Turtledove
Advertisement

What should be our cutoff for Category:Works Set in the Far Future? Turtle Fan 15:53, May 3, 2011 (UTC)

I was comtemplating that myself. Instead of saying "far future", we might want to say "an unknown future date". We have a few post-apocalyptic works that could be set any time between tomorrow and the end of time. TR 18:15, May 3, 2011 (UTC)
Yes, but we also have a few works that are set at a date in the future which is settled, more or less, but is hard to pin down with precision and/or would result in a ridiculously large number. The first story in Asimov's Foundation, for instance, is set in the 51st century, or somewhere thereabouts. (As you might expect, the exact dating gets contradicted a bit over the course of the story, which I believe weighs in these days at 22 novels and a bajillion shorts, thanks in large part to Asimov's heirs being very generous with admitting other authors' works into the canon.) Roughly one hundred fifty years from there to the first half of Foundation and Empire, and "Trantor Falls" is set sixty years into the century that elapses between the two halves of that volume. So TF (no relation) is in the late 53rd century or the early 54th century. I guess that fits the definition of "an unknown future date," but it's not really in keeping with the spirit.
Actually I had the above wrong by a power of ten. We're talking about the late 503rd or early 504th centuries, which is a good deal more unmanageable than the 53rd and 54th. Turtle Fan 01:39, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
Subject to a more thorough review of the bibliography, I'd think the year 3000 makes a good place to draw a line in the sand. One category for stories that are set after that year (though I think Earthgrip just about straddles that) and another for those where the date is anyone's guess? Turtle Fan 00:05, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I see. Yes, 3000 is probably ok, although, since we don't have many stories set past the 22nd Century, we could probably make it the year 2200 without much consequence. TR 00:43, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah. The 23rd century just doesn't feel all that distant to me, though. I blame a childhood and adolescence of religiously watching Star Trek. (I still watch as an adult, although in a much more secular fashion. On the other hand, I'm able to understand what's going on much better now. And if I can't it's the show's fault, not mine; I've had a few old favorites ruined by catching something utterly nonsensical that flew right by me when I was younger.) Turtle Fan 01:39, May 4, 2011 (UTC)
Hmm, forgot this conversation. Anywho, I agree the 23rd isn't that far off, especially in when considering the 503rd, but I can say with some confidence that we don't have enough stories set in the 23rd to justify it's own category, so might as well start there says I. TR 22:10, May 16, 2011 (UTC)
That's a point. What about a category for the far future and another category for the third millennium, with the 21st century being a subcat of the latter? Turtle Fan 01:08, May 17, 2011 (UTC)
I'd been thinking about that as well. We still have the issue of really far off stories as well as ones set in an unknown future. But re-catting for the millennia is probably a good idea. TR 14:37, May 17, 2011 (UTC)