No aliens in the 'Verse...How do you feel? by BWare42

I love the vision of a 'verse without aliens. It's not like we're missing anything as far as the story is concerned. Most aliens we see in sci-fi TV and movies are little more than humans with reptile skin, or maybe a ridge on their nose. Joss said he needed to "spend some time away from latex," and for that I'm glad. He gave us a world without aliens, transporters, wormholes, and with very few lasers, and set the story on a little ship without weapons or defenses that never passes the speed of light. Yet this ends up being the most intellectually stimulating, funny, exciting, and emotionally engaging story you could want.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 6:24 PM

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 6:38 PM

CHRISMOORHEAD

I usually hate Science Fiction. I hated Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG, Stargate, etc. Up until now I couldn't give you a lot of reasons why Firefly was different for me, but I'll be damned, it has a lot to do with there not being any aliens. Why don't I like aliens? The same reasons already listed, it's overdone, it provides too much freedom for ultimately powerful characters, etc. When I first saw previews for Serenity, I thought I was going to hate River because of how powerful she was being made out to be, but the character's too flawed (in a good way) for me to hate her, and damnit, Summer Glau's just too cute to hate.

"Deep in the battlefield covered in blood
Lies an Airborne Ranger dying in the mud
He fought for his country and he died like a man
Though some people back home just wouldn't understand"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 7:00 PM

REGINAROADIE

I'm of two sides to the whole "no aliens" rule that FIREFLY/SERENITY has. On the one hand, adding aliens to the already complex mix that they have going on might lead to some distractions and bring stuff up that they might not want to explore.

But I can't help feel that if the show had continued, they would have missed out on an interesting opportunity. Now, before you tear me a new asshole, listen to this.

One movie I saw recently was Terrence Malick's latest masterpiece THE NEW WORLD, which was about the Jamestown settlers and the John Smith/Pocahontas relationship. This is an amazing film, taking something that taught in elementary school and turning it into an unusual, fascinating and hypnotic slice of history that makes you feel the same sense of alien wonder and discovery that Smith, the settlers and the natives must have felt when they first encountered each other. And it got me thinking about something.

Joss made FIREFLY as a sort of ode to the Western genre. And that part of that genre is the Native American aspect that played key roles in such classics like BILLY JACK and THE SEARCHERS. The relationships between the settlers and cowboys with the Natives is a HUGE part of the genre. If you can blend sci-fi and Western together to be an allegory of early American history, then aliens could easily stand as a metaphor for Native Americans. There's no rule that says that aliens have to be technologically advanced. Humans 500 plus years into the future making a trek across space to settle in new worlds already inhabited by a less technologically advanced race of beings could easily take the place of the settlers moving west to make a new civilization and encountering the Native population.

Joss is obviously smart enough to realize this, so it seems odd that he intentionally chose to miss out on a rather large metaphor that's ripe for material.

I can't think of any other sci-fi story that deals with alien encounters in that way. In a vein similar to the settlers 400 or so years ago when they first came to North America. And I think FIREFLY could have been the first to deal with that, if they didn't restrict themselves with an arbitrary "no aliens" rule.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
"Couldn't we at least abduct their political or religious leaders instead of just any idiot in a pick-up truck?"

"I'm sure the Great Leader has his reasons."

"Well I'm sure the Great Leader is just some sort of twisted ass freak."

"All right, I am now offically ignoring you, commence anal probing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 7:17 PM

SAMEERTIA

Aliens? We don't need no stinkin' aliens.

*Ertia suddenly realizes that she's being rather terse tonight, and that she has said exactly nothing original. Maybe she needs a nap.*

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 8:00 PM

CHINDI

LOL on all the responses.. ditto, oh and yes I see that point, and ITA and ditto.

The thing is, as has been said, that many shows deal with aliens in the universe etc. THIS show was about being on the frontier. It is a western.. and it is about us- the humans.

That does NOT mean we do not think there are other life forms out there.. maybe more intelligent maybe not, who knows.. but other shows go there.. we go here. There is room on the airwaves for all sorts of outlooks...

This vision, Joss' vision, just works for me and connects with me BECAUSE it is so human...

Chindi (hoping there never will be a time when naughty men can't slip about...)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 8:39 PM

QUIXOTIC

I don't have anything against the oncept of aliens, and I'm sure if Joss were to write them, they would be interesting.

That being said, I am glad that they aren't in the show. Aliens in sci-fi suffer in much the same way as elves and dwarves, etc. do in fantastic settings. They become quick and easy stereotypes, while the humans actually get to have real characters. Think Klingon: honorable warriors [or, if you're old enough, treacherous ones.] Dwarves: drunken miners with an axe-fetish. And so on.

It's always nice to see humans get to be the good guys and the bad guys, and the ones in the middle.

Yeah, and if wishes were horses we'd all be eating steak.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 11:09 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BWare42:How do you feel about Joss's vision of a non-alien future? Does he mean we still haven't met any in 500 years, or there are none out there? And either way, how do you feel about it?

Were you asking about the Joss quote that sometimes appears in the blue space at the top of the homepage here....

