lot start coding, I'll go and see what they want.
"nullus anxietus sanguinae!"
Andrew
Geoduck
Starr) wrote:
Also, there's the question of just how the dead Overlord organized his
empire, and how he picked his underlings. If people under him
deliberately got promoted because of loyalty/lack of ambition as
opposed to talent, then everything might revolve around the EO, and
completely collapse upon his death.
--
Geoduck
geo...@usa.net
http://www.olywa.net/cook
Kai Henningsen
> Of course, when the request was originally made, U.S. fields were mixed
> with G.M. and non-G.M. foods. There was no immediate way to seperate the
> two.
The way I heard it, US exports were *intentionally* mixed up so there was
no way for consumers to select non-GM foods.
> It did? I had heard from Europeans that the EU initally tried to block
> the shipment of GM foods. Correct me if I'm wrong.
You are.
> Europe hasn't been winning too many friends in the U.S. with their trade
> policies, so you'll forgive us USian's if we are a bit paranoid about the
> intentions behind the whole G.M. thing.
Well, the US certainly has been winning no friends over here with *their*
trade policies.
You know, there's a big difference between saying "we only want this stuff
and not that" (EU to USA), and saying "you have to want this stuff" (USA
to EU).
OTOH, the EU has been turning around and telling their member states the
same sort of thing.
> Sure, particularly the more loony Greens who are willing to stupid
> things to get them off the shelves. That does wonders for the perception
> in the U.S. of European credibility on what are very reasonable concerns.
Interestingly enough, from what I hear, the US seems to have a near-
monopoly on the more loony Greens.
> Labelling would be a fair compromise, if Europe would realize that it
> takes a hell of a lot of work and money to seperate out fields and
> suchlike.
We didn't mix them up in the first place. Why should we care how much work
it is?
>It's not just going to happen overnight because someone in
> Brussels or wherever waves a magic wand and pronounces that America must
> label their foodstuffs. That sort of thing leads to trade wars.
As far as I'm concerned, 90% of the US-EU trade wars are caused by US
pigheadedness. (The other 10% are caused by EU pigheadedness, to be sure.)
Kai
--
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/
"... by God I *KNOW* what this network is for, and you can't have it."
- Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu)
John VanSickle
>
> In article <37E4BD...@online.no>, Vegard Valberg
> <vval...@online.no> writes
> >GM foods are a huge risk, that there have not been enough tests to show
> >they are safe, and that there have been some tests that could indicate
> >that they are dangerous (in Britain rats were found to have their immune
> >system impaired after ingesting GM foods). I am not playing Russian
> >Roulette with my life.
> >
> Well no, the rats were fed on potatoes that had been "spiked" to simulate a
> GM food, so no GM foods used, the chemical used to spike the spuds was
> known to cause problems in the immune system ...
Unless the only difference between the GM potatoes and the normal kind
is the presence of the chemical in question, then *NO*, the test did
not simulate GM food, and furthermore the researchers are guilty of
misrepresentation.
Regards,
John
--
"It matters not whether you win or lose.
What matters is whether *I* win or lose." -- Darin Weinberg
jon courtenay grimwood
Dan Goodman wrote in message <3TFE3.74$Hh3....@ptah.visi.com>...
>In article <37e42963...@news.pipeline.com>,
>Robert Pearlman <rpea...@pipeline.com> wrote:
>>John VanSickle <vans...@erols.com> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>> violently suppress it.
>>
>>identify of gene-modified vegetables.
>
It is if you're in France and the roads are blocked, lorries are overturned
and a mob has just wrecked the local macdonalds and some minister has come
out of the woodwork to say they might have a point...
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Henningsen) wrote:
>Interestingly enough, from what I hear, the US seems to have a near-
>monopoly on the more loony Greens.
This may be because your Greens are a viable political party, rather
than a fringe group. Your sane Greens act to restrain the loonies.
>As far as I'm concerned, 90% of the US-EU trade wars are caused by US
>pigheadedness. (The other 10% are caused by EU pigheadedness, to be sure.)
From where I sit, I'd put it much closer to even.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 7/24/99
Matt Austern
> > Sure, particularly the more loony Greens who are willing to stupid
> > things to get them off the shelves. That does wonders for the perception
> > in the U.S. of European credibility on what are very reasonable concerns.
>
> Interestingly enough, from what I hear, the US seems to have a near-
> monopoly on the more loony Greens.
Not exactly; I think it's an artifact of the way that the US press
works. The US has no Green party of any importance at all; the Green
party here is even more insignificant politically than the Libertarian
party. The US press thus has no incentive to distinguish between
ordinary Green activists and genuine madmen like Kaczynsky. The Green
party is so unfamiliar around there that center-right newspaper editors
have no reason to make fine distinctions.
Zookie
Gareth Wilson wrote in message
<37E439FC...@student.canterbury.ac.nz>...
>
>
>Vegard Valberg wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Or "Silicone is a totally inert substance that is perfectly safe to use
in breast
>> > implants."
>> > Wait a second, that was actually right, wasn't it? And the only people
who
>> > disagreed were bloodsucking lawyers and the women they managed to con
into suing.
>>
their life
>> and health ruined by them are just stories made by unscrupolous lawyers!
>> Hmmmm, maybe not.
>
they got
>those diseases through being cursed by witches than their implants.
>
>
Well, saline breast implants are safe. If they weren't, half of CA would be
disolving by now. But *silicone gel filled ones are not*, because:
Silicone gel is not a *totally* inert substance.
There is no way of guaranteeing that the implants will not leak.
When silicone gel leaks into the body there will be problems. That is
a fact.
Zookie
Gareth Wilson wrote in message
>
>
>Vegard Valberg wrote:
>
>>
>> As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray
it on
>> bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant women",
>> at all unhealthy", or "Red meat is good for you, it is one of the four
>> food groups".
>
breast
>implants."
>Wait a second, that was actually right, wasn't it? And the only people who
>disagreed were bloodsucking lawyers and the women they managed to con into
suing.
OK, the implant manufacturers manage to slip large "devices" into
the bodies of millions of women, without proper testing or medical
approval, inspite of the fact that they involve likely pollution of their
bodies with an artificial substance the likes of which no earthly life
form has ever encountered. They make a few billion, and for years
anyone that might have information that threatens this practice faces
persecution at the hands of agents out to protect said billions.
Yep, those lawyers are a bunch of shady characters out to malign
the poor downtrodden manufacturers. The lawyers are the greedy
money hungry ones. Those manufacturers, on the other hand, were
just doing what they did out of the goodness of their hearts.
Ian
>Gareth Wilson wrote:
>>
>> Vegard Valberg wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > As opposed to "DDT is perfectly safe, in fact feel free to spray it on
>> > bathing children", or "Thalomide is perfectly safe for pregnant women",
>> > or "Heroin is much less addictive than morphine", or "Cigarettes are not
>> > at all unhealthy", or "Red meat is good for you, it is one of the four
>> > food groups".
>>
>> Or "Silicone is a totally inert substance that is perfectly safe to use in breast
>> implants."
>> Wait a second, that was actually right, wasn't it? And the only people who
>> disagreed were bloodsucking lawyers and the women they managed to con into suing.
>
> Yes of course, all those stories we hear about women who get their life
>and health ruined by them are just stories made by unscrupolous lawyers!
>Hmmmm, maybe not.
Actually, yes, AFAIK.
Extensive study was done on the issue and it was finally determined that
silicone implants didn't cause any harm. This was after massive recalls
and payoffs.
There was never any clear causal link between implants and harm in the
first place. Just a lot of women who happened to have health problems and
implants, and where the implants couldn't be ruled out as the cause.
Ian
>> Who can tell?
>> Seriously though the tests are still ongoing, but already we
>> see signs that this might lead to allergic reactions (what if you are
>> allergic to a certain plant or animal, and DNA from that plant or
>> animal was transplanted into other products), sickness
>> (Creutzfeld-Jacobs anyone? Something similar could easily come from GM
>> food, scrapy and Mad-Cow disease came from grinding up dead sheep and
>> using them for food, DNA manipulation can very well lead to something
>> similar), and so forth (for instance DNA transmigration which could
>> lead to some new problems). The point is that it is a risk, it's like
>> playing Russian roulette without knowing how many bullets or chambers
>> there are in the revolver.
>
>My problem with this is that it hypothesizes the existence of a risk
>with *zero* evidence to support said hypothesis.
Acually they have a rather better case than that.
There are almost certainly _some_ problems, as there are with the onset of
any such new technology. But we haven't identified what they are yet,
because there has been _remarkably_ little effort to actually test various
GM foods and see what the problems are.
A few have been discovered incidentally already, relating to the growing of
the foods. For example, there is some pest-resistant GM crop which
cross-pollinated with other nearby plants, resulting in monarch butterflies
being poisoned after eating them. Monarchs are an important part of the US
ecosystem.
>It is by no means irrational to exercise caution, but to reject the
>benefits of a new technology merely because one is frightened of risks
>that have not been proven to exist is the epitome of irrationality.
It doesn't seem the "epitome of irrationality" to reject the new technology
_pending_ evaluation of the risks. Which is exactly what the US does with
things like new drugs... but apparently not GM foods, because they fall
into a jurisdictional hole between US agencies!
>> By the way if the US would only comply with EU request that
>> all GM foods be clearly labelled as such then I would have no problems
>> with GM foods (of course the US knows that the European consumer would
>> never buy it). Crazy part is that the EU government wanted to bring in
>> GM food, but the people are very opposed to them.
>
>If the GM foods are cheaper to produce, causing the price tag to be
>lower, the producers of the regular kind will demand a tariff to make up
>the difference.
Which is an irrelevant worry because that sort of thing is covered by the
WTO.
Ian
>Robert Patrick Meyer wrote:
>>
>> In article <37E3E9...@online.no>, vval...@online.no says...
>> > Something similar could easily come from GM food, scrapy and Mad-Cow
>> > disease came from grinding up dead sheep and using them for food, DNA
>> > manipulation can very well lead to something similar),
>>
>> How? Some of the other points you made regarding GM foods are pretty
>> valid, but those were prion diseases.
>
> Something similar in effect if not in cause. However said prions came
>from organic sources (e.g the ground up sheep), therefore they can be
>generated naturally. So if we pick the wrong genes to transplant (e.g
>the genes that lead to certain diseases) then said disease could migrate
>to the people who eat it (similar to how if you eat animals or people
>with certain inherited diseases most specifically Creutzfeld-Jacobs, you
>might contract the disease or something similar yourself).
The thing is that "prions" are quite an unusual substance - they're not
viruses, they're even simpler. Biochemical structures with no genes, that
can replicate in the proper environment.
Genetic engineering can't cause anything to get prions. Probably wouldn't
meaningfully cause it to be more susceptible to them, either. And prions
are a really odd case in that I doubt any kind of traditional drug,
vaccine, or anything at all like that would work against them at all.
Craig
any good and which is _not_ mentioned in these lists as a cliche?
--
Craig
Steve Hix
> > We have cases
> > where eating animals (or people, in the case of some cannibal tribes
> > IIRC on Papua New Guinea) with inherited diseases has led to people
> > getting those diseases themselves.
If you're referring to the Fora, no.
The diseases passed on were not inherited, they just had a
*really* long incubation period. Finding them started a whole
new are a of study, "slow virus".
tomwomack00
> Well, saline breast implants are safe. If they weren't, half of CA would be
> disolving by now. But *silicone gel filled ones are not*, because:
>
> Silicone gel is not a *totally* inert substance.
Nor's saline, presumably; I'd not be entirely happy to have a kilogram of salt
water appear in the middle of my body cavity. Presumably saline has the correct
concentration of Na+ and Cl- to avoid noxious osmotic trouble, but I'm not quite
sure I want that number of signalling species to appear anywhere near my nerves.
