BronzeOracle
Sage
Hey guys
The novel I'm writing has elements that could be called bronzepunk or togapunk. While exploring these themes I stumbled across this article which I thought I'd share:
Make Way for Plaguepunk, Bronzepunk, and Stonepunk | Table Of Malcontents | Wired.com
My own view is that the 'punk' genre is like a retrospective SF - what would happen if in the past technology diverged and went further than it had? And so we have all kinds of technologies that look outdated and yet are futuristic.
From this perspective I disagree with the article that the movie '300' is bronzepunk - I reckon its a fantasy take on a historical event, but its not really 'punk'. I can't see where any technology divergence has occurred.
What I reckon is bronzepunk is say 'Bubo' the owl in the old Clash of the Titans flick:
Although Bubo is 'made by the gods' he's clearly mechanical, like some mysterious clockwork is inside.
Another example of bronzepunk or stonepunk could be the Olmec's flying machine and the golden condor in the cartoon series 'Cities of Gold'
These are flying machines with an ancient technology that isn't really electronic or using jet or propeller propulsion, and both are really a SF spin on ancient statues rather than modern flying craft.
I was wondering whether its another element that makes the 'punk' genre 'punk'. Is it a dystopian view? Although some punk stories have this (e.g. City of Lost Children) I don't think its a defining element of the genre. Like SF some stories are dystopian (e.g. Bladerunner) and some optimistic (e.g. Star Trek). Likewise, Miyazaki's 'Castle in the Sky Laputa' is definitely steam/dieselpunk but it is whimsical not dystopian.
What are others' thoughts on this - what makes steampunk 'punk'? Also, does anyone know of any cool bronzepunk or stonepunk stories?
The novel I'm writing has elements that could be called bronzepunk or togapunk. While exploring these themes I stumbled across this article which I thought I'd share:
Make Way for Plaguepunk, Bronzepunk, and Stonepunk | Table Of Malcontents | Wired.com
My own view is that the 'punk' genre is like a retrospective SF - what would happen if in the past technology diverged and went further than it had? And so we have all kinds of technologies that look outdated and yet are futuristic.
From this perspective I disagree with the article that the movie '300' is bronzepunk - I reckon its a fantasy take on a historical event, but its not really 'punk'. I can't see where any technology divergence has occurred.
What I reckon is bronzepunk is say 'Bubo' the owl in the old Clash of the Titans flick:
Although Bubo is 'made by the gods' he's clearly mechanical, like some mysterious clockwork is inside.
Another example of bronzepunk or stonepunk could be the Olmec's flying machine and the golden condor in the cartoon series 'Cities of Gold'
These are flying machines with an ancient technology that isn't really electronic or using jet or propeller propulsion, and both are really a SF spin on ancient statues rather than modern flying craft.
I was wondering whether its another element that makes the 'punk' genre 'punk'. Is it a dystopian view? Although some punk stories have this (e.g. City of Lost Children) I don't think its a defining element of the genre. Like SF some stories are dystopian (e.g. Bladerunner) and some optimistic (e.g. Star Trek). Likewise, Miyazaki's 'Castle in the Sky Laputa' is definitely steam/dieselpunk but it is whimsical not dystopian.
What are others' thoughts on this - what makes steampunk 'punk'? Also, does anyone know of any cool bronzepunk or stonepunk stories?
Last edited: