He did not find the story clear, and I can certainly see his points. Already, I've made some changes in the story I'm currently working on, to make it easier to read. But...

The story is set on an alien world with no connection to earth. So, I use "fiveday" as a unit of time. He advises "week".

There are probably a dozen similar examples, but I'll stick with this one as typical of them all. Breaking up days into weeks is a usage pecular to this world. There is no reason to think an alien world is going to have seven day units of time.

So, here and dozens of times throughout the story, I am torn between a word that reminds readers that they are on an alien world, and a word that would make the story easier to read. Are the character's mounts horses or zwilfs? Does the teenage girl say, "like" or do I invent non-human slang?

This is, of course, not a problem peculiar to this story, but something every science fiction writers must deal with. Any thoughts?

Rick
 

Most times in alien fiction, we are reading a "translation". So, sometimes it's best for the word to be "translated" into its closest English cousin. On the other had, you're right, an alien week might not be seven days.

In the Wheel Of Time, weeks are not measured in sevens. Zebras are called razors. So, IF catchy and well placed with subtle exposition, the horse equivelent could well be another term.

But please don't have the teenager say, "Like". Unless this is a comedy, 20/21st century colloquialisms would seem out of place.
 

When fiveday is introduced so long as you make it clear that they use a 5 day week rather than a terran 7 day cycle, you should be fine.

That however does bring into question alot of other things, how long is there day/night cycle, yearly rotation etc.

The same goes with a "zwilth" so long as it is introduced as an equine analog there shouldn't be any confusion.

If "fiveday" is used, there must be some good reason to do it---say the year itself allows a neat divide into this kind of grouping. But one shouldn't rename things just for the sake of renaming them. Chances are, if humans colonize worlds, for the immediate future they will use "weeks" and "months" as the terms, whatever length is in place. [Not applicable to Rick Norwood's story, which he quite clearly states is set on a world with no connection to Earth.]

There's the old "call a 'rabbit' a 'smeerp'" rule---if your creature looks and acts like a rabbit, just calling it a "smeerp" is bad science fiction. Unless a "zwilf" is different from a horse, it's a horse, and should be called such.

(Check out "The Lord of the Rings," and Tolkien's appendix on Middle Earth calender reform, for an interesting diversion on something we, when we get down to it, really take for granted.)
 

When I write a story set on another world, one of the first things I work out is the length of the year, length of the day, star system, moons, land/sea ratio, gravity, atmosphere, etc. I find that most of this stuff never gets into the story, but I know it, and so when I need it, it's there.
 

Earthsea -- horses, goats, swans

Neveryon -- horses, cats, pigs

The Worm Ouroboros -- spiders, antelopes, grasshoppers (on Mercury!)

But those are fantasy. Such usage doesn't seem right for science fiction.

Dune -- sandworms, bedogs, abas

Out of the Silent Planet -- hnakra, hrossa, pfifltrigg

Ringworld -- Pierson's puppeteers, kzin, sunflowers

The more I think about it, in science fiction you cannot have horses on an alien planet unless they come from earth. But that just states the problem. It doesn't solve it.

 

Some books are a lot of fun just because they do give us new ways to look at familiar objects. I think "fiveday" is good because it contains its own explanation. Isn't it star wars that has "hoppers" to ride that look like a cross between a kangaroo and a rabbit? have fun! be cool!
 

Was it THE FLYING SORCERORS?
 

I also suggest reading Orson Scott Card's "Writing Science Fiction and Fantasy" because I believe he addresses some of this.

I personally think it's a stylepoint. If you choose to use other terminology, you have to expect that it will turn off some readers. All? No. Many? Depends how steep the learning curve is for your world and how hooked your readers are.

Some authors get away with lots of world building and have us talking about things from their imaginary worlds as if they are real. I think the key is that the things those authors spend time building are different enough from our world to stand out (e.g., not just calling horse-like creatures zwilfs, but having something be particularly different about zwilfs, maybe their diet consists entirely of radiation, they shed their hide every 2 months, and the males lay eggs that the females tend. None of this is any good, just throwing out some wacky differences that may have plot points.)