'I believe we are the only sentient beings in the universe, and I believe that 500 years from now, we will still be the only sentient beings around.' ~Joss

The first time I read that quote I thought 'whaaa? no kidding, that's wierd'. It's one of the few instances where I totally completely fundamentally disagree with Joss. He doesn't just say we won't have met them yet, he says 'only...in the universe'. I don't know how people look out into the twinkly black and think we are it, the top of the heap, the only time in this enormous amazing riot of a place where everything converges to make intelligent creatures that speak to each other. In fact, I think there are plenty of other kinds of creatures on this very planet who speak to each other. Chimps and bonobos communicate with each other, have been taught human sign language and can be fluent enough to have conversations with people about emotions far more complex than 'give treats now'. Elephants communicate with one another over hundreds of miles using very low frequency sound. Dolphins, whales, and mice (!) make high pitched sounds with at least as much complexity of pattern as symphonic music. Heck, your dog feels happy and sad. That's where the dictionary draws the line for sentience; at feelings. If you want to draw the line farther on at understanding of right and wrong, you can teach a dog your version of right and wrong, and he at least comes to understand your definition. So, yeah, I think there are others out there, and I doubt it will take us 500 years to meet them. Unless of course, we manage to never learn to stop kicking the crap out of each other. I doubt the neighbors would want to meet us until we learn that lesson. But that's a whole other kettle of fishies. im-outrageous-o Consciousness is one of my favorite subjects.

As far as an SF story with no aliens, I'm glad Joss wrote FF without aliens, it's refreshing to see SF that doesn't use that convention to move the story line along.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 11:21 PM

J6NGO1977

Quote:
Originally posted by Quixotic:
Dwarves: drunken miners with an axe-fetish. And so on.

You forgot with a Scottish accent as well. lol

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, February 2, 2006 11:34 PM

ASARIAN

I feel good about the absence of aliens. I like my fair share of them -- and Lord knows I've seen them enough -- but there is something really refreshing about them not being there in FireFly/Serenity.

We create our own mess, is also an underlying message, I think. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous aliens, or to take arms against our self-made troubles, and by opposing end them? I'm going with the latter. :)

"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 3:51 AM

QUIXOTIC

Quote:
Originally posted by j6ngo1977:
Quote:
Originally posted by Quixotic:
Dwarves: drunken miners with an axe-fetish. And so on.

You forgot with a Scottish accent as well. lol

Och, laddy!

Yeah, and if wishes were horses we'd all be eating steak.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 5:42 AM

CYBERSNARK

Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
'I believe we are the only sentient beings in the universe, and I believe that 500 years from now, we will still be the only sentient beings around.' ~Joss

The first time I read that quote I thought 'whaaa? no kidding, that's wierd'. It's one of the few instances where I totally completely fundamentally disagree with Joss.

Yeah, I have troubles with that too.

Don't get me wrong, I like that Firefly has no aliens, and I certainly wouldn't add any.

Thing is, I draw a distinction between "TV aliens" (as seen on Star Trek) and "aliens" (as seen in textual SF and only ever hinted at in TV land). I'm talking about the aliens of Farscape (Moya, Pilot, Zhaan, Aerin), or pre-thud Andromeda (the Magog, who reproduce by injecting larvae into host species, or the Than, who are insect-based, with "families" in the trillions, but do not have a hive-mind [and even pride themselves on being non-conformist individualists], or the Concensus of Parts, who out-Borged the Borg, extruding "Concensii" for specific tasks, then reintegrating them into the Concensus hive-mind --heck, the Nietzscheans were initially the most alien of the bunch, and they were 90% human).

As someone else-thread posted, aliens are too often used as shorthand stereotypes (all Klingons are stamped from this mold, all Vulcans from this mold, etc). I want a series that gives us some aliens with as much individuality as humans. Yeah, let humans be good, bad, and morally ambiguous, but let the other species do the same.

(This is the reason I loved DS9; it was Star Trek that didn't play by the Star Trek rules. It had Ferengi family drama, Bajoran factionalism, Klingon internecine politics, Cardassian social revolution, human black ops. . . There were no "token" characters.)

-----
We applied the cortical electrodes but were unable to get a neural reaction from either patient.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 6:35 AM

DIAVO

Quote:
Originally posted by Jadehand:
I forget who said it, and this may not be a direct quote but, "I think the biggest proof that there is intelligent life out there, is that they haven't tried to contact us."

It was a Calvin & Hobbes comic. Bill Watterson. =)
The strip had them in their woods and Calvin looks down to see some litter and says this. No faith in humanity.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 6:44 AM

BWARE42

You hit the crux of my question. The whole "no aliens on the show" was really secondary. I think the concept of no aliens is great in Firefly!

