Re: He is Risen

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:45:31 -0400, Sea Wasp wrote:

> mimus wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:28:54 -0400, Sea Wasp wrote:
>> 
>>> mimus wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 12:02:39 +0000, GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bitstring <fs7m0v11rjf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, from the wonderful person
>>>>> ravenlynne <ravenlynne@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said
>>>>>
>>>>>>The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Christ is risen indeed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, this was posted to sci fi groups, so I suppose it's on topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> But crossposted to rec.arts.startrek.current, which nobody seems to
>>>>> have bothered to snip (until now).
>>>>
>>>> Let the Trekkies suffer.
>>>>
>>>> Case in point: I just saw a post a bit back on another group about
>>>> Clarke's death that listed SF "greats" and had Roddenberry in the
>>>> list . . . .
>>>
>>> Works for me.
>> 
>> <mildly, after typing and then deleting diatribe>
>> 
>> If Roddenberry was a "great", who would you consider a "hack"?
> 
> I don't generally use the term, except for the latter George Lucas --
> and even for him, I've discovered that it's clearly a matter of the evil
> influence of his neck.

"Neck"?

> But if you insist, how about the people 
> who took Harlan Ellison's material and from it produced "The 
> Starlost"? The writers of "Voyagers"?
> 
> Roddenberry created one of the most influential and enduring SF 
> properties of all time. Like it or hate it, Star Trek is one of two, 
> and only two, SF properties which can reasonably claim to have changed 
> the world's perception of SF to the point that it became part of the 
> mainstream instead of an isolated fringe group activity. The other, 
> even more powerful, property is of course Star Wars.
> 
> The influence of Star Trek -- especially through the original series, 
> which was at the time a quite edgy and risk-taking show -- can 
> certainly justify calling its creator one of the greats.

Popular TV/movie SF != "greatness in SF" to me.

And even at that I'd say Kubrick's _2001_ did more for the genre in that
respect than _Star Trek_ or _Star Wars_, both of which were moronically
and disgracefully cheesy from the first.  Kid stuff.

And I doubt that the percentage of people who started as "Trekkies" who
actually moved on to read what might be called (at least in comparison)
serious SF is very high.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

-- 

Color television is certainly a lot more fun than this terribly
risky genetic method of reproduction we've taken over.

Ah, well, it's a beautiful world.

< _The Einstein Intersection_