Mixing
Is there a term for the science fiction trope where a character lists two historical things and a future thing?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
96
down vote
favorite
In Babylon 5, for example, a character lists famous bombings like "Hiroshima, Dresden, San Diego" with the first items in the list being real and the last being fictional. This dialog technique of casually tying the past into a fictional future seems to be common in franchises with world-building like Star Trek.
Is there a name for the trope where a character specifically lists two real, historical items and then a third fictional one? That always seems to be the pattern.
science-fiction-genre terminology trope
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
 |Â
show 10 more comments
up vote
96
down vote
favorite
In Babylon 5, for example, a character lists famous bombings like "Hiroshima, Dresden, San Diego" with the first items in the list being real and the last being fictional. This dialog technique of casually tying the past into a fictional future seems to be common in franchises with world-building like Star Trek.
Is there a name for the trope where a character specifically lists two real, historical items and then a third fictional one? That always seems to be the pattern.
science-fiction-genre terminology trope
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
4
How else would you write a story of the future? You would set a story in the 30th century and have all references to historical persons and events be from before 2018? How much sense would that make?
– user14111
Aug 26 at 2:36
29
To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp"). Yes, I understand the purpose of it, but just because it has purpose doesn't mean this pattern of dialog isn't a trope.
– Wickethewok
Aug 26 at 2:44
9
+1 This question and answer thread gives excellent insight into a core concept of science fiction writing.
– JakeGould
Aug 26 at 4:52
2
@user14111 If you're writing a story that takes place in the year 3046, you wouldn't necessarily have to refer to any historical moment from pre-2000. How often does stuff come up in conversation from over a thousand years ago? This is clearly a literary device to help put things into context for the reader. Logically, the speaker in the story likely wouldn't bother referring to any event over a thousand years ago b/c there would be more relevant options that are more recent (in their mind).
– Doc
Aug 26 at 21:13
8
@Doc, Jericho, Troy, Sodom, Gomorroh, Pompeii and (erm) Atlantis are all mentioned today as destroyed cities, and all were over 1000 years ago. Once in the public consciousness as a famous example, stays in the public consciousness regardless of time.
– gbjbaanb
Aug 26 at 23:59
 |Â
show 10 more comments
up vote
96
down vote
favorite
up vote
96
down vote
favorite
In Babylon 5, for example, a character lists famous bombings like "Hiroshima, Dresden, San Diego" with the first items in the list being real and the last being fictional. This dialog technique of casually tying the past into a fictional future seems to be common in franchises with world-building like Star Trek.
Is there a name for the trope where a character specifically lists two real, historical items and then a third fictional one? That always seems to be the pattern.
science-fiction-genre terminology trope
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
In Babylon 5, for example, a character lists famous bombings like "Hiroshima, Dresden, San Diego" with the first items in the list being real and the last being fictional. This dialog technique of casually tying the past into a fictional future seems to be common in franchises with world-building like Star Trek.
Is there a name for the trope where a character specifically lists two real, historical items and then a third fictional one? That always seems to be the pattern.
science-fiction-genre terminology trope
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
edited Aug 26 at 12:32
Rand al'Thor♦
91.9k36436609
91.9k36436609
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
asked Aug 26 at 2:09
Wickethewok
57227
57227
4
How else would you write a story of the future? You would set a story in the 30th century and have all references to historical persons and events be from before 2018? How much sense would that make?
– user14111
Aug 26 at 2:36
29
To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp"). Yes, I understand the purpose of it, but just because it has purpose doesn't mean this pattern of dialog isn't a trope.
– Wickethewok
Aug 26 at 2:44
9
+1 This question and answer thread gives excellent insight into a core concept of science fiction writing.
– JakeGould
Aug 26 at 4:52
2
@user14111 If you're writing a story that takes place in the year 3046, you wouldn't necessarily have to refer to any historical moment from pre-2000. How often does stuff come up in conversation from over a thousand years ago? This is clearly a literary device to help put things into context for the reader. Logically, the speaker in the story likely wouldn't bother referring to any event over a thousand years ago b/c there would be more relevant options that are more recent (in their mind).
– Doc
Aug 26 at 21:13
8
@Doc, Jericho, Troy, Sodom, Gomorroh, Pompeii and (erm) Atlantis are all mentioned today as destroyed cities, and all were over 1000 years ago. Once in the public consciousness as a famous example, stays in the public consciousness regardless of time.
– gbjbaanb
Aug 26 at 23:59
 |Â
show 10 more comments
4
How else would you write a story of the future? You would set a story in the 30th century and have all references to historical persons and events be from before 2018? How much sense would that make?
– user14111
Aug 26 at 2:36
29
To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp"). Yes, I understand the purpose of it, but just because it has purpose doesn't mean this pattern of dialog isn't a trope.
– Wickethewok
Aug 26 at 2:44
9
+1 This question and answer thread gives excellent insight into a core concept of science fiction writing.
– JakeGould
Aug 26 at 4:52
2
@user14111 If you're writing a story that takes place in the year 3046, you wouldn't necessarily have to refer to any historical moment from pre-2000. How often does stuff come up in conversation from over a thousand years ago? This is clearly a literary device to help put things into context for the reader. Logically, the speaker in the story likely wouldn't bother referring to any event over a thousand years ago b/c there would be more relevant options that are more recent (in their mind).
– Doc
Aug 26 at 21:13
8
@Doc, Jericho, Troy, Sodom, Gomorroh, Pompeii and (erm) Atlantis are all mentioned today as destroyed cities, and all were over 1000 years ago. Once in the public consciousness as a famous example, stays in the public consciousness regardless of time.
– gbjbaanb
Aug 26 at 23:59
4
4
How else would you write a story of the future? You would set a story in the 30th century and have all references to historical persons and events be from before 2018? How much sense would that make?
– user14111
Aug 26 at 2:36
How else would you write a story of the future? You would set a story in the 30th century and have all references to historical persons and events be from before 2018? How much sense would that make?
– user14111
Aug 26 at 2:36
29
29
To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp"). Yes, I understand the purpose of it, but just because it has purpose doesn't mean this pattern of dialog isn't a trope.
– Wickethewok
Aug 26 at 2:44
To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp"). Yes, I understand the purpose of it, but just because it has purpose doesn't mean this pattern of dialog isn't a trope.
– Wickethewok
Aug 26 at 2:44
9
9
+1 This question and answer thread gives excellent insight into a core concept of science fiction writing.
– JakeGould
Aug 26 at 4:52
+1 This question and answer thread gives excellent insight into a core concept of science fiction writing.
– JakeGould
Aug 26 at 4:52
2
2
@user14111 If you're writing a story that takes place in the year 3046, you wouldn't necessarily have to refer to any historical moment from pre-2000. How often does stuff come up in conversation from over a thousand years ago? This is clearly a literary device to help put things into context for the reader. Logically, the speaker in the story likely wouldn't bother referring to any event over a thousand years ago b/c there would be more relevant options that are more recent (in their mind).
– Doc
Aug 26 at 21:13
@user14111 If you're writing a story that takes place in the year 3046, you wouldn't necessarily have to refer to any historical moment from pre-2000. How often does stuff come up in conversation from over a thousand years ago? This is clearly a literary device to help put things into context for the reader. Logically, the speaker in the story likely wouldn't bother referring to any event over a thousand years ago b/c there would be more relevant options that are more recent (in their mind).
– Doc
Aug 26 at 21:13
8
8
@Doc, Jericho, Troy, Sodom, Gomorroh, Pompeii and (erm) Atlantis are all mentioned today as destroyed cities, and all were over 1000 years ago. Once in the public consciousness as a famous example, stays in the public consciousness regardless of time.
– gbjbaanb
Aug 26 at 23:59
@Doc, Jericho, Troy, Sodom, Gomorroh, Pompeii and (erm) Atlantis are all mentioned today as destroyed cities, and all were over 1000 years ago. Once in the public consciousness as a famous example, stays in the public consciousness regardless of time.
– gbjbaanb
Aug 26 at 23:59
 |Â
show 10 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
123
down vote
accepted
TV Tropes calls it "Famous, Famous, Fictional." The trope description does not cite any other name, which means there almost certainly is not another commonly used term for it. (The trope descriptions are generally quite good about citing more traditional terminology for such things.)
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
36
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
1
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
 |Â
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
As described above the trope is "Famous, Famous, Fictional". Incidentally, in the very first sentence of Philip Pullman's novel "La Belle Sauvage" one finds this trope in the form "Fictional, Fictional, Famous":
Three miles up the river Thames from the center of Oxford, some distance from where the great colleges of Jordan, Gabriel, Balliol, ...
Although admittedly this situation is rather different because the two fictional examples have been established previously in the writing, whereas when the trope "Famous, Famous, Fictional" is used, the example corresponding to fictional has generally not been introduced previously.
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
123
down vote
accepted
TV Tropes calls it "Famous, Famous, Fictional." The trope description does not cite any other name, which means there almost certainly is not another commonly used term for it. (The trope descriptions are generally quite good about citing more traditional terminology for such things.)
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
36
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
1
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
 |Â
show 3 more comments
up vote
123
down vote
accepted
TV Tropes calls it "Famous, Famous, Fictional." The trope description does not cite any other name, which means there almost certainly is not another commonly used term for it. (The trope descriptions are generally quite good about citing more traditional terminology for such things.)
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
36
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
1
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
 |Â
show 3 more comments
up vote
123
down vote
accepted
up vote
123
down vote
accepted
TV Tropes calls it "Famous, Famous, Fictional." The trope description does not cite any other name, which means there almost certainly is not another commonly used term for it. (The trope descriptions are generally quite good about citing more traditional terminology for such things.)
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
TV Tropes calls it "Famous, Famous, Fictional." The trope description does not cite any other name, which means there almost certainly is not another commonly used term for it. (The trope descriptions are generally quite good about citing more traditional terminology for such things.)
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
answered Aug 26 at 2:53
Buzz
28k689151
28k689151
36
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
1
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
 |Â
show 3 more comments
36
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
1
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
36
36
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
It also mentions the Rule of Three: "The first two instances build tension, and the third releases it by incorporating a twist." That's a more general version of the same grouping.
– Brythan
Aug 26 at 4:09
1
1
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
The quote at the top of the page calls it the "Science Fiction Law of Threes", but that term is not used any more widely than the page title.
– Kelly Thomas
Aug 26 at 17:26
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Brythan: The first mention of something (i.e. the third item in the list) can logically never be a twist, as it's the first time we hear anything about it. For example: [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Donald Trump] would suggest a conspiracy that's currently being concocted by White House staffers or politicians. However, [Julius Caesar, Jon Snow, Glorp the Galactic Overlord] doesn't quite work as a twist as we have no knowledge of Glorp before he was mentioned in this list.
– Flater
Aug 27 at 15:16
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Flater: Just because it's fictional doesn't necessarily means it's the first time it's mentioned. The TV Tropes page mentions "Orville Wright, Neil Armstrong, and Zefram Cochrane" where the latter, while fictional, is already well-known in Star Trek lore.
– Medinoc
Aug 28 at 11:39
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
@Medinoc: My point is that when it is mentioned for the first time, it's inherently not a twist. As per OP's comment, the third element is not just fictional but also unknown (which logically has to coicide with being fictional - otherwise it defeats the purpose of the trope OP is focusing on): "To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp")."
– Flater
Aug 28 at 11:44
 |Â
show 3 more comments
up vote
1
down vote
As described above the trope is "Famous, Famous, Fictional". Incidentally, in the very first sentence of Philip Pullman's novel "La Belle Sauvage" one finds this trope in the form "Fictional, Fictional, Famous":
Three miles up the river Thames from the center of Oxford, some distance from where the great colleges of Jordan, Gabriel, Balliol, ...
Although admittedly this situation is rather different because the two fictional examples have been established previously in the writing, whereas when the trope "Famous, Famous, Fictional" is used, the example corresponding to fictional has generally not been introduced previously.
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
As described above the trope is "Famous, Famous, Fictional". Incidentally, in the very first sentence of Philip Pullman's novel "La Belle Sauvage" one finds this trope in the form "Fictional, Fictional, Famous":
Three miles up the river Thames from the center of Oxford, some distance from where the great colleges of Jordan, Gabriel, Balliol, ...
Although admittedly this situation is rather different because the two fictional examples have been established previously in the writing, whereas when the trope "Famous, Famous, Fictional" is used, the example corresponding to fictional has generally not been introduced previously.
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
As described above the trope is "Famous, Famous, Fictional". Incidentally, in the very first sentence of Philip Pullman's novel "La Belle Sauvage" one finds this trope in the form "Fictional, Fictional, Famous":
Three miles up the river Thames from the center of Oxford, some distance from where the great colleges of Jordan, Gabriel, Balliol, ...
Although admittedly this situation is rather different because the two fictional examples have been established previously in the writing, whereas when the trope "Famous, Famous, Fictional" is used, the example corresponding to fictional has generally not been introduced previously.
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
As described above the trope is "Famous, Famous, Fictional". Incidentally, in the very first sentence of Philip Pullman's novel "La Belle Sauvage" one finds this trope in the form "Fictional, Fictional, Famous":
Three miles up the river Thames from the center of Oxford, some distance from where the great colleges of Jordan, Gabriel, Balliol, ...
Although admittedly this situation is rather different because the two fictional examples have been established previously in the writing, whereas when the trope "Famous, Famous, Fictional" is used, the example corresponding to fictional has generally not been introduced previously.
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
answered Aug 31 at 22:35
sdf
1111
1111
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f193560%2fis-there-a-term-for-the-science-fiction-trope-where-a-character-lists-two-histor%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
4
How else would you write a story of the future? You would set a story in the 30th century and have all references to historical persons and events be from before 2018? How much sense would that make?
– user14111
Aug 26 at 2:36
29
To clarify, the trope seems to have characters refer to two real items and one fictional one ("Mozart, Beethoven, and Gleepgorp"). Yes, I understand the purpose of it, but just because it has purpose doesn't mean this pattern of dialog isn't a trope.
– Wickethewok
Aug 26 at 2:44
9
+1 This question and answer thread gives excellent insight into a core concept of science fiction writing.
– JakeGould
Aug 26 at 4:52
2
@user14111 If you're writing a story that takes place in the year 3046, you wouldn't necessarily have to refer to any historical moment from pre-2000. How often does stuff come up in conversation from over a thousand years ago? This is clearly a literary device to help put things into context for the reader. Logically, the speaker in the story likely wouldn't bother referring to any event over a thousand years ago b/c there would be more relevant options that are more recent (in their mind).
– Doc
Aug 26 at 21:13
8
@Doc, Jericho, Troy, Sodom, Gomorroh, Pompeii and (erm) Atlantis are all mentioned today as destroyed cities, and all were over 1000 years ago. Once in the public consciousness as a famous example, stays in the public consciousness regardless of time.
– gbjbaanb
Aug 26 at 23:59