In article <
rAuun...@kithrup.com>,
---------
Found it. This was posted in 2016.
Subject: Re: What is easier to write - real world SF, or imaginary world SF?
In article <nmh7b7$cic$
2...@dont-email.me>,
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <
sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
> I write both SF and Fantasy at the same speed... when writing. But for
>SF, I have tons of research that I have to do in order to make sure that
>geeks reading it don't whine "but but but PHYSICS! Reaction Mass! LAWS
>OF THERMODYNAMICS!".
So I said,
I hear you. Most fortunately, I am married to a guy who knows
most of that stuff and if he doesn't, will calculate it and/or
look it up in the Chemical Rubber Handbook, whereof he owns more
than one copy.
[Sea Wasp continued]
>For Fantasy, I don't need to worry about the
>whining geeks telling me I'm just wrong, but I *do* have to construct an
>entire consistent world using different laws, and I know that ANOTHER
>set of geeks will be asking annoying questions like "but in Book 1 you
>said that Whatsamages work by THIS principle, but in book 5 they're
>using THAT principle..."
So I said,
Yup. And the worst part is, the consistency geeks have *just
finished reading* the book that was published last year after you
wrote it four or five years ago. It's like asking an actor, "Do
you remember that scene where you ... ?" but he doesn't, because
he didn't watch the DVD last night the way you did.
Then Brian Scott said,
From
b.s...@csuohio.edu Mon Jul 18 09:59:58 PDT 2016
[quoting Wasp]
> For Fantasy, I don't need to worry about the whining
> geeks telling me I'm just wrong,
Sure you do: David F. will tell you that your economy can't
work, I'll tell you that your names make no sense at all,
and Graydon will have some societal objection that turns
out to be profound once you figure out exactly what it is!
> but I *do* have to construct an entire consistent world
> using different laws, and I know that ANOTHER set of
> geeks will be asking annoying questions like "but in
> Book 1 you said that Whatsamages work by THIS principle,
> but in book 5 they're using THAT principle..."