[BOOKS] ✭ Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943 By John W. Campbell Jr. – Motyourdrive.co.uk

Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943 txt Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943, text ebook Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943, adobe reader Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943, chapter 2 Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943, Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943 c81e2a Contents The Silver Lining Essay By The Editor Ie John W Campbell Jr The Weapon Makers, Part Of Weapon Shops Of Isher AE Van Vogt Interior Artwork By Frank Kramer In Times To Come Essay By UnknownFlight Into Darkness Webb Marlowe Ie J Francis McComas Interior Artwork By Frank KramerMimsy Were The Borogoves Lewis Padgett Ie Henry Kuttner And CL Moore Interior Artwork By KollikerThe Man In The Moon Henry A Norton Interior Artwork By KollikerGod S Footstool Essay By Malcolm JamesonThe Analytical Laboratory December Essay By The Editor Ie John W Campbell Jr Blue Ice Probability Zero Series Henry KuttnerProbability Zero Essay By L Sprague De Camp And Fox B Holden And Colin Keith And Henry KuttnerEfficiency Probability Zero Series Colin Keith Ie Malcolm Jameson Noise Is Beautiful Probability Zero Series Fox B HoldenThe Anecdote Of The Movable Ears Probability Zero Series L Sprague De CampBrass Tacks Essay By The Editor Ie John W Campbell Jr Opposites React , Part Of Seetee Serial Willi Stewart Ie Jack Williamson Interior Artwork By Kolliker

10 thoughts on “Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943

  1. says:

    Winner of the 2019 Retro Hugo 1944 for Best Novelette Mimsy Were the Borogoves by Lewis PadgettInteresting how views and opinions change over time.When I first read this in 2017 I thought it was a bit boring Maybe because I was expecting a time travel story, which it kinda is, but it isn t the main point.It is about how upbringing and education, and experience as well, shape the way we think and act How we rely on patterns instead of instinct But what would a child do Interesting.Basis for the movie The Last Mimzy.Can be read here.

  2. says:

    In case it s not obvious, the link up there in the description takes you to page where you can read the entire story for free It s not very long and well worth your time.Like all the best science fiction, this story is about ideas Despite being nearly 70 years old, the story could easily be set in present day without changing it at all The ideas feel fresh and develop wonderfully as the story goes along.Recommended

  3. says:

    This is a novelette, first published in 1943, so it is eligible for Retro Hogo this year.In a far, far future, a sentient being experiments with time machine and sends their offspring toys to somewhere around XX century Twice Without response They declare it a failure and move on In the mid 20th century a boy finds the stuff and starts to play with it, giving it also to his younger sister And as all good toys, those are educational.One of popular at that time ideas, based presumably on behaviorist paradigm in psychology, that kids are tabula rasa and can be taught anything and become anyone Here it even leads to quite surprising statements like Babies, of course, are not human they are animals, and have a very ancient and ramified culture, as cats have, and fishes, and even snakes the same in kind as these, but much complicated and vivid, since babies are, after all, one of the most developed species of the lower vertebrates In short, babies have minds which work in terms and categories of their own, which cannot be translated into the terms and categories of the human mind An interesting read of old school SF

  4. says:

    But no boy has ever left a box unopened, unless forcibly dragged away It was a toy Scott sensed, with the unerring instinct of a child Excellent novelette with a literary hook Despite an unpromising start, the story ends well The section on the adults reactions is too long and clumsy A child knows nothing of Euclid A different geometry from ours wouldn t impress him as being illogical.Like many smart people, Moore and Kuttner got geometry, and learning in general, backward We don t see things as we do because we learned Euclid s axioms Euclid derived his axioms from how we view reality A child learns to throw and catch a ball knowing nothing about physics But I don t think I ll change your little song You mustn t If you did, it wouldn t mean anything I won t change that stanza, anyway, he promised Just what does it mean It s the way out, I think, the girl said doubtfully I m not sure yet My magic toys told me 2019 Best Novelette 1944 Retrospective Hugo Award finalist Published in Astounding Science Fiction, February 1943 A symbol, to us, means than what we see on paper.

  5. says:

    My boyfriend s mom recommended the movie, and while I was doing research on the title, I came across this story and decided to read it first to see if I would enjoy it The story is certainly sci fi and ahead of its time The story is heavily psyhonalitical a psychological and psychotherapeutic theory first laid out by Sigmund Freud in the 19th Century and poses questions regarding children s development, in particular how they learn I liked the symbology of the story and how Through The Looking Glass gave insight into this new learning style X, that is very different from the Euclid theory that all the adults in the story have been conditioned to I am very interested in watching the movie to see how it s different from the original story, which I will report on later.So, I finally got around to watching the movie and I wasn t really surprised that they changed the story line quite a bit from the original story, but it was a pretty good movie none the less Basically, they happied up the ending in true Hollywood fashion, added some environmental aspects, and changed the psychological aspects to mental psychic abilities However, I would recommend reading the original story and then watch the movie, as they both are great and interesting in their own unique ways.

  6. says:

    I am amused by some reviews that find this hard to fathom because of the 1940 s point of view having grown up on classic sci fi, it made me warmly nostalgic and it was not at all difficult to understand or get into Although I m surprised I hadn t run across this one before If I mention how ahead of its time this was, am I also at fault for thinking less about the imagination of the past Either way, this is a top notch short story and I d put it up against anything written today It holds its own, with the slight exception of the know it all psychologist authority, a formula that feels a bit dated It is deliciously creepy I ll be talking and thinking about this one for a long time.

  7. says:

    My favorite SF short story of all time.

  8. says:

    After watching the movie The Last Mimzy, I d wanted to see if there was a book and if so, how it compared The book came out in 1943 vs 2007 for the movie Both begin in the far future with the purpose of explaining the toys In the book, a scientist is experimenting with time travel, seeming to give it up after several failed attempts In the movie, there is also than one attempt one sent to Alice as in Alice in the looking glass but the attempts aren t mere curiosity There is something genetically wrong with humans in the future that can only be fixed with DNA from the past The problem is how to get it Humans can t time travel Things can but they need help getting back so the toys somehow teach the children how to do that and a child s tear accidentally falls on Mimsy and carries her DNA back to the future How were they planning on collecting the DNA they needed The book spends a lot of time discussing how babies think differently than us till we train them otherwise The younger the children, the easier it was to communicate with them, training them to an alternate way of thinking In this case though, the children learned and then disappeared, presumably time traveling to when the toys were originally sent Period, end of story, no explanation In the original story, there s no indication that the toys have been sent with a mission or that they ve been altered in any way They re just his sons old toys, something disposable that won t be missed if they re ruined or don t come back.In the movie, they re specifically designed with the purpose of collecting DNA from the past in order to save the future Past attempts have failed This is the LAST Mimzy and it s communicating to Emma that the world is dying and this is their last chance to save it In both book and film, the futuristic toys were interesting to the untrained minds of young children They were able to see and understand things the adults couldn t This is where the original story went off into the concept that babies think in ways incomprehensible to mature humans The concept is presented that what if a child s mind had not been trained in Euclidian thinking what would the differences in our adult thinking be In the movie, the toys gave way to a wonderful range of visual fun They could speak telepahically, the boy could hear things others couldn t and could speak to spiders, the girl could transport sugar just by thinking it, they saw a geometric tube of a bridge between planets They could ve and should ve used this much better It was visually exciting but it seemed unrelated to sending Mimzy forward to the future with the old DNA to save the world The movie also brought in fractals ancient fractals, that the boy had been doodling Tibet palmistry I wouldn t be surprised to find that there s a lot I m missing in the author s original intention The movie didn t clarify it.

  9. says:

    Scott s actions are forced DNF.

  10. says:

    What Just what Amazing Be prepared it s like nothing you could ever imagine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *