[009]
smokedpoacher
Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
n
I\'m not sure where you\'re getting the idea that people here are dismissing all science fiction. Obviously there is sophisticated, adult science fiction - the question is whether \'\'Gargoyles\'\' and its ilk should be counted amongst it.
to:
I\\\'m not sure where you\\\'re getting the idea that anyone here is dismissing all science fiction. Obviously there is sophisticated, adult science fiction - the question is whether \\\'\\\'Gargoyles\\\'\\\' and its ilk should be counted amongst it.
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
As far as I can tell, the main question they were asking was \
to:
As far as I can tell, the main question they were asking was \\\"who\\\'d win in a fight, a gargoyle or a robot?\\\". And that\\\'s what is meant by \\\"pulpish subject matter\\\".
Fry isn\\\'t saying that being targeted at adults makes a programme sophisticated by default, he\\\'s saying the opposite - that a programme should try for a reasonable level of sophistication before it can be described as truly \\\"adult\\\" (his comments were part of a longer rant - http://youtu.be/cWCbBrVLSQs?t=35m23s - about TV shows that are aimed at adults but could be mistaken for children\\\'s fare).
And there\\\'s truth in what Lewis wrote, even if he seems a tad confused (when he says that the critics \\\"cannot be adults themselves\\\", isn\\\'t \\\'\\\'he\\\'\\\' the one using \\\"adult\\\" as a term of approval?), but bear in mind that he said that in 1953. He was responding to a then-widespread disdain for adults who read children\\\'s fantasy; the popularity of \\\'\\\'Harry Potter\\\'\\\' alone demonstrates that this attitude has hit a steep decline since then. Had Lewis lived to see the era in which two hundred million dollars could be spent on \\\'\\\'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen\\\'\\\', and a further eight hundred million spent on tickets to see it, he might have written something rather different.
(As for \\\'\\\'Doctor Who\\\'\\\', well, would you say those episodes challanged your views on warfare?)
Fry isn\\\'t saying that being targeted at adults makes a programme sophisticated by default, he\\\'s saying the opposite - that a programme should try for a reasonable level of sophistication before it can be described as truly \\\"adult\\\" (his comments were part of a longer rant - http://youtu.be/cWCbBrVLSQs?t=35m23s - about TV shows that are aimed at adults but could be mistaken for children\\\'s fare).
And there\\\'s truth in what Lewis wrote, even if he seems a tad confused (when he says that the critics \\\"cannot be adults themselves\\\", isn\\\'t \\\'\\\'he\\\'\\\' the one using \\\"adult\\\" as a term of approval?), but bear in mind that he said that in 1953. He was responding to a then-widespread disdain for adults who read children\\\'s fantasy; the popularity of \\\'\\\'Harry Potter\\\'\\\' alone demonstrates that this attitude has hit a steep decline since then. Had Lewis lived to see the era in which two hundred million dollars could be spent on \\\'\\\'Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen\\\'\\\', and a further eight hundred million spent on tickets to see it, he might have written something rather different.
(As for \\\'\\\'Doctor Who\\\'\\\', well, would you say those episodes challanged your views on warfare?)