> There is no way of guaranteeing that the implants will not leak.
Think very carefully about what you mean by 'guarantee'; it's meaningless unless
handled quantitatively. You could make it wildly unlikely that they'd leak by
machining them out of ruthenium; you could make them less likely to leak by
increasing the thickness of the plastic casing. But it's meaningless to talk
about a guarantee unless you have a threat model - there's a difference between
protecting against hugs from over-amorous boyfriends, protecting against being
hit full in the chest by a deploying airbag during a 70kph crash, or protecting
against adversaries with tungsten-carbide drills.
>
> When silicone gel leaks into the body there will be problems. That is
> a fact.
It's susceptible to test, and as far as I know the tests have been done (in
mice, of course, since doing them in humans would be grotesquely unethical) and
show that the problems either don't happen or bear no relation to the problems
the implants are claimed to call.
Tom
Ian
>>I'm not disputing that they had health problems. But it's more likely that
>they got
>>those diseases through being cursed by witches than their implants.
>
>Well, saline breast implants are safe. If they weren't, half of CA would be
>disolving by now. But *silicone gel filled ones are not*, because:
>
>Silicone gel is not a *totally* inert substance.
>There is no way of guaranteeing that the implants will not leak.
>
>When silicone gel leaks into the body there will be problems. That is
>a fact.
No, that does not appear to be a "fact". Extensive scientific study has
(relatively recently) established that there don't seem to be problems from
silicone gel leaking into the body.
Phil Fraering
>Not exactly; I think it's an artifact of the way that the US press
>works. The US has no Green party of any importance at all; the Green
>party here is even more insignificant politically than the Libertarian
>party. The US press thus has no incentive to distinguish between
>ordinary Green activists and genuine madmen like Kaczynsky. The Green
>party is so unfamiliar around there that center-right newspaper editors
>have no reason to make fine distinctions.
Center-right newspaper editors?
How many states does your United States have?
(Checks time)
Whoops, gotta slide.
--
Phil Fraering Now I lay me down to sleep
p...@globalreach.net Try to count electric sheep
/Will work for tape/ Sweet dream wishes you can keep
How I hate the night. - Marvin, the Paranoid Android.
Phil Fraering
Okay: The first two items in Phil's Anti-Cliche List:
* Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
a walking zombie?
* The dashing aristocratic secret agent/mercenary isn't tall and
handsome, but is a mutant hunchbacked dwarf who manages to break
a bone for every twenty pages or so of elapsed mission time?
(I'm sure there are others).
Joe Kalash
Starr) wrote:
> In article <37E2EED7...@erols.com>,
> John VanSickle said:
>
> > 60. When the Evil Overlord dies, none of his surviving
> > henchmen move into the power vacuum; instead, his
> > empire collapses.
>
> I might file this uder "dramatic baloney" rather than "severe
> baloney"... it depends a lot on the circumstances, I think,
> especially whether the Evil Overlord was the local government
> or just a mega-criminal operating _against_ the government.
>
Or even reality. Think of Alexander the Great (as an off the cuff
example). His empire collapsed after he died.
--
Joe Kalash
Really Easy Internet, Inc.
kal...@really-easy.com
Joel Baxter
>Craig <cr...@cmcarthur.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>>Can anyone come up with a theme, character, setting, plot etc, which is
>>any good and which is _not_ mentioned in these lists as a cliche?
>>--
>>Craig
>
>Okay: The first two items in Phil's Anti-Cliche List:
>
>* Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
>form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
>technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
>a walking zombie?
>
>* The dashing aristocratic secret agent/mercenary isn't tall and
>handsome, but is a mutant hunchbacked dwarf who manages to break
>a bone for every twenty pages or so of elapsed mission time?
>
>(I'm sure there are others).
Yeah, but it's all in the implementation. We could pare your two examples
down to "cliches" suitable for the list:
* People who have animal companions bonded to them, which they can
communicate with.
* A charismatic aristocrat who leads a double life as a secret agent.
Of course, as you showed above, these two cases can be elaborated on to show
that they did _not_ get a cliched treatment in the books that you have in
mind. Likewise, the same can be true for any (well, just about any) of the
cliches already listed.
Kind of a fun game though. What book do you suppose I have in mind here:
* A dabbler in white magic learns that a mighty wizard plans to unleash
demons to ravage the earth. He journeys to his lair to stop him.
Could be one of many I suppose. Now if I add more details:
* A priest (a dabbler in white magic) learns that a mighty wizard plans to
unleash demons to ravage the earth, because he is in the pay of a jaded arms
dealer who wants to see the ultimate in destruction. He journeys to his
lair to stop him. When, after a discussion, he fails to dissuade the
wizard, he lets him proceed with his summoning. Demons destroy the world.
The End.
(This one was brought to mind by another ongoing thread around here.)
--
Joel Baxter jba...@lemur.stanford.edu http://lemur.stanford.edu/~jbaxter/
Dan Goodman
Joel Baxter <jba...@tinderbox.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
>In article <j5q3s7...@127.0.0.1>, Phil Fraering <pgf@lungold> wrote:
>>Craig <cr...@cmcarthur.demon.co.uk> writes:
>>
>>>Can anyone come up with a theme, character, setting, plot etc, which is
>>>any good and which is _not_ mentioned in these lists as a cliche?
>>
Yes, but there was a sequel.
And the Spindizzy end-of-all-the-universes book had a preface quoted from
something written _after_ The End. Blish apparently had a problem with
destroying the world and _leaving_ it destroyed.
James Blish, _Black Easter_.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Rich Clark
Joel Baxter <jba...@tinderbox.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message
news:7s42il$jot$1...@nntp.Stanford.EDU...>
> * A dabbler in white magic learns that a mighty wizard plans to
unleash
> demons to ravage the earth. He journeys to his lair to stop him.
Jesse Jackson meets with Saddam Hussein?
Bill Dugan
snip
>Also, there's the question of just how the dead Overlord organized his
>empire, and how he picked his underlings. If people under him
>deliberately got promoted because of loyalty/lack of ambition as
>opposed to talent, then everything might revolve around the EO, and
>completely collapse upon his death.
OTOH, if he picked talented ambitious underlings, after his death his
empire might collapse while they fought for his place.
Otto
<lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>On 19 Sep 1999 14:52:00 +0200, kaih=7PBlf...@khms.westfalen.de (Kai
>Henningsen) wrote:
>
>>As far as I'm concerned, 90% of the US-EU trade wars are caused by US
>>pigheadedness. (The other 10% are caused by EU pigheadedness, to be sure.)
>
>From where I sit, I'd put it much closer to even.
Yes, but you're American, so you're inherently biased and unreliable.
Kai's European, and therefore totally impartial and rational.
Commodore Otto
Otto
<iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>There are almost certainly _some_ problems, as there are with the onset of
>any such new technology. But we haven't identified what they are yet,
>because there has been _remarkably_ little effort to actually test various
>GM foods and see what the problems are.
That would require that someone actually _eat_ them, and we all know
that if you eat genetically-engineered food you'll grow an extra head
and green scaly skin and start sucking out people's lymphatic fluid.
Oh, and mankind has been selectively breeding animals since we first
noticed that big parents = big kids (a very crude, high-level form of
genetic engineering), and we have yet to come up with a
two-hundred-foot sheep that can knock over barns and grazes an entire
golf course in a day.
Commodore Otto
David Johnston
>
> Can anyone come up with a theme, character, setting, plot etc, which is
> any good and which is _not_ mentioned in these lists as a cliche?
Hard to say. If anyone comes up with one, doubtless it can be added.
For example, all time travel storylines would be included since the list maker
doesn't like time travel. I haven't seen "Near light speed travel with
relativistic effects leads to starship crew and passengers becoming increasingly
out of touch with the society they leave behind" even though it's a good idea,
but it could certainly be added to the list since it has been used repeatedly.
Any idea that has been used more than once is eligible, and ideas that have
been used only once are also eligible if the list maker doesn't like them.
Otto
<tomwo...@netscapeonline.co.uk> wrote:
>Zookie <zo...@bullweb.com> wrote in message news:e4taSEtA$GA.116@cpmsnbbsa02...
>
>> There is no way of guaranteeing that the implants will not leak.
>
>Think very carefully about what you mean by 'guarantee'; it's meaningless unless
>handled quantitatively. You could make it wildly unlikely that they'd leak by
>machining them out of ruthenium; you could make them less likely to leak by
>increasing the thickness of the plastic casing. But it's meaningless to talk
>about a guarantee unless you have a threat model - there's a difference between
>protecting against hugs from over-amorous boyfriends, protecting against being
>hit full in the chest by a deploying airbag during a 70kph crash, or protecting
>against adversaries with tungsten-carbide drills.
What exactly do you and your girlfriend _DO_ in bed together?
Never mind, actually, I'd rather you didn't say...
Commodore Otto
David Johnston
>
> David Johnston wrote:
> >
> > John VanSickle wrote:
> >
> >> 43. All of the spacefaring races have roughly the same level of
> >> technology.
> >
> > One notes that assuming any trade in commodities is going on,
> > technology would tend to equalise.
>
> This assumes cliche #473: "Despite the vast distances involved, travel
> and trade between star systems is no more difficult than travel and
> trade between countries."
Yeah, but it's kind of boring for interstellar travel to be basically
impractical, even if it is.
Otto
>OK, the implant manufacturers manage to slip large "devices" into
>the bodies of millions of women, without proper testing or medical
>approval, inspite of the fact that they involve likely pollution of their
>bodies with an artificial substance the likes of which no earthly life
>form has ever encountered.
Shit, I do that every time I _breathe_. If the bag the silicone's in
doesn't break, then what's the issue?
Pacemakers aren't a natural thing for people, but nobody's disputing
that those are useful items. And I don't recall seeing too many
animals making their own eyeglasses or corrective lenses, do you?
(PS--how many of those women who rushed out to get bigger boobs really
thoroughly researched what they were doing first?)
Commodore Otto
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Oh, of course. I'd forgotten that the slans secretly took over Europe
years ago.
Ian
>On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 15:09:19 -0300, Ian
><iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
>>There are almost certainly _some_ problems, as there are with the onset of
>>any such new technology. But we haven't identified what they are yet,
>>because there has been _remarkably_ little effort to actually test various
>>GM foods and see what the problems are.
>
>That would require that someone actually _eat_ them,
Actually, many of the biggest potential problems are in environmental
impact, not reaction in humans. There has been remarkably little effort to
investigate how most GM foods interact with the surrounding environment.
Also, effort to investigate the effects you get when animals eat GM food
are rather sub-optimal as well.
The fact is that, at least in the US, GM foods fall into a jurisdictional
hole so nobody is really creating or enforcing much of any standard. The
research is often limited to whatever the company producing the food
decides to do.
>and we all know
>that if you eat genetically-engineered food you'll grow an extra head
>and green scaly skin and start sucking out people's lymphatic fluid.
This is a rather ludicrous strawman.
>Oh, and mankind has been selectively breeding animals since we first
>noticed that big parents = big kids (a very crude, high-level form of
>genetic engineering), and we have yet to come up with a
>two-hundred-foot sheep that can knock over barns and grazes an entire
>golf course in a day.
Another strawman. Additionally, GM foods are qualitatively different from
the products of selective breeding due to the potential for genes to cross
species lines in unpredictable ways.
Like, for example, the time when GM corn (IIRC it was corn), engineered for
pest resistance, started cross-pollinating the pest resistance gene to
nearby plants (a wild variety of corn or grass) that nobody thought it was
fertile with at all. Monarch butterflies, who loved to eat that plant,
started dropping like flies.
tomwomack00
news:G8flN8c=nGCm3n1Wac...@4ax.com...
