This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Retrofuturism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If this article is on retro-futurism, should we be including things that were just plain futurism at the time? For example, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is obviously retro-futuristic, in that it uses a mid-twentieth-century vision of the future (and places it during the actual past), but Metropolis or Buck Rogers were genuine "future" settings. I think the article should be more clear on this topic. - Branddobbe 23:51, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
I don't think "retro-futurism" is a portmanteau of "retro" and "futurism". I mean, obviously it is derived from those words, in that it is those two words placed one after the other. But surely a corresponding portmanteau would be "returism" or "futro". Or "futroism". -- Supermorff 15:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the new Battlestar Galactica tv series be included since it uses antiquated technology in contrast with its futuristic setting? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.15.11.58 ( talk • contribs) (22:40, 3 January 2007)
I added a new section: Retrofuturism#Hoaxing featuring an example I saw in the Photoshopping article. If anyone knows of other notable retro-futuristic hoaxes, please add them. -- Teratornis 17:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I think there should be a mention of the Tomorrowland section of the Disney theme parks in the examples of retro-futurism. Each Tomorrowland (or in the case of Disneyland Paris, 'Discoveryland') is based on a retro-futuristic architectural design. Macg4cubeboy 03:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering why this article focuses entirely on the 50's era retro-futurism. Isn't that merely one flavor of retro-futurism? For instance, I fully expected steampunk to be listed here as a subcategory of retro-futurism, and yet it's excluded as something else entirely. Rofang 01:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Source said "The term, "steampunk," was coined to refer to science fiction which built on Victorian society and technology, a genre inspired as much by contemporary representations of the works of Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, as by anything actually produced during the late 19th century.(...).Finally, retrofuturism takes earlier science fiction as its raw materials, revisiting mid-20th century constructions of the future from a more contemporary perspective." This is a contrasting sentence construction, it does not show equivalence. Yobmod ( talk) 07:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Why was the referance to Dr Who removed? ( Slatersteven 17:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC))
Although not a retro-futrue film Dune certainly has a retro-future look to it, should it be included in the film list? ( Slatersteven 18:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC))
There's insufficient material in that article to stand on its own, but it makes a reasonable subcategory for this article (where it's already discussed). RandomCritic 19:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Not adding him to the list of artists is a serious oversight. -- Armadillo01 15:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)armadillo01
There seems to be some uncertainty over what qualifies as retro-futuristic; in looking at some of the entries, I get the impression that some editors have thought that any science fiction more than a few years old is "retro-futuristic". Here are my thoughts on what retro-futuristic is not:
Ideally, retrofutures should be set in the future (at least, the future from the point of view of the particular time the retrostyle is based on -- the date might be the present or even the last few decades) but I suppose we have to include "presents" where futuristic tech has been produced by mad scientists and the like. There's still a difference between retro-futuristic tech intruding in an ordinary retro society, and a total retro-futuristic society (where, say, everybody is wearing shiny plastic clothing and going to work by jet-pack), and that might be worth breaking out at some point. RandomCritic 05:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
On another note, a distinction needs to be made between retro-futurism and remakes of pre-1965 science fiction subjects (like Flash Gordon, Nineteen Eighty-Four, and Duck Dodgers -- in these cases, the "retro" style that may appear derives not from a deliberate choice to be anachronistic, but from a faithfulness to the established styles of the subject matter. It may be an exercise in nostalgia, but it's not "retro" because the styles aren't contradictory to the time and place of their origin. -- RandomCritic ( talk) 16:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone consider this to be retro-futurist? I think it is a bit off the mark. I have seen it listed over in the steampunk article, to which it is closer. But, it really has nothing to do with a Victorian or early 20th century model of the future. Rather, it is set in the Victorian age, but with anachronistic technology. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am going to delete it. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 20:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Anyone wanna toss BTTF II into the appropriate category? TheHYPO ( talk) 07:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:Robot attackers.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The clothing article is a stub, and everything described therein pertains to retrofuturism (futuristic clothing means dressing in skintight suits etc as imagined in old-fashioned SF). So i think this article should have a subsection about retrofuturism's influence on fashion, and the other should redirect there. Yobmod ( talk) 10:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. Retro-futurism is an aesthetic sensibility; what doeas "futuristic clothing" refers to? is a confusing entry, with no references; is more like a personal analysis, it should probably be completely rewritten or maybe erase. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
201.235.212.119 (
talk)
12:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I'Ve done the merge, after ssing the strange addition from "Glamour magatzine" to this article. The resulting section i've put under design, and it probably needs to be shortened or made into a sub-heading of design? At least until more sources are found to make a seperate section needed. Also tagged some lists for trimming. Yobmod ( talk) 08:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Somebody should add the 08 speed racer movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.229.117 ( talk • contribs) (03:45, 23 June 2008)
who says these are notable - most are red links, and even the blue links don't have cites with anyone calling them notable for this style of design. It is a POV, OR, mini-promotional list. Yobmod ( talk) 08:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
"-- again -- because of a failure of imagination."
