Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site bambi.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!magic!science!bambi!steve
From: steve@bambi.UUCP (Steve Miller)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: Re: FTL weapons and other UNexplainables (flame) (flame of flame)
Message-ID: <386@bambi.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 31-Mar-86 11:38:36 EST
Article-I.D.: bambi.386
Posted: Mon Mar 31 11:38:36 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 2-Apr-86 00:58:28 EST
References: <4609MW9@PSUVM> <417@pucc.BITNET> <6995@tektronix.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Bell Communications Research Inc., Morristown, NJ
Lines: 19

> > I really find it hard to believe (and quite hilarious, frankly)
> > that there are
> > folks out there who ACTUALLY THINK they can explain UNexplainables in Star
> > Trek or, for that matter, any other sci-fi adventure.
> 
> I do think these discussions are interesting, but I hope that everybody out
> there doesn't really BELIEVE all this stuff.

Someone in net.tv.drwho (Mark Modig?) once made the point that explaining
unexplainables in the context of a fictional universe in order to maintain
consistency is a characteristic of the true fan.  It's a kind of puzzle:  How
do I reconcile last week's story with this week's, in a fashion consistent
with the underlying premises of the series?  If you can find a convincing 
answer, it helps to maintain the suspension of disbelief that series sf
requires.  Also, it lets you feel like you have some interaction with
the series, as opposed to being merely the passive observer.  Further,
it is good mental exercise.  Remember the sf author advisors in _Footfall_ ?

	-Steve Miller ihnp4!bambi!steve