Connecting Readers and Writers discussion

I am including a link to this article because I would love to know what you think. Do you have any tips?
http://xerposa.com/steampunk-heroes-man

I think it's a wonderful article. I don't have much to add to it.

The charm of Steampunk is that it uses art to put us back in touch with science. The usual way people manage this is by learning about science (i.e, through the mind). But this way, it goes through the heart. It reminds us of the days when there were "gentleman scientists" and "Renaissance men" who could dramatically move its boundaries by direct observation of simple objects ---- people like Erastothenes and Galileo.

There's such a gulf today, in terms of knowledge, between scientists and non-scientists. Fiction dealing with the Age of Reason shows a glimpse of days when that gulf was smaller (even if it wasn't always easier to bridge) --- whether it's steampunk, or the naturalist studies of Dr. Maturin.

I honestly believe the environment has little to do with the character. It's the challenging situations and how he/she chooses to react to them which is what makes (or breaks) the character.

FYI: I do like steampunk

I think one of the reasons that Genre Fiction (all genre) tends to get a bad rap from the more literarilly minded is that it often relies on the genre for sources of character defintion and conflict resolution.

In Sci Fi the hero solves the problem with ... SCIENCE!

In Fantasy the hero solves the problem with... Something Magical!

In Cyberpunk the hero solves the problem with... ANGST AND TECH!

Contrast that to traditional literature where the hero must overcome strictly through personal traits, interactions, strength of character, etc.

Now that's not always the case and there are lots of instances where, as Stephen points out that the story and the hero can be removed from the setting and do very well on their own (such as Picard talking his way through a negotiation, or a wizard finding inner strength as the core to solving the primary conflict).

I do agree, however, that there is a problem in modern culture with science vs non-science, a problem made worse by the propagation of political agendas and noncritical thinking as tools to beat down on science. That is it's own thread...