I also have been doing a lot of reading about writing lately and most books seem in agreement that it's best to avoid trying to portray dialect or other-speech in dialogue. You can use descriptors "Go away," she said in her thick Russian accent, for example (instead of trying to do "Go avay."). Or, I think as you suggested, you can use the dialect at first, and then switch back to standard English, expecting that your readers still "hear" the dialect. But in any event, it's generally best to stick to standard English. There are plenty of successful authors who are able to get away with it. Doesn't mean it makes sense for those of us who aren't yet in the "successful authors" category.

Your fiveday could be based on their moon's orbit.

Now one has the question on the society of a five day week. Is one day a day of rest? four days of work one day off. Do they look forward to the weekend? or do they work three days and take one day off?

If the days are a lot longer than our, they might work four days for ten hours a day, then take one day off to rest. They get forty hours of work each week. Of course the nights would also be longer.

How many weeks are there in the year? Do the weeks come out even each year or are they off? It could be that their year is divided by five evenly and have nothing to do with the moon.

Make one change, and it can effect other things you are not paying attention to.

I have alternate time measurements in my story. About 1/2 the people don't notice/care enough to comment, half do. About 1/4 of the people reading it have a real issue with the time units. So far I've kept them but I keep working on making them clearer.

I try to do this by using a common phrase and substituting my word: ie - "Wait a minute" becomes "Wait a tick." Sometimes it works, others I rewrite.

I've read a book with "ninesuns" for week. It didn't bother me. If you use a new term, regardless of what it is, the reference has to be clear. I wouldn't have a problem with "fiveday" because I would assume it is a "week" but 2 days shorter than ours.

The units that are different than our own are hard to grasp. In the original TV series Battlestar Galactica in addition to such wonderful words as frack and feldercarb it had different time measurements. I never did quiet figure out if Centon was a minute or an hour. The new series has dropped feldercarb and the time references.

Make the reference as clear as possible. If it is jarring to a majority of reader you might want to change it. If only a few people raise issue, decide what works best for your story and go with it.

 

*****

Yeah, it's definitely "The Flying Sorcerers," but it's by Larry Niven as well as David Gerrold. It's spelled that way on the spine of the book---I just checked my shelf copy. I remember having a big laugh when I realized whose name "As a color, shade of purple-gray" sounded like...
 

quote:

---

Sometimes I've used "klicks," which is short but seems unsatisfactory---besides, I'm pretty sure I picked it up from somebody's work, but I don't remember who.

---

Probably every book involving the military you've ever read.
 

One runs into problems with any measurement systems, when one tries to convert. Use metrics, stay in metrics, easy. Use American units and stay in american units, easy. Covert and tough.

I also avoid Terran as a term for humans. I also avoid using earth as the location when there are invasions or anything else bad to happen. I stick them out in some colony planet and have fun with it.

[This message has been edited by rstegman (edited June 20, 2007).]
 

quote:

---

I decided early on that the Americans would lead into space.

---

Fortunately for your prediction, the Americans nabbed a bunch of German rocket scientists after the war.

Compare that too: 1 liter is 100 deciliters and 1000 millimeters. Now for mass 1000 grams is 100 decagrams and 1 kilogram. Everything works in a power of ten, not the varied system we use now. Is it possible US measurements will make it into space? Yes. Is it likely? I'd say not.
 

Americans not only resist the metric system, they also resist evolution, birth control, and global warming. John Stewart said it best. "Reality has a liberal bias."

According to one US Government report, the United States has committed "unilateral intellectual disarmament".

There is a good story idea there, but Gene Wolfe already wrote it in "Nine American Nights".

[This message has been edited by Rick Norwood (edited June 21, 2007).]
 

quote:

---

It has been adopted for everyday life by most nations through a process called metrication. As of 2006, 95% of the world's population live in metricated countries, although non-metric units are still used for some purposes in some countries. The holdouts to full metrication are the United States and, to a lesser degree, the United Kingdom, where there is public attachment to the traditional units.

---

The metric system isn't something that casually gloms itself on to a populace - it does indeed end up being foisted on people. I don't know if I would go so far as to say that the governments that have implemented it do not care about the feelings of its people, or that the US Government, by resisting the metric system, is inherently more caring than other governments. I think it's a political move - whichever government implemented the metric system would likely lose the next election and likely several after that, and the incoming party would simply reverse the metrication that has already taken place to pacify the people.

Jayson Merryfield
 

I learned it in Kentucky.