But I saw Joss's quote about sentient beings the other day and wondered how many believed it. I certainly don't. Like Jodi Foster said in "Contact.": "I don't know if ther's life on other planets...If not, it seems like an awful waste of space." <>

I like the discussion about the show though too - one of the fresh pieces of Firefly was the "no aliens" slant. It allows for greater examination of the human condition...In a space-western setting!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 6:45 AM

SPINLAND

"Sometimes I think the surest sign that there's intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is the fact none of it has tried to contact us." -- Calvin

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"That's what governments are for, [to] get in a man's way." -- Malcolm Reynolds

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 6:45 AM

I think there are sentient non-terrestrial things in real life but even the word alien seems cliché.

In Firefly I’m happy that they are not there. First off there’s no reason that just because something exists we’d need to meet it, and second the lack of aliens it allows us something else people. Oh aliens are great for metaphors, and they’re great for stories, and even great for giving insight into people, but if you don’t need to have them in story about people having them distracts from people.

Firefly is not about aliens, it is about people, and unlike Aliens, a movie that was also about people, there is no vital function the be served by aliens of any sort. If the crew is supposed to meet something scary there are people for that, if they are to meet something strange and totally alien seeming … some people juggle geese.

It is a hell of a lot easier to make a scary person than a scary monster, and unless there is some reason for a monster the person is usually more effective.

Strange odd incomprehensible cultures can be made by people too, in fact it would probably seem more odd if such a culture was inhabited by human beings.

-

Also consider that it doesn’t matter whether or not aliens are real or whether we would meet them.

If aliens were to come up to us to day, introduce themselves, shake mandibles, whatever, I think there would still be a place for a TV show set 500 years on with no aliens in it. Speculative fiction is speculative, instead of asking, “What will we be like in 500 years if left to our own devices?” we would ask, “What will we be like in 500 years if we had been left to our own devices?”

The second question is just as valid as the first.

-

In real life I think they exist because it makes sense to me.

There are two basic arguments for the existence of life on earth:
1 Random chance caused the evolution of life from non-living matter.
2 God did it.

If it was random chance I can see life being unique to this planet just as easily as I can see the lottery numbers coming out 1,2,3,4,5,6 every drawing from now to eternity. Very possible, hardly likely.

If it was God then the idea that there is no life on other planets is absurd. From religions where God is a compassionate perfect being to ones where God is a jealous highly flawed arrogant ass I have never heard of a single version of God (or the gods) that would leave all of the universe, save one spot, devoid of life.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 6:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BWare42:"I don't know if ther's life on other planets...If not, it seems like an awful waste of space." <>

That's the way I feel about it too: the universe is not at all wasteful, and us alone in all of it would be a gigantic waste of space and energy.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 6:58 AM

ARCADIA

Hmm... my roommate actually took an astronomy class last semester called "Extraterrestial life". Now she called me ignorant and narrow-minded whenever I say I doubt there are aliens. I suppose that aliens could exist. The universe is vast, after all. However, if there are any, I doubt they are similiar enough to us to be able to communicate, ever. I doubt they are close enough that we will ever meet them, no matter how technologically advanced we become. Even if we could meet them, would we want to? That's a lot of complications. If star trek was real, I doubt it would be so utopian. Probably quite the opposite.

I really like the fact that there are no aliens in Firefly. It gives everyone the opportunity to focus on the things that are so human about the show, mainly the emotions that the characters feel and share with on another. I have liked some alien characters in other shows, but when I sit down and think about them (overanalyze, whatever), I find that I must view there actions with a certain amount of distrust simply because they are aliens and their thought process, I reason, is so vastly different from ours... also, I hate how aliens just become an exageration of one characteric or two. Vulcans are logical. Klingons are agresssive. The goa'uld are stinky thieves. Okay. That's nice?

I'm rambling so I will stop. Happy friday, all.

"Objects in Space"
River: It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 7:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cybersnark:
(This is the reason I loved DS9; it was Star Trek that didn't play by the Star Trek rules. It had Ferengi family drama, Bajoran factionalism, Klingon internecine politics, Cardassian social revolution, human black ops. . . There were no "token" characters.)

I didn't like what they did with the Ferengi, greed was more or less a planet wide religion, larger than that actually, and it collapsed almost overnight.

Beliefs that strong don't fall that easily. The rest I'm with you on.

One of the things in Star Trek was that everyone (every species) is the same, Klingons love Shakespeare for example. In galactic politics, like on earth, only Nixon could go to China. Every planet or empire had gone through social revolution after revolution until the local version of the fittest won out. The show takes place after that point.

So after all of that sameness only the humans, one Vulcan, and one Klingon can be original? If it followed its own rule everyone would be just as diverse, but each culture would be centered around a different point. Yet it made other rules so that to do something that made sense required breaking the Star Trek rules.

Don't get me wrong, I like almost all Trek, but seeing variation in the other species was done too little.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 7:21 AM

BROWNCOAT1

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

Personally I like the fact that Joss decided to go w/ an alien free universe. I prefer to keep the focus on humanity, its dynamics and how everyday people like Mal & crew deal w/ their enviroment. One of the things about Star Trek that kind of killed it for me was all the aliens & getting bogged down in their culture, etc.

I think that it is a bit naive to think that we are the only species in the universe & that Earth is the only populated planet. Of course if was an intelligent alien species I would avoid this planet & its inhabitants too.

