(cont...)<br>So Cory...if all this really is the
case, then a "Steampunk" story would be a story that
radically juxtaposes things like H-Bombs & rocketships into
an age where they don't belong in order to make
enlightening points about both the technology AND the time
period. (In a sense, all "Steampunk" stories are
alternative history). This is why the distinction is
valuable: Verne and Wells were writing very traditional
"what if?" SF--the same kind we write today when we
speculate about what a trip to Mars would be like or how a
working cold fusion formula would change society. But the
first person to say "Why don't we take this totally
outdated speculative book written in 1875 and film it AS
IS today, WITHOUT updating it" made a tremendous
mental breakthrough. Whoever did it unquestionably
INVENTED something new...and that new thing causes our
heads to swim in a way that is very analogous to what
Gibson did with VR in his cyberpunks. THEREFORE...I
suggest that, though a "Steampunk" work can certainly be
BASED on an actual 19th century book, 19th century
books themselves cannot be Steampunk. And I hereby move
that we limit ourselves to using the word thus!
;-)<br><br>Felinius: I hope maybe you will see now that Walt Disney
DID NOT just "remake a Vernian treasure." The
hitherto undiscovered "retro" uses for Verne's obsolete
speculations was A BOLT OUT OF THE BLUE...completely
disconnected from anything that Verne contributed (though
Verne's plot was definitely used). As to what you guys
may or may not think about Walt Disney
personally...hey, you gotta give credit where credit is due. And
his "20,000 Leagues" is undeniably a
masterpiece...even if you're not yet convinced that it has quite the
watershed importance I give it.<br><br>Ain't this FUN?