I would like to read a book about what it would have been like if the Europeans had made it to North America and the natives already had guns and tech at about the 19th century level. I don't think it would have been so easy. More like what happend in China. #airship
@reddingofish: That's more realistic than the picture. If North America was that technologically advanced, wouldn't it make sense that settlers would've gone to (and maybe conquered) Europe? #airship
@PSac: Well, you'd have to take into account how an advanced Native American culture would operate. I'm not labeling them all as peace-loving peoples (goodness knows many were the opposite) but I don't imagine that trans-oceanic conquest and colonization would have been in the cards. #airship
@Althestane: At the end of the day the Native North American people didn't have the concept of land ownership so how could they go anywhere and "conquer"? #airship
@Sunshineyness: but is that necessarily what they would believe were they so advanced? And though they may not believe in owning land, that doesn't mean anything about not owning people, or using them, or taking their goods. #airship
@The_Sporean_Bob: I guess that's true. I was thinking conquering in the very western sense I think (claiming that land is physically yours). That doesn't exclude taking people, food, supples, etc. But would they have stayed? Governed? It's very difficult to say because the core concepts of their culture were so different than the Europeans even when comparing them at the time of equal technologies. #airship
@Sunshineyness: That's only because they weren't at a stage where economics had risen to the forefront of their philosophical views. The idea of ownership can only be derived from that. They were getting close though, when settlers first arrived. The concept of alliance was being utilized - which requires a tangible distinction of tribes in order to work - and the concept of sovereignty was in its early stages as well. #airship
@1Grand_Marquis: I guess than the better question would have been what if the colonists arrived about 100 years later? Would they tribes have had alliances formed that would have enabled them to avoid being defeated by the Europeans?
(Also, upon some quick searches I'm finding interesting articles on how the issue of Native Americans and land ownership is an historically sticky one...) #airship
@Sunshineyness: That assumes that cultural devolopment follows some positivistic path. It's not like they were a few turns away from researching "Nationalism" in Civilization IV. And as you've seen from your google searches, simply stating that "Native Americans" didn't have notions of land ownership oversimplifies things a great deal.
Now I'm about to be a bad commenter by not looking up what I'm about to say: Regardless of whether or not "Native Americans" (I keep using quotes because European settlers encountered several different tribes) had notions of land ownership, they were organized enough to push a pitiful band of settlers into the sea. #airship
@Sunshineyness: Possibly. It really depends on which tribe went over there, I guess. The Inca, for example, most often used hegemonic methods to slowly absorb other tribes into their own, so they probably would have stayed and indoctrinated the Europeans in their ways, made them speak their languages, and build some roads. Who knows, really? #airship
@PSac: Who the heck would want Europe during that era? Other than a few bright spots of civility amongst the upper classes (Renaissance art, science, literature) most of Europe was a cold, over-crowded, plague-ridden hell hole. The Advanced First Nations may have sent a few scouts to Europe to see what the place is like, they surely would have returned home disappointed and carrying quite a few parasites. I don't see the flu and small pox wiping out hoards of the Advanced First Nations folks since they obviously would have invented anti-virals, antibiotics, and vaccines by then, but still the germ-ridden unwashed Europeans probably wouldn't have been on any interest to them. #airship
The Pilgrims did not actually land in NYC, they landed at Plymouth, MA, where they were warmly received by their eventual victims and taught how to feed themselves and hunt and bathe ... okay, I lied about that last part; Pilgrims didn't bathe much. #airship
@Rumtum: Don't forget they landed in Provincetown first, but there were already too many tourists, they couldn't find a room in any B & B, so they moved on. #airship
@Rumtum: not quite so warmly received actually. Pilgrims chose to settle on land that the natives knew was worthless and plagued with periodic disease. I remember reading that they were allowed to stay because native leadership found it politically expedient for some reason. They fully expected them to die out or be absorbed into native societies. Little did they know that the Pilgrims brought pigs, bees and rats with them. #airship
@Althestane: They were also not all "pilgrims" on the Mayflower. There were other types of settlers on that boat as well, not all of them were fleeing persecution. #airship
@Althestane: they weren't received at all at first. They landed where all the natives had died out due to the smallpox epidemic brought by the Jamestown settlers that had raged up the coastline. The only reason they survived at first was because they raided the graves of dead natives (Amerindians in that area buried their dead with food, apparently). Then Squanto (Tisquantum, which basically means 'Wrath of God' in his native language) comes along and can speak english, cause he's been brought to Europe and back twice, and helps them survive (mostly cause his tribe is completely dead). I seem to remember that Massasoit didn't pay much attention to them besides allying with them, cause they were more worried about Mohican/Mohawk invasion after most of the Wampanoag had died out.
