Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:31:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Bittner <drewbitt at yahoo.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Alternative reality v SF
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

--- Ern <elilley at mindspring.com> wrote:
> I'm working on my editorial for the next issue of
> SFRevu and thought I'd do xomething about the place
> of Alternate Reality fiction in SF.
>
> Where did it come from, and is all Sf alt reality
> after its expiration date has passed? Should shows
> like Smallville and enterprise be thought of as AR?
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Ern
> Sent via BlackBerry from Cingular Wireless

Alt reality, to me, is exemplified by Harry
Turtledove. It works from the premise that something
in the past happened differently-- everything after
that proceeds from that change and the ramifications
are explored.

On that basis, Smallville and Enterprise aren't AR--
they are superheroic and action/adventure sf programs.

Shows like Tru Calling, Quantum Leap and 7 Days may be
AR, as they deal with the implications of making
changes in the past so that a negative outcome turns
positive. A show like Irwin Allen's Time Tunnel,
though, wouldn't be, because the characters end up
"fixing" any paradoxes they cause before they move on.

Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea *may* be AR (it
happened in that far off year of 1984, after all), as
with Lost in Space (1999? 2000-something?) and
Space:1999 (see title), but I still think of them as
mainstream sf instead of alt reality.

Turning to horror/fantasy... nah, let's not go there.

Drew

__________________________________________________