FIS and "retro style"?

[cybermuepf]

Hi Jack et al.,

this is one question I've wanted to ask for a long time:
In one of the earlier FIS episodes, Agent Garrett mentions that their current media industry ressembled the "Golden Age" of Hollywood in the 20th century.

And when listening to the FIS episodes, it often reminds me of "film noir" (expressionist visual styles, dark and threatening urban structures, etc.).
I even imagine the FIS special unit as dressed like the people in the 1940s/50s (only their weapons, computers, etc. would be SciFi-high tech).

So, Jack, was "film noir" one of your inspirational resources for the FIS audio drama, or is this just a figment of my imagination?

Cheers,
Peter

[JulieH]

nice imagery, though I do do picture Kircher and Resnik in slacks, not skirts...

[slipgate9]

It wasn't only your imagination. There's some influence there.

How noir it would appear in the minds of listeners, of course, depends on the listener. What I very much like about the modern audio drama style form is that the world is rendered not by narration or the "vision" of the writer, but by the listener's imagination, which will make the world intimately their own. I'm sure no two people imagine the Five Islands and the people in it the same, and I think that's great. I plant seeds and hope everyone will grow what they like

[slipgate9]

I should add that one of my goals was to convey great diversity, of people, of themes and styles. On the matter of the latter, I wagered that the mind of the listener would amplify those most appealing to them in rendering their personal mental visual of the world and characters. It's a win situation for everyone, I think. I don't want to impose too much. I'd rather let the imagination go wild. The human imagination is a powerful, beautiful thing.

[cybermuepf]

> nice imagery, though I do do picture Kircher and Resnik in slacks, not skirts...
Hm, Julie, how about some nice "Marlene Dietrich" slacks? You choose the slacks, and I adapt my imagination ;-)

"The human imagination is a powerful, beautiful thing."
I`m not quite sure. From my sociological background, I`d rather say that our imagination is "mainly" the result of everyday and past media experiences [what we´ve watched on TV, heard on the radio, read in books, seen on the WWW, etc.].
Therefore, I think that my "film noir" imagery is rather a "lack" of creative imagination because I always find it extremely hard to imagine the future (How will people look in 50, 100, 200, etc. years? How will all the different media and technologies change them and their environment? etc.).

And I think I`m not alone: Take, for example, "Star Trek". As a child, I found it extremely funny that Volcans living on a distant planet (light years away) looked like us - apart from their pointed ears and some emotional deficit syndrome.

Or, when I watched the "Dune mini series" on youtube some days ago, the "Fremen" reminded me of the Jews in Monty Python´s "Life of Brian". The
Harkonnen soldier`s were almost dressed as Japanese samurai and the scenery seemed painted, etc. In the end, Dune`s SciFi effect was completely lost because I had to giggle all the time.

~Peter

[slipgate9]

	Quote:	cybermuepf
	> ....I`d rather say that our imagination is "mainly" the result of everyday and past media experiences [what we´ve watched on TV, heard on the radio, read in books, seen on the WWW, etc.]. Therefore, I think that my "film noir" imagery is rather a "lack" of creative imagination because I always find it extremely hard to imagine the future (How will people look in 50, 100, 200, etc. years? How will all the different media and technologies change them and their environment? etc.). ~Peter

Of course the things we imagine are derived from experience in some fashion, whether it's what we've lived, observed, read, dreamed, etc. That's the nature of it, isn't it? Our imagination is limited by the data and our ability to branch connections between the bits of information to extrapolate possibilities of what may still be out there to experience, and of course to develop scenarios from which we can logically progress a likely course, all based on experience. Otherwise, we're dealing with abstractions without the context necessary to incorporate it into the collage or composite rendered by the imagination any meaningful way. Or do you have me overthinking it?

I'd say the ability to imagine the future is what those sci-fi novelists are for, though their visions are fairly diverse.

The future would be interesting to see. Unfortunately, we only experience time in a linear fashion. If it were otherwise, our brains would likely explode. I don't know if I mean that literally, but it's an amusing thought.

As for what creatures from other planets would look like, I think that our expressions of that are limited by the media and by our experience. Scientists may come up with better answers than others because they have a deeper understanding of science and physics, but even they have limited data and must extrapolate.

My guess is there's likely a wealth of life out there that would not be recognizable to us as alive, much less "intelligent".

[Bill Hollweg]

That and a finite budget equals humanoid aliens on TV...LOL
But still makes for cool TV. Look at your cellphone.. Tell me Star Trek has no influence- beam me up Scotty.

That all said- though one could argue that it's what is taken in equals what we see as limited-

But I disagree- it's how we take what is in our minds from tv-movies-books-art- day to day life etc etc etc- and then jumble it together and using the tools at hand <in this case all the stuff in our brains> make the new/the imagined/the sci-fi the Art et all.

It's been said there are only 7 stories/plots or something <paraphrasing here>...
If that's the case why read fiction at all? As it's all been done.

But I don't think so- I honestly think the art is there to be made and the theatre of the mind is 4d so the realms to explore are vast and cool and always soemthing new to discover...

Sorry for the rant- etrnal artistic optimist here- now if only the movies and TV would make something good... It's been years...So untill hollywood gets a clue- make mine AD!

[slipgate9]

	Quote:	Bill Hollweg
	It's been said there are only 7 stories/plots or something <paraphrasing here>... If that's the case why read fiction at all? As it's all been done.

Some actually buy into that generalizing bullshit. I do not. If we want to generalize further, there is only 1 kind of story: one involving *something*. That is no more absurd.

It's just a rationalization.

People are naturally inclined to emphasize the importance of the abilities and virtues they possess ... and downplay the importance and worth of those they most certainly do not. It's self-serving, marginalizing what they feel is a deficit, a weak area. In this case, it's the talent of coming up with original ideas. They will declare that there is no such thing and only the execution of an idea matters.

They are wrong.

Both matter.

Jack Kincaid says so.

[slipgate9]

Okay, so I should add that it's not always self-serving.... The idea of there being "no original ideas" enjoys a lot of social reinforcement, which makes it appealing, because that makes it "safe". It's also prevalent among writers who think of stories in very mechanical terms (and often think it's perfectly fine for their characters to be the puppet bitches of the plot).

Stop me now as I've said too little.

[Bill Hollweg]

Puppet Bitches of the plot- ROTFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!