Talk:New Worlds for Old

Novels: Short story / Fantasy Low‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Short story task force.
	This article is supported by Fantasy task force.

A "modern" anthology

Perhaps it is as it was compiled in 1971, but my reservations about calling the tales themselves, some of which are described as from the eighteenth century, as "modern" was reverted. Can anybody explain, please? --Old Moonraker (talk) 19:11, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did that in the comment. The modern era of history is generally considered to begin with the Renaissance, that is just before 1500. Not sure I would put it that far back, but that's neither here nor there. When you consider that Carter issued paired anthologies in which ancient and medieval material in the first of each pair were followed by comparatively more recent material in the second of each, the term modern is an apt descriptor. BPK (talk) 04:44, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply; I can see where you're coming from now, but this isn't evident in the piece (or in the edit summary, for that matter). Fantasy literature lists only recent authors in its "modern" paragraph, and fantasy literature is the context of this article. You explain that you are using the historical context here, which does indeed consider "early modern" as circa C16, but the scale they are using starts pre-literature, in the Stone Age! To make this article look sensible, the specific context of the anthologist's inclusion of older works elsewhere in her series would need to go in. --Old Moonraker (talk) 07:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, maybe so. But by the way, Lin Carter wasn't a woman. Lin was short for Linwood. BPK (talk) 22:59, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies to Linwood, particularly as he's got his own article here.

Using historians' list of time periods when describing literature doesn't seem appropriate: it's a bit like using radiocarbon dating on old copies of Amazing Stories. I propose to go back to where we were. That way, we'll be consistent with the time scale used on the Fantasy literature article.

--Old Moonraker (talk) 07:00, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All done? Implementing. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Companion volume, modern

I agree with User:Moonraker reservations expressed 6 years ago.

I would call #6-7 companion volumes, as "early" and "modern" fantasy anthologies edited by Lin Carter and released together. But we say those selections span Medieval-19th and 19th-20th centuries. That "early" selection #6 includes one excerpt from the [1914?] Kenneth Morris early-20c retelling of the Mabinogion. And includes the 1906 Kipling poem "Puck's Song".

At a glance it appears to me #22 continues the early selection broadly defined, and this volume #35 with its 18th-20th scope actually contains all of the leftovers that Carter deemed most valuable to the series.

Cf. Talk:The Young Magicians, Talk:Golden Cities, Far.
--P64 (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P64, that was Old Moonraker, who I fear put himself out to grass a couple of years ago, but he and I usually saw eye-to-eye on things, and in this context I find "modern" absurdly ambiguous. We have a rich language and can surely do better. Moonraker (talk) 22:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]