__________________________________________

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

Richmond, VA & surrounding area Firefly Fans:

http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/richmondbrowncoats/

http://www.richmondbrowncoats.org

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 7:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic: If it was God then the idea that there is no life on other planets is absurd. From religions where God is a compassionate perfect being to ones where God is a jealous highly flawed arrogant ass I have never heard of a single version of God (or the gods) that would leave all of the universe, save one spot, devoid of life.

Religions do tend to go for the slant that their believers are the ones chosen by God, so it's a pretty logical extention of that of train of thought to the idea that this is the only planet with life of any sort.

Shiny Trees! Yavanna made Shiny Trees!
Aztecs used the term firefly metaphorically, meaning a spark of knowledge in a world of ignorance or darkness.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 7:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Arcadia:
also, I hate how aliens just become an exageration of one characteric or two. Vulcans are logical. Klingons are agresssive. The goa'uld are stinky thieves. Okay. That's nice?

I have to ask, do you watch Stargate? If you're talking about goa'uld as an entire alien race (instead of a culture in that race) that is quite false. At one point the SGC had three allies, the Asgaurd, the Jaffa rebellion, and members of the goa'uld species (tok‘ra). If you’re not talking about the whole species then you have to admit that the power structures of some cultures in real life are quite a bit like that.

Also in Star Trek while the Klingons were an exaggeration of aggressiveness the Vulcans were hardly an exaggeration of logicalness. I've seen quite a bit, though not all, of Star Trek and I can't think of a single logical Vulcan. If they're an exaggeration of anything it's the inability to admit failure to attain an ideal.

-

Though I disagree with two thirds of your examples I agree with your point, it is irksome when aliens are just an exaggerated trait.

Quote:
I'm rambling so I will stop.

That rarely stops me.

Quote:
Happy friday, all.

Same to you.

-
-

I've just been reminded of something. The show Babylon 5 had an episode where the religious leaders of various worlds were meeting. While there was significant variation in almost all cultures most if not all aliens had one world religions.

If memory serves the meetings went something like this:
"Allow me to introduce the high priest of my planet."
"Allow me to introduce the high priest of my planet."
"Allow me to introduce the high priest of my planet."
"This is a Hindu priest, this is a Catholic priest, this is a Lutheran priest, this is an orthodox rabbi, this is a Mohammedan priest, this is an Islamic priest, this is a Mormon priest, this is a Buddhist monk, this is a Baptist priest, this is a ..." (We have a lot of different types of Christians don‘t we.)

The idea seems to be that humanity itself is an exaggeration of a single trait, diversity if you're nice, rabid factionalism and schismatic practices if your not.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 7:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by liminalosity:
Religions do tend to go for the slant that their believers are the ones chosen by God, so it's a pretty logical extention of that of train of thought to the idea that this is the only planet with life of any sort.

If that logic held then the only life of any sort would be the members of whichever particular religion you are talking about (and things necessary for/desirable to those believers.)

For example, either all non-Roman Catholics are figments of a deranged imagination or the Roman Catholic god creates non-believers in places very far away from Jerusalem and Jesus and the like.

Then again there might have been a point when people said, "Sure there could be other continents, but there can't be any life on them, we're the chosen of god."

Every religion that contends god is the only source of life seems obsessed with the idea that god creates people and things outside of the religion. Dolphins for example, lots of people like to talk about how smart dolphins are. Even if you think they are moronic it is hard to deny that they are sentient, yet they are not Christians, so by the argument that says there is no sentient life on other planets the Christian god didn't make them and Christians must therefore believe that dolphins must not really exist.

The argument simply doesn't hold. About the only thing exclusive religions unanimously agree on is that god created life sentient and otherwise outside of the initial reach of the religion. Perhaps one day a method of fluent communication with dolphins and crows will exist and there will be missionaries to the crows and dolphins.

Perhaps not, either way god created life outside the bounds of his religion. The things can't even understand the language (well actually both can be trained to understand some English and therefore probably other languages (like Hebrew and Aramaic), but not enough to understand the word God), but god made them.

That's just what god (according to exclusive religions) does, he makes heathens on top of heathens, he makes sentient life that is even further from him than heathens. He just goes around and makes stuff, lots of stuff.

-

If everything is for the believers then why create stuff in America if the religion is in Israel?
Why because one day the religion will reach America.
Oh ... just like one day humanity will be on other planets?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 8:13 AM

ARCADIA

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:
I have to ask, do you watch Stargate? If you're talking about goa'uld as an entire alien race (instead of a culture in that race) that is quite false. At one point the SGC had three allies, the Asgaurd, the Jaffa rebellion, and members of the goa'uld species (tok‘ra). If you’re not talking about the whole species then you have to admit that the power structures of some cultures in real life are quite a bit like that.

I'm not entirely sure what you are saying here, but I will attempt to respond.

I'll start by saying that I have seen season 1-4 and 8 of stargate, with assorted episodes of other seaons here and there.

I admit, when it comes to intergallactic government, stargat did a pretty good job of creating power structures. The fact that the asgard bully the goa'uld through bluffing especially tickles me.

My point, however, didn't have much to do with that. For good or bad, it seems to me that all goa'uld (not necessarily Tok'ra, they come from a different mother so therefore they have a different "genetic memory" so they are not who I am talking about here) are liars, they steal, and they are power-hungry by default. I am glad that this is somewhat justified through genetic memory (the having a thousand hitlers in your head point). They made effective villians (well... not towards the end, but in the beginning, hell yes), but they aren't strong characters. Almost every singel one of them (I won't say all because as I said, I have not seen every episode of every season, and some of the episodes I have seen I saw so long ago that my memories of them are not completely there any more) is just a generic villian. They are fairly interchangeable.

Quote:
Also in Star Trek while the Klingons were an exaggeration of aggressiveness the Vulcans were hardly an exaggeration of logicalness. I've seen quite a bit, though not all, of Star Trek and I can't think of a single logical Vulcan. If they're an exaggeration of anything it's the inability to admit failure to attain an ideal.

Well, I never said that they were an successful exageration of perfectly logical beings. Perhaps they were a poke at Thomas Jefferson and the enlightenment era, I don't know... I chose the adjective logical because I was uncertain how many people posting actually watched star trek and I wanted to use something that is fairly well known about vulcans to make my point more universal. I was a Voyager girl, myself. It was a horrible show, but I was in elementry school/junior high and the captain was a girl so I thought it was awesome.

That said... I will conceed to you somewhat. Vulcans try to attain this ideal of being emotionless and logical all the time, and often they fail. At the same time, I will argue that if there had not been five star trek series and therefore hundreds of opertunities to explore them further, this is all any vulcan would have ever been: an annoying logic machine that sometimes breaks and refuses to admit it. They had a great potential to be interchangeable. This is just my opinion. Also, I will state again that I primarily watched Voyager, which isn't really the best show for Vulcans.

But I guess the whole point of my earlier rant was the same point you made with the religious comment. Humans are so diverse. Aliens, in most scifi I have seen, are so uniform. They are all loyal to one ideal, one religion... there is always one thing that defines them as an alien race. I see no reason why they should (aside from convenience -- it would be difficult storytelling to make a realistic alien culture). Humans are diverse, why shouldn't aliens be diverse? I guess Stargate attempted this with goa'uld v. tok'ra... but mostly, it doens't happen. That was my main point.

Quote:
The idea seems to be that humanity itself is an exaggeration of a single trait, diversity if you're nice, rabid factionalism and schismatic practices if your not.

That's an interesting idea. Definately something I hadn't thought about.

Peace.

"Objects in Space"
River: It's just an object. It doesn't mean what you think...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 8:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by christhecynic:Then again there might have been a point when people said, "Sure there could be other continents, but there can't be any life on them, we're the chosen of god."

Hey Chris, Yup, crusading religions have done that acreoss the globe... if you insert the word 'intelligent' or 'ensouled'.

Quote:
Even if you think they [dolphins] are moronic it is hard to deny that they are sentient, yet they are not Christians, so by the argument that says there is no sentient life on other planets the Christian god didn't make them and Christians must therefore believe that dolphins must not really exist.

I'm a complete heretic who believes that what people refer to as soul is evolution. When communication within a species reaches the concept of compassion, bingo, 'soul'.

Quote:
Perhaps one day a method of fluent communication with dolphins and crows will exist and there will be missionaries to the crows and dolphins.

Ohhh, that's an image I hate to entertain. OTOH, the crows would just steal all the shiny, and divebomb the missionaries.

Quote:
That's just what god (according to exclusive religions) does, he makes heathens on top of heathens, he makes sentient life that is even further from him than heathens. He just goes around and makes stuff, lots of stuff.

Stuff for someone with membership in the club to feel superior to, which, yeah...I snagged this from your response to another poster...

Quote:
Also in Star Trek while the Klingons were an exaggeration of aggressiveness the Vulcans were hardly an exaggeration of logicalness. I've seen quite a bit, though not all, of Star Trek and I can't think of a single logical Vulcan. If they're an exaggeration of anything it's the inability to admit failure to attain an ideal.

I think our failure to understand that heirarchy doesn't quite work is showing.

Quote:
Oh ... just like one day humanity will be on other planets?

yeah, and we want our hot chocolate waiting for us when we get there, because we're going to need to sort through that stuff of ours, right away.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 10:57 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Arcadia:
But I guess the whole point of my earlier rant was the same point you made with the religious comment. Humans are so diverse. Aliens, in most scifi I have seen, are so uniform. They are all loyal to one ideal, one religion... there is always one thing that defines them as an alien race. I see no reason why they should (aside from convenience -- it would be difficult storytelling to make a realistic alien culture). Humans are diverse, why shouldn't aliens be diverse? I guess Stargate attempted this with goa'uld v. tok'ra... but mostly, it doens't happen. That was my main point.

Actually I got that, but I nitpick, it's just the compulsion that I don't have enough tact to overcome.