> Like, for example, the time when GM corn (IIRC it was corn), engineered for
> pest resistance, started cross-pollinating the pest resistance gene to
> nearby plants (a wild variety of corn or grass) that nobody thought it was
> fertile with at all. Monarch butterflies, who loved to eat that plant,
> started dropping like flies.
Um, you're conflating two stories here. The cross-pollination of pest-resistance
genes to wild species is a standard possibility mentioned, but I don't remember
any cases where it's actually occurred.
The monarch butterflies died when they ate plants coated with pollen from
Bt-producing corn; it's not quite clear whether, in nature, plants would ever
get that coated with corn pollen.
Tom
Podkayne Fries
>On Sun, 19 Sep 1999 15:09:19 -0300, Ian
><iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
>>There are almost certainly _some_ problems, as there are with the onset of
>>any such new technology. But we haven't identified what they are yet,
>>because there has been _remarkably_ little effort to actually test various
>>GM foods and see what the problems are.
>
>That would require that someone actually _eat_ them, and we all know
>that if you eat genetically-engineered food you'll grow an extra head
>and green scaly skin and start sucking out people's lymphatic fluid.
>
>Oh, and mankind has been selectively breeding animals since we first
>noticed that big parents = big kids (a very crude, high-level form of
>genetic engineering), and we have yet to come up with a
>two-hundred-foot sheep that can knock over barns and grazes an entire
>golf course in a day.
>
We're working on it, though. A friend of mine raises sheep and has been
breeding them for long legs, among other things. They look like really
fat mountain goats. In forty or fifty more generations, who knows?
--
Regards, Podkayne Fries
When you're having a bad day and people are trying your patience,
remember that it takes 42 muscles to frown ... but only 4 to pull
the trigger on any decent sniper rifle.
EdLincoln
>20. An alien race's values and beliefs are indistinguishable from those
> of an Oriental culture.
This is one of my pet peeeves.
1.) Extremely complex devices that would require extremely advanced technology
to build but do something that could be done far moreeasily.
eg. Huge battle robots that are really less effective than bombers and A Bombs,
light sabres that are less usefull than guns.
2.) Any alien computer can interface perfectly with a laptop or tricorder.
Ian
His empire was split into three parts among his "henchmen" after he died,
it did not immediately collapse. The parts did, over the long run, not do
nearly so well as Alexander's empire.
Nancy Lebovitz
>On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:38:57 GMT, David Johnston
><rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>
>>John VanSickle wrote:
>>
>>> 41. Most aliens breathe oxygen, just like humans do.
>>
>>Strikes me as not necessarily being unrealistic.
>
>But so few alien races _don't_ apparently breathe oxygen that the few
>exceptions are notable in themselves. And it's very seldom that
>anyone bothers to comment on this fact in SF--it's just taken for
>granted.
It seems reasonable that most of the aliens we have a lot of social
contact with will be able to handle our atmosphere, and those are
the aliens who'll show up in tv and movies.
By the way, you probably mean aliens who can manage under Earth
conditions. There's a lot more to compatibility than one gas.
OBSF: _Between Planets_ by Heinlein--iirc, there was a Martian
who was in an atmosphere tank and suffering badly from Venerian
gravity.
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com
Calligraphic button catalogue available by email!
John VanSickle
>
> We're working on it, though. A friend of mine raises sheep and has
> been breeding them for long legs, among other things. They look like
> really fat mountain goats. In forty or fifty more generations, who
> knows?
I keep entertaining the notion of trying to domesticate the racoon.
The folks over at talk.politics.animals were against the idea, and in
any event I don't have nearly the resources for the project.
But like most carnivores, they're so darn cute...
Regards,
John
--
"A lady is someone who never shows her underwear unintentionally."
Lillian Day
John VanSickle
Naw, Jimmy Carter!
--
"It matters not whether you win or lose.
What matters is whether *I* win or lose." -- Darin Weinberg
Geoduck
<vans...@erols.com> wrote:
>Rich Clark wrote:
>>
>> Joel Baxter <jba...@tinderbox.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message
>> news:7s42il$jot$1...@nntp.Stanford.EDU...>
>>
>> > * A dabbler in white magic learns that a mighty wizard plans to
>> unleash
>> > demons to ravage the earth. He journeys to his lair to stop him.
>>
>> Jesse Jackson meets with Saddam Hussein?
>
>Naw, Jimmy Carter!
And which one is Carter replacing?
--
Geoduck
geo...@usa.net
http://www.olywa.net/cook
John F. Eldredge
<iadm...@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>Additionally, GM foods are qualitatively different from
>the products of selective breeding due to the potential for genes to cross
>species lines in unpredictable ways.
>
>Like, for example, the time when GM corn (IIRC it was corn), engineered for
>pest resistance, started cross-pollinating the pest resistance gene to
>nearby plants (a wild variety of corn or grass) that nobody thought it was
>fertile with at all. Monarch butterflies, who loved to eat that plant,
>started dropping like flies.
The genes that might cross through hybridization or through an
intermediate vector such as bacteria or virii might be new, but the
process of genes crossing from one species to another is a natural
one, and has been happening all along.
--
John F. Eldredge -- eldr...@poboxes.com
PGP key available from http://www.netforward.com/poboxes/?eldredge/
--
"There must be, not a balance of power, but a community of power;
not organized rivalries, but an organized common peace." - Woodrow Wilson
Matt Austern
> > * Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
> > form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
> > technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
> > a walking zombie?
>
> I thought the ideas were supposed to be "any good". That one is quite
> a bit dumber than trying to change history.
Yep. Nobody could write an interesting story with that premise, let
alone a book with genuine depth, eh?
Joe Kalash
<rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
> > Or even reality. Think of Alexander the Great (as an off the cuff
> > example). His empire collapsed after he died.
> >
>
> Actually it broke into several factions.
That's not collapsing?
Phil Fraering
>Podkayne Fries wrote:
>>
>> We're working on it, though. A friend of mine raises sheep and has
>> been breeding them for long legs, among other things. They look like
>> really fat mountain goats. In forty or fifty more generations, who
>> knows?