All information comes from 1491 by Charles C. Mann #airship
@Sunshineyness:
The Mayflower people were just about evenly divided between the religious Separatists and the traders, with a few hired guns (Miles Standish, et al). They first tried to land at P-Town, but couldn't navigate the shoals; their next landing was at Nausset, where they pillaged a few graves for souvenirs and stole the winter corn supply. Finally they (probably didn't) land on Plymouth Rock, where my 11th G-G-grandfather was born.
Generally the Puritans and Pilgrims traded with the natives, except for liquor and firearms.
They don't tell you the story about the Pilgrim who was hanged as a habitual criminal or the guy who "liked" sheep.
ROW THAT SLOOP BILLINGS, YOU BASTARD! YAAA! THE NEXT TIME THEY TURN THE MAYFLOWER 2, YOU BETTER INVITE ME!
(Sorry. It's the ancestral family grudge coming out again...) #airship
@Althestane:
(As long as I'm rattling on here...)
"Die out or be absorbed" Remember what happened to the trading colony in what would later be Maine, around 1615 or so. All guys. The natives let them starve and later bought them as slaves. Do believe the Pilgrims had to go rescue them.
The natives were no nice guys. They kept slaves and had a widespread slaving network, the other natives they captured they tortured to death, they cleared land and hunted by setting wildfires and in the Midwest they set up buffalo jumps and let a good percentage of the meat just lie there and rot. Ecologists not them.
The pilgrims had steel; that was like having the atomic bomb, especially since around 1600 the Seneca started pushing into MA/RI and taking over from the other tribes. #airship
@firstofnormalin: all true! Though in the end, the settlers didn't require steel to completely dominate the native's lands. There was a great National Geographic article that basically outlined that the settlers unknowingly waged ecological and biological warfare on the native population. The east coast tribes had a fairly sophisticated agricultural system with crop rotations and leaving fields fallow, though it was not something that westerners would recognize. The 'Pilgrims' agricultural system came in and destroyed the balanced NA system. They also brought fruit trees and non-native plants that choked out existing vegetation and the humble, imported bees were made quite busy pollinating and spreading the European ecology instead of native species. Westerners literally changed the earth under their feet and the entire habitat around them. #airship
@Althestane:
all true. "literally changed the earth under their feet" Quite literally--they brought earthworms into North America. I've heard some talk that some of Ye Olde New England Stonne Walls might have been built by the natives, which implies year-round settlement, as do the ossuaries on Cape Cod. It's also possible that smallpox was carried into the "New World" by European fisherman much before the Pilgrim/Puritan landed (the story about Lord Jeff Amherst and the smallpox blankets isn't true).
More than likely if the Glorious Rebellion hadn't happened and a lot of people went to "Northern Virginia" (New England) because of the 30 Years War, the Puritans would have been driven out. Believe L. Sprague DeCamp wrote about that scienerio in one of the Wheels of If stories. #airship
@Sunshineyness:
Yeah, but you'd lose half the cast from starvation during the first winter.
And watch out or that one Pilgrim kid who got fined for fornication a few years later and bore such a grudge that he never joined the church until he was on his deathbed (no names need be mentioned) #airship
So, here's a serious question: are there interesting things that you can do with time travel that aren't about the question of changing the future? #paradox
@braak: Maybe making sure the future does happen, but I guess that would someone would be trying to change it. The long and short answer of your question is 'no' I do believe. #paradox
@Makidian: Watch Primer - it deals with both ideas, how to travel through time and not change the future, and all the other consequences. It requires multiple viewings to get how the whole thing untangles. Highly recommended! #paradox
@braak: Time travel can be used merely as a setting. in 99% of doctor who episodes, for example, timeline stuff really isnt plot centric
You can also have time travel used as a predictive tool. So its not about changing the future, merely knowing what it is.
