The Steampunk Forum at Brass Goggles
December 16, 2017, 09:54:47 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Brassgoggles.co.uk - The Lighter Side Of Steampunk, follow @brasstech for forum technical problems & updates.
 
   Home   Blog Help Rules Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Dieselpunk vs. Pulp  (Read 10203 times)
Honky-Tonk Dragon
Snr. Officer
****
United States United States

Scootin' through a West that Ne'er Was...


WWW
« on: March 09, 2007, 02:45:23 am »

In hopes of allowing discussions of dieselpunk to go on without debate over semantics, I am opening this thread up for that debate.
My position Pulp: was a genre, a LARGE genre, which covered science fiction, heroic fantasy, espionage fiction, detective fiction, Golden Age comics, Westerns, Horror, and probably some other genres I can't think of now. It had a rich history and it's influence on pop culture is not to be underestimated. I mean it, and those who advocate lumping what I think of as dieselpunk under it's name, no disrespect.

BUT... I would consider science fiction taking place in that era, which was written in that era Pulp.
When contemporary fiction is placed in that era... particularly when jaded post-modern or post-post-modern perspectives and sensibilities enter into the vision... it is something else.
To just emulate that writing style, the style of Lovecraft, Hammett, Howard, Hubbard, etc., that would be kitsch, and nostalgia.
To "colonize the past with the present" in the era from the 20's to the 50's, that is something all together different. Sure it can be kitsch and nostalgia, but if done well (and certainly at this point, there hasn't really been a great Deiselpunk novel) it has potential to do a lot more.
I can imagine a dieselpunk world, that while assuredly influenced by Pulp, is not pulp. I think there are others here who can as well...

Yes, adding the suffix -punk to a timeperiod or fictional genre can be carried out ad absurdem. Sandalpunk, Sailpunk, Paleopunk... but at least a few here seem interested in exploring the concept of dieselpunk... who are they are hurting by doing so?
Logged

"I replied that only <i>lost</i> causes were of any interest to a gentleman..."
Jorge Luis Borges "The Shape of the Sword"

Official Engraver of the Imperial Stamps of the Duchy of McIntyre
Interstellar Machine
Officer
***
United States United States


<>< Straight and Narrow

Interstellarmac
WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2007, 04:43:55 am »

Up until relatively recently, Science Fiction was a fairly new literary genre. However, now that many scifi works are becoming outdated, what was once sci-fi is taking on new names. So, in effect, an additional genre is being added every couple of decades. I am sure that the reimagined Battlestar Galactica will be in that position in a couple decades because for the most part it uses only today's technology and puts it in space (they even have Hummers). So, what will today's scifi be called tomorrow? Retro-Futurism? Nuclearpunk? Informationpunk?
Logged
Fantômas
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


As many steps ahead of this claim as I want to be.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2007, 04:43:58 am »

No one man they aren't hurting anybody. Creativity is fabulous, thats my vote, and the more you mix it up the more an existing genre either defines itself as distinctly different without the help of the folks involved or the more it changes and mutates into something better. if it's really that week, I guess it could just puff out, I don't see that happening here though.

really I think there should be a forum for retrofuturism at large. There are a lot of creative folks out there, and a lot of people with great ideas with massive creative contributions just to offer because it makes em happy. Thats seriously cool, and really when it comes down to it no individual has the right to limit or judge the creative vision of another, just to select their own preferences. Hell, if I don't like something I don't bother with it, but it certainly isn't my place to tell anyone what does and doesn't fit in a genre! Cheesy

Maybe I'll help myself to that privilege when i am a one man genre machine, pumping the suckers out like Henry Ford...that sure isn't today though. Wink



I think diesel punk is seriously cool HTD, but I would like some more examples of it, and I would like to understand better what you specifically love about it, really i am curious what everyone likes about it.

cheers.