Ahaha, way to get stuck into writers on two occasions ahaha. IAmTheCoinMan ( talk) 17:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
An IP user added this a while back ,but i must have been on a break. The citation used did not mention "retro" anywhere. Unfortunately, neither did the 2 new cites, so i have removed it for now. Yob Mod 13:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I deleted the cover illustration from the August 1928 issue of Amazing Stories. There are a couple of reasons for this. The first, less important one, is that it doesn't illustrate what it was purported to illustrate. It does not illustrate "The jet pack, an icon of the future". It illustrates an event in Edward Elmer Smith's story The Skylark of Space in which the hero, Richard Seaton, has constructed a device (preliminary to building the titular Skylark spaceship) which is effectively an anti-gravity harness, though not named as such, which utilizes an imaginary invisible energy (supposedly arising from the reaction of copper with the fictitious substance "X") to allow the wearer to propel himself in any direction. It does not utilize rockets or jets, and it is not worn as a "pack" on the back or elsewhere.
More significantly, however, as far as this article is concerned, the illustration is simply "random pulp sf cover", and has no relevance to the article. This is not an article about vintage sf; it is an article about retro-futurism, which may draw upon vintage sf for inspiration but is a thoroughly modern phenomenon. As far as I know, no retro-futuristic work utilizes Doc Smith's harness as a basis, and even if it did, what this article needs is an illustration of the modern derivative, not the early 20th-century inspiration. RandomCritic ( talk) 18:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
In following up the references on this subject in this article, I find that the only example of the use of retro-futurism to refer to a "reactionary modernist" ideology is in a blog post by Dale Carrico, where the context ("a short description of retro-futurism (to which I allude often but which I have never really dealt with in any kind of extended way)") makes it clear that this is Carrico's own, idiosyncratic usage. As such, it fails WP:N. As Carrico's usage has little or nothing to do with the standard usage of the term, it's appropriate to remove references to it from this article. RandomCritic ( talk) 16:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The paragraph then simply terminates and moves on to the next section heading. Did someone fudge an edit? Delete something they shouldn't have? 98.108.164.197 ( talk) 04:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Ohh, right, sorry, that's from the last paragraph of the "Characteristics" section. 98.108.164.197 ( talk) 04:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to add to this. • RPG Examiner http://www.examiner.com/x-6911-RPG-Examiner~y2009m5d27-Retrofuturism-in-gaming (Examiner is currently blocked; WP is not content to merely be an incomplete mirror of information readily available elsewhere, now it has to censor that image also) • You say Apocalypse, I say retro-chic
Retrofuturism, like all science fiction, has been social comment, not merely the nostalgia listed as examples in the current version of the article. I can think of many reasons why you may prefer to see it as only pretty pictures, but the truth is somewhat different. 24.5.21.150 ( talk) 10:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
The wonder city you may live to see. I guess not yet in public domain, but cool. emijrp ( talk) 19:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Can modern uses of 1950s/1960s depictions of the future be considered "retrofuturistic"? AmericanLeMans ( talk) 01:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Under Themes it says (or said; I changed it a bit since):
One such theme is dissatisfaction with modern futurism. In some respects, an extrapolation of the present to the future produces disappointing, or even ghastly results, exemplified in cyberpunk and other dystopian futures characterized by overpopulation, environmental degradation, and transfer of power to unaccountable private entities or governments. Compared to such a future, retrofuturism suggests a world which may be more comfortable or at least more capable of being understood.
And what I don't fully understand here is that part: "retrofuturism suggests a world which may be more comfortable or at least more capable of being understood".
What's "world" referring to here? The real world or the fictional worlds displayed in works of retrofuturism or past science fiction?
In any case I think this paragraph needs some further adjustments!
Also some other idea for it: retrofuturism is usually also about conveying a sense of the magnitude of change that occured, making the present more futuristic when inquiring imaginations of the now from the past.
I also created: Category:Retrofuturism and would be glad if you could help fill it if I missed anything.
Also something about the lead: retrofuturism isn't just "a trend in the creative arts showing the influence of depictions of the future produced in an earlier era" but also a general field of interest: it's simply about reinspecting past generations' imaginations of the future from the temporal standpoint of said future. So e.g. steampunk is part of this artistic trend noted there; reexamining e.g. 1900's science fiction and speculation of the future is a field of interest.
-- Fixuture ( talk) 19:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Someone should tone the Kraftwerk down in the article, it's way too much. Some contributor to this article is obviously a big fan, we don't need 3 album covers here, mostly when two of them aren't even retrofuturistic at all, just retro. -- 90.156.104.160 ( talk) 11:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The whole issue of what makes a car retro-futuristic is interesting. There are certainly a lot of autos today that are retro in appearance (they make reference to older versions of automobiles, like the Chrysler PT Cruiser trying to appear as a 1950s British taxicab) but to be retro-futuristic Chrysler's reference point needs to be science fiction, by definition. For example, all that 1950s speculation that in the future we'd be driving nuclear-powered flying cars, if Chrysler had used that as their reference point then, yes, that would be retro-futuristic. And truth be told, even the article on the PT Cruiser simply says it is "retro in design". I would argue removing this photo. Xenomorph erotica ( talk) 16:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
To what past era of science fiction is it making reference to? If whoever wrote this said, "William Gibson references H.G. Wells' post-apocalyptic science fiction" then that would be retro-futuristic. Making claims like, "The post-apocalyptic variant is the one usually associated with retrofuturism, where characters will rely upon a mixture of old and new technologies" is both original research and written by someone who doesn't understand what retro-futurism is. I'm going bold and arguing that until someone can find citations backing up these claims it gets removed. Xenomorph erotica ( talk) 16:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I find the language used in this article frustrating and highly academic. A definition, used in the introduction, "can be seen as an animating perspective on the world" means virtually nothing to me. Simply looking out the window gives me an animated perspective on the world as well; how is this relevant besides it being a random quote? Here are the lines I can't find any citations for, haven't found any on-line and until whoever wrote them can back them up suggest removing:
--In the Etymology section there is this claim, "The word "retrofuturism," combines more recent ideas of nostalgia and retro with older traditions of futurism."
citation needed
--Everything in Characteristics, from, "Retrofuturism incorporates two overlapping trends which may be summarized as the future as seen from the past and the past as seen from the future... " to "... a quest for stylistic authenticity may continue to draw on writers and artists of the desired period" is uncited and while interesting ideas it's all
Original Research.
--The author of this article has not actually demonstrated that there is anything inherently retro-futuristic about cyberpunk as a whole, especially these repeated claims that dystopian futures and a "dissatisfaction with modern futurism" (?) somehow make it so. I would call for the removal of all cyberpunk mention (which would effectively remove Themes) until said citations can be produced.
--Everything dealing with Kraftswerk (see above).
--The Fashion section makes claims like, "The garments envisioned have most commonly been either one-piece garments, skin-tight garments, or both, typically ending up looking like either overalls or leotards, often worn together with plastic boots" which might be true, but again, where is the citation?
--The list of Video Games seems random and since others have already questioned it I would argue for its removal.
I understand some might say "how is this improving the article by removing 75% of the context?" and normally I would agree but I have searched for any citations I could find to help back up these claims and have come up with nothing. As it stands, I question the use of Original Research in an article that doesn't seem to 100% grasp the concept of retro-futurism in the first place.