>I keep entertaining the notion of trying to domesticate the racoon.
>The folks over at talk.politics.animals were against the idea, and in
>any event I don't have nearly the resources for the project.
>But like most carnivores, they're so darn cute...
Join your local wildlife-in-distress aid group, maybe?
David Johnston
>
> In article <7s1rro$p...@crl3.crl.com>, wds...@crl.com (William December
> Starr) wrote:
>
> > In article <37E2EED7...@erols.com>,
> > John VanSickle said:
> >
> > > 60. When the Evil Overlord dies, none of his surviving
> > > henchmen move into the power vacuum; instead, his
> > > empire collapses.
> >
> > I might file this uder "dramatic baloney" rather than "severe
> > baloney"... it depends a lot on the circumstances, I think,
> > especially whether the Evil Overlord was the local government
> > or just a mega-criminal operating _against_ the government.
> >
>
David Johnston
>
> Craig <cr...@cmcarthur.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> >Can anyone come up with a theme, character, setting, plot etc, which is
> >any good and which is _not_ mentioned in these lists as a cliche?
> >Craig
>
> Okay: The first two items in Phil's Anti-Cliche List:
>
> form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
> technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
> a walking zombie?
I thought the ideas were supposed to be "any good". That one is quite
a bit dumber than trying to change history.
>
> * The dashing aristocratic secret agent/mercenary isn't tall and
> handsome, but is a mutant hunchbacked dwarf who manages to break
> a bone for every twenty pages or so of elapsed mission time?
A minor variation on a well worn theme.
>
> (I'm sure there are others).
>
David Johnston
>
> David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> writes:
>
> > > * Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
> > > form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
> > > technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
> > > a walking zombie?
> >
> > I thought the ideas were supposed to be "any good". That one is quite
> > a bit dumber than trying to change history.
>
> alone a book with genuine depth, eh?
<Shrug> A really great writer can save any idea, even the goofy ones.
I've got a sneaking suspicion that whatever book you are talking about
is an uninteresting story with genuine depth but I have plausibility
issues with using that premise and calling it science fiction.
Michael Martinez
>Matt Austern wrote:
>>
>> David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> writes:
>>
>> > > * Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
>> > > form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
>> > > technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
>> > > a walking zombie?
This reminds me of the cheesy "super-intelligent collective microbe mind"
cliche. A billion sub-cellular microbes have somehow evolved to a higher
collective intelligence that can inhabit and control host bodies.
Which reminds me of the collective intelligence cliche....
--
\\ // Worlds of Imagination on the Web in...@xenite.org
\\// FREE! Watch Internet TV shows at Xenite.Org!
//\\ [http://www.xenite.org/index.htm]
// \\ENITE.org...............................................
Danny Sichel
> Thalidomide is safe to give to pregnant women *in one optical isomeric form*.
> There's 2 optical isomers of it, one is good, one is *bad*. If this had been
> known at the time the problem with thalidomide wouldn't have happened, the
> lab tests were on the good one while the mass produced version had both in
> it, that's how the problem arose. But it did have positive benefits in the
> good form.
Well, actually, the problem is that thalidomide racemizes in the
metabolism. So even if the pills WERE enantiomerically pure to begin
with, they wouldn't have stayed that way.
Otto
Martinez) wrote:
>In article <37E744...@telusplanet.net>, David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> wrote:
>>Matt Austern wrote:
>>>
>>> David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> writes:
>>>
>>> > > * Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
>>> > > form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
>>> > > technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
>>> > > a walking zombie?
>
>This reminds me of the cheesy "super-intelligent collective microbe mind"
>cliche. A billion sub-cellular microbes have somehow evolved to a higher
>collective intelligence that can inhabit and control host bodies.
>
>Which reminds me of the collective intelligence cliche....
And, tangentially, we're back to the idea that A: any super-advanced
computer will automatically become self-aware, and B: you can make a
computer super-advanced to that point by simply adding a bigger
processor or more memory.
Commodore Otto
Michael Brazier
>
> kaih=7PBlf...@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) writes:
>
> > > Sure, particularly the more loony Greens who are willing to stupid
> > > things to get them off the shelves. That does wonders for the perception
> > > in the U.S. of European credibility on what are very reasonable concerns.
> >
> > Interestingly enough, from what I hear, the US seems to have a near-
> > monopoly on the more loony Greens.
>
> Not exactly; I think it's an artifact of the way that the US press
> works. The US has no Green party of any importance at all; the Green
> party here is even more insignificant politically than the Libertarian
> party. The US press thus has no incentive to distinguish between
> ordinary Green activists and genuine madmen like Kaczynsky. The Green
> party is so unfamiliar around there that center-right newspaper editors
> have no reason to make fine distinctions.
For that matter, the center-left newspaper editors (who are much more
common and influential) don't bother to draw fine distinctions between
varieties of Green either. The American media are, in general, blind to
_all_ subtle political distinctions throughout the spectrum.
--
Michael Brazier
"... go do something you hate! Being miserable builds character!"
-- Calvin, _Calvin & Hobbes_
Helen & Bob
Michael Martinez wrote:
>
>
> So, we can thank Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for about half
> the cliches in current SF television, movies, and publishing. I knew that
> story was just an over-rated cliche factory....
>
What you, and most people, forget, is that every cliché was at one time a fresh,
new idea. IF something becomes cliché, that by no means denigrates its FIRST use.
Prime example is a scene in a western (the name of which escapes me for a moment -
- famous film) where two cowpokes (one of them Henry Fonda ) OH YES - THE OX-BOW
INCIDENT == come into a saloon after a month or so on the trail, hot, dirty,
thirsty, etc, have a drink, and stare at the painting of a showgirl in tights
hanging above the bar. Now, that type of thing was used in a bunch of westerns,
and became trite, cliché. BUT, when used the first time, it was innovation.
Now, you were saying about 2001 ???
Bob
Phil Fraering
>This reminds me of the cheesy "super-intelligent collective microbe mind"
>cliche. A billion sub-cellular microbes have somehow evolved to a higher
>collective intelligence that can inhabit and control host bodies.
This was in a fantasy book, or maybe a hard-SF book set in the
world of Paradise Lost.
Phil Fraering
>Matt Austern wrote:
>>
>> David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> writes:
>>
>> > > * Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
>> > > form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
>> > > technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
>> > > a walking zombie?
>> >
>> > I thought the ideas were supposed to be "any good". That one is quite
>> > a bit dumber than trying to change history.
>>
>> Yep. Nobody could write an interesting story with that premise, let
>> alone a book with genuine depth, eh?
><Shrug> A really great writer can save any idea, even the goofy ones.
>I've got a sneaking suspicion that whatever book you are talking about
>is an uninteresting story with genuine depth but I have plausibility
>issues with using that premise and calling it science fiction.
Well, if you want to read the book, I'm sorry I spoiled parts for
you, but it's _The Golden Compass_ by Philip Pullman.
Michael Martinez
>On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:11:33 GMT, Mic...@xenite.org (Michael
>Martinez) wrote:
>
>>cliche. A billion sub-cellular microbes have somehow evolved to a higher
>>collective intelligence that can inhabit and control host bodies.
>>
>
>And, tangentially, we're back to the idea that A: any super-advanced
>computer will automatically become self-aware, and B: you can make a
>computer super-advanced to that point by simply adding a bigger
>processor or more memory.
So, we can thank Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for about half
the cliches in current SF television, movies, and publishing. I knew that
story was just an over-rated cliche factory....
David Johnston
>
> In article <37eb184f...@news.erols.com>, otto...@the.couch (Otto) wrote:
> >On Tue, 21 Sep 1999 19:11:33 GMT, Mic...@xenite.org (Michael
> >Martinez) wrote:
> >
> >>This reminds me of the cheesy "super-intelligent collective microbe mind"
> >>cliche. A billion sub-cellular microbes have somehow evolved to a higher
> >>collective intelligence that can inhabit and control host bodies.
> >>
> >>Which reminds me of the collective intelligence cliche....
> >
> >And, tangentially, we're back to the idea that A: any super-advanced
> >computer will automatically become self-aware, and B: you can make a
> >computer super-advanced to that point by simply adding a bigger
> >processor or more memory.
>
> So, we can thank Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for about half
> the cliches in current SF television, movies, and publishing. I knew that
> story was just an over-rated cliche factory....
>
HAL was not spontaneously self-aware. He was deliberately programmed
to be self-aware.
Mic...@xenite.org
>Michael Martinez wrote:
>
>> So, we can thank Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for about half
>> the cliches in current SF television, movies, and publishing. I knew that
>> story was just an over-rated cliche factory....
>
>fresh, new idea.
Now, now. Just because someone makes a joke doesn't mean they've forgotten
that all cliches start out as fresh idea. I did forget that Hal was
programmed to be self-aware.
[snip interesting example of the beginning of a western movie cliche]
>Now, you were saying about 2001 ???
We can blame it for a lot of cliches.
Helen & Bob
Mic...@xenite.org wrote:
> In article <37E84466...@ix.netcom.com>, Helen & Bob <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >Michael Martinez wrote:
> >
> >> So, we can thank Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY for about half
> >> the cliches in current SF television, movies, and publishing. I knew that
> >> story was just an over-rated cliche factory....
> >
> >What you, and most people, forget, is that every cliché was at one time a
> >fresh, new idea.
>
> Now, now. Just because someone makes a joke doesn't mean they've forgotten
> that all cliches start out as fresh idea. I did forget that Hal was
> programmed to be self-aware.
>
> [snip interesting example of the beginning of a western movie cliche]
>
> >Now, you were saying about 2001 ???
>
> We can blame it for a lot of cliches.
>
>
Therefore, any production that has some fresh ideas that are subsequently copied is to blame
for clichés. Is that a correct assessment of your statement? Just trying to get it
straight, no agreeing or disagreeing.
Michael Martinez
>
>Therefore, any production that has some fresh ideas that are subsequently
>copied is to blame for clichés. Is that a correct assessment of your
>statement? Just trying to get it straight, no agreeing or disagreeing.
Well, it follows from my statement. I certainly would have to agree with
the assertion.
Of course, it sort of deflates any humor value there might have been in my
initial crack about 2001....
Kent Coyle
> --
> Joe Kalash
> Really Easy Internet, Inc.
> kal...@really-easy.com
>
>
Oh, you have to go back *that* far. There's the Dominican Republic
after the death of Rafael Trujillo. Haiti after the death of Baby Doc (aka
Baskethead). There's even the Soviet Union. klc
Helen & Bob
Michael Martinez wrote:
> In article <37E8E2BE...@ix.netcom.com>, Helen & Bob <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> >Therefore, any production that has some fresh ideas that are subsequently
> >copied is to blame for clichés. Is that a correct assessment of your
> >statement? Just trying to get it straight, no agreeing or disagreeing.
>
> Well, it follows from my statement. I certainly would have to agree with
> the assertion.
>
> Of course, it sort of deflates any humor value there might have been in my
> initial crack about 2001....
>
OK, My bad, lousy mood, dog pissed on the rug, bad day, whatever, I missed it. I was in a
lousy mood and missed the sarcasm. Sometimes, I'm just not here. Didn't mean to jump on you.
Apology extended.
Bob
John VanSickle
>
> Mic...@xenite.org (Michael Martinez) writes:
>
> >This reminds me of the cheesy "super-intelligent collective microbe
> >mind" cliche. A billion sub-cellular microbes have somehow evolved
> >to a higher collective intelligence that can inhabit and control host
> >bodies.
>
> world of Paradise Lost.
It was an element in "The Return of Nathan Brazil," one of Chalker's
Well World novels. The race in question was called the Dreel. The
Dreel had conquered the entire Andromeda galaxy and was invading the
Milky way.
Regards,
John
Helen & Bob
Otto wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 1999 07:07:59 -0700, Helen & Bob
> <chil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Therefore, any production that has some fresh ideas that are subsequently copied is to blame
> >for clichés. Is that a correct assessment of your statement?
>
> Yes, if you're an idiot and interpret in a totally literal manner.
>
> 2001 had a lot of cool ideas in it, and it was a cool movie. Too many
> people saw 2001 and said "hey, all those cool ideas made the movie
> cool, I'll put them in _my_ sci-fi production and _it_ will be cool
> too!"
>
> Commodore Otto
>
> >Just trying to get it straight, no agreeing or disagreeing.
>
> Bullshit. Your criticism of the statement is as plain as the nose on
> your face.
>
> Commodore Otto
Otto, I have a very small nose, and you have a very touchy ego. I was not trying to get on your
case, but you have taken offense where none was intended. I will drop the subject.
Bob
Kai Henningsen
> Craig <cr...@cmcarthur.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
> >Can anyone come up with a theme, character, setting, plot etc, which is
> >any good and which is _not_ mentioned in these lists as a cliche?
> >--
> >Craig
>
> Okay: The first two items in Phil's Anti-Cliche List:
>
> * Everyone's souls reside outside their bodies, taking the tangible
> form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
> technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
> a walking zombie?
I forgot that this was on my reading list ... ah yes: The Golden Compass.
> * The dashing aristocratic secret agent/mercenary isn't tall and
> handsome, but is a mutant hunchbacked dwarf who manages to break
> a bone for every twenty pages or so of elapsed mission time?
That one's too easy.
Kai
--
http://www.westfalen.de/private/khms/
"... by God I *KNOW* what this network is for, and you can't have it."
- Russ Allbery (r...@stanford.edu)
Kai Henningsen
> It seems reasonable that most of the aliens we have a lot of social
> contact with will be able to handle our atmosphere, and those are
> the aliens who'll show up in tv and movies.
>
> By the way, you probably mean aliens who can manage under Earth
> conditions. There's a lot more to compatibility than one gas.
>
> OBSF: _Between Planets_ by Heinlein--iirc, there was a Martian
> who was in an atmosphere tank and suffering badly from Venerian
> gravity.
Who wrote the story (and how was it called) about the sulfur-breathing
aliens which were addicted to tobacco smoke?
Dan Goodman
>On 23 Sep 1999 02:28:00 +0200, kaih=7PQpd...@khms.westfalen.de (Kai
>Henningsen) wrote:
>
>>na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote on 20.09.99 in <7s64jd$p...@netaxs.com>:
>>
>>> It seems reasonable that most of the aliens we have a lot of social
>>> contact with will be able to handle our atmosphere, and those are
>>> the aliens who'll show up in tv and movies.
>>>
>>> By the way, you probably mean aliens who can manage under Earth
>>> conditions. There's a lot more to compatibility than one gas.
>>>
>>> OBSF: _Between Planets_ by Heinlein--iirc, there was a Martian
>>> who was in an atmosphere tank and suffering badly from Venerian
>>> gravity.
>>
>>Who wrote the story (and how was it called) about the sulfur-breathing
>>aliens which were addicted to tobacco smoke?
Hal Clement, _Iceworld_. Of course, tobacco was completely harmless to
humans...
>Which of course, brings us back to the cliche list- 'aliens who become
>addicted to some common Earth substance.' (Cinnamon in Turtledove's
>'World War' books, Salt(!?) on First Wave...)
I thought it was ginger rather than cinnamon.
--
Dan Goodman
dsg...@visi.com
http://www.visi.com/~dsgood/index.html
Whatever you wish for me, may you have twice as much.
Geoduck
Henningsen) wrote:
>na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) wrote on 20.09.99 in <7s64jd$p...@netaxs.com>:
>
>> It seems reasonable that most of the aliens we have a lot of social
>> contact with will be able to handle our atmosphere, and those are
>> the aliens who'll show up in tv and movies.
>>
>> By the way, you probably mean aliens who can manage under Earth
>> conditions. There's a lot more to compatibility than one gas.
>>
>> OBSF: _Between Planets_ by Heinlein--iirc, there was a Martian
>> who was in an atmosphere tank and suffering badly from Venerian
>> gravity.
>
>Who wrote the story (and how was it called) about the sulfur-breathing
>aliens which were addicted to tobacco smoke?
Which of course, brings us back to the cliche list- 'aliens who become
addicted to some common Earth substance.' (Cinnamon in Turtledove's
'World War' books, Salt(!?) on First Wave...)
--
Geoduck
geo...@usa.net
http://www.olywa.net/cook
Otto
Nancy Lebovitz
It was ginger in the "World War" books. How about "aliens who become
addicted to some common Earth substance, and who apparently have had
no experience with addiction before".
Is "humans have a chance against superior alien technology because
the aliens are stupid and/or extremely inflexible" on the list?
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com
Calligraphic button catalogue available by email!
David Johnston
>
> David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> writes:
>
> >Matt Austern wrote:
> >>
> >> David Johnston <rgo...@telusplanet.net> writes:
> >>
> >> > > form of some sort of animal, and with advanced and sinister enough
> >> > > technology, can be separated from said body, turning the person into
> >> > > a walking zombie?
> >> >
> >> > a bit dumber than trying to change history.
> >>
> >> Yep. Nobody could write an interesting story with that premise, let
> >> alone a book with genuine depth, eh?
>
> ><Shrug> A really great writer can save any idea, even the goofy ones.
> >I've got a sneaking suspicion that whatever book you are talking about
> >is an uninteresting story with genuine depth but I have plausibility
> >issues with using that premise and calling it science fiction.
>
> Well, if you want to read the book, I'm sorry I spoiled parts for
> you, but it's _The Golden Compass_ by Philip Pullman.
Oh right. I didn't recognise it because I didn't read that far into it.