Logged

" 'I' Is For 'Infamy' "
Crow
Gunner
**

« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2007, 04:50:13 am »

I find dieselpunk cool because it opens the door for art deco designs and whatnot.
and after seeing some of benjamin carr's work, I'd kill for a dieselpunk type survival horror game... like Bioshock but with more H.P. Lovecraft mixed in
Logged

"And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust."
- The Wasteland,T.S. Eliot
Cory
Guest
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2007, 04:52:39 am »

It's just obnoxious in the same way that trying to turn Steampunk into some kind of exclusive DIY Punk thing is obnoxious. Pulp doesn't belong to people who call it "Dieselpunk", regardless of how they rename it in accordance with the Cyber/Steampunk naming convention. Pulp isn't their thing to rename. It would be just as obnoxious as if I went up to a Fantasy fan and starting going on about "Magicpunk", and then defending myself by pointing out that "Fantasy" can mean anything from a Disney fairy tale to a daydream about sex with my hot coworker.

As for "Dieselpunk" itself, I think there's a problem inherent to the example used previously. You put forward:
Quote
But as an example Indiana Jones is Pulp, but not Dieselpunk. The best example I can think of as Dieselpunk right now, was an alternate Earth in the DC comics multi-verse (prior to the original Crisis on Infinite Earths) where WWII lasted for decades.

To which I replied:
Quote
I find it interesting that you consider Golden Age DC Comics to be "dieselpunk" because they're fighting Nazis while not considering Indiana Jones "dieselpunk" when in 2 of 3 films he's fighting Nazis.

You then corrected me, saying:
Quote
No, I'm not refering to Golden Age DC comics... those would be Pulp... But Bronze and Modern Age comics playing with the Golden Age settings... that is Dieselpunk.

So now here's the thing... So a recent DC Comics Elseworld title taking place in the Golden Age with Superman and Batman engaging in Nazi-smashing is "Dieselpunk" while Indiana Jones engaging in Nazi-smashing is not "Dieselpunk".

On what grounds? Both of them are modern stories set in the Pulp era playing with Pulp tropes. So what makes The Golden Age "Dieselpunk" and Raiders of the Lost Ark just Pulp?

From this vantage point, "Dieselpunk" doesn't appear to have any real meaningful definition anyways. "Dieselpunk" is just whatever Pulpy stuff that people who like to rename things "Punk" because they like Steampunk choose to call "Dieselpunk".
Logged
Simon Hogwood
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


Adventurer & Scholar


« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2007, 05:02:10 am »

Quote
But as an example Indiana Jones is Pulp, but not Dieselpunk. The best example I can think of as Dieselpunk right now, was an alternate Earth in the DC comics multi-verse (prior to the original Crisis on Infinite Earths) where WWII lasted for decades.

To which I replied:
Quote
I find it interesting that you consider Golden Age DC Comics to be "dieselpunk" because they're fighting Nazis while not considering Indiana Jones "dieselpunk" when in 2 of 3 films he's fighting Nazis.

You then corrected me, saying:
Quote
No, I'm not refering to Golden Age DC comics... those would be Pulp... But Bronze and Modern Age comics playing with the Golden Age settings... that is Dieselpunk.

So now here's the thing... So a recent DC Comics Elseworld title taking place in the Golden Age with Superman and Batman engaging in Nazi-smashing is "Dieselpunk" while Indiana Jones engaging in Nazi-smashing is not "Dieselpunk".

On what grounds? Both of them are modern stories set in the Pulp era playing with Pulp tropes. So what makes The Golden Age "Dieselpunk" and Raiders of the Lost Ark just Pulp?

Just by reading over this, it seems to me that the DC comic referred to is a definite Alternate History, while Indiana Jones is, at least theoretically, not (although, I've always wondered about that line in Raiders about the Ark "leveling mountains". Alternate Bible canon?).

Another thing to consider is that Pulp, in my understanding, originally referred to a printing convention rather than a genre. I've often thought of the pulps as being the precedent for modern mass-market-paperbacks, in which appears genres from romance to adventure fiction, which is really what I would expect most people to mean when they refer to the "pulp genre".
Logged

"The laws of the land mean nothing to a man with a giant mechanical spider!" - Jake of All Trades

"The only clue to my secret obsession is one completely badass hat." - Jacob Squirrel
Fantômas
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


As many steps ahead of this claim as I want to be.


WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2007, 05:06:18 am »

It's just obnoxious in the same way that trying to turn Steampunk into some kind of exclusive DIY Punk thing is obnoxious. Pulp doesn't belong to people who call it "Dieselpunk", regardless of how they rename it in accordance with the Cyber/Steampunk naming convention. Pulp isn't their thing to rename. It would be just as obnoxious as if I went up to a Fantasy fan and starting going on about "Magicpunk", and then defending myself by pointing out that "Fantasy" can mean anything from a Disney fairy tale to a daydream about sex with my hot coworker.

As for "Dieselpunk" itself, I think there's a problem inherent to the example used previously. You put forward:
Quote
But as an example Indiana Jones is Pulp, but not Dieselpunk. The best example I can think of as Dieselpunk right now, was an alternate Earth in the DC comics multi-verse (prior to the original Crisis on Infinite Earths) where WWII lasted for decades.

To which I replied:
Quote
I find it interesting that you consider Golden Age DC Comics to be "dieselpunk" because they're fighting Nazis while not considering Indiana Jones "dieselpunk" when in 2 of 3 films he's fighting Nazis.

You then corrected me, saying:
Quote
No, I'm not refering to Golden Age DC comics... those would be Pulp... But Bronze and Modern Age comics playing with the Golden Age settings... that is Dieselpunk.

So now here's the thing... So a recent DC Comics Elseworld title taking place in the Golden Age with Superman and Batman engaging in Nazi-smashing is "Dieselpunk" while Indiana Jones engaging in Nazi-smashing is not "Dieselpunk".

On what grounds? Both of them are modern stories set in the Pulp era playing with Pulp tropes. So what makes The Golden Age "Dieselpunk" and Raiders of the Lost Ark just Pulp?

From this vantage point, "Dieselpunk" doesn't appear to have any real meaningful definition anyways. "Dieselpunk" is just whatever Pulpy stuff that people who like to rename things "Punk" because they like Steampunk choose to call "Dieselpunk".


On the grounds that Nazis do not equal Diesel punk man.

Dieselpunk is pretty recognizable also (though again I hate the name). I think the rocketeer was pretty dieselpunk, so was sky captain, flash gordon anyone? the list seems to go on.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2007, 05:09:50 am by Fantômas » Logged
Simon Hogwood
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


Adventurer & Scholar


« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2007, 05:10:46 am »

Of course not, but as they happen to  live in about the same era they make convenient enemies.
Logged
Fantômas
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


As many steps ahead of this claim as I want to be.


WWW
« Reply #8 on: March 09, 2007, 05:13:24 am »

Of course not, but as they happen to  live in about the same era they make convenient enemies.

they TOTALY DO!!!! Cheesy
Logged
fmra
Snr. Officer
****

Dollmaker


« Reply #9 on: March 09, 2007, 05:24:31 am »

I think the rocketeer was pretty dieselpunk, so was sky captain, flash gordon anyone? the list seems to go on.

I completely agree.  Streamlining, technology level, clothing aesthetics...
Logged

Tempus Rerum Imperator.

"But that's not steampunk hjghahkahjkfdsahjklfdsa!!!!!11one11" -- Anachronist

20,000 leagues below Chuck E' Cheese
Honky-Tonk Dragon
Snr. Officer
****
United States United States

Scootin' through a West that Ne'er Was...


WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 09, 2007, 05:25:48 am »


Another thing to consider is that Pulp, in my understanding, originally referred to a printing convention rather than a genre. I've often thought of the pulps as being the precedent for modern mass-market-paperbacks, in which appears genres from romance to adventure fiction, which is really what I would expect most people to mean when they refer to the "pulp genre".

Thank you Mr. Hogwood.
Yes, pulp is derived from the fact that these descendants of the pennydreadfuls were seen as disposable writing... to even call them literature at the time would have offended the literati of the time. "Real books" were hard bound on higher quality paper. Pulps were printed on woodpulp.
Things are not so clearcut today. While some books, particularly those that would have been pulp back in the day due to their subject matter, are published only in mass-market paperback editions, for many books reaching the mass-market stage is actually a sign of success. You have to sell enough of the hardcover edition to justify larger distribution.
This is another reason why I have hard time refering to contemporary work as Pulp.
Also it reminds me too much of Pulp Fiction, a fine movie but not at all in the same genre as Dark City.
Logged
Simon Hogwood
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


Adventurer & Scholar


« Reply #11 on: March 09, 2007, 05:31:40 am »

Thank you Mr. Hogwood.
Yes, pulp is derived from the fact that these descendants of the pennydreadfuls were seen as disposable writing...

