Talk:The Sirens of Titan/Archive 1

Stage version

This is a tricky area, but I think worth exploring and fleshing out. I remember seeing the Organic Theatre Company's version of Sirens in 1977. Most web reports indicate a date of 1974 for when it was initially conceived, but I can only find peripheral references to 1977 performances. I'm trying to verify an April 6, 1977 performance at the Lerner Theatre in Chicago (via the folloing link: http://www.users.muohio.edu/erlichrd/Clockworks%202/Clock2,%205-9%20(thru%202004).htm). The reason I think it's important to document this adaptation is that when I first saw adverts for the performance at UCLA (and bought tickets to see) I couldn't conceive any way the book could be adapted to the stage. It was brilliantly done.

I'm also trying to verify that Joe Mantegna and Dennis Franz were part of the cast. Any help here?

New image

A heads up on the new image: I'm currently going through and adding infoboxes for all Hugo Award winners and nominations in the Best Novel category (at least those books that have existing articles, anyway). The info contained in these boxes is prefferably in relation to the first edition printing of the book - including the image, if possible. Quite frankly, I was surprised to see Vonnegut being treated with such pulp-cover nonsense, but then again, it was only his second book. Anyway, if anybody was confused or indignant with the new image, that's the explanation. Personally, I find it to be an interesting addition... who hasn't seen that purple bulk cover? (I moved that just a little further down the article, BTW.) -- Antepenultimate 23:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Science fiction?

First off, let me say that The Sirens of Titan is quite probably my favorite book.

Secondly, and more to the point, anyone who has read this book should know that it's really not a science fiction novel as much as it is a satire. It satirizes religion, it satirizes war, it satirizes the entire existence of the human race. Yes, Vonnegut uses the trappings of science fiction to accomplish it, but the emphasis isn't on science fiction at all. Plot devices like the chrono-synclastic infundibulum are very blatantly plot devices, with the narrator declining to go into detail about how they would actually function. Instead of lasers, the warriors in the exceedingly and hilariously brief battle between Mars and Earth use the very real weapons of the Cold War on one side and 19th-century rifles on the other.

I realize that this book was originally marketed as science fiction, but any fool can see that this book stretches far beyond that genre. It satirizes it, in fact, as well as it satirizes anything else it addresses. The problem is, it's so damn hard to pigeonhole anything Vonnegut ever wrote into one specific genre... Kudzu1 07:44, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does satisfy the minimum conditions of Science Fiction as stated by the scholar Darko Suvin in his book Metamorphoses of Science Fiction (if I recall the title correctly). Those conditions are that the narrative structure is determined by a "novum" or strange newness. Suvin offers the floating island of Laputa in Gulliver's Travels as the antithesis of the novum: it is strange and new that an island could float above the earth, but the reason it's not a novum is that the narrative does not depend upon the magnets or the floating island. The Chrono-synclastic-infundibulum qualifies as a novum, in my opinion, because it determines the narrative trajectory of Malachi Constant. But, you raise an interesting point. The problem with genre classification is that no work ever "fits" exactly into a genre, and so we're left trying to find the right-sized round hole that can take a square peg of a certain size. Vonnegut's work probably does qualify as science fiction and satire, and that shouldn't be a problem for us. I suspect that you may know the Vonnegut canon pretty well and take seriously his comment that he's not a science fiction writer. He may not think so, but plenty of other people do. And in the eyes of most scholars and critics, the author is no better judge of his/her work than anyone else (and often is much worse). Victorianist 19:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Space ships? Check! Aliens? Check! Invasion from Mars? Check! Of course it is a science fiction, whatever Vonnegut (pbuh) says! Satire on twentieth century life? Check too, that's what science fiction is all about: perspectivating, if you'll excuse my English, current themes by staging them in an outlandish context. If TSOT is not sci-fi, neither are Clarke, Asimov or Bradbury. /roger.duprat.copenhagen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.243.127.162 (talk) 21:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it's an SF tale doesn't disqualify it from being much more and much else. Since this is Wikipedia, more will be made of SOT being SF than perhaps should be, but this is an encyclopedia of, by and for geeks, seriously, what do you want? Bustter (talk) 00:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indie bands refer to Sirens of Titan?

Someone please tell me how these two references in Trivia relate to the book Sirens of Titan.

Indie rockers Bound Stems recorded a song titled "Rented A Tent (A Tent, A Tent)" for their 2006 LP, Appreciation Night.

Indie Band Rogue Wave has a song titled "Harmonium" on their latest LP, Asleep at Heaven's Gate

Unless there's a direct reference these ads for two "Indie" bands should be deleted. --Gouveia2 21:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both are lines/concepts from the book, which should probably be pointed out if the items are kept. That doesn't mean these items belong in the article, though; there are so many indie bands doing so many pop-culture references that they could overwhelm wikipedia. - DavidWBrooks 21:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember correctly, the "Rented A Tent" bit is what the main character thinks the marching drums sound like. The phrase is used repeatedly in the book.

Harmoniums are creatures that feed on the energy of sound vibrations. They are native to the planet Mercury, and the novel discusses them at length.

That being said, Wikipedia has a style guideline (WP:TRIVIA) that discourages the use of trivia sections in articles, so it could still be argued that the whole section should be removed.

—PHaze 22:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That anti-trivia guideline is only a suggestion, and in my humble opinion is wielded over-harshly at times. The presence of a concept in popular culture is often a good measure of its importance to society, and detailing that presence can convey important information to the reader. Within limits, of course. - DavidWBrooks 01:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's exactly my point, David and PHaze. Indie bands are an obscure niche in music culture. Now, if a popular band made direct reference to the book, on the level of the trivia about Al Stewart, I believe it would be significant trivia (??) or proper cultural reference. Maybe a case can be made that these Indie songs were strongly influenced by the book, and the songs are entirely about the book. I dunno.

Maybe this section should be renamed In popular culture?

Gouveia2 16:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with that last point, and have renamed it. Whether the dinky-little-rock-band references should remain - or that overly long Douglas Adams quote - is another matter. - DavidWBrooks 23:05, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good. That seems to fit better. And for whatever it's worth, I vote to remove the DLRB reference.

And I understand what you're saying about the long Douglas Adams quote. It's nice that he glowed about the book. The fact that he is a significant figure in popular science fiction might tip the balance towards keeping he quote. But I could go either way. --17:44, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Gouveia2

Updated Summary?

I think the summary is rather pitiful and it is more about the characters than the actual plot. I think it would be wise to create a "Character" section and further the Plot section. I could possibly even find the time to do it but am new to Wikipedia editing and wouldn't mind some guidance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Legion9 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]