(eg, buying the winning lottery ticket using time travel requires no paradox, as long as you dont claim till after you return).
You can even use time-travel in a story merely as a direction to travel in. Seeing the universe from a 90 degree rotated angle gives you a very weird perspective on the universe. (hmz cant quite remember the short story that had that). #paradox
Maybe they should be doing more of these miniseries with a definite beginning middle and end instead of trying to drag it all out over several seasons. This way we could maybe have enjoyed TSCC. BSG may not have flamed out so much in its final season. These writers seem to start out strong but with no conclusion in sight, they seem to struggle in season 2 or so. #paradox
@omnibus_spiritus: You dont need to fixed length to do that though.
You simply have to write with possible endings in mind. Every question you raise, you must already know *a* answer too.
You cycle the plotlines, wrap up some, introduce more. Farscape pulled this off very well (imho). They had zero-day notice of cancellation, but as they didn't have so many ongoing plots, a miniseries pretty much wrapped it all up.
Thats the problem with BSG.
They had a whole season to wrap stuff up and failed too. Length wasnt their problem, just bad writting. They had enough notice.
Of course, sometimes the opersite can happen.
Babylon 5 wrapped everything up really nicely in its 4th seasons, only to get renewed and struggled :P #paradox
@twDarkflame: I look at a show like Dexter as a prime example of good writing. I would say this is the best series on TV that I watch. Each season has a storyline. The first was about the Ice Truck Killer, the second revolved around Dexter's psycho girlfriend and the last revolved around his relationship with the DA. Each season wrapped up the substory, while the big picture carries on. It is a simple arch, he is a serial killer, when will he get caught? I think there are often too many subplots that distract from the main story. I think many of these subplots are not important. You can end Dexter this season if you want to. He gets caught! The other plots are not really that important. I don't want to get into them too much so as not to wreck it for everybody else.
I would see SGU kind of like Star Trek Voyager. Lost in space, have to get home, have some adventures along the way. We knew Harry Kim was attached to his parents but we didn't have to go into every hockey game his father failed to attend or how heartbroken they were when they found out he was lost in space. Janeway had a husband but a simple picture of him on her mantle was enough to get the message across that she cared for him. Each season ends with a cliffhanger, but the crux of the show is that they have to get home.
BSG had a premise of "we have to get to earth", but then got distracted with the destinies and visions and so forth. The second main storyline was the religious angle. They could have really done something with that and I felt ripped off with what we got. I think the two storylines about the voyage and religion caused conflict as to which was more important and the show to lose direction, of course this falls on the heads of the writers as you say. #paradox
BBC has at least been trying to win over the sci-fi community , while Sy-fy really hasn`t done much , though I enjoy Eureka and SG :universe is ok . #paradox
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
(Also, upon some quick searches I'm finding interesting articles on how the issue of Native Americans and land ownership is an historically sticky one...) #airship
10/29/09
Now I'm about to be a bad commenter by not looking up what I'm about to say: Regardless of whether or not "Native Americans" (I keep using quotes because European settlers encountered several different tribes) had notions of land ownership, they were organized enough to push a pitiful band of settlers into the sea. #airship
10/30/09
10/31/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
This isn't the MF II, it's the HMS/USS Liet-Kynes (serves two masters). #airship
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
All information comes from 1491 by Charles C. Mann #airship
10/29/09
The Mayflower people were just about evenly divided between the religious Separatists and the traders, with a few hired guns (Miles Standish, et al). They first tried to land at P-Town, but couldn't navigate the shoals; their next landing was at Nausset, where they pillaged a few graves for souvenirs and stole the winter corn supply. Finally they (probably didn't) land on Plymouth Rock, where my 11th G-G-grandfather was born.
Generally the Puritans and Pilgrims traded with the natives, except for liquor and firearms.
They don't tell you the story about the Pilgrim who was hanged as a habitual criminal or the guy who "liked" sheep.
ROW THAT SLOOP BILLINGS, YOU BASTARD! YAAA! THE NEXT TIME THEY TURN THE MAYFLOWER 2, YOU BETTER INVITE ME!
(Sorry. It's the ancestral family grudge coming out again...) #airship
10/29/09
(I was the kid in the Thanksgiving pageant in 3rd grade complaining that it wasn't historically accurate.) #airship
10/29/09
(As long as I'm rattling on here...)
"Die out or be absorbed" Remember what happened to the trading colony in what would later be Maine, around 1615 or so. All guys. The natives let them starve and later bought them as slaves. Do believe the Pilgrims had to go rescue them.
The natives were no nice guys. They kept slaves and had a widespread slaving network, the other natives they captured they tortured to death, they cleared land and hunted by setting wildfires and in the Midwest they set up buffalo jumps and let a good percentage of the meat just lie there and rot. Ecologists not them.
The pilgrims had steel; that was like having the atomic bomb, especially since around 1600 the Seneca started pushing into MA/RI and taking over from the other tribes. #airship
10/30/09
10/31/09
all true. "literally changed the earth under their feet" Quite literally--they brought earthworms into North America. I've heard some talk that some of Ye Olde New England Stonne Walls might have been built by the natives, which implies year-round settlement, as do the ossuaries on Cape Cod. It's also possible that smallpox was carried into the "New World" by European fisherman much before the Pilgrim/Puritan landed (the story about Lord Jeff Amherst and the smallpox blankets isn't true).
More than likely if the Glorious Rebellion hadn't happened and a lot of people went to "Northern Virginia" (New England) because of the 30 Years War, the Puritans would have been driven out. Believe L. Sprague DeCamp wrote about that scienerio in one of the Wheels of If stories. #airship
10/31/09
Yeah, but you'd lose half the cast from starvation during the first winter.
And watch out or that one Pilgrim kid who got fined for fornication a few years later and bore such a grudge that he never joined the church until he was on his deathbed (no names need be mentioned) #airship
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
Wait, I just thought of something: what if it's happened exactly like this already? I think I just blew my own mind.
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
10/29/09
(Also, nice catch with the multi-pass, wasn't sure anyone would get it.) #airship
10/29/09
@AmishJohn: #airship
10/19/09
10/19/09
10/19/09
10/19/09
10/19/09
10/19/09
10/19/09
You can also have time travel used as a predictive tool. So its not about changing the future, merely knowing what it is.
(eg, buying the winning lottery ticket using time travel requires no paradox, as long as you dont claim till after you return).
You can even use time-travel in a story merely as a direction to travel in. Seeing the universe from a 90 degree rotated angle gives you a very weird perspective on the universe. (hmz cant quite remember the short story that had that). #paradox
10/20/09
Watching Flashforward after seeing Primer is like being forcefed baby food after dining on the world's finest cuisine. #paradox
10/19/09
10/19/09
You simply have to write with possible endings in mind. Every question you raise, you must already know *a* answer too.
You cycle the plotlines, wrap up some, introduce more. Farscape pulled this off very well (imho). They had zero-day notice of cancellation, but as they didn't have so many ongoing plots, a miniseries pretty much wrapped it all up.
Thats the problem with BSG.
They had a whole season to wrap stuff up and failed too. Length wasnt their problem, just bad writting. They had enough notice.
Of course, sometimes the opersite can happen.
Babylon 5 wrapped everything up really nicely in its 4th seasons, only to get renewed and struggled :P #paradox
10/19/09
I would see SGU kind of like Star Trek Voyager. Lost in space, have to get home, have some adventures along the way. We knew Harry Kim was attached to his parents but we didn't have to go into every hockey game his father failed to attend or how heartbroken they were when they found out he was lost in space. Janeway had a husband but a simple picture of him on her mantle was enough to get the message across that she cared for him. Each season ends with a cliffhanger, but the crux of the show is that they have to get home.
BSG had a premise of "we have to get to earth", but then got distracted with the destinies and visions and so forth. The second main storyline was the religious angle. They could have really done something with that and I felt ripped off with what we got. I think the two storylines about the voyage and religion caused conflict as to which was more important and the show to lose direction, of course this falls on the heads of the writers as you say. #paradox
10/19/09
10/19/09
God I hate twists. #paradox