Talk:Invasion literature

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following users are actively contributing to this topic and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: Stbalbach (talk • contribs • email)

Should some note be taken of the alternative history (fiction) writing tradition here? Smerdis of Tlön 14:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Possibly. The genre refers to a specific set of novels between 1871 and 1914 and their notable influences leading up to WWI. One can extend it pre and post Dorking, and there is a section for that in the article, but I think it might be Original Research to label works as part of the genre, so if we do add more material outside the timeframe, it should be not a central theme of the article, but influences and traditions. I've also added alternative history (fiction) to the See Also section. --Stbalbach 23:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] opening paragraph

I think it should be noted in the opening paragraph that this genre appeared right after the Franco-Prussian War rather than having it look like it spontaneously appeared. The unexpected nature of that conflict was one of the main factors in forming the social background that caused the genre's success. I also think that if The Battle of Dorking is one of the seminal works of the genre, a link to that work is relevant. But I'm willing to hear the other side before restoring this information. MK2 14:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The genre took off, or became a notable genre, starting with the appearance of Dorking in 1871. But in fact the roots of the genre existed before the Franco-Prussian war, invasion stories using new technologies go back to the 1780s (in France) with hot air baloons. It would be a mistake to say that the Franco-Prussian war was the roots of the genre. -- Stbalbach 02:57, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I realize The Battle of Dorking was the first manifestation of the genre. But a story doesn't become a popular success for no reason. Its success was due to the anxiety caused by the unexpected outcome of the war. If The Battle of Dorking had been published two years earlier it would have been ignored and forgotten. The article should explain the context of the times in which the events it's describing occurred. MK2 16:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

It does. The Wikipedia:Lead section is just a summary of the article. The article proper discusses the war. Expand on it if you want-- Stbalbach 16:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] England Invaded merge

I proposed the merge as it was an odd orhpaned entry with nothing linked into it that could easily be tagged on the end of the "Notable invasion literature" section. (Emperor 14:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC))

This is a general article about a literary genre. England Invaded is a proper noun which describes a cycle of books by one particular author. We don't merge book articles into genre articles. Books and book cycles have their own articles. I would recommend that England Invaded be merged into the author article, and one or two of those books be listed in the notable invasion literature section. -- Stbalbach 16:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

hmm I just looked at it more closely, England Invaded is a book published in 1977 as a collection of stories from the Invasion Literature period. The problem with listing them individually under "notable invasion literature" in this article is I'm not sure they are all that notable (I don't think any of them are mentioned elsewhere in the article). In which case probably the best thing to do is just leave it as a separate article and link to that article from this article. -- Stbalbach 16:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

As you have discovered it is a single book that reprints various stories from the genre. I can't see any reason why it can't fit in here - if theya ren't notable then the other entry should be deleted which I think is a pity as they are solid contributions to the genre. Perhaps the best idea would be to put the merge tags back and let everyone else decide the best way forward? (Emperor 19:55, 20 July 2006 (UTC))

Notable in the sense that they should be listed in a genre survey article ie. that they are historically significant in the genre, representing milestones or new developments in the genre. However they are certainly notable enough to be in their own article. There is nothing wrong with the current set up, there is no reason to merge these articles (the stories are not significant enough to be part of a genre survey) nor delete the article (the stories are notable enough to have their own article). If you want to include the stories in this article, you need to show why they deserve to be noted. The genre is very large, this is not a "list of" article, it is a survey showing a select few of the most important works. -- Stbalbach 03:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is Alternate History Invasion part of Invasion Literature?

Stbalbach removed all references to alternative history genre, stating: "I've never seen this considered invasion literature - invasion lit is forward looking playing on fears, not historical what-if's".

I want to dispute this. If you consider invasion literature as including only the fictional depiction of a country being invaded in future by real-life hostile countries with the military potential to actually do it, you would be right. But then you should also exclude Science Fiction depictions of invasion from space. Still, The War of the Worlds has always been considered part of invasion literature, and I think rightly so. (It has by the way many similarities with "The Great War in England".) Obviously, people who were effected by the original "War of the Worlds" and the various film and radio adaptations were not actually afraid of an invasion from Mars. The fictional Martians reflected their more concrete real fears. In my view, fictional Nazis rampaging through England and the US, or a fictional Inquisition torturing people in the Twentieth Century because the Armada won in 1588, are reflecting the same. The main thrill of the genre is exactly in showing familiar places where you feel safe as threatened/invaded/conquered by a hostile destructive enemy. Which is the enemy and if he direcly named or is represented by some fictional analogue, and what kind of analogue, are imortant details but still details and not part of the essence. I think the Alternate History invasion has as much place in this genre as the Outer Space invasion.Adam keller 13:17, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, I.F.Clarke is basically the man when it comes the IL genre, he has written a number of scholarly books on it (he is/was a Professor of English at University of Strathclyde and his books are published by Oxford University Press), he is the recognized expert. He's really about the only expert. In the back of his Voices Prophysing War: Future Wars 1763-3749 (1992) he lists all the books published since 1763 in the genre up to 1990 (over 1200 works). None of the books that were listed in this article that I removed does he list (although some of the authors are, but different works). It makes sense, the whole point of the genre is that is about future wars, it is about playing on peoples fears of current events in portraying future events. I think it is original research to say what we personally think should or should not be the scope of the genre and dilutes the value of the article to put in works that we think might be included, even when the recognized expert in the field does not list them. -- Stbalbach 16:03, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not realise that Invasion Literature has such a one clear defining text, one may almost say Scripture. Far be it from me to perform Original Research on Wikipedia, even if these distinctions keeping space invasion in and alternative history out still seem arbitary and senseless.

I found a bit about Clarke's book on the net, and will try to find and read it -it seems quite interesting.

By the way, am I right in understanding that his criteria is simply a depiction of war happening in the future, and that the war depicted need not actually include an invasion? For example, does his list of 1200 books include the many (fortunately all fictional) depcitions of nuclear war, where usually the two sides just destroy each other with bombs and no invasion takes place? Adam keller 08:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Easily enough this particular genre has a solid scholarship and definition behind it, unlike most. Yes nuclear holocaust stories are discussed by Clarke, for example Dr. Strangelove - he says of nuclear holocaust stories:

"that fearful possibility has generated the greatest volume of disaster in futuristic fiction, as Paul Brians has demonstrated with admirable scholarship in his authoritative analysis of these stories, Nuclear Holocausts: Atomic War in Fiction, 1895-1984 (1987). This invaluable book covers the fiction of nuclear warfare..The introductory survey gives an excellent history of origins and developments; and the main part of the book provides accounts and commentaries on more than 800 titles. The information is kept up to date in Nuclear Texts and Contexts, newsletter of the International Society for the Study of Nuclear Texts and Contexts."

Hope this information is helpful, sounds like the makings of a new Wikipedia article Nuclear holocaust literature. Also highly recommend Clarke's Voices Prophesying War, full of good info like that. -- Stbalbach 13:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

There already exists the pretty throfrough article World War III in popular culture covering this subject, to which I made some contributions.Adam keller 16:57, 11 October 2006 (UTC)