> Subject: Re: Firefly?
> From: Bill Snyder airmail.net>
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
>
> On Fri, 02 May 2008 22:10:44 -0700, John Schilling
>
>
>
> spock.usc.edu> wrote:

>>On Fri, 2 May 2008 23:01:51 +0200, Pete B _xsomeething.com> wrote:

>

>>>In article reader2.panix.com>, jdnic...@panix.com says...

>>>> In article news.usenetserver.com>,
>>>> Pete B _xsomeething.com> wrote:

>>>>>In article comcast.com>,
>>>>>kwicker1b_nos...@comcast.net says...

>>>>>> Since you asked in the RASFW newsgroup, it should be noted FIREFLY is an
>>>>>> example of a subgenre, SF western:

>

>>>>>In some peoples eyes, in others (i think the creator as well) it's a
>>>>>likely extrapolation of how its going to look in the future, there will
>>>>>be rich people with flying cars and the poor losers who can only a
>>>>>afford a horse.

>

>>>> Because as we see today, poor people are stuck with horses?

>

>>>We do if we pay attention, yes.

>

>>Again, where should we be paying attention to see this?

>

>>To see, I must remind you, poor people who are stuck with *horses*.
>>Not poor people with donkeys, or poor people with mules, or poor
>>people with oxen or llamas or water buffalo. Poor people who are
>>"stuck", with actual horses.

>
> It's actually quite difficult to put enough of a point on a horse
> that it will penetrate a poor person and remain embedded.
>