Escape Artists
Escape Pod => Science Fiction Discussion => Topic started by: shwankie on March 14, 2008, 01:17:45 AM
-
So, per Ocicat's post in the original "Guilty Secrets" thread, I am going to post my most embarrassing SF favorites, the things I was reading when I should have been reading something else.
-Piers Anthony's Immortality Series. As long as you mentioned it, Ocicat, I might as well include it. of course, i was like 15; but, still, no real excuse to read it *all.* I actually like a couple of them, and have re-read them in recent years. Shameful, but true.
-The Vampire Lestat, Queen of the Damned. Okay, I am not as embarrassed by this as some folks might be. I have a pretty hardcore obsession with vampires, though thankfully not in a 14-year-old Goth girl way. I enjoy the full mythology, the way the changes in vampire lore illustrate the changes in cultures and societies, and the psychology behind it. Oh, and the sex and violence. What can I say, I am a well-rounded kinda girl.
I am sure there are many, many more; but, it's late, I'm tired, and there's only so much shame one person can take in a week.
-
The Gentry Lee "Bright Messengers" books. I was a fan of the Rama series he co-wrote (hijacked) from Clarke and since these books were set in the same universe as Rama I had to read them. I forgot much of them but seem to remember that there was alot of overdone violence and unlikeable characters in the books. A rape or two thrown in for good measure. Dreadful.
-
So, per Ocicat's post in the original "Guilty Secrets" thread, I am going to post my most embarrassing SF favorites, the things I was reading when I should have been reading something else.
-Piers Anthony's Immortality Series. As long as you mentioned it, Ocicat, I might as well include it. of course, i was like 15; but, still, no real excuse to read it *all.* I actually like a couple of them, and have re-read them in recent years. Shameful, but true.
-The Vampire Lestat, Queen of the Damned. Okay, I am not as embarrassed by this as some folks might be. I have a pretty hardcore obsession with vampires, though thankfully not in a 14-year-old Goth girl way. I enjoy the full mythology, the way the changes in vampire lore illustrate the changes in cultures and societies, and the psychology behind it. Oh, and the sex and violence. What can I say, I am a well-rounded kinda girl.
I am sure there are many, many more; but, it's late, I'm tired, and there's only so much shame one person can take in a week.
The Incarnations of Immortality were high literature compared to most of the Xanth series... and I read a fair number of those before realizing that they were really pretty gross and unfunny. (But the puns kept me coming back...) Like you said, though, that was more than half a lifetime ago.
-
-Piers Anthony's Immortality Series. As long as you mentioned it, Ocicat, I might as well include it. of course, i was like 15; but, still, no real excuse to read it *all.* I actually like a couple of them, and have re-read them in recent years. Shameful, but true.
I thought I *had* read all of those, but years later somebody told me that there were volumes for Satan and God as well (I thought they were the Eternals, not simply two more positions to be filled by just anyone ???). From what I've heard, I'm not at all sorry for having missed them.
-
The X-Wing series. Can't really defend myself, but dammed if I don't have all but a couple embarrassingly well thumbed on my bookshelf.
-
The X-Wing series. Can't really defend myself, but dammed if I don't have all but a couple embarrassingly well thumbed on my bookshelf.
It's the Dirty Dozen! In SPACE! What's not to love?
-
Piers Anthony's 'Blue Adept' series. At least the first three (I found #4 to be unreadable). I have mixed feelings on this: parts of the series were pretty imaginative and fun, but other parts were sheer crap.
-
Terry Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule. The other books in that series (I think I read four of them) really annoyed me, but I had a blast reading that first one at the end of high school.
-
I read far too many of the Xanth novels myself. My only excuse was that I was still in high school at the time.
Mostly I don't think I have much patience for the real offenders. I threw Sword of Shannara by Terry Books across the room when I was able to predict another plot point based on already having read LotR. I could never get into the Anita Blake Vampire / sex books by Laurell K. Hamilton, which seems to be the "guilty pleasure" of choice for many of my friends these days (along with the Kushiel series by Jacqueline Carey - which I also threw across a room). I finished Orson Scott Card's "Children of the Mind", but only because it was the audio version, and I still nearly strangled myself a few times while listening.
I do like some light stuff though, like the Myth Adventure series by Robert Lynn Asprin. And though I don't read Star Trek or Star Wars novels, I've read several books set in the B5 universe. Hey, they were good, really!
Mostly though my guilty pleasure is comics. Tons of them. A lot of good, fairly literate stuff (in the vein of Gaiman's Sandman (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1401210821/escapepod-20) or the fabulous retelling of the War of Troy, Age of Bronze (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1582402000/escapepod-20)), but also lots of Superhero junkfood, from Superman down to Booster Gold and the Avengers. I just love me some comics.
-
Mostly though my guilty pleasure is comics. Tons of them. A lot of good, fairly literate stuff (in the vein of Gaiman's Sandman (http://www.amazon.com/Absolute-Sandman-Vol-1/dp/1401210821/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205541113&sr=1-1) or the fabulous retelling of the War of Troy, Age of Bronze (http://www.amazon.com/Age-Bronze-1-Thousand-Ships/dp/1582402000)), but also lots of Superhero junkfood, from Superman down to Booster Gold and the Avengers. I just love me some comics.
Sandman is awesome... and I love me some Astro City!
-
Mostly though my guilty pleasure is comics. Tons of them. A lot of good, fairly literate stuff (in the vein of Gaiman's Sandman (http://www.amazon.com/Absolute-Sandman-Vol-1/dp/1401210821/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205541113&sr=1-1) or the fabulous retelling of the War of Troy, Age of Bronze (http://www.amazon.com/Age-Bronze-1-Thousand-Ships/dp/1582402000)), but also lots of Superhero junkfood, from Superman down to Booster Gold and the Avengers. I just love me some comics.
Sandman is awesome... and I love me some Astro City!
I'm a sucker for a good comic. Anything Gaiman, Hellblazer, Y the Last Man (sniff), Runaways, X-Men (although it's been a long time since I've read a really good X-Men book), Daredevil. Yeah, some very fun stuff, there.
-
... though I don't read Star Trek or Star Wars novels, I've read several books set in the B5 universe. Hey, they were good, really!
To be fair, the worthy ones finish parts of the story that the TV show didn't have time for, i.e. the stand-alones To Dream in the City of Sorrows and The Shadow Within, and the trilogies of the "Psi Corps", "Technomages" and particularly the "Legions of Fire" trilogy which chronicles the story of Centauri Prime and Emperor Mollari II.
All of those, I've read and liked. The rest I'm not interested in from what I've heard.
-
The entire Deathstalker series by Simon R. Green. I love the damn things, but I have to conceded that they aren't exactly...highbrow. Great fun, but there is definatley a campy feel to them.
-
Guilty secrets, eh...
Little Fuzzy by H. Beam Piper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Fuzzy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Fuzzy)
Darned good 1962 exploration of what we mean when we say "sentient". I tried pushing on one of my friends when I read it in high school and he couldn't get past the name of the book.
-
Guilty secrets, eh...
Little Fuzzy by H. Beam Piper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Fuzzy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Fuzzy)
Darned good 1962 exploration of what we mean when we say "sentient". I tried pushing on one of my friends when I read it in high school and he couldn't get past the name of the book.
I found that as a free downloadable ebook and read it on my Palm V (which has since been stolen :()
-
MIne would have to be Warday by Whitley Strieber and James Kunetka.
-
Mostly I don't think I have much patience for the real offenders. I threw Sword of Shannara by Terry Books across the room when I was able to predict another plot point based on already having read LotR. I could never get into the Anita Blake Vampire / sex books by Laurell K. Hamilton, which seems to be the "guilty pleasure" of choice for many of my friends these days (along with the Kushiel series by Jacqueline Carey - which I also threw across a room). I finished Orson Scott Card's "Children of the Mind", but only because it was the audio version, and I still nearly strangled myself a few times while listening.
I do like some light stuff though, like the Myth Adventure series by Robert Lynn Asprin.
You and I share some similarities. I *love* Asprin, and guess I don't consider it a guilty pleasure. It's fluffy, but not "bad' in the sense that the Anita Blake's are bad (and boy, are they...the only things worse were her fairy porn books. I am sure that series had a name, but I forgot it in the lurid fog she loosely deems "plot"). I, too, gave up on Sword of Shannara rather emphatically.
We do differ in that I never finished "Children of the Mind" in any format, and from the sounds of it, I am better off (thanks for the phrase, Joss)!
-
I picked up Simon R. Green's Something from the Nightside (http://www.amazon.com/Something-Nightside-Book-1/dp/0441010652/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1207324687&sr=8-2/) and just finished reading it the other night. It's in the same vein of urban fantasy we get Jim Butcher and Laurell K. Hamilton from, although I enjoyed it more. It's ridiculous goth noir fun, something Ben Phillips should be narrating for the audiobook version. The plot is a bit formulaic at times -- where our hero takes us from one place in Nightside so we can get to the next place. But it's dark enough and fun enough to make me consider picking up more of the series.
-
Guilty secrets, eh...
Little Fuzzy by H. Beam Piper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Fuzzy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Fuzzy)
Darned good 1962 exploration of what we mean when we say "sentient". I tried pushing on one of my friends when I read it in high school and he couldn't get past the name of the book.
I found that as a free downloadable ebook and read it on my Palm V (which has since been stolen :()
Thanks for the recommendation, you two.
I've downloaded an e-copy, and am about halfway through it. As kids' books go, it's pretty good. And the sentience question is dealt with very well.
As with so much science fiction, though, the xenobiology annoys me. There's no way that alien species are going to fit into neat little boxes labelled (for example) "mammal". Even the distinction between "animal" and "plant" isn't going to be recognisable on a different evolutionary tree. But that's really a tiny quibble. Overall, a book well worth reading for free.
-
Okay, time to come clean about my unnatural love for "The Destroyer" series by Warren Murphy and Richard Sapir. I've read all 120 something of them, used to collect the comics, and even have a DVD of the moderately crappy film starring Joel Gray as Chiun. Dollar for dollar these are the most entertaining 45 minute reads ever, hilariously funny, super fast paced, and as mentally cleansing as an LSD lobotomy.
My other admission - I hate all fantasy literature with the exception of select stories from Robert E. Howard's writings. I've read plenty of it. I waded through Tolkein's stuff, the idiotic Xanth books, all manner of series stories in various young adult titles like Lloyd Alexander's Prydian books, or CS Lewis' Narnia stories, I've read the shorts in genre mags too, F&SF, Asimovs, and Science Fiction Age. I can't stand any of it. I even reserve special hatred for Robert Heinlein's "Glory Road, his only true fantasy story, while I will happily read and reread anything else in his collection. The only thing I hate more than traditional fantasy short stories or novels, is modern or urban fantasy. These stories actually make me seethe with anger.
Short of that though, I've got nothing else guilty or otherwise.
-
One word: Animorphs.
jrderego - What about Terry Pratchett? I normally dislike straight fantasy, but I really enjoy some of his books (which might count as a guilty pleasure, but it certainly isn't something I'm ashamed of. Good Omens is one my top 5 books.
-
One word: Animorphs.
I went through almost all of those when I was younger, but I got into the "I R serious reader, I R reading literature" phase of high school before they got to any kind of conclusion (did they ever get to a conclusion?).
-
One word: Animorphs.
jrderego - What about Terry Pratchett? I normally dislike straight fantasy, but I really enjoy some of his books (which might count as a guilty pleasure, but it certainly isn't something I'm ashamed of. Good Omens is one my top 5 books.
Never read him. I have a few friends that love the Discworld stuff, but I've never given them a try.
-
My other admission - I hate all fantasy literature with the exception of select stories from Robert E. Howard's writings. I've read plenty of it. I waded through Tolkein's stuff, the idiotic Xanth books, all manner of series stories in various young adult titles like Lloyd Alexander's Prydian books, or CS Lewis' Narnia stories, I've read the shorts in genre mags too, F&SF, Asimovs, and Science Fiction Age. I can't stand any of it. I even reserve special hatred for Robert Heinlein's "Glory Road, his only true fantasy story, while I will happily read and reread anything else in his collection. The only thing I hate more than traditional fantasy short stories or novels, is modern or urban fantasy. These stories actually make me seethe with anger.
Short of that though, I've got nothing else guilty or otherwise.
OK, I'll bite.
What's the story on "hate" for fantasy? I'm not saying you or anyone else should like it. But, finding the genre silly, or tedious, or boring, or trite I could understand. But hate? (or I guess it's actually hate!!!) Did an elf abuse you when you were a child, or what?
I'm also curious as to why you consider Glory Road a "true fantasy story" while Job, The Number of the Beast and The Cat who Walks Through Walls don't fall into that category. He certainly made an effort to create science-fictional (I hesitate to say "scientific") underpinnings for Glory Road, while he really doesn't even try with the others I mentioned.
-
OK, I'll bite.
What's the story on "hate" for fantasy? I'm not saying you or anyone else should like it. But, finding the genre silly, or tedious, or boring, or trite I could understand. But hate? (or I guess it's actually hate!!!) Did an elf abuse you when you were a child, or what?
I'm also curious as to why you consider Glory Road a "true fantasy story" while Job, The Number of the Beast and The Cat who Walks Through Walls don't fall into that category. He certainly made an effort to create science-fictional (I hesitate to say "scientific") underpinnings for Glory Road, while he really doesn't even try with the others I mentioned.
It's a completely irrational hatred. There's nothing inherently wrong with fantasy literature, but I can't suspend my disbelief enough to even remotely enjoy it. Sort of like eating asparagus (guilt admission #3), I know it's good for me, I know my wife made it, I know she made hollandaise sauce from scratch, and I know it should not make me want to heave when I see it at the table... but it does. Strangely, I am perfectly okay with fantasy in film or television, and actually enjoy it. But reading it is like wiping my eyes with 100 grit sandpaper.
As for Heinlein's stuff, Job, and Number of the Beast (which was hilariously awful), and The Cat Who Walks Through Walls doesn't use any of the fantasy mechanics that Glory Road does, and even when he is scientifically showing how the dragon has firely breath, my willing suspension of disbelief has gathered a length of twine and is throttling my brain.
(on edit - huzzah, I figured out the tags!)
-
I went through an intense Xanth-loving phase in my early teens. Haven't gone near the books since. In their defense, I don't think Piers Anthony ever intended for them to be anything more than fun froth.
Shortly afterwards I graduated to Anthony's "Cluster" series. Only afterwards did I realize that the stories could be reduced to "Hero travels to new planet. Hero learns to have sex in local fashion. Repeat."
-
I went through an intense Xanth-loving phase in my early teens. Haven't gone near the books since. In their defense, I don't think Piers Anthony ever intended for them to be anything more than fun froth.
Shortly afterwards I graduated to Anthony's "Cluster" series. Only afterwards did I realize that the stories could be reduced to "Hero travels to new planet. Hero learns to have sex in local fashion. Repeat."
Clusterf#ck? ;D
-
OK, I'll bite.
What's the story on "hate" for fantasy? I'm not saying you or anyone else should like it. But, finding the genre silly, or tedious, or boring, or trite I could understand. But hate? (or I guess it's actually hate!!!) Did an elf abuse you when you were a child, or what?
