jon_p_noble at yahoo.com
Wed Sep 15 20:58:46 EDT 2004
--- Paul Andinach <pandinac at ucc.gu.uwa.edu.au> wrote:
> > I read Ash a while ago, and some of what looks
> like magic is
> > explained by technology, but I can't remember if
> it all is- or if
> > the technology itself turns out to be magical.
> It's fundamental to the plot that *everything* that
> looks like magic
> is explained by technology, in a way that makes it
> science fiction
> rather than fantasy - although once it starts
> getting into the
> esoteric quantum mechanics stuff the narrator (who
> is a history PhD,
> Jim, not a physicist) gives up and settles for the
> broad outlines.
> (Which is dashed convenient for the author, come to
> think of it.)
Despite its pseudo-scientific explanation I'd regard
Ash as fantasy rather than SF, and historical fantasy
at that. From Mary Gentle there is also 1610 which is
a fantasy all about history (although it could also
qualify as SF too - even more so than Ash - and has no
real magic in it) (like the "editor" of the material
in the book I'm awaiting the Russell Crowe - Angelina
Jollie movie of it)
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at suberic.net with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at http://suberic.net/dwj/list/
More information about the Dwj