I think the reasoning (and I'm not saying it is good reasoning) behind having alien cultures center on one ideal is that it is trying to expand the real world to the size of the universe instead of trying to stick the real world into a universe.

Often times one culture on earth will have one ideal or set of ideals they strive to and those ideals will bring them into conflict with other cultures. Instead of saying, "Each alien race has a diverse set of cultures," it says, "Each alien race is one culture."

But then it takes it a step further and says, "For the purposes of simplicity each culture has a single view."

Which is of course absurd.

The one guiding goal of the Roman Empire was order. They wanted to bring order to the world, one of the biggest insults you could throw was accusing someone of furthering disorder. Does that mean they all got along and worked together to bring order under one unified philosophy of how to do it? Hell no. They spent about half of their time killing each other.

In a typical sci-fi show a race with the goal of order would have worked out exactly how to go about it centuries before they showed up and there would be no infighting unless the plot required it explicitly. I don't care how much you believe in social evolution the idea that a single form of a single idea would eventually win out as the fittest for every single culture on a planet (for every planet) is absurd.

Which is what I think you were saying, more or less.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 11:31 AM

FERT1

Quote:
As someone else-thread posted, aliens are too often used as shorthand stereotypes (all Klingons are stamped from this mold, all Vulcans from this mold, etc). I want a series that gives us some aliens with as much individuality as humans. Yeah, let humans be good, bad, and morally ambiguous, but let the other species do the same.

You just described Babylon 5. That was my first thought when I read your post. Think about it. Of the Centauri, the main characters you had on the show were Londo and Vir. Vir chose the high road, and Londo chose the low road. But...Londo wasn't entirely a villain. In fact, he was a very complex character whom you felt sorry for at times, even though he did some really despicable things. He was victim as much as villain, and in the end realized his mistakes, when it was too late, at least for him. He even had heroic moments. He was a very complex and layered character. He came across as very...human. All the characters on that show were 3 dimensional, and all evolved and grew as people, (so to speak). A very well done show if you've never seen it!

Now having said all that, I like Firefly just fine without the aliens. Why? Because it's original, and it makes a certain sense. Even if you believe there is alien life out there, when first exploring the universe, the likelihood of encountering it would be pretty slim. After all the tired old sterotypes and Star Trek aliens with speed bumps on their head, Joss's verse was quite refreshing, very new and different. That's one of the things I've always liked about Joss's projects. You can count on something new and refreshing, not the same old thing that has been rehashed a million times.

I've had an idea for some time for a storyline that I think would make a good SF book. Yes, it's very similar to an old Twilight Zone episode, but that is not what inspired me. The story would be of an alien invasion, similar to War of the Worlds, with cruel, heartless aliens that think nothing of killing off the people to take their planent from them. In the end, you would find out the invaders were from a place called Earth. What actually inspired me on that idea, was a friend telling me that our "top minds" had discussed and study the whole alien encounter thing, and decided that if aliens contacted us, it would never be for a good reason. It would be to mean us harm in some way. My reaction was, "Yeah, they think that because that's exactly what we [humans] would do." Then it hit me, you know, that would make a good story.

While I don't think Firefly needs aliens, I do believe in sentient alien life. I don't necessarily think it's in our own galaxy or even particularly close. As someone else mentioned, it would most likely be too far away for our species to ever meet, even with advanced space travel capabilities. The Universe is very vast. I think it's very egocentric to think we would be the only life or only intelligent life.

1. If you believe God designed the Universe, then as others have pointed out, it's a terrible waste of space - just doesn't make sense.

2. If you think there is no God and it's all evolution, then it still makes sense that life would evolve. It would almost have to evolve. It could and most likely would be very different from life on this planet. I even think scientist are pretty short-sighted to think that a planet would have to have a very similar atmosphere and climate to our own in order for life to evolve.

One of the main concepts behind the theory of evolution is that life adapts to the environment, not the other way around. Just because life on this planet could not live there, doesn't mean it couldn't have it's own ecosystem with creatures that evolved to live under those conditions. Am I making sense?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 11:50 AM

MICHAELANGELO

Great thread, and i echo about 95% of y'all.

Adding aliens would ruin the show. Humans are strange & diverse enough.

Secondly, they cost too much! In a TV show they end up being humans with a bumpy nose or vestigial horns & yellow skin... ruttin lame. If you are gonna do aliens, *DO* aliens, not Joe Schmoe actor with a bit more makeup on.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 11:55 AM

FERT1

Quote:
As someone else-thread posted, aliens are too often used as shorthand stereotypes (all Klingons are stamped from this mold, all Vulcans from this mold, etc). I want a series that gives us some aliens with as much individuality as humans. Yeah, let humans be good, bad, and morally ambiguous, but let the other species do the same.

