Calle wrote:
Do we really *discuss* Ben Steed's intentions that often? Occasionally, we speculate on what they may have been, but that is more of morbid curiosity, I think.
And I do not think we discuss the differences between Terry Nation and Chris Boucher. I mean, really, what would that be about? "Well, Terry is dead and Chris is not"?
We *do* discuss the differences in the *works* of Terry Nation and Chris Boucher -- and *that* is interesting. There we can actually say things, like for example that Boucher's works tend to be rather a lot darker and more pessimistic than Nation's. This is something we can discuss. This is something that is drawn from the sources available to us.
Actually, I'd say that Nation's work was more pessimistic and that Boucher's was more cynical.
For an example, compare the two "endings" to Blake's that each of them wrote.
Both stories feature our "heroes" walking into a trap and in a sense Nation's might seem more optimistic, in that they survive in his story and not in Boucher's. However, "Terminal" does have a broader vision, and a much more pessimistic one, which sees humanity ultimately evolving into the brutish "Links". This is lacking in "Blake", which operates on a more personal level, being a final confrontation between Avon and Blake.
Nation's pessimism is seen in his other work as well, such as "Survivors", which envisages a grim future for humanity. Nuclear wars are also a common component in his science fiction stories.
Boucher's work is more grounded in cynicism. He doesn't, in any of his stories I'm aware of, envisage a disaster for humanity on a large scale. It's more a case of "business as usual", with the powerful exploiting the weak, etc. "Shadow" seems typical of this.
Best wishes, James