Xenomorph erotica (
talk)
17:18, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't see it discussed in the article, and many of the text frames look modern. - Scarpy ( talk) 04:27, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Retrofuturism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If this article is on retro-futurism, should we be including things that were just plain futurism at the time? For example, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is obviously retro-futuristic, in that it uses a mid-twentieth-century vision of the future (and places it during the actual past), but Metropolis or Buck Rogers were genuine "future" settings. I think the article should be more clear on this topic. - Branddobbe 23:51, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
I don't think "retro-futurism" is a portmanteau of "retro" and "futurism". I mean, obviously it is derived from those words, in that it is those two words placed one after the other. But surely a corresponding portmanteau would be "returism" or "futro". Or "futroism". -- Supermorff 15:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't the new Battlestar Galactica tv series be included since it uses antiquated technology in contrast with its futuristic setting? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.15.11.58 ( talk • contribs) (22:40, 3 January 2007)
I added a new section: Retrofuturism#Hoaxing featuring an example I saw in the Photoshopping article. If anyone knows of other notable retro-futuristic hoaxes, please add them. -- Teratornis 17:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
I think there should be a mention of the Tomorrowland section of the Disney theme parks in the examples of retro-futurism. Each Tomorrowland (or in the case of Disneyland Paris, 'Discoveryland') is based on a retro-futuristic architectural design. Macg4cubeboy 03:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering why this article focuses entirely on the 50's era retro-futurism. Isn't that merely one flavor of retro-futurism? For instance, I fully expected steampunk to be listed here as a subcategory of retro-futurism, and yet it's excluded as something else entirely. Rofang 01:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Source said "The term, "steampunk," was coined to refer to science fiction which built on Victorian society and technology, a genre inspired as much by contemporary representations of the works of Jules Verne and H.G. Wells, as by anything actually produced during the late 19th century.(...).Finally, retrofuturism takes earlier science fiction as its raw materials, revisiting mid-20th century constructions of the future from a more contemporary perspective." This is a contrasting sentence construction, it does not show equivalence. Yobmod ( talk) 07:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Why was the referance to Dr Who removed? ( Slatersteven 17:00, 2 September 2007 (UTC))
Although not a retro-futrue film Dune certainly has a retro-future look to it, should it be included in the film list? ( Slatersteven 18:37, 4 September 2007 (UTC))
There's insufficient material in that article to stand on its own, but it makes a reasonable subcategory for this article (where it's already discussed). RandomCritic 19:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Not adding him to the list of artists is a serious oversight. -- Armadillo01 15:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)armadillo01
There seems to be some uncertainty over what qualifies as retro-futuristic; in looking at some of the entries, I get the impression that some editors have thought that any science fiction more than a few years old is "retro-futuristic". Here are my thoughts on what retro-futuristic is not:
Ideally, retrofutures should be set in the future (at least, the future from the point of view of the particular time the retrostyle is based on -- the date might be the present or even the last few decades) but I suppose we have to include "presents" where futuristic tech has been produced by mad scientists and the like. There's still a difference between retro-futuristic tech intruding in an ordinary retro society, and a total retro-futuristic society (where, say, everybody is wearing shiny plastic clothing and going to work by jet-pack), and that might be worth breaking out at some point. RandomCritic 05:10, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
On another note, a distinction needs to be made between retro-futurism and remakes of pre-1965 science fiction subjects (like Flash Gordon, Nineteen Eighty-Four, and Duck Dodgers -- in these cases, the "retro" style that may appear derives not from a deliberate choice to be anachronistic, but from a faithfulness to the established styles of the subject matter. It may be an exercise in nostalgia, but it's not "retro" because the styles aren't contradictory to the time and place of their origin. -- RandomCritic ( talk) 16:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Does anyone consider this to be retro-futurist? I think it is a bit off the mark. I have seen it listed over in the steampunk article, to which it is closer. But, it really has nothing to do with a Victorian or early 20th century model of the future. Rather, it is set in the Victorian age, but with anachronistic technology. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I am going to delete it. --- RepublicanJacobite The'FortyFive' 20:40, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
Anyone wanna toss BTTF II into the appropriate category? TheHYPO ( talk) 07:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Image:Robot attackers.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
The clothing article is a stub, and everything described therein pertains to retrofuturism (futuristic clothing means dressing in skintight suits etc as imagined in old-fashioned SF). So i think this article should have a subsection about retrofuturism's influence on fashion, and the other should redirect there. Yobmod ( talk) 10:10, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. Retro-futurism is an aesthetic sensibility; what doeas "futuristic clothing" refers to? is a confusing entry, with no references; is more like a personal analysis, it should probably be completely rewritten or maybe erase. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
201.235.212.119 (
talk)
12:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I'Ve done the merge, after ssing the strange addition from "Glamour magatzine" to this article. The resulting section i've put under design, and it probably needs to be shortened or made into a sub-heading of design? At least until more sources are found to make a seperate section needed. Also tagged some lists for trimming. Yobmod ( talk) 08:53, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Somebody should add the 08 speed racer movie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.229.117 ( talk • contribs) (03:45, 23 June 2008)
who says these are notable - most are red links, and even the blue links don't have cites with anyone calling them notable for this style of design. It is a POV, OR, mini-promotional list. Yobmod ( talk) 08:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
"-- again -- because of a failure of imagination."