You're quite welcome.  Smiley Hmm, I'm having a thought here . . .

Pennydreadful - Allan Quartermain - Steampunk
Pulp - Doc Savage - Dieselpunk
MMP - Dirk Pitt - ?
Logged
Fantômas
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


As many steps ahead of this claim as I want to be.


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 09, 2007, 06:05:18 am »


Another thing to consider is that Pulp, in my understanding, originally referred to a printing convention rather than a genre. I've often thought of the pulps as being the precedent for modern mass-market-paperbacks, in which appears genres from romance to adventure fiction, which is really what I would expect most people to mean when they refer to the "pulp genre".

Thank you Mr. Hogwood.
Yes, pulp is derived from the fact that these descendants of the pennydreadfuls were seen as disposable writing... to even call them literature at the time would have offended the literati of the time. "Real books" were hard bound on higher quality paper. Pulps were printed on woodpulp.
Things are not so clearcut today. While some books, particularly those that would have been pulp back in the day due to their subject matter, are published only in mass-market paperback editions, for many books reaching the mass-market stage is actually a sign of success. You have to sell enough of the hardcover edition to justify larger distribution.
This is another reason why I have hard time refering to contemporary work as Pulp.
Also it reminds me too much of Pulp Fiction, a fine movie but not at all in the same genre as Dark City.


Dark city was nothing but ACES BABY!
Logged
Cory
Guest
« Reply #13 on: March 09, 2007, 04:41:27 pm »

Just by reading over this, it seems to me that the DC comic referred to is a definite Alternate History, while Indiana Jones is, at least theoretically, not (although, I've always wondered about that line in Raiders about the Ark "leveling mountains". Alternate Bible canon?).

Indiana Jones is certainly alternate history... He found the Ark of the Covenant in one movie and the Holy Grail in another, complete with one of the Arthurian knights! That's pretty alternate, unless you're suggesting that events depicted were in the realm of serious historical possibility. If so, then it wouldn't even be proper to call, say, The Difference Engine or Queen Victoria's Bomb alternate history then either.

Quote
Another thing to consider is that Pulp, in my understanding, originally referred to a printing convention rather than a genre. I've often thought of the pulps as being the precedent for modern mass-market-paperbacks, in which appears genres from romance to adventure fiction, which is really what I would expect most people to mean when they refer to the "pulp genre".

That's in the same class as arguing that "Fantasy" isn't a useful label because it can mean Lord of the Rings, Clash of the Titans, Dungeons and Dragons, Thief of Baghdad, Sleeping Beauty and dreams about taking the secretary on the photocopier. The term "Pulp" has been understood by anyone who made or liked a retro 30's movie, book or RPG before it was "discovered" by "Dieselpunks".
Logged
Simon Hogwood
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


Adventurer & Scholar


« Reply #14 on: March 09, 2007, 04:51:38 pm »

Just by reading over this, it seems to me that the DC comic referred to is a definite Alternate History, while Indiana Jones is, at least theoretically, not (although, I've always wondered about that line in Raiders about the Ark "leveling mountains". Alternate Bible canon?).


Indiana Jones is certainly alternate history... He found the Ark of the Covenant in one movie and the Holy Grail in another, complete with one of the Arthurian knights! That's pretty alternate, unless you're suggesting that events depicted were in the realm of serious historical possibility. If so, then it wouldn't even be proper to call, say, The Difference Engine or Queen Victoria's Bomb alternate history then either.


Granted. Perhaps I should have said overt alternate history - WWII lasting for decades has slightly more impact on the course of history than the discovery - and subsequent loss or suppression - of mystical artifacts by a single individual, no matter how cool he is.  Wink


Quote
Another thing to consider is that Pulp, in my understanding, originally referred to a printing convention rather than a genre. I've often thought of the pulps as being the precedent for modern mass-market-paperbacks, in which appears genres from romance to adventure fiction, which is really what I would expect most people to mean when they refer to the "pulp genre".


That's in the same class as arguing that "Fantasy" isn't a useful label because it can mean Lord of the Rings, Clash of the Titans, Dungeons and Dragons, Thief of Baghdad, Sleeping Beauty and dreams about taking the secretary on the photocopier. The term "Pulp" has been understood by anyone who made or liked a retro 30's movie, book or RPG before it was "discovered" by "Dieselpunks".


I will now refer you to the compendium of all human knowledge.
Logged
Cory
Guest
« Reply #15 on: March 09, 2007, 05:05:25 pm »

And let me throw that compendium right back attacha', with my emphasis added:

"A common misconception is that 'pulp fiction' is limited in scope to 1940s adventure fiction in the vein of Indiana Jones. While such fiction is, in fact, encompassed under the heading of 'pulp fiction', the heading itself is by no means limited to describing only that type of fiction."

In fact, most fans of Pulp recognize that adventure isn't the only style of Pulp... there are Noir Pulps, Horror Pulps, Science-Fi Pulps, Western Pulps, Lesbian Pulps and so on... and that's okay. It doesn't need any further description except to compound the two genres. Maybe by "Diselpunk" you mean Sci-Fi Pulps or Adventure Pulps, or some combination of the two?
Logged
Ottens
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


Gatekeeper


WWW
« Reply #16 on: March 09, 2007, 06:29:21 pm »

Dieselpulp??  Cheesy
Logged
Simon Hogwood
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


Adventurer & Scholar


« Reply #17 on: March 09, 2007, 06:34:44 pm »

In fact, most fans of Pulp recognize that adventure isn't the only style of Pulp... there are Noir Pulps, Horror Pulps, Science-Fi Pulps, Western Pulps, Lesbian Pulps and so on... and that's okay. It doesn't need any further description except to compound the two genres. Maybe by "Diselpunk" you mean Sci-Fi Pulps or Adventure Pulps, or some combination of the two?

Exactly. I might also add that, like Steampunk, the term "Dieselpunk" implies an anachronistic/alternate history aspect that differentiates from "classic" Adventure Pulp.
Logged
Cory
Guest
« Reply #18 on: March 09, 2007, 06:42:40 pm »

Exactly. I might also add that, like Steampunk, the term "Dieselpunk" implies an anachronistic/alternate history aspect that differentiates from "classic" Adventure Pulp.

However, A) there really isn't anything of any meaningful substance that differentiates Steampunk from Victorian-Edwardian Scientific Romances and Voyages Extraordinaires, and B) so far I haven't seen anything that differentiates "Dieselpunk" in any meaningful way from Pulp, up to and including that argument about The Golden Age vs. Raiders of the Lost Ark
Logged
Simon Hogwood
Zeppelin Admiral
******
United States United States


Adventurer & Scholar


« Reply #19 on: March 10, 2007, 12:32:38 am »

A) If you think so - and I'm not saying you're wrong - then no, there is no difference between Adventure Pulp and Dieselpunk.

B) Therefore, the question becomes what, if anything, separates Victorian-Edwardian Scientific Romances and Voyages Extraordinaires and Adventure Pulp from Steampunk and Dieselpunk? You say nothing, that they're different terms for the same things. There's nothing wrong with that. I, on the other hand, feel the need to differentiate between the two, so I do, in a an admittedly subjective manner.

Take The Difference Engine and Crimson Skies*. I would label these as Steampunk and Dieselpunk, respectively, mostly because the world they describe is considerably and undeniably different, historically, then our own. (Oddly, both feature the breakup of the U.S. - Coincidence? My Americentric worldview?) 20,000 Leagues and Indiana Jones, on the other hand I would consider Voyage Extraordinaire and Pulp, because, in the end, the world continues on much as it really is.

I realize just typing all that up that not everything will be so easily divisible.(Wild Wild West, anyone?) Again, if you don't consider this level of division necessary, then that's really all that can be said.

Please understand, I hold you and your opinion in the deepest respect. Hopefully, my position is expressed clearly enough, and from hereon we can agree do disagree.  Smiley

* I switched the Dieselpunk example from Golden Age to Crimson Skies because I'm slightly more familiar with the latter, and so feel more comfortable using it in my definition.
Logged
Fantômas
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


As many steps ahead of this claim as I want to be.


WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 10, 2007, 03:22:09 am »

A) If you think so - and I'm not saying you're wrong - then no, there is no difference between Adventure Pulp and Dieselpunk.

B) Therefore, the question becomes what, if anything, separates Victorian-Edwardian Scientific Romances and Voyages Extraordinaires and Adventure Pulp from Steampunk and Dieselpunk? You say nothing, that they're different terms for the same things. There's nothing wrong with that. I, on the other hand, feel the need to differentiate between the two, so I do, in a an admittedly subjective manner.

Take The Difference Engine and Crimson Skies*. I would label these as Steampunk and Dieselpunk, respectively, mostly because the world they describe is considerably and undeniably different, historically, then our own. (Oddly, both feature the breakup of the U.S. - Coincidence? My Americentric worldview?) 20,000 Leagues and Indiana Jones, on the other hand I would consider Voyage Extraordinaire and Pulp, because, in the end, the world continues on much as it really is.

I realize just typing all that up that not everything will be so easily divisible.(Wild Wild West, anyone?) Again, if you don't consider this level of division necessary, then that's really all that can be said.

Please understand, I hold you and your opinion in the deepest respect. Hopefully, my position is expressed clearly enough, and from hereon we can agree do disagree.  Smiley

* I switched the Dieselpunk example from Golden Age to Crimson Skies because I'm slightly more familiar with the latter, and so feel more comfortable using it in my definition.

I think there is a distinct difference, and it isn't so difficult to support. Authentic Pulp is/was written during a very specific period of time. And when it envisions the future that vision is the footprint of a genuine perspective on what the future might have been. NOW, when we recreate that vision our vision is not a genuine vision of the future, because we don't do so to hypothesize about the future , we do it to recreate the effect that envisioning the future in a past era resulted in...that being the aesthetic only it can never be the same because we can't ever see things exactly the way they did, we lack the temporal context, besides it wouldn't be that interesting if we could so we don't sweat it too much and we take creative license. The aesthetic that results from trying to recreate the aesthetic of the past envisioning their future and our creative license is the retrofuturist aesthetic "dieselpunk". and it's good to give it a different name because then it is easier to differentiate it from the authentic pulp of the period.

The difference between pulp, and dieselpunk is the same as the difference between steampunk and the writings of Jules Verne is the same as the difference between an authentic antique and a reproduction.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2007, 03:27:42 am by Fantômas » Logged
Honky-Tonk Dragon
Snr. Officer
****
United States United States

Scootin' through a West that Ne'er Was...


WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 10, 2007, 08:45:41 am »

So can we agree to disagree in regards to nomenclature?
You might have guessed, I am kind of fond of Dieselpunk as a term, it is inspiring to me. While I don't think much has been done up til now that truly qualifies, I think it would be interesting to explore. If everyone else hates the name, well let's come up with new one! I like "dieselpunk", but I ain't married to it.
I've stated that I think Pulp is too broad for what it seems most of us would like to play with regarding 20's through 50's anachronism... Ottens suggested Dieselpulp... Any takers?
What needs to be done so that we can discuss 20's through 50's anachronism without starting flamewars, and without sucking all the fun out of the very things which help inspire that discussion?
Logged
Josh of Vernian Process
Zeppelin Captain
*****
Antarctica Antarctica


Maestro of Steam


WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 10, 2007, 12:10:05 pm »

I can't believe you nerds (yes I am a nerd too) are still arguing about this.  Tongue

Dieselpunk, Steampunk, Petrolpunk, Gasoholpunk, Electripunk, Solarpunk, Nuclearpunk, Energypunk.........

WHO CARES!!!??? (Ok I'm sure I'll care tomorrow when I'm not drunk). LOL.

But yeah, can't we all just get along?? I'm at the point that I son't care what genres people make up over night. Just leave my Steampunk alone.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee  Shocked
Logged

Gilded Age Records is a collective of like minded Indie artists, all unified by a common 19th Century/Steampunk theme.
<A HREF="http://www.gildedagerecords.com"><img src="http://www.movementproductions.net/art/gilded/gilded_banner1.gif">
Tinkergirl
Brass Goggles Curator
Founders
Zeppelin Captain
********
United Kingdom United Kingdom


WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 10, 2007, 03:26:07 pm »

Ahem, we are not responsible for the posting of tipsy moderators.  *rollseyes*

That said, while I enjoy a good academic debate at the best of times, it seems that there are a couple of different views here, so forgive me if I stumble a little, but it's starting to encroach on personal attacks and enthusiasm giving way to aggression, and I'd really rather not have any of that.

  • All is Pulp:  This view states that the fiction genre either based in, or written during, the 1920's to 1945's (or so) is known as pulp.  The term dieselpunk is simply a fairly recent attempt to classify a genre that some did not yet know the established name for.
  • That was Pulp:  This view states that only fiction written during the pulp era is pulp.  Fiction written after pulp, but in a pulp style is not pulp, but another form of fiction.
  • Pulp contains Dieselpunk:  This view believes that dieselpunk is a subgenre of pulp, much in the same way that High Fantasy is a subgenre of Fantasy.  Probably characterised by a focus on the rise of petroleum power and somewhat larger-than-life noir in its outlook.
  • Dieselpunk isn't Pulp:  An increasingly unpopular view in this thread, that states that dieselpunk has nothing to do with pulp, and exists on it's own merits.  It is to the early to mid 20th Century what Steampunk is to the 19th Century, and does not aknowledge pulp's existance at all.
  • Dieselpunk is a cool name:  A fairly tame view that likes the word dieselpunk, and that finds it evocative of certain pieces of fiction that have something to do with the mid-ish 19th Century.  Doesn't see the harm in calling their favoured pieces of fiction dieselpunk.

Is that about the gist of it?  Personally, I'm of the opinion that Pulp Contains Dieselpunk is the best route for me personally, as pulp is a rather broad category, and if defined properly, then people who like one form of pulp over another (namely ones with the as-yet somewhat nebulous 'dieselpunk' vibe) will be able to find others like it.  Which really, is the purpose for genre names after all - classification and grouping with similar pieces.  If it serves a purpose - then it has a use.

Still, at the moment, as Mr Cory has tried to extract from people, the exact definition of dieselpunk is a bit iffy.  I believe that a good start on defining this (or finding that it has no definion) is to find a couple of pieces of well known fiction that epitomise this sub-genre.  Establishing the style that all dieselpunk has in common, then it will have a use as a subgenre, especially if that subgenre does not yet have a useful name within the pulp genre.
Logged
Ottens
Snr. Officer
****
Netherlands Netherlands


Gatekeeper


WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 10, 2007, 04:00:32 pm »

The term “Dieselpunk” was first coined to describe a darker, dirtier side of Steampunk, informed by Cyberpunk sensibilities, set in a post-Steampunk era with a higher industrial level of development. However due to the relative lack of fiction that fits this description the suggestion has been raised that “Dieselpunk” may in fact be nothing else than Pulp fiction.

Pulp refers to inexpensive fiction magazines widely published from the 1920s through the 1950s. They were the successor to 19th century penny dreadfuls and dime novels, and are often remembered for their sensational and exploitative stories and thrilling cover art. Despite the common association, pulp was not limited to the scope of 1940s adventure fiction in the vein of Indiana Jones. Pulp magazines often contained a wide variety of genre fiction; indeed, many classic science fiction and crime novels were originally serialized in pulp magazines such as Weird Tales, Amazing Stories , and Thrilling Wonder Stories.

The question arises what, if anything, separates “Dieselpunk” from Pulp. Although at first glance the two may seem identical, there exists a subtle difference; the same difference that makes Steampunk stand apart from Victorian-Edwardian Scientific Romances and Voyages Extraordinaires—the colonisation of the past with the present; the transportation of modern-day technology and sensibilities into the Pulp Era. And just like Steampunk exists within the framework of speculative fiction, of which the origins date back to the pioneering works of Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, Mark Twain and Mary Shellebey, Dieselpunk resides under the banner of Pulp, specifically characterised by the rise of petroleum power and technocratic perception, incorporating neo-noir elements and sharing themes with Adventure Pulp.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.798 seconds with 16 queries.