I hear the metric farsee is a bit shorter, though.

More frequently these days, when I face questions like this, I ask myself what does it do for the story? That includes what it does for the characters, the plot, the readers and so forth.

In a hard science fiction story or book, I think using human terms is the same as using unexplained Faster-than-light travel, transporters and spontaneous food generators. It sticks out like an ugly child.

In soft science fiction and fantasy, etc., I think days, weeks, months and so forth are fine.

Specific names, like "December" are different, though. I swear I hit December reading LotR and stumbled over it. Or was it the Hobbit? As much detail as that world had, it really stuck out.

I also think it's important to consider your word count. In a 3,000 word short story, hard science or not, how much space are you willing to risk on explaining a different calender? For that, a fiveday is perfect.

I agree that any story or book about an alien world is a translation. If the Aliens landed and used a different month, any document translated into English would use the English equivalent. I don't mean they would say "week" if the original document said "fiveday". I mean if it was 35 days--7 fivedays--the translation would read 5 weeks (not 7) and not even mention the difference. It's converted to a system the reader will understand.

However, if the story mentioned the month of "Rebmeced", the translator would have to convert it to some equivalent, such as "December". So I can see an argument for specific names, too.

So my rules, for myself, are:

* No specific names, like December
* Use non-specific terms like weeks, days, months...
* ...unless writing hard science fiction
* Keep space in mind.
 

*****

Tall buildings are a matter of vanity. As I recall, the tallest buildings are in Brunei or Singapore, somewhere in Southeast Asia---what else have they got to be proud of?

*****

Anybody who gets their news from Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" needs to get a new psychiatrist. Liberalism might seem nice, but there are other opinions and other points of view---not that you'd know it from watching "The Daily Show."

Obviously, if you have to constantly refer to a glossary, the book is tiring. But if you're just trying to make it colorful by inventing new words (or new creatures) then you're not alone; many writers have done it successfully (Tolkien famously, as mentioned by others here.)

Also, I would call a rabbit-like creature on another world something besides rabbit; after all, it can't BE a rabbit, unless it was transported there, right? It had to have evolved separately... it can't be oryctolagus cuniculus! Think like a zoologist, maybe. If we're on earth, it's "rabbit"; if not, not.
 

"Tall buildings are a matter of vanity. As I recall, the tallest buildings are in Brunei or Singapore, somewhere in Southeast Asia---what else have they got to be proud of?

Anybody who gets their news from Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" needs to get a new psychiatrist. Liberalism might seem nice, but there are other opinions and other points of view---not that you'd know it from watching "The Daily Show.""

Well, Singapore is one of the cleanest cities in the world, has a very low crime rate, and the highest math scores for high school graduates anywhere in the world. At my university, we teach would be teachers out of Singapore math books, because they are so much better than American math books.

I get my news from Slate, The Week, and Science News. I get my jokes from Jon Stewart. And I know the difference.

It also seemed strange to me that if the people really had started calling horses runner beasts, for whatever reason, over the time passage that McCaffrey has for them to have forgotten science, etc (I did like the way she turned HNO3 into a word that they used, without remembering where the word had come from), why wouldn't the term "runner beast" have evolved into something shorter like "runbee?" Runner beast is so awkward.
 

[This message has been edited by debhoag (edited June 23, 2007).]
 

*****

I liked the Pern books, liked 'em a lot, but dropped the ball somewhere after the first dozen...actually, I thought they were fantasies with some SF and hard science grafted on. They were "colonized" from some kind of "galactic civilization" and then were completely forgotten---they might as well be in another universe. (I gather some later books, after I dropped the ball, cover some of these details.)

They passed muster with the field---after all, the first of them were published in Campbell's Astounding---but, had the big fantasy boom of the present day come back then, they might not have been published as SF at all...
 

In any case, we both seem to be fans of the Campbell Astounding, and so we probably agree about more things than we disagree about.

The story "Luck", which I posted the first 13 lines from, was written as a Campbell ASF idea story. Then I stupidly tried some experimental writing techniques. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Based on Stan's response to the story, if I had used plain, whitebread writing it would have sold.

[This message has been edited by Rick Norwood (edited June 24, 2007).]
 