Ahaha, way to get stuck into writers on two occasions ahaha. IAmTheCoinMan ( talk) 17:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
An IP user added this a while back ,but i must have been on a break. The citation used did not mention "retro" anywhere. Unfortunately, neither did the 2 new cites, so i have removed it for now. Yob Mod 13:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I deleted the cover illustration from the August 1928 issue of Amazing Stories. There are a couple of reasons for this. The first, less important one, is that it doesn't illustrate what it was purported to illustrate. It does not illustrate "The jet pack, an icon of the future". It illustrates an event in Edward Elmer Smith's story The Skylark of Space in which the hero, Richard Seaton, has constructed a device (preliminary to building the titular Skylark spaceship) which is effectively an anti-gravity harness, though not named as such, which utilizes an imaginary invisible energy (supposedly arising from the reaction of copper with the fictitious substance "X") to allow the wearer to propel himself in any direction. It does not utilize rockets or jets, and it is not worn as a "pack" on the back or elsewhere.
More significantly, however, as far as this article is concerned, the illustration is simply "random pulp sf cover", and has no relevance to the article. This is not an article about vintage sf; it is an article about retro-futurism, which may draw upon vintage sf for inspiration but is a thoroughly modern phenomenon. As far as I know, no retro-futuristic work utilizes Doc Smith's harness as a basis, and even if it did, what this article needs is an illustration of the modern derivative, not the early 20th-century inspiration. RandomCritic ( talk) 18:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
In following up the references on this subject in this article, I find that the only example of the use of retro-futurism to refer to a "reactionary modernist" ideology is in a blog post by Dale Carrico, where the context ("a short description of retro-futurism (to which I allude often but which I have never really dealt with in any kind of extended way)") makes it clear that this is Carrico's own, idiosyncratic usage. As such, it fails WP:N. As Carrico's usage has little or nothing to do with the standard usage of the term, it's appropriate to remove references to it from this article. RandomCritic ( talk) 16:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The paragraph then simply terminates and moves on to the next section heading. Did someone fudge an edit? Delete something they shouldn't have? 98.108.164.197 ( talk) 04:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Ohh, right, sorry, that's from the last paragraph of the "Characteristics" section. 98.108.164.197 ( talk) 04:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to add to this. • RPG Examiner http://www.examiner.com/x-6911-RPG-Examiner~y2009m5d27-Retrofuturism-in-gaming (Examiner is currently blocked; WP is not content to merely be an incomplete mirror of information readily available elsewhere, now it has to censor that image also) • You say Apocalypse, I say retro-chic
Retrofuturism, like all science fiction, has been social comment, not merely the nostalgia listed as examples in the current version of the article. I can think of many reasons why you may prefer to see it as only pretty pictures, but the truth is somewhat different. 24.5.21.150 ( talk) 10:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
The wonder city you may live to see. I guess not yet in public domain, but cool. emijrp ( talk) 19:59, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Can modern uses of 1950s/1960s depictions of the future be considered "retrofuturistic"? AmericanLeMans ( talk) 01:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Under Themes it says (or said; I changed it a bit since):
One such theme is dissatisfaction with modern futurism. In some respects, an extrapolation of the present to the future produces disappointing, or even ghastly results, exemplified in cyberpunk and other dystopian futures characterized by overpopulation, environmental degradation, and transfer of power to unaccountable private entities or governments. Compared to such a future, retrofuturism suggests a world which may be more comfortable or at least more capable of being understood.
And what I don't fully understand here is that part: "retrofuturism suggests a world which may be more comfortable or at least more capable of being understood".
What's "world" referring to here? The real world or the fictional worlds displayed in works of retrofuturism or past science fiction?
In any case I think this paragraph needs some further adjustments!
Also some other idea for it: retrofuturism is usually also about conveying a sense of the magnitude of change that occured, making the present more futuristic when inquiring imaginations of the now from the past.
I also created: Category:Retrofuturism and would be glad if you could help fill it if I missed anything.
Also something about the lead: retrofuturism isn't just "a trend in the creative arts showing the influence of depictions of the future produced in an earlier era" but also a general field of interest: it's simply about reinspecting past generations' imaginations of the future from the temporal standpoint of said future. So e.g. steampunk is part of this artistic trend noted there; reexamining e.g. 1900's science fiction and speculation of the future is a field of interest.
-- Fixuture ( talk) 19:58, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Someone should tone the Kraftwerk down in the article, it's way too much. Some contributor to this article is obviously a big fan, we don't need 3 album covers here, mostly when two of them aren't even retrofuturistic at all, just retro. -- 90.156.104.160 ( talk) 11:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The whole issue of what makes a car retro-futuristic is interesting. There are certainly a lot of autos today that are retro in appearance (they make reference to older versions of automobiles, like the Chrysler PT Cruiser trying to appear as a 1950s British taxicab) but to be retro-futuristic Chrysler's reference point needs to be science fiction, by definition. For example, all that 1950s speculation that in the future we'd be driving nuclear-powered flying cars, if Chrysler had used that as their reference point then, yes, that would be retro-futuristic. And truth be told, even the article on the PT Cruiser simply says it is "retro in design". I would argue removing this photo. Xenomorph erotica ( talk) 16:13, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
To what past era of science fiction is it making reference to? If whoever wrote this said, "William Gibson references H.G. Wells' post-apocalyptic science fiction" then that would be retro-futuristic. Making claims like, "The post-apocalyptic variant is the one usually associated with retrofuturism, where characters will rely upon a mixture of old and new technologies" is both original research and written by someone who doesn't understand what retro-futurism is. I'm going bold and arguing that until someone can find citations backing up these claims it gets removed. Xenomorph erotica ( talk) 16:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I find the language used in this article frustrating and highly academic. A definition, used in the introduction, "can be seen as an animating perspective on the world" means virtually nothing to me. Simply looking out the window gives me an animated perspective on the world as well; how is this relevant besides it being a random quote? Here are the lines I can't find any citations for, haven't found any on-line and until whoever wrote them can back them up suggest removing:
--In the Etymology section there is this claim, "The word "retrofuturism," combines more recent ideas of nostalgia and retro with older traditions of futurism."
citation needed
--Everything in Characteristics, from, "Retrofuturism incorporates two overlapping trends which may be summarized as the future as seen from the past and the past as seen from the future... " to "... a quest for stylistic authenticity may continue to draw on writers and artists of the desired period" is uncited and while interesting ideas it's all
Original Research.
--The author of this article has not actually demonstrated that there is anything inherently retro-futuristic about cyberpunk as a whole, especially these repeated claims that dystopian futures and a "dissatisfaction with modern futurism" (?) somehow make it so. I would call for the removal of all cyberpunk mention (which would effectively remove Themes) until said citations can be produced.
--Everything dealing with Kraftswerk (see above).
--The Fashion section makes claims like, "The garments envisioned have most commonly been either one-piece garments, skin-tight garments, or both, typically ending up looking like either overalls or leotards, often worn together with plastic boots" which might be true, but again, where is the citation?
--The list of Video Games seems random and since others have already questioned it I would argue for its removal.
I understand some might say "how is this improving the article by removing 75% of the context?" and normally I would agree but I have searched for any citations I could find to help back up these claims and have come up with nothing. As it stands, I question the use of Original Research in an article that doesn't seem to 100% grasp the concept of retro-futurism in the first place.
Xenomorph erotica (
talk)
17:18, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't see it discussed in the article, and many of the text frames look modern. - Scarpy ( talk) 04:27, 10 May 2022 (UTC)