| |
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, William R. Ward writes:
> "LUGNET Admin" <suz@lugnet.com> writes:
> > This is sounding like a good plan. build.fantasy
> >
> > Of course, this may invite space folks to request build.sci-fi... there are
> > probably plenty of them who would argue that sci-fi = space about as much as
> > fantasy = castle.
>
> Then there are those who rankle at the word "sci-fi" and pronounce it
> "skiffy". It's "SF", thankyouverymuch. According to such people,
> anyway. There is a big difference between the tacky "sci-fi"
> epitomized by 1950's B-movies and some of the great "SF" (speculative
> fiction) literature that happens to be set in a futuristic world.
> Then there's the camp that says that fantasy is just another subset of
> SF.
>
> The difference is that except for NASA models, which are extremely
> rare, there's nothing in .space that isn't some form of science
> fiction. On the other hand, .castle has a historical basis that is
> totally independent from any sorcery or dragons.
On the other hand, discussion of set 4818 (for one example), clearly has no
basis in reality or history, yet belongs in .castle because .castle is about
the LEGO theme Castle. So discussion of fantastical stuff does have a place in
.castle. So then the question comes, should the theme groups be limited to
discussion of stuff directly connected to the theme (and thus we need a new
place to talk about lots of space and castle type creations) or is the theme
discussion area for anything fairly related to the theme. I think it's the 2nd,
and therefore I think certainly LOTR creations belong in .castle. Pern
creations are problematical because they are SF (and thus from that perspective
more properly belong in .space), but clearly look more like fantasy (and would
seem more at home in .castle).
Sorry about being so adamant about this, but I want to make sure that when new
groups are created, they are created for good reasons.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Fantasy group?
|
| (...) Then there are those who rankle at the word "sci-fi" and pronounce it "skiffy". It's "SF", thankyouverymuch. According to such people, anyway. There is a big difference between the tacky "sci-fi" epitomized by 1950's B-movies and some of the (...) (22 years ago, 2-May-02, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
29 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
