User:Karsten Sill
Quoting episodes/films
Minor question: I frequently quote two episodes in one footnote, is this a possible way? Or is using a semicolon better? e.g:
- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, 4 June 1982 and Star Trek III: The Search for Mr Spock, 1 June 1984.
Overview (for now)
1 Introduction
2 Science Fiction Film and Genre
- 2.1 What is science fiction?
- 2.1.1 The Novum & Postmodernism
- 2.2 Genre Theory
3 Star Trek sui generis (most parts are quite short, still needs some work on my side)
- 3.1 The Cage and The Original Series
- 3.2 The Next Generation
- 3.3 Deep Space Nine and Voyager (proves that the universe becomes an open text)
- 3.4 Enterprise (discrepancies within the genre...)
- 3.5 Star Trek Films (proves major differences between series and films)
(the following section roughly prove that the Star Trek is consistent, closed)
- 3.6 The Principle Of Recurrence (characters reappear in various places for certain reasons)
- 3.7 Episodes Recycled (the same as above but in relation to episodes, story arcs)
- 3.8 The Mirror Universe (???)
- 3.9 The Prime Directive (is the prime directive a genre convention? needs to be proved)
4 Virtual Realities
- 4.1 Illusions
- 4.1.1 The logic of illusions (relates to Mr Spock and how he prevents genre changes)
- 4.2 The Holodeck
- this chapter should either verify the central question, Star Trek tolerates various genres on different levels
5 Genre Characters (stupid title?)
- 5.1 The Alien Stereotype (exists in every series with minor modifications)
- 5.2 I'm a doctor, not a... (the doctors)
- 5.3 further examples of characters, red shirts
- again proves that the Star Trek series' are consistent regarding the characters
6 Parodies - should underline the results of 3. and 5.
7 Conclusion
The Fragestellung
1. Does the Star Trek universe comply with genre conventions/inner logic? Genre conventions are either limitations (pessimistic) or a clear distinction from other genres (optimistic)
2. The inner logic of the universe utters itself in consistency and credibility
3. the audience is fond of the characters elements that adhere to this logic (basically what we talked about yesterday: heroic captain, familiar crew, technology, a homely starship, Vulcans, androids and borgs that almost(!) always act in the same manner
4. there are three possible ways I will try to prove:
- a) the Star Trek universe is consistent, logical, credible although it opens itself towards other genres
- b) the universe is not consistent due to the influence of other genres
- c) the universe is a genre of its own, its logic cannot be mapped on other sf universes (Star Trek), parodies subvert Star Trek's genre conventions and by doing so they consolidate 'the Star Trek genre'
- Nochmals danke nochmal für deine Hilfe Olaf! Mittlerweile sind einige Dinge wesentlich klarer geworden. Habe gerade eine längere Einleitung mit Fragen geschrieben und beschäftige mich mit der Frage, was 'genre conventions' überhaupt sind...
- I read your thoughts under 4 with delight - you have moved to questions and possible answers and with that into a field of research... --Olaf Simons 15:57, 16 March 2008 (CET)
Questions
I rather put them here, before I forget
Formal stuff
- how do I address the reader? I, we, one..., personal or impersonal (one), I used impersonal before but personal is much easier
- Everything is possible. The question is rather what kind of adress this is to be, how the first person is handled. What does it do in your text.
- how to quote epsiodes? Time signatures?
- The first quote comes with the episode and date, so that I know where we are. The second als following just the short title.
Genre theory
- there's a lot about literary and film genre theory
- as I said earlier - no general theories (if you do not plan to prove them wrong). Deal with the problem you define and define the problem with a look at the object.
- I'd rather like to give a short account on genre theory discourse and point the stuff that is actually applicable instead of repeating countless voices from theorists - well, that's a large amount and I don't how to deal with it. I already quoted/summarized some opinions: Aristotle, Plato, Goethe, triads, Genette, Croce
- The question is really what do you need the theory for. The answer must stand for itself, yet if the theory hepled you to get it, you'll have to bring it into the game.
Chapters
- not sure if I should give an overview of science fiction film, seems dispensable (???)
- As above: develop the question, deal with it directly. Generalities I can get from anywhere else are not necessary.
- the overview draft is much too long: currently I am planning three core chapters: virtual realities, time travel and "sui generis" (the Star Trek series & films)
- Think of what your chapters will prove.
- extra (though this may be too much, irrelevant): parodies, star wars
- Might be extremely interesting as they give a clear concept of the genre by subverting it.
- I have absolutely no estimation of chapter length, genre theory may fill 20 pages max, virtual realities covers 3 episodes (from the presentation) and some more on the side, time travel maybe 3-4, sui generis probably 20 pages as well... I am really in the dark here...
- The perfect chapter length is that which allows me to follow your thought. You have to ask a question and to dive into materials - and you have to summarize your result. The good chapter has a central thought. --Olaf Simons 14:15, 11 March 2008 (CET)
- Your chapters do not tell me what your results might be, what kind of question you might ask, what kind of investigation I am to expect... ---Olaf Simons 14:24, 11 March 2008 (CET)
Off Topic
Articles on Shakespeare: http://www.independent.ie/education/shakespeare/
http://www.uni-kiel.de/medien/stj/bibliographie/framesseite.htm
