The funny thing is that when you read SF literature of today you get a sense that a lot of what we see onscreen is behind the more cutting edge thinking in the books. This isn't surprising because SF in the visual mediums is usually at least a decade or so behind the literature. As such often the general audience is behind many of those who read SF lit rather than just relying on SF ideas depicted onscreen.
A lot of the ideas in TOS were already very familiar to the readers of SF lit at the time.
I suppose part of the difference is that an author has the time to indulge and research his material before he commits his final ideas to print while film and television producers (who aren't usually versed in the latest SF concepts) are pressed to get the show on the road.
In the real world I find it somewhat amusing how occasionally the media and the public get hung up on emerging new sciences that make them nervous because they don't understand them while many SF readers are often composed about it because they were already familiar with the given subjects at least a decade or so prior.
I recall someone once saying that science fiction was the antidote to future shock.
A lot of the ideas in TOS were already very familiar to the readers of SF lit at the time.
I suppose part of the difference is that an author has the time to indulge and research his material before he commits his final ideas to print while film and television producers (who aren't usually versed in the latest SF concepts) are pressed to get the show on the road.
In the real world I find it somewhat amusing how occasionally the media and the public get hung up on emerging new sciences that make them nervous because they don't understand them while many SF readers are often composed about it because they were already familiar with the given subjects at least a decade or so prior.
I recall someone once saying that science fiction was the antidote to future shock.