You just described Babylon 5. That was my first thought when I read your post. Think about it. Of the Centauri, the main characters you had on the show were Londo and Vir. Vir chose the high road, and Londo chose the low road. But...Londo wasn't entirely a villain. In fact, he was a very complex character whom you felt sorry for at times, even though he did some really despicable things. He was victim as much as villain, and in the end realized his mistakes, when it was too late, at least for him. He even had heroic moments. He was a very complex and layered character. He came across as very...human. All the characters on that show were 3 dimensional, and all evolved and grew as people, (so to speak). A very well done show if you've never seen it!

Now having said all that, I like Firefly just fine without the aliens. Why? Because it's original, and it makes a certain sense. Even if you believe there is alien life out there, when first exploring the universe, the likelihood of encountering it would be pretty slim. After all the tired old sterotypes and Star Trek aliens with speed bumps on their head, Joss's verse was quite refreshing, very new and different. That's one of the things I've always liked about Joss's projects. You can count on something new and refreshing, not the same old thing that has been rehashed a million times.

I've had an idea for some time for a storyline that I think would make a good SF book. Yes, it's very similar to an old Twilight Zone episode, but that is not what inspired me. The story would be of an alien invasion, similar to War of the Worlds, with cruel, heartless aliens that think nothing of killing off the people to take their planent from them. In the end, you would find out the invaders were from a place called Earth. What actually inspired me on that idea, was a friend telling me that our "top minds" had discussed and studied the whole alien encounter thing, and decided that if aliens contacted us, it would never be for a good reason. It would be to mean us harm in some way. My reaction was, "Yeah, they think that because that's exactly what we [humans] would do." Then it hit me, you know, that would make a good story.

While I don't think Firefly needs aliens, I do believe in sentient alien life. I don't necessarily think it's in our own galaxy or even particularly close. As someone else mentioned, it would most likely be too far away for our species to ever meet, even with advanced space travel capabilities. The Universe is very vast. I think it's very egocentric to think we would be the only life or only intelligent life.

1. If you believe God designed the Universe, then as others have pointed out, it's a terrible waste of space - just doesn't make sense.

2. If you think there is no God and it's all evolution, then it still makes sense that life would evolve. It would almost have to evolve. It could and most likely would be very different from life on this planet. I even think scientist are pretty short-sighted to think that a planet would have to have a very similar atmosphere and climate to our own in order for life to evolve.

One of the main concepts behind the theory of evolution is that life adapts to the environment, not the other way around. Just because life on this planet could not live there, doesn't mean it couldn't have it's own ecosystem with creatures that evolved to live under those conditions. Am I making sense?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 12:18 PM

KIZYR

Quote:
Originally posted by ThePistonEngine:
But I disagree with those who say it undermines the viewers ability to connect on human emotions. Babylon 5 was a great series with aliens, at least the first two seasons (definately not the last two)

...
......touché

B5 was great in that regard. Probably the paragon of your more 'classic', unblended sci-fi. I think it's a lot of what was reiterated in this thread about B5's aliens being just as diverse as humans, mostly.

Quote:
Originally posted by Fert1:
1. If you believe God designed the Universe ... it's a terrible waste of space

2. If you think there is no God and it's all evolution, then it still makes sense that life would evolve.

Ok, I'd like to chime in on this tangent of the discussion, since I find it most interesting. That and I believe God designed the universe through the natural laws that we've been discovering for the past 20,000 years, evolution included (then again, my thoughts on evolution as a theory are too long-winded, so I'll skip it for now).

I believe that alien life is possible. I think any shred of evidence, right down to the Martian rocks with evidence of extraterrestrial bacteria, is enough to firmly place alien life within the possible category.

Plus which, religiously, I see nothing that'd limit God from creating life anywhere and everywhere, on up 'til sentient life evolved. Scientifically, evolution isn't supposed to be a localized theory, but a generally-applicable one; therefore it doesn't make much sense to completely rule it out once we leave the atmosphere. Sure, there are factors that would inhibit life--heat, lack of heat, lack of water, etc. But it's not far-fetched to think that somewhere in this universe exists a few planets in a similar situation as Earth, at least as far as things like the presence of water and carbon are concerned.

By the way, before the Renaissance period, in some churches the idea of a round world was prohibited because it would mean the possible existence of other people who hadn't received God's revelations. And that would open up too many theological questions. So, some folks have used religion to limit how big the world--or 'verse--can be. KF

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 12:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fert1:
I've had an idea for some time for a storyline that I think would make a good SF book. Yes, it's very similar to an old Twilight Zone episode, but that is not what inspired me. The story would be of an alien invasion, similar to War of the Worlds, with cruel, heartless aliens that think nothing of killing off the people to take their planent from them. In the end, you would find out the invaders were from a place called Earth. What actually inspired me on that idea, was a friend telling me that our "top minds" had discussed and study the whole alien encounter thing, and decided that if aliens contacted us, it would never be for a good reason. It would be to mean us harm in some way. My reaction was, "Yeah, they think that because that's exactly what we [humans] would do." Then it hit me, you know, that would make a good story.

That has been done before, you mentioned The Twilight Zone, Outer Limits had one where they pointed out the invaders were from Earth to begin with. (The twist, becasue they always have one, was that the place they were invading was more or less a campground and the race was actually far more advanced than humans, and when the people came to pick up their kids they were pissed.)