Understanding societies, and realizing that there is no one has yet created a society that is perfect. Social environments come and go along with governments. To feel so strongly that one way is the only way will limit your thinking and push all your writing into a vain that only those in complete agreement with you might enjoy. As writers we should look at a society in terms of the good and the bad, the trade offs that make some work better than others. If Singapore imposes harsher standards on its people and in result there is less crime, higher levels of education, and a better society, then we must ask if the loss of some "freedoms" is worth the price of an overall higher level of society. It might not be worth it, and it would probably not work in other parts of the world where the base social system is different and would work against that form of system.

We all have different views about what is good and bad in this world, and we should respect, as well as rejoice, the fact we do have our differences. I would ask that the emotional venom be released somewhere else. With all the places on the internet to vent frustrations with like minded people, here we should argue over how to write societies we might disagree with, not grab up a banner to wave in favor of one or the other.

Back on the topic at hand, I enjoyed the pern books. I did stop keeping up with them after the major mysteries had been solved, but I did like the alternate take on dragons. I first picked it up expecting something more along the lines of dragonlance. When it turned out to be nothing like other dragons, I loved it.

Two very different cultures. The low crime rate that caning and its level of punishment creates would never work in Gaza, would it? I mean there is a whole different culture, one that would not accept caning as a deterent.

Okay, go on to the dweebs and the rocketes on Deneb IV. The rocketes believe in ancestor worship. Their dead communicate on a regular basis with heads of households and sometimes errant grandkids. Family is everything. Families are comfortably allied in tribes. But alliance (and obedience) are diluted the further you get from the family so large governments, which are groupings of tribes, have little direct control. Personal honor is sacred and each family is concerned with keeping that honor. To do less makes them less equal than their neighbors. Makes them seem weak. Laws are little more than suggestions and revenge is the most common (if not, only) kind of justice.

Could you get a low crime rate among the rocketes with caning and like punishments? Could a central government impose order on all tribes equally?

Then, half a world away, across one vast ocean and two impenetrable deserts live the dweebs. The dweebs live in single family units with no contact with ancestors but the dweebs have a very faint but acknowledgeable touch of hive mind. They are conscious of each other's presence and have a sense of commonality, or purpose. There is a strict sense of what is right and what is not and the central authority reaches out to punish errant members according to the perceived severity of their "mistakes." It is a homogenous society (actually, the rocketes and the dweebs both are).

Will caning and its like make for a low crime rate here?

[This message has been edited by arriki (edited June 24, 2007).]

[This message has been edited by arriki (edited June 24, 2007).]
 

Culture (note big C) does not come and go with governments. Governments come and go with cultures (note little c).

The culture in question may not always be a universally held Culture among the governed but will always be the culture of the governors. When those rascals are thrown out their culture is thrown out too. The governed's Culture is not typically afftected when a new governing culture (though certain civilizations have done a thorough job reworking their conquered peoples.)

The way one perceives life defines how one lives life, which is why truly alien peoples have to work hard to reconcile themselves to each other (its been mentioned before but OSC does this well in the Speaker Trilogy)

"It is not important whether or not the interpretation is correct--if men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences." - W.I. Thomas

[This message has been edited by Matt Lust (edited June 24, 2007).]
 

My current novel I cheated, the colony is small and authoritarian. Survival is the motivation for appropriate behavior, since the colony is on a less than hospitable world. One day I'll write in more complex societies, but for now I'll stick with working on character stories. There is a vast difference between understanding how they work, and the ability to write them well. One step at a time.

I have had experience with a few individuals who's views were the end all of viewpoints and none other could be correct. Everything within their lives were warped by this attitude which they never seemed to be able to overcome. Hmm, that might be an interesting character plot for a story. I'll have to file that one away for further thought. Of course I do believe it has been done before, but...anyways.

I think there is some relation to the original question of the thread. Since we have strayed a bit, I think that societies are also a source of language. Let's take some of the current inner city slang that has been permeating outside into the rest of the world. Most people have heard the word "Bling", even if it makes some of us cringe. It's slang, and most of us wouldn't use it in reference to ourselves, it derives from a culture and society that tends to have excessive crime. Along with statements like "Keep it real" which we have all heard, but sometimes miss the true meaning it has. I have a friend who explained quite a bit I never knew about the culture of the inner cities which would makes Singapore sound divine. "Keep it real" is in effect a term for staying within the bounds of that society, embracing the negatives as positives and refusing to change or break out of the mold of the inner city society. The word "Hood" which started as a reference to Neighborhood, took on a derogatory meaning as it was used for places of high crime and poverty.

Personally, "fiveday" doesn't need any form of explanation. There have been other shows and books that have invented replacement terms for time and measurement that never were explained, but were made apparent as the story progressed. The original Battlestar Galactica used alternate words for time increments. Never did they come out and directly explain how they related to a earth measurement, but as you watched the words became apparent from their use. Sometimes I believe critiquers are looking so hard to find something wrong, they can mistake those little bits that do improve a story as a problem.

I do have certain political ideas, but, by the rules intended to keep these boards orderly and polite, I rarely bring them up. I've mentioned my Internet Fan Fiction days---one of the reasons I stopped hanging 'round there was the constant vehement political debate, and my feeling that said debate was controlled by interested parties. I suppose it boils down to that I can stand to control myself, but I couldn't stand being controlled. (It wasn't the only reason I left, though.)

Gaza is an example of statelessness---none of the nearby states wish to attempt to administer it, and attempts to establish even the most basic government and government services have obviously failed. (It's not easy to set up a working government from scratch.) Probably only an outside power could bring order to the area...
 

The US and the West in general are trying to push nations out of tribalism into democracy. But that is a jump that none of the European nations made. All of them moved from tribalism to monarchy. Gradually, over a long period of time, strong rulers united countries, often using brutal persecution of minorities to force diverse tribes into a common language and culture. Only after centuries of absolute monarchy gave people a sense of belonging to a nation rather than to a tribe did democracy become possible.

Tell the story from the POV of a leader of an African nation, who is idealistic (think Charlemagne) but is forced to use brutal methods to end tribal warfare. The UN steps in and tries to make him "play nice" -- but that will lead to endless tribal warfare. How does he solve the problem?

 

Of course it asn't tribal warfare he was ending and he was seemd to be emmulating Mao in style. He doesn't seem nice but he does seem to be effective at changing things. However, the change he's brought has not seemed to work out too well.

A story that included a broad understanding of the throes of Africa in a post-colonial setting could be very powerful. especiallly from the Africans point of view as opposed to Bova's Voyager Trilogy that was distinctly a western point of view.
 

I've heard that it takes a minimum of three generations living under something like Tito for unity to take root, for people to feel part of something greater than tribe/extended family ties. The first generation experienced that divisive life style/culture. Generation two, remembers it vaguely and from stories told by the first generation. To generation three -- where the the first generation has died off or is senile -- the old culture is an artifact but has some pull. For the fourth generation, this is how life is. The older ways are just stories and no one they know actually lived it.

Something like that.

Diversity is the enemy of nationalism?
 

A lot of the present nations (and this included the USA) were kinda forced together at gunpoint. A lot of present troubles comes from groups and countries (not including the USA) that don't much like having been forced together.

I see Rick Norwood's idea as compelling and interesting, but not necessarily science fiction---a certain lack in the "science" part---but, hey, it might make an interesting read nonetheless. There aren't many good novels involving socio-political changes...
 

Mack Reynolds published "Border, nor Breed, nor Birth," in Analog.

Future social changes have always been part of sf.

The trick is coming up with a solution to the problem, because those who want to force emerging nations to hold to first world standard of morality KNOW they are right.
 

Take the US founding. We were rough with tories, british and others etc but we stopped being rough when compromise had to happen, especially on the (now) morally, ethically and legally reprehensible issue of slavery.

your story would have to include right but also shrewd actions.

For better or worse a coast to coast United States would not exist if there had not been compromise.
 

In any case, difficult moral choices make good stories.

 

Just last Saturday, some breaking news from Britain and Scotland came in on the channels. (If you follow the news, you already know what news I mean.) At one point, the cable news I watched switched to a British cable news service---by them and for them---and, a couple of times when measurements came up, they talked of "miles," several times. I didn't listen that closely, but I don't recall "kilometers" or "meters" coming up.

I guess when the chips are down, the British still think of, and think in, the old-fashioned British measurements.

[edited to remove a really clumsy sentence.]

[This message has been edited by Robert Nowall (edited July 02, 2007).]