I did a quick check and it would seem that I no longer have my copy of the "original". (One must periodically discard casual fiction.) I did, however, find his novel "The Brain Stealers", his take on the Puppet Masters theme. Leinster also wrote tie-ins for "Land of the Giants". A lot of SF writers did TV tie-in novels back then. Keith Laumer did so for "The Invaders".
"A Logic Named Joe" predicted Alexa way back in 1946
- Thread starter bryce
- Start date
And of course James Blish did Star Trek. What's intriguing is that he put in allusions to events and entities from his own original fiction, basically treating ST as if it took place in his Cities in Flight universe (albeit with one or two references to his other fiction, I think). It goes to show that back then, Blish was bigger than Trek, at least in SF circles.
There's also Isaac Asimov's novelization of the film Fantastic Voyage, in which he heavily revised the story to make it more scientifically plausible. The novelization was actually released before the movie to build interest for it (an alien concept in our spoiler-phobic era), so people often mistake the movie for an adaptation of the book instead of the reverse.
Let's see, Thomas M. Disch wrote the first tie-in novel to The Prisoner. Looks like there were also tie-ins to Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea by Paul W. Fairman and Lost in Space by Dave Van Arnam and Ted White (under the name Ron Archer). I don't think I've heard of any of those authors.
Of course, by the mid-'70s or so, nearly all novelizations were by Alan Dean Foster.
Ted White did at least one comic book tie-ins.
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...0KHRH0C7UQ4dUDCAY&uact=5#imgrc=fROkiq8GXjgppM:
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...0KHRH0C7UQ4dUDCAY&uact=5#imgrc=fROkiq8GXjgppM:
The funny thing is, BTTF2 was just doing what Star Wars wand others were - hawking the latest alluring shiny pet rock thing, although a fax machine was aimed at a tad different audience than plastic poseable toys. But when BTTF2 came out, it was greater than sliced bread.
I would also argue these old movies and shows create the ideas that technologists translate into real life products (in what's arguably the most difficult and complex process) that are then sold by marketers to resolve a need we're told exists. Years later people look back and see a correlation and think it's always due to prediction or crystal ball or cold reading or fad and/or some other coincidence. After all, video conferencing has been viable for some time now and most people still are more than contented with audio-only communication.
Yeah but did they predict what ancient religions had (as some believe religions are the original sci-fi, but the world is made up of all types)? Or is it prediction or planting or furthering an idea based on "genetic memory" aka "race memory"?
Maybe that's true up to a point, but as a rule, SF movies and TV rarely "create" anything. Generally, any new idea shows up in prose science fiction at least a decade or two before it percolates out to mass-media SF, sometimes much longer. I mean, Jules Verne predicted fax machines and computer networks in 1863 (Paris in the Twentieth Century, which went unpublished until 1994).
Not to mention that the SF writers are often basing their conjectures on proposals from real scientists. The relationship between science and science fiction has always been a cycle of mutual inspiration, an ongoing dialogue. Scientists discover or derive new principles, writers imagine their possible applications, later scientists are inspired by the writers to find ways to make those applications real, etc. It's not prognostication, it's creativity. An idea has to be imagined before it can be realized.
That actually works if you believe the human race has been around more then one time in the cycle of life and we had invented all this stuff before and keep repeating the cycle.