Talk:Diaspora (novel)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I modified the synopsis a bit -- my recollection (seemingly backed up on Egan's home page http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ ) is that the novel is much more focused on the polis' desire to understand the cascading cosmic catastrophes and that the ET aspect is a consequence of that. Probably a better job could still be done by someone more intimately familiar with the book. Jgm 16:03, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Loved this book.
This book was an excellent read. I just read it a few months ago and it's not lost anything with the passage of time... :-)
[edit] "Polises"
Wasn't "polities" the plural of "polis" in the novel? (Just from memory: I don't have my copy to hand) -- Karada 17:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nope. End of chapter 1 -- "Welcome to the Coalition of Polises". 4.253.46.181 22:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 16 December 2006 rewrite
I've just submitted a rewrite/expansion of the article, and included a provisional infobox (it's the first infobox I've done), which is based on the paperback version I have. It's a Gollancz paperback, with a yellow cover, featuring a reddish, thermal-imagey comet and a starry background. Strangely, the artist isn't credited anywhere on the book. What a book!
Gardener of Geda 06:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 23 December 2006 update
I've just submitted a new version, with a completed infobox and a scan of the cover. It's not the first-edition cover; I couldn't find one that I considered to be "legal" to upload, so I just scanned my own copy.
Gardener of Geda 15:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] hardware
Isn't it mentioned somewhere that the polis has backups scattered about the Solar System? —Tamfang 23:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] spoiler warning
Shouldn't there be one somewhere before the plot summary?
[edit] pronouns
What's meant by "virtualized gender-neutral pronouns"? —Tamfang 22:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I changed this and included information from the gender-neutral pronouns article. I don't think the "v" in ve/vis/ver stands for anything at all. -Father Inire 22:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- I think I see. Isn't there an asexual (corporeal) character in Distress who uses ve? —Tamfang 08:40, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Yes, and Keri Hulme, who coined the term, identifies as an asexual. I don't remember whether the term pops up in any of Egan's other work featuring intelligent software.-Father Inire 02:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
-
[edit] new sections at the bottom, please
I just finished this book, and I've got my copy on hand. This whole article is really very.... well, A) it doesn't describe the book very well, B) what it does describe is so full of spoilers it isn't even worth putting in a spoiler warning, you might as well just say, "don't read this article if you also intend to read this book." and, C) some of it is just plain uninformative. I've gone ahead and done a significant rewrite, I've tried to streamline things as much as possible, I've added in important information and removed unimportant information, and I got rid of a number of absurdly, rediculously large spoilers. Some sample modifications: I've significantly altered the plot section to not give away large chunks of the plot (neutron messages, Transmuters, that sort of thing), I've removed a profusion of characters from the characters section, keeping only those characters who either appear before the Diaspora or whose mention cannot give away plot points not already given away in readily available publicity materials (Egan's website). I don't know how much information on Kozuch Theory should be in the plot summary, but I'd like to move the gender-neutral pronouns bit (it's only like a few sentences) to the plot summary right after the bit on the invented Kozuch Theory. If any of you think any of these changes were bad and damaged the article irreperably, feel free to change back (not revert, change back specifically the parts you disagree with, please) but I'd like to know why, just out of curiosity.
No offence to people who have contributed to this thing before me, but when I picked up this book I was horrified to realise just how much this article gave away of the plot and how little justice it seemed to do (again, no offence, it just struck me as emphasising all the wrong things).
P.S. I'd like to include some sort of summary of the book's... "gist," not just the plot's gist but the ideas that float around in the book like the future of life in a space-faring world and of personhood and so on, which I hope can be discussed without giving away major plot points, considering how important they are to interpretations of the book itself. Thanks for your contributions, all.216.129.211.105 (talk) 07:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- You read the article before reading the book? --Closedmouth (talk) 08:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I think that you have done the community a disservice by stripping out information from this article. I just finished the book and read this article in the hopes of finding some background information on the characters and concepts. To say that the information ought to be stripped out to prevent plot spoilage for those who haven't read the book, I think misses the point entirely. If you read a wikipedia entry about a book before you read the book, aren't you doing things in the wrong order? In any case, what possible benefit could there be in removing certain character profiles? That certainly seemed to me to be a haphazard and poorly considered edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.196.154.118 (talk) 05:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- A lot of the stuff I removed, I felt, was not very informative. An example of a character profile I got rid of was a one sentence introduction to the Contingency Handler. I can't remember all the others. Before I made the modifications, the article seemed to imply that the book was solely about hunting down aliens. The plot description went something like (abridged): "the earth is destroyed, and the Diaspora is formed to look for aliens, and then they discover a message hidden in neutrons, and then they discover a way to leave the universe." What sort of background information were you looking for? I've been interested in modifying the sections on polis concepts and polises, just to... clean them up a bit, perhaps make them a little bit truer to the index in the back of the book. Any suggestions? Should there be a section on Kozuch Theory?216.129.211.105 (talk) 08:45, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
I modified the synopsis a bit -- my recollection (seemingly backed up on Egan's home page http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/ ) is that the novel is much more focused on the polis' desire to understand the cascading cosmic catastrophes and that the ET aspect is a consequence of that. Probably a better job could still be done by someone more intimately familiar with the book. Jgm 16:03, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Loved this book.
This book was an excellent read. I just read it a few months ago and it's not lost anything with the passage of time... :-)
[edit] "Polises"
Wasn't "polities" the plural of "polis" in the novel? (Just from memory: I don't have my copy to hand) -- Karada 17:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
- Nope. End of chapter 1 -- "Welcome to the Coalition of Polises". 4.253.46.181 22:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 16 December 2006 rewrite
I've just submitted a rewrite/expansion of the article, and included a provisional infobox (it's the first infobox I've done), which is based on the paperback version I have. It's a Gollancz paperback, with a yellow cover, featuring a reddish, thermal-imagey comet and a starry background. Strangely, the artist isn't credited anywhere on the book. What a book!
Gardener of Geda 06:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 23 December 2006 update
I've just submitted a new version, with a completed infobox and a scan of the cover. It's not the first-edition cover; I couldn't find one that I considered to be "legal" to upload, so I just scanned my own copy.
Gardener of Geda 15:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] hardware
Isn't it mentioned somewhere that the polis has backups scattered about the Solar System? —Tamfang 23:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] spoiler warning
Shouldn't there be one somewhere before the plot summary?
[edit] Gabriel
I didn't edit the article, because maybe this is a matter of opinion (though I have a faint recollection of it being stated explicitly), but isn't the fact that Gabriel has a gender a consequence of being a Carter-Zimmerman native (and thus more fond of certain ancestral conventions) rather than an "eccentric" personal choice? Maybe I missed something, but that was my impression.72.49.11.230 (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Diaspora(GollanczPB).jpg
Image:Diaspora(GollanczPB).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Gleisner definition
The meaning of "gleisner" has been removed a couple of times by German-speakers unfamiliar with the word. The word does appear in some German-English dictionaries, but not all of them, so I imagine it's just an obscure word. As a native English speaker, I'll admit that there may be many words in the English dictionary which I'm not familiar with either. The link to the Webster's site works just fine as far as I can tell, and I've restored it. Father Inire (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think the question is, does giving the German definition of the word provide any information about the subject of the article (the novel)? I'd say no; there's no indication from Egan (that I know of) that the word was chosen based upon any meaning in any language (of course if there is such an indication it could be included here and referenced). As it stands this is just random digression or, at best, original research. Jgm (talk) 02:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- I'm with Jgm. There's nothing within the novel to explain the origin of the name. So unless there's some source out there that makes this connection (with all the usual caveats about the quality of that source), this definition shouldn't be in here. I would be interested to know if Egan chose the name on the basis of some translation or the "sound" of it, but unless we can source a meaning, it's just WP:OR. As an aside, the cited German definition sheds no light whatsoever on the gleisner's of the novel. It's difficult to see how the terms "hypocrite" or "dissembler" apply to them as they are portrayed in the novel. I'll remove the text for now, but we can discuss further here as required. --Plumbago (talk) 07:41, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- The definition itself isn't original research, so in my opinion it would be trivia at worst (and there's plenty of trivia in Wikipedia articles - I thought it was better to incorporate this trivia into the article rather than start a trivia section). I loaned someone my copy of Diaspora, so I can't go back and check the text for now, but as I recall the fleshers and polis dwellers are somewhat prejudiced against the gleisners to the extent that they're essentially banned from living on Earth, and the polis dwellers have little to do with them. My interpretation (this part is indeed original research) is that the fleshers and the polis dwellers see the gleisners as hypocritical and dishonest because they imitate biological life in form while their minds exist "only" as software - not totally embracing either "pure" experience. Father Inire (talk) 17:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I'd buy this explanation. Certainly, as far as the fleshers and polis-dwellers are concerned, the gleisners fall between two stools: they reject biology (unlike the fleshers), but wish to maintain close contact with the "real world" (unlike the polis dwellers). Anyway, while I would completely agree that WP has far (far!) more egregious examples of WP:TRIVIA, I'm reluctant to add this here because of its WP:OR overtones. Perhaps we need to contact Egan (presumably he has an e-mail address?), proffer appropriate and abundantly-justified praise, and then pop the question? :-) --Plumbago (talk) 14:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I read somewhere that gleisner means 'one who wants to have it both ways'. Wish I could remember where; it's not in my dictionary. The applicability is obvious. —Tamfang (talk) 07:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] motivation of the Introdus
The repeated hostility to exponential replicators (as represented, at one point, by a Coca-Cola can!), and a mention that the fleshers have unlimited discretion in modifying the environment only within small enclaves, suggest to me that the original Introdus – a scary leap into the unknown for most people – was driven by environmental collapse. Is there anything else to support or contradict this? Is there a passage stating or implying that the biosphere had "recovered" since 2100? —Tamfang (talk) 07:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)