I don't actually like either show, and I think it can probably be done much better than they did it.

I'm not trying to talk you out of your story, btw.

-
-

The sci-fi thing I've had in my head was one where there were simply people, a lost colony in a space faring future, and they had grown into two groups, one of which had the ultimate version of an, "us and them," mentality and they had a concept that I think is pretty alien, perhaps even more so than most aliens in sci-fi. It was that they were "us versus them" and never "us vs. us" no matter what.

So when the colony was found, and the explorers who found it tried to overthrow the people in charge because of moral differences the ones in charge wouldn't punish or harm them in any way because the explorers had certain genetic markers making them a part of "us."

I don't think anyone's ever done that. The closest I can think of is the Deep Space Nine creed, "No changeling has ever harmed another." But that is hardly the same as members of a very violent society saying, "No matter what you do to us, even if you kill some of us, we will not harm you."

Which is sort of what I mean by human beings being alien, you can see that some people might do that, the roots of it exist here and now, but if you saw a culture doing that, a group of people who would kill an outsider for little or no reason getting beaten to death (or some such) without a fight because the ones doing it shared a couple of gene sequences, wouldn't that seem alien?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 12:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MichaelAngelo:
Secondly, they cost too much! In a TV show they end up being humans with a bumpy nose or vestigial horns & yellow skin... ruttin lame. If you are gonna do aliens, *DO* aliens, not Joe Schmoe actor with a bit more makeup on.

One of the things about Aliens that I like, one of the many things, is that there is a reason the aliens are bipedal beyond the fact that they are people in suits.

The reason is the same reason that cloning Ripley produced an alien, and the one born of a dog was different than the ones born of people.

The aliens were produced not just by the host's body, but by the host's genetics. Some traits were taken. It always seemed like a nice touch, just giving a reason why they look like people in funny suits. I also liked the fact that instead of making the creatures look alien only by costuming they put effort into making the body movements alien too.

On the other hand an explanation isn't enough Star Trek had an episode in The Next Generation to try to explain why everyone looked like a human in makeup, but it really didn’t make it any more believable.

Just the idea that all aliens would communicate vocally is kind of shortsighted, there are animals here on earth that communicate (to some degree) based on color, you can fit in a lot more shades than you can phonemes so why not have things talk like that?

-

There are some limits to alien life, there's only so many legs you need (but I have no idea what the limit is), if you're in a cold place it helps to be warm blooded, if you're a predator you only really need two eyes (though you certainly can have more) and they should be pointed in the direction you generally move. It goes on, but the limits are hardly enough to make all aliens look like people. My point is that that should be taken into account when making up an alien, if something lives underwater for God’s sake make it hydrodynamic, for example.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 12:43 PM

Someday everything will work correctly and there will be no more double posts. Perhaps three days after the end of everything.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 12:48 PM

MICHAELANGELO

Quote:
Originally posted by Fert1:
One of the main concepts behind the theory of evolution is that life adapts to the environment, not the other way around. Just because life on this planet could not live there, doesn't mean it couldn't have it's own ecosystem with creatures that evolved to live under those conditions. Am I making sense?

We continue finding life on *this* planet where scientists didn't think for a second it could survive... fact is indeed stranger than fiction.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 12:49 PM

PSYCHICRIVER

Little groggy.

PsychicRiver

"Two by two, hands of blue."

"We'll take care of each other. I'll knit!"
"I swallowed a bug."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 1:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by PsychicRiver:
Little groggy.

Congratualations, you get the, "First person to answer the actual question," award.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 4:35 PM

Quote:
...I think that it is a bit naive to think that we are the only species in the universe & that Earth is the only populated planet...

We haven't found any other life out there, so until we do, it isn't really naive to believe we're alone. I've noticed that many are quick to believe in a universe teeming with life even though there's no evidence to support it, and I wonder how many of these same people reject the idea of God or creation because they think it unscientific.

Quote:
...But I saw Joss's quote about sentient beings the other day and wondered how many believed it. I certainly don't. Like Jodi Foster said in "Contact.": "I don't know if ther's life on other planets...If not, it seems like an awful waste of space."...

I agree with Joss. As to whether it is wasted space, it can be largely empty without being a waste. Artists and graphic designers know the power of empty space: it draws attention to everything else. Like a diamond on black velvet, Earth itself is very beautiful against the black of space. We saw this for the first time when we went to the moon. I believe in a very creative God who does things on a grand scale because he can. God may have created the vastness of the universe because he liked it as a canvas for Earth. Maybe he created it for us to appreciate his power and beauty. Or, maybe he created it as a playground for us to explore.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 4:35 PM

Quote:
...I think that it is a bit naive to think that we are the only species in the universe & that Earth is the only populated planet...

Quote:
...But I saw Joss's quote about sentient beings the other day and wondered how many believed it. I certainly don't. Like Jodi Foster said in "Contact.": "I don't know if ther's life on other planets...If not, it seems like an awful waste of space."...

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, February 3, 2006 8:07 PM