Off Topic > Other Conspiracy Theories

The Ethics of Fantasy

<< < (2/4) > >>

smartcooky:
I personally don't have any problem whatsoever with authors writing a fictional story in a real world setting, and then playing with reality. In fact, I get somewhat annoyed at people who go out of their way to criticise such works of fiction because of their questionable historical accuracy. For example, Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" was hugely criticised in certain quarters because they thought his conclusions went against what they accept as history. Its a work of fiction, folks. Brown made that clear from the get go.

I see it as no different than a work of fiction by someone like, Tom Clancy. He created a series (mostly written by Jeff Rovin) called Op Center which involved a fictional government agency called NCMC (National Crisis Management Centre). This agency was supposed to have been based in a building which used to be a pilot's ready room and flight crew staging area near the Naval Reserve flight line at Andrews AFB. In fact, there is no such thing as NCMC, and the building, as described in the books, doesn't exist (although there is a similar building very much like the the one described in the books at Travis AFB where the outdoor scenes for the movie was shot). However, it doesn't matter, because its just a work of fiction.

Peter B:

--- Quote from: smartcooky on August 12, 2018, 07:33:27 AM ---I personally don't have any problem whatsoever with authors writing a fictional story in a real world setting, and then playing with reality. In fact, I get somewhat annoyed at people who go out of their way to criticise such works of fiction because of their questionable historical accuracy. For example, Dan Brown's "The Da Vinci Code" was hugely criticised in certain quarters because they thought his conclusions went against what they accept as history. Its a work of fiction, folks. Brown made that clear from the get go.
--- End quote ---

I didn't know about criticism of Brown from that angle. :)

What I do know is that the plot was lifted pretty much completely from theories proposed in the crypto-history book "The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail" by Leigh, Lincoln and Baigent (note that TDVC character Sir Leigh Teabing's name is derived from those of two of the authors), two of whom sued Brown.

And from a writer's perspective, TDVC was a pretty ordinary piece of writing. Though, judging from its sales that often doesn't matter if the subject matter is interesting enough to enough people (see also the "Fifty Shades" and "Twilight" series!).


--- Quote ---I see it as no different than a work of fiction by someone like, Tom Clancy. He created a series (mostly written by Jeff Rovin) called Op Center which involved a fictional government agency called NCMC (National Crisis Management Centre). This agency was supposed to have been based in a building which used to be a pilot's ready room and flight crew staging area near the Naval Reserve flight line at Andrews AFB. In fact, there is no such thing as NCMC, and the building, as described in the books, doesn't exist (although there is a similar building very much like the the one described in the books at Travis AFB where the outdoor scenes for the movie was shot). However, it doesn't matter, because its just a work of fiction.

--- End quote ---

I'm working through some similar issues with a story I'm trying to put together - basically it's an attempt to do a better "Apollo 18" story than appeared in that movie from a few years ago. I discussed some of the issues with Obviousman a few months ago, but basically the problem I'm trying to resolve is whether the launch of Apollo 18 is something which happens in our timeline (and was therefore effectively covered up) or something which happened in an alternative timeline and was therefore known to the public.

bknight:
Apollo 18 was killed by the Congress when they took funds away from NASA and diverted them to social programs pure and simple.
The drive to land on the Moon had been accomplished and the goal was obtained so the fever to continue at breakneck pace was slowed, missions that had hardware bought and paid for were shelved IIR shorty before A 12.  NASA itself was somewhat reluctant to press beyond A17 as they had been fortunate to overcome difficulties in subsequent missions achieving a 100% ratio of returning crews alive from Luna missions.


To the Liberals that deemed money wasted on the Lunar Missions wanted funds diverted and got them.  Manned  missions were sent into LEO with the Shuttle and ISS (thanks goodness or some science to proceed).  The drive to develop a reusable spacecraft did not work as planned, and that project was scrapped.


NASA is at the whim of current Congress and the Executive.  They know this and attempt to do long term planning with the constant thought of reduce budgets in their minds.  Not a very good for longer termed projects, but it is the best the Country can do.


Off the soapbox, just my thoughts and I hope that long termed missions to the Moon and beyond will be undertaken.

Halcyon Dayz, FCD:

--- Quote from: Peter B on August 12, 2018, 08:59:24 AM --- the problem I'm trying to resolve is whether the launch of Apollo 18 is something which happens in our timeline (and was therefore effectively covered up) or something which happened in an alternative timeline and was therefore known to the public.

--- End quote ---
Some time ago we discussed the Apollo 20 mystification and the consensus was that doing an Apollo-style mission in secret is impossible.

nomuse:
The problem I have is not one of logic but of ethics. Given sufficiently rubber science, or sufficient suspension of disbelief, almost any scenario can be made plausible for the length of a book.

Not all scenarios are equal, however. Those two faces are visible in the Apollo Hoax; on one side, it is a silly idea presented with shoddy science that gives us a chance to talk about the real thing some more. But on the other side, the very idea of the hoax is (and is meant as, by the promoters) a statement that the scientists and engineers we admire, have worked along side, in some cases are ourselves, are deeply dishonest, grossly incompetent, or both.

Other than being a form of a general and pervasive anti-science trend, though, the Apollo Hoax argument strikes me as being more ethically neutral than not. Creating a narrative, however, in which the Holocaust was fake (whether for a shoddy web page or for a serious novel) is not ethically neutral.

And that's the thing. There is hardly a bad idea in the popular pseudo-archeological circles that isn't rooted in hyperdiffusionism, nationalism, and often as not bald-faced racism.

It would be simple to write a novel in which the Solutrean Hypothesis is correct. It hardly needs any mangling of the facts to work. But it would not be a kind thing to do.

And that's my problem. Even for an adventure romp along the lines of Stargate, every real-world Kensington Rune Stone and Coso Artifact you bring in to add that patina of verisimilitude to your plot plays into someone else's ongoing narrative. And it is a narrative, too often, of intolerance and hate.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page