Science Fiction Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Copyright
There is a potential copyright issue in that the Darkover_series#The_Ages_of_Chaos section is a literal word-for-word copy of the The Ages of Chaos section of A Reader's Guide to Darkover that's found at the front of Darkover novels such as Traitor's Sun (1999). I am not familiar enough with Darkover to write my own description of this era. For now I don't think it needs to be tagged {{copyvio}} as it may well qualify as "fair use" though the text should at least be attributed to the source. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 05:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I re-wrote that one - but all (or most) of the others also are copyvio and need to be cleaned up. See: http://members.fortunecity.com/arwen_e/ko/marionb.html#biblio - Davodd 17:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
The Alton Gift
I have a copy of The Alton Gift but am wondering about the existing series structure.
- Marion_Zimmer_Bradley#Series lists this as part of the The Children of Kings trilogy (which only has two books).
- Darkover_series#After_the_Comyn_.28Against_the_Terrans:_The_Second_Age.29 lists this as part of After the Comyn (Against the Terrans: The Second Age)
- The book itself states
- A Novel of Darkover
- The long-awaited sequel to Traitor's Sun.
- Just before the title page is a "Marion Zimmer Bradley From DAW Books" page that has a section called Novels of Darkover which lists Exile's Song, The Shadow Matrix, and Traitor's Sun.
- There is no mention of The Children of Kings trilogy nor After the Comyn (Against the Terrans: The Second Age).
- Deborah J. Ross' web site [1] mentions The Children of Kings but also "there will be three new books set in 'modern' Darkover, each one a 'stand-alone'" implying The Children of Kings is not an official series name. Actually, she has it in a section titled Modern Darkover set in the same type/size as The Clingfire Trilogy meaning that may be a more appropriate name. Marc Kupper (talk) (contribs) 00:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
a lot missing
Surely some introductory material discussing themes, tone, style etc of the novels before plunging into the chronology would be useful? And why is there no discussion of the novels, in the order they were written, as opposed to the chronology? This article is treating the material as if it were historical, not fictional. Weird. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.62.47 (talk) 03:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
I think I have fixed at least half of this -- I think it's clear now that we are discussing fiction, not history. However, I don't feel qualified to discuss style and tone issues. The themes are discussed in the sections giving Bradley's time periods. As far as discussing them in the order in which they were written, I don't know how you could make sense of this to the average Wikipedia reader. Bradley started writing in the middle of the timeline, then moved into the past and future as inspiration struck. Symphony Girl (talk) 15:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Source for the new chronology?
- Reflecting on that some books state they are in one era, and then there is evidence with story lines lining up to support where it goes while the chronology in the books state there are a different era, the books are in order as their story falls into place. (Not the chronology in the beginning of some of the books.)
This sentence is a mess and doesn't belong in Wikipedia. Ignoring the terrible grammar for now (ugh)... So, instead of being ordered by the chronology as stated by the author, the books are ordered by ... what, exactly? Is there some evidence to support the claim that the books state that they are in one era but actually are in another? Because, the ACTUAL chronology seems fine to me. This made-up one here in Wikipedia has no basis. - 207.118.127.145 (talk) 04:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I think I've fixed the sentence in question.Symphony Girl (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, further reading has shown me that inconsistencies do indeed exist. HOWEVER, my question now is, on the inconsistent chronologies, are they signed "--M.Z.B."? If not, I would not regard them as being "official". - 207.118.127.145 (talk) 04:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Hawkmistress
I disagree with leaving Hawkmistress under Hundred Kingdoms period, I think its more in age of chaos, also my czech edition of it says so too.
Robin_WH —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robin WH (talk • contribs) 19:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Even english cover of the book (used here on wiki pages under Hawkmistress title) says Age of chaos. If noone will say anything about it in 30 days, I will so modify main Darkover series article and subarticle Hawkmistress to display this book under Age of Chaos category.
Robin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robin WH (talk • contribs) 12:41, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
- The period of the Hundred Kingdoms comes at the tail end of the Ages of Chaos - which end with the signing of the Compact. Hakmistress thus falls very securely into the Hundred Kingdoms period. --KagamiNoMiko (talk) 09:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- {{{SPOILER}}}Hawkmistress ends with the signing of the Compact. Put it in either period. 24.27.31.170 (talk) 02:31, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
I moved Hawkmistress into the Ages of Chaos and someone immediately moved it back into the Hundred Kingdoms. The chronology section in the front of many of the modern books indicate that the Ages of Chaos is correct, but then if you read Zandru's Forge, which overlaps Hawkmistress, you'd have to place it back in the Hundred Kingdoms. I think the real problem is that Bradley did not really care about the timeline as much as her readers did.Symphony Girl (talk) 03:41, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Both List_of_Darkover_books and Hawkmistress! state the book is part of the Ages of Chaos, but this page places it under The Hundred Kingdoms. I don't know the answer, but I think the actual situation is quite confusing... 93.62.153.142 (talk) 08:59, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Ghost Wind
Ref. 26 says:
- The concept of a "ghost wind" was introduced in the 1970 novel, The Winds of Darkover. Incidents involving ghost winds appear in Two to Conquer, Darkover Landfall, The Forbidden Tower and several of the short stories.
Well that first sentence is just wrong. Both the Ghost Wind and the Ya-men (mentioned in the paragraph the ref. refers to) are already in The Door Through Space (1961), set on the planet Wolf in the same universe as Darkover (which is mentioned in that novel). The Dry-towns also show up there --- in fact, both them and the Ya-men (though not the G.W.) come from the "Bird of Prey" 1957 original of The Door Through Space, along with a number of other parallels. But somehow all this got ~mysteriously~ shunted to Darkover some years later. I would sort this out but I seem to be too dumb to know how to mess with refs :( Idontcareanymore (talk) 16:09, 15 November 2013 (UTC)