Editing 1491: Stories of the Past and Future

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 14: Line 14:
 
For works set in the future, particularly in the near future, there's a real possibility that audiences will still read or watch it past the date in which is was set, allowing them to compare the real world of this era to the one the author projected. This doesn't make the work less valuable, necessarily, but it does make the limits of such speculation painfully obvious, and tends to make the [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Zeerust future presented there look dated and quaint]. Randall labels these futuristic works as "obsolete".
 
For works set in the future, particularly in the near future, there's a real possibility that audiences will still read or watch it past the date in which is was set, allowing them to compare the real world of this era to the one the author projected. This doesn't make the work less valuable, necessarily, but it does make the limits of such speculation painfully obvious, and tends to make the [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Zeerust future presented there look dated and quaint]. Randall labels these futuristic works as "obsolete".
  
For works set in the past, there's an opposite and somewhat more subtle effect.  Once the work itself is old enough, audiences tend to forget that they were intended as historical fiction in the first place. If an old work is set in the past, it's often assumed that they were set in their own time, not in the still more distant past. That impacts how we experience the work, because we tend to assume that it's a faithful representation of its own time, not a later interpretation that was intended to be old (and possibly nostalgic) even in its own time.
+
For works set in the past, there's an opposite and somewhat more subtle effect.  Once the work itself is old enough, audiences tend to forget that they were intended as historical fiction in the first place. If an old work is set in the past, it's often assumed that they were set in their own time, not in the still more distant past. That impacts how we experience the work, because we tend to assume that it's a faithful representation of it's own time, not a later interpretation that was intended to be old (and possibly nostalgic) even in it's own time.
  
On top of this, in a similar situation to the failed attempt at {{w|futurology}}, for future-facing works of fiction, even a conscientiously faithful 'historic' film can age badly. Later understanding of previously hazy historical situations can be developed between the time of the fictional work being authored and your experience of it.
+
To demonstrate those impacts, this chart sorts various works by the year they were created, graphed against how far in the past or future they were originally set.  Lines on the chart are added to separate when each work ceases to work as either a prediction or as a [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PeriodPiece period piece]. For future works, the cut-off is obvious: if it was set in a year prior to the current year, we know that the predictions are obsolete (and can easily determine how accurate or inaccurate that future is).  Hence, at the time the chart was written (in 2015), works like ''1984'' ''2001: A Space Odyssey'' are obsolete, while works like''Star Trek'', which take place in a more distant future, are still theoretically possible. (''Back to the Future Part II'' is deliberately right on the line, as it was set in 2015).   
 
 
To demonstrate those impacts, this chart sorts various works by the year they were created, graphed against how far in the past or future they were originally set.  Lines on the chart are added to separate when each work ceases to work as either a prediction or as a [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PeriodPiece period piece]. For future works, the cut-off is obvious: if it was set in a year prior to the current year, we know that the predictions are obsolete (and can easily determine how accurate or inaccurate that future is).  Hence, at the time the chart was written (in 2015), works like ''1984'' and ''2001: A Space Odyssey'' are obsolete, while works like ''Star Trek'', which take place in a more distant future, are still theoretically possible. (''Back to the Future Part II'' is deliberately right on the line, as it was set in 2015).   
 
  
 
For the past works, Randall sets the cut-off as when the work itself is older than the events in question were when it was first written/made.  Hence, modern audiences are unlikely to realize that the Epic of Gilgamesh was intended to sound ancient, even when it was new, or that novels like ''Les Miserables'' were intended as historical fiction, or even that films like ''Chinatown'' or shows like ''Happy Days'' were intended as period pieces when they were made.  To modern audiences, we just see an old work set in an old time, and tend to assume that the two periods were the same.
 
For the past works, Randall sets the cut-off as when the work itself is older than the events in question were when it was first written/made.  Hence, modern audiences are unlikely to realize that the Epic of Gilgamesh was intended to sound ancient, even when it was new, or that novels like ''Les Miserables'' were intended as historical fiction, or even that films like ''Chinatown'' or shows like ''Happy Days'' were intended as period pieces when they were made.  To modern audiences, we just see an old work set in an old time, and tend to assume that the two periods were the same.
  
The setup of the chart points to the reality that, in process of time, more and more works will cross those lines. Future audiences will likely assume that films like ''Apollo 13'' and ''Schindler's List'' were made around the time of the events in question. And modern science fiction works, if they're still remembered in the future, will become just as obsolete as past works.  And Randall even indicates "this chart" on the chart, apparently acknowledging that it will become dated as time goes by.  
+
The setup of the chart points to the reality that, in process of time, more and more works will cross those lines. Future audiences will likely assume that films like ''Apollo 13'' and ''Schindler's List'' were made around the time of the events in question. And modern science fiction works, if they're still remembered in the future, will become just as obsolete as past works ever work.  And Randall even indicates "this chart" on the chart, apparently acknowledging that it will become dated as time goes by.  
  
 
The title text jokes that ''2001'' cuts from prehistoria to the future before ''The Flintstones'' theme can become recognizable. This references the fact that, despite being primarily set in what was then the future, the film opens in the ancient past, thus appearing in both parts of the graph, with one part being very close to ''The Flintstones''. This plays on the fact that one of these was a very serious work and the other a playful animated show that was intended as family comedy.  
 
The title text jokes that ''2001'' cuts from prehistoria to the future before ''The Flintstones'' theme can become recognizable. This references the fact that, despite being primarily set in what was then the future, the film opens in the ancient past, thus appearing in both parts of the graph, with one part being very close to ''The Flintstones''. This plays on the fact that one of these was a very serious work and the other a playful animated show that was intended as family comedy.  

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)