I'm also curious as to why you consider Glory Road a "true fantasy story" while Job, The Number of the Beast and The Cat who Walks Through Walls don't fall into that category. He certainly made an effort to create science-fictional (I hesitate to say "scientific") underpinnings for Glory Road, while he really doesn't even try with the others I mentioned.
It's a completely irrational hatred. There's nothing inherently wrong with fantasy literature, but I can't suspend my disbelief enough to even remotely enjoy it. Sort of like eating asparagus (guilt admission #3), I know it's good for me, I know my wife made it, I know she made hollandaise sauce from scratch, and I know it should not make me want to heave when I see it at the table... but it does. Strangely, I am perfectly okay with fantasy in film or television, and actually enjoy it. But reading it is like wiping my eyes with 100 grit sandpaper.
As for Heinlein's stuff, Job, and Number of the Beast (which was hilariously awful), and The Cat Who Walks Through Walls doesn't use any of the fantasy mechanics that Glory Road does, and even when he is scientifically showing how the dragon has firely breath, my willing suspension of disbelief has gathered a length of twine and is throttling my brain.
Oh, good, Wind, I'm glad you asked—I was wondering the same thing.
Hey, derego, have you tried Tad William's Memory, Sorrow & Thorn trilogy? It's pretty much epic in length, but you may find it more palatable. You have to make it through the first ca. 100 pages, though. It lays down a lot of groundwork that you may find slow, and then there's a long wander through some dark tunnels (which I personally think is brilliantly done, but others find it tedious). After that, though, it's hard to put down. But if you don't like it, just be warned that the first book ends in a cliffhanger.
I guess my guilty secret would be that I enjoyed the first 6 Dragonlance novels... though I haven't read them in years decades.
<edit: typo>
-
I went through an intense Xanth-loving phase in my early teens. Haven't gone near the books since. In their defense, I don't think Piers Anthony ever intended for them to be anything more than fun froth.
Shortly afterwards I graduated to Anthony's "Cluster" series. Only afterwards did I realize that the stories could be reduced to "Hero travels to new planet. Hero learns to have sex in local fashion. Repeat."
I thought the Xanth stuff was great (y'all know how I enjoy puns by now) until I got old enough to realize that his obsessions with young girls' panties wasn't quite... appropriate? acceptable? palatable?
Never did try the "Cluster" or "Adept" stuff, though... Enjoyed the first couple of "Incarnations of Immortality" until even HE seemed to get bored with writing them. :)
-
I went through an intense Xanth-loving phase in my early teens. Haven't gone near the books since. In their defense, I don't think Piers Anthony ever intended for them to be anything more than fun froth.
Shortly afterwards I graduated to Anthony's "Cluster" series. Only afterwards did I realize that the stories could be reduced to "Hero travels to new planet. Hero learns to have sex in local fashion. Repeat."
Clusterf#ck? ;D
All I'll say is, Piers Anthony seems to have put quite a bit of thought into how non-humanoid aliens might have sexual intercourse. (In all fairness, I remember enjoying the books quite a bit... maybe I should seek them out again and see if they hold up.)
-
I went through an intense Xanth-loving phase in my early teens. Haven't gone near the books since. In their defense, I don't think Piers Anthony ever intended for them to be anything more than fun froth.
Shortly afterwards I graduated to Anthony's "Cluster" series. Only afterwards did I realize that the stories could be reduced to "Hero travels to new planet. Hero learns to have sex in local fashion. Repeat."
Clusterf#ck? ;D
All I'll say is, Piers Anthony seems to have put quite a bit of thought into how non-humanoid aliens might have sexual intercourse. (In all fairness, I remember enjoying the books quite a bit... maybe I should seek them out again and see if they hold up.)
Larry Niven also seems to be quite obsessed with inter-species sex (though, in the case of Ringworld, I think it's technically intra-species sex). He even wrote an essay about Superman's sex problems (http://www.rawbw.com/~svw/superman.html)...
-
Larry Niven also seems to be quite obsessed with inter-species sex (though, in the case of Ringworld, I think it's technically intra-species sex).
Don't think so; "rishathra" was defined as "sex outside of one's species, but within the hominids."
-
Larry Niven also seems to be quite obsessed with inter-species sex (though, in the case of Ringworld, I think it's technically intra-species sex).
Don't think so; "rishathra" was defined as "sex outside of one's species, but within the hominids."
Well, the Ringworld species are all descendants of the Pak (who, for the sake of simplicity can be considered human), so they're all within the clade "humans". Whether you consider them to be different species, or different races* within a species is a matter of semantics, and depends on which definition of "species" you use.
One of the classic definitions (the Biological Species Concept) involves reproductive isolation, with any two populations that are capable of interbreeding being considered the same species. If the Machine People can breed with the City Builders, and the City Builders can breed with River People, and River People can breed with Ghouls, then all of these groups are members of the same species.
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
Oh, and "hominids" is... well, not wrong, exactly, but misleading. The hominid group includes chimps and gorillas, but not baboons and gibbons, and is a very arbitrary line to draw. All the Ringworld populations are definitely hominoids (members of genus Homo) and, for that matter, if we do define them as separate species, they're all members of the family Homo sapiens, so a better definition would be "sex outside of one's species, but within the humans", though that might be somewhat confusing.
* Biologically "race" encompasses far larger variations than are seen within populations of humans outside of science fiction. There is only one race of humans
-
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
"Klingons and humans" is a poor example. The Star Trek universe has the ludicrous concept that all alien races are cross-fertile.
-
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
"Klingons and humans" is a poor example. The Star Trek universe has the ludicrous concept that all alien races are cross-fertile.
And I think there was an STNG episode where Picard, a Klingon, and a Romulon were on a planet with some ancient dude who explained that all these races basically came from the same pond of primordal goo. I guess if they branched off late enough in the evolutionary tree they would have the ability to interbreed.
-
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
"Klingons and humans" is a poor example. The Star Trek universe has the ludicrous concept that all alien races are cross-fertile.
And I think there was an STNG episode where Picard, a Klingon, and a Romulon were on a planet with some ancient dude who explained that all these races basically came from the same pond of primordal goo. I guess if they branched off late enough in the evolutionary tree they would have the ability to interbreed.
I remember the episode, but there are enough other differnces that I can't believe they'd be close enough. We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
The only way this assumption made sense to me was if reproduction was routinely done via artificial manipulation, rather than "the old-fashioned way."
In reality, I suspect it was just a "convention" of the series that crept in before anyone had much chance to think about it.
-
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
"Klingons and humans" is a poor example. The Star Trek universe has the ludicrous concept that all alien races are cross-fertile.
And I think there was an STNG episode where Picard, a Klingon, and a Romulon were on a planet with some ancient dude who explained that all these races basically came from the same pond of primordal goo. I guess if they branched off late enough in the evolutionary tree they would have the ability to interbreed.
I remember that one. I think it was called "The Chase". For some reason I thought one of the searchers was a Cardassian.
-
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
"Klingons and humans" is a poor example. The Star Trek universe has the ludicrous concept that all alien races are cross-fertile.
And I think there was an STNG episode where Picard, a Klingon, and a Romulon were on a planet with some ancient dude who explained that all these races basically came from the same pond of primordal goo. I guess if they branched off late enough in the evolutionary tree they would have the ability to interbreed.
I remember the episode, but there are enough other differnces that I can't believe they'd be close enough. We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
Yeah, but scientists think that we may have interbred with Neanderthals, which were a fairly close relative at one time. So maybe we branched off from Klingons, Vulcans, and the others late enough that our reproductive processes were still compatible.
-
I can't remember if interfertility was specifically addressed, but either way, depending on the definition you use, you could make a case either way; whereas with kryptonians and humans (or klingons and humans) there's no way to consider them in any way related.
"Klingons and humans" is a poor example. The Star Trek universe has the ludicrous concept that all alien races are cross-fertile.
And I think there was an STNG episode where Picard, a Klingon, and a Romulon were on a planet with some ancient dude who explained that all these races basically came from the same pond of primordal goo. I guess if they branched off late enough in the evolutionary tree they would have the ability to interbreed.
I remember that one. I think it was called "The Chase". For some reason I thought one of the searchers was a Cardassian.
Yeah, I think you're right. My memory isn't too good.
-
And I think there was an STNG episode where Picard, a Klingon, and a Romulon were on a planet with some ancient dude who explained that all these races basically came from the same pond of primordal goo. I guess if they branched off late enough in the evolutionary tree they would have the ability to interbreed.
I remember that one. I think it was called "The Chase". For some reason I thought one of the searchers was a Cardassian.
Yeah, I think you're right. My memory isn't too good.
Nor mine. We could both be wrong.
-
You both have better memories than you thought...
They were Cardassians, and the ep is called "The Chase." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chase_(Star_Trek:_The_Next_Generation)
-
We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
Okay, we're totally off topic now - but actually we probably can breed with chimps. We just, you know, don't. And scientists won't touch the issue with a 10 foot pole. Much less try actually doing it - for fear they'd have hoards of angry citizens at their door with torches and pitchforks. Which probably isn't far from how the public would react if someone were to produce such a creature, even in a test tube.
-
Yeah, but scientists think that we may have interbred with Neanderthals, which were a fairly close relative at one time. So maybe we branched off from Klingons, Vulcans, and the others late enough that our reproductive processes were still compatible.
According to the episode, what was left on the various dead planets were bacteria, which had a genetic imperative of some kind to evolve into a humanoid, and all life on those planets evolved from those bacteria. Which explains why jellyfish and giraffes look so much like humans.
So, in the Star Trek canon, you are more closely related to (and therefore more likely to be interfertile with) an ear or corn than a vulcan or klingon.
The alternative hypothesis is that a group of Homo Habilis developed warp travel without leaving any evidence of an industrial society, and then somehow evolved copper-based blood, extra hearts or telepathy. In that case, they might be "closely enough related" to be able to interbreed, in theory, but the massive differences in physiology would probably mean that any pregnancy would be inviable.
Before that episode, I was happy enough to assume that all the aliens didn't really look like humans in make-up, but that the producers didn't have access to enough non-bipedal actors to fill out the roles. Of course, the half-breeds can't be rationalised as being anything other than a very bad idea, but that episode made everything about Star Trek aliens suck.
-
We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
Okay, we're totally off topic now - but actually we probably can breed with chimps. We just, you know, don't. And scientists won't touch the issue with a 10 foot pole. Much less try actually doing it - for fear they'd have hoards of angry citizens at their door with torches and pitchforks. Which probably isn't far from how the public would react if someone were to produce such a creature, even in a test tube.
As an example, consider the outrage currently going on because some researchers implanted a human nucleus into a cow egg (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/02/medicalresearch.ethicsofscience?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), and grew it to the 32-cell stage (this would be before the embryo implants in the uterus wall).
Whether or not humans and chimps are interfertile is hotly debated - one issue is that they have one more chromosome pair, which often (but not always) prevents interfertility. There have been experiments in the past, and several human/chimp hybrids have been claimed, but there's really not been any hard evidence. See Wikipedia's Humanzee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanzee) article for more detail.
-
We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
Okay, we're totally off topic now - but actually we probably can breed with chimps. We just, you know, don't. And scientists won't touch the issue with a 10 foot pole. Much less try actually doing it - for fear they'd have hoards of angry citizens at their door with torches and pitchforks. Which probably isn't far from how the public would react if someone were to produce such a creature, even in a test tube.
As an example, consider the outrage currently going on because some researchers implanted a human nucleus into a cow egg (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/02/medicalresearch.ethicsofscience?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), and grew it to the 32-cell stage (this would be before the embryo implants in the uterus wall).
Whether or not humans and chimps are interfertile is hotly debated - one issue is that they have one more chromosome pair, which often (but not always) prevents interfertility. There have been experiments in the past, and several human/chimp hybrids have been claimed, but there's really not been any hard evidence. See Wikipedia's Humanzee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanzee) article for more detail.
History Channel just did a documentary about Stalin's plan to create human/chimpanzee hybrids to fight the cold war. It went as far as implanting chimpanzee sperm into human women, or so the show purports.
And, before anyone else jumps in with the quote - "Get your damn hands off me you dirty ape!"
-
We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
Okay, we're totally off topic now - but actually we probably can breed with chimps. We just, you know, don't. And scientists won't touch the issue with a 10 foot pole. Much less try actually doing it - for fear they'd have hoards of angry citizens at their door with torches and pitchforks. Which probably isn't far from how the public would react if someone were to produce such a creature, even in a test tube.
As an example, consider the outrage currently going on because some researchers implanted a human nucleus into a cow egg (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/02/medicalresearch.ethicsofscience?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), and grew it to the 32-cell stage (this would be before the embryo implants in the uterus wall).
Whether or not humans and chimps are interfertile is hotly debated - one issue is that they have one more chromosome pair, which often (but not always) prevents interfertility. There have been experiments in the past, and several human/chimp hybrids have been claimed, but there's really not been any hard evidence. See Wikipedia's Humanzee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanzee) article for more detail.
History Channel just did a documentary about Stalin's plan to create human/chimpanzee hybrids to fight the cold war. It went as far as implanting chimpanzee sperm into human women, or so the show purports.
And, before anyone else jumps in with the quote - "Get your damn hands off me you dirty ape!"
Wasn't it: "Get your paws off me, you damned, dirty apes!"
Another great one: "It's a made house.....A MAD HOUSE!!"
-
We can't cross with chimps, and it's hard to buy the idea we're genetically closer to Klingons and Vulcans than chimps.
Okay, we're totally off topic now - but actually we probably can breed with chimps. We just, you know, don't. And scientists won't touch the issue with a 10 foot pole. Much less try actually doing it - for fear they'd have hoards of angry citizens at their door with torches and pitchforks. Which probably isn't far from how the public would react if someone were to produce such a creature, even in a test tube.
As an example, consider the outrage currently going on because some researchers implanted a human nucleus into a cow egg (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/02/medicalresearch.ethicsofscience?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront), and grew it to the 32-cell stage (this would be before the embryo implants in the uterus wall).
Whether or not humans and chimps are interfertile is hotly debated - one issue is that they have one more chromosome pair, which often (but not always) prevents interfertility. There have been experiments in the past, and several human/chimp hybrids have been claimed, but there's really not been any hard evidence. See Wikipedia's Humanzee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanzee) article for more detail.
History Channel just did a documentary about Stalin's plan to create human/chimpanzee hybrids to fight the cold war. It went as far as implanting chimpanzee sperm into human women, or so the show purports.
And, before anyone else jumps in with the quote - "Get your damn hands off me you dirty ape!"
Wasn't it: "Get your paws off me, you damned, dirty apes!"
Another great one: "It's a made house.....A MAD HOUSE!!"
Yes yes, that's the quote! :)
-
So, in the Star Trek canon, you are more closely related to (and therefore more likely to be interfertile with) an ear [of] corn than a vulcan or klingon.
Hmm... There's a certain South Park episode in which Wendy Testaburger declaims "F*** Gregory! F*** him right in the ear!" They also did an entire episode about cross-species fertility entitle An Elephant [Makes Love to] a Pig.
And then there's the satellite dish that grows out of Cartman's butt... and the aliens who only say "Moo"...
My God... South Park IS sci-fi!!! (Which brings us back on topic, because South Park is a Guilty Pleasure. You're welcome. :-* )
-
Hmm... There's a certain South Park episode in which Wendy Testaburger declaims "F*** Gregory! F*** him right in the ear!"
And a certain Family Guy episode in which kids wanting to stay virginal have ear-sex.