1491: Stories of the Past and Future - Revision history

Igordebraga: /* Explanation */

2025-08-14T15:23:26Z

‎Explanation

Arcorann: /* Works listed */ hack to make a working wikilink to the page itself

2024-12-11T10:35:54Z

‎Works listed: hack to make a working wikilink to the page itself

Maplestrip: /* Explanation */ Sectioning "how to read the graph" so people will have an easier time finding helpful information.

2024-01-24T15:08:28Z

‎Explanation: Sectioning "how to read the graph" so people will have an easier time finding helpful information.

172.71.178.138: /* Trivia */ Cat missing. (And, while here, apostrophe correct but bad written style.)

2023-09-29T06:17:13Z

‎Trivia: Cat missing. (And, while here, apostrophe correct but bad written style.)

141.101.98.214: /* Works listed */ Missing work added. (Note markup compromises, other choices made.)

2023-09-29T06:12:47Z

‎Works listed: Missing work added. (Note markup compromises, other choices made.)

Arcorann: /* Works listed */

2023-09-29T03:13:44Z

‎Works listed

FaviFake: Fixed old http:// link

2023-06-27T09:33:02Z

Fixed old http:// link

Jacky720: rv

2022-05-04T23:56:14Z

Show changes

Ex Kay Cee Dee at 23:56, 4 May 2022

2022-05-04T23:56:12Z

Show changes

Jacky720: rv

2022-05-04T23:45:17Z

Show changes

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 The setup of the chart points to the reality that, in process of time, more and more works will cross those lines. Future audiences will likely assume that films like ''Apollo 13'' and ''Schindler's List'' were made around the time of the events in question. And modern science fiction works, if they're still remembered in the future, will become just as obsolete as past works.  And Randall even indicates "this chart" on the chart, apparently acknowledging that it will become dated as time goes by.
-The title text jokes that ''2001'' cuts from prehistoria to the future before ''The Flintstones'' theme can become recognizable. This references the fact that, despite being primarily set in what was then the future, the film opens in the ancient past, thus appearing in both parts of the graph, with one part being very close to ''The Flintstones''. This plays on the fact that one of these was a very serious work and the other a playful animated show that was intended as family comedy.
+The title text jokes that ''2001'' cuts from prehistoria to the future before ''The Flintstones'' theme can become recognizable. This references the fact that, despite being primarily set in what was then the future, the film opens in the ancient past, thus appearing in both parts of the graph, with one part being very close to ''The Flintstones''. This plays on the fact that one of these was a very serious work and the other a playful animated show that was intended as family comedy. Also, the prehistoric part ends with [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZzVNLCeYKI an hominid screaming], in a way that could transition into [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq7noaMwLfg the horns of ''The Flintstones'' opening].
 ===How to read the graph===

@@ Line 262: / Line 262: @@
 | ''{{w|Star Wars sequel trilogy|Star Wars}}'' (VII – IX)||sequel film trilogy||2015*||style="color:#8B0000;" data-sort-value="1,000,000,000" | 1 billion || data-sort-value="-1,000,000,000"|"A long time ago"|| See note at episodes IV–VI
 |-
-| ''{{xkcd|1491|This chart}}''||xkcd comic||2015-02-25|| 0.000 || data-sort-value="2015" | 2015-02-25||<!-- *would be cleaner as* [[1491: Stories of the Past and Future|Self-referential]] *but param-pipe apparently gets broken by table-pipe, so...* -->[https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1491:_Stories_of_the_Past_and_Future Self-referential]
+| ''{{xkcd|1491|This chart}}''||xkcd comic||2015-02-25|| 0.000 || data-sort-value="2015" | 2015-02-25||[[1491: Stories of the Past and Future#top|Self-referential]]
 |-
 |}

@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 The setup of the chart points to the reality that, in process of time, more and more works will cross those lines. Future audiences will likely assume that films like ''Apollo 13'' and ''Schindler's List'' were made around the time of the events in question. And modern science fiction works, if they're still remembered in the future, will become just as obsolete as past works.  And Randall even indicates "this chart" on the chart, apparently acknowledging that it will become dated as time goes by.
-How to read the graph:
+The title text jokes that ''2001'' cuts from prehistoria to the future before ''The Flintstones'' theme can become recognizable. This references the fact that, despite being primarily set in what was then the future, the film opens in the ancient past, thus appearing in both parts of the graph, with one part being very close to ''The Flintstones''. This plays on the fact that one of these was a very serious work and the other a playful animated show that was intended as family comedy.
 * X-axis: Date of publication.
 * Y-axis, "Years in the future": Number of years the story's events take place, after the story's publication.
@@ Line 38: / Line 40: @@
 Thus it's clear that the definitions of the lines are consistent with each other as they follow similar but inverted functions.
 The graph uses variable {{w|logarithmic scale}}s, adjusting the scale in various regions to the temporal density of works being plotted. If the scale were linear, the graph would in fact represent a (bidimensional) {{w|Minkowski diagram}}, which depicts the moving cones of past and future in spacetime as one's present advances in time.
 === Works listed ===

@@ Line 403: / Line 403: @@
 ==Trivia==
-*Later after the initial release of this comic Randall added a link to this page. It's viewable in the HTML-source or here: [https://xkcd.com/1491/info.0.json https://xkcd.com/1491/info.0.json]. The text is: ''"this is a massive fucking graph beyond the limits of normal transcription. you can find a full listing of data points at http:\n\nwww.explainxkcd.com\nwiki\nindex.php\n1491"''.
+*Later after the initial release of this comic Randall added a link to this page. It is viewable in the HTML-source or here: [https://xkcd.com/1491/info.0.json https://xkcd.com/1491/info.0.json]. The text is: ''"this is a massive fucking graph beyond the limits of normal transcription. you can find a full listing of data points at http:\n\nwww.explainxkcd.com\nwiki\nindex.php\n1491"''.
 {{comic discussion}}
@@ Line 414: / Line 414: @@
 [[Category:Terminator]]
 [[Category:Back to the Future]]

@@ Line 261: / Line 261: @@
 |-
 | ''{{w|Star Wars sequel trilogy|Star Wars}}'' (VII – IX)||sequel film trilogy||2015*||style="color:#8B0000;" data-sort-value="1,000,000,000" | 1 billion || data-sort-value="-1,000,000,000"|"A long time ago"|| See note at episodes IV–VI
 |-
 |}

@@ Line 252: / Line 252: @@
 |''{{w|10,000 BC (film)|10,000 BC}}''||film by Roland Emmerich||2008||style="color:#8B0000;" data-sort-value="12007" | 12,007|| data-sort-value="-10,000"|10,000 BCE||
 |-
-| ''{{w|Year One (film)|Year One}}''||film by Harold Ramis||2009||style="color:#8B0000;" | 2008||data-sort-value="1"|1 CE|| The movie title is inaccurate; it is difficult to determine the film's actual year as it depicts Cain and Abel (c. 4000 BCE) existing simultaneously with Abraham, Sodom and Gomorrah (c. 2000 BCE).
+| ''{{w|Year One (film)|Year One}}''||film by Harold Ramis||2009||style="color:#8B0000;" | 2008||data-sort-value="1"|1 CE|| The movie title is not intended to refer to 1 CE, as it is clearly set well before that; it is difficult to determine the film's actual year as it depicts Cain and Abel (c. 4000 BCE) existing simultaneously with Abraham, Sodom and Gomorrah (c. 2000 BCE).
 |-
 | ''{{w|Downton Abbey}}''||TV series||2010*||style="color:#8B0000;" data-sort-value="90" | ~90||1912–1923||

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 | titletext = Little-known fact: The 'Dawn of Man' opening sequence in 2001 cuts away seconds before the Flintstones theme becomes recognizable.
 }}
 {{TOC}}
 == Explanation ==
 It's long been common for narrative works to be set in the past, and this tendency goes back to ancient mythology. The opposite approach, setting a work in a speculative future, has been less common prior to modern times. The oldest example Randall presents is from 1733, but it didn't really become a trend until well into the 19th century, and didn't become really common until the 20th century.
@@ Line 169: / Line 168: @@
 | ''{{w|Roots (miniseries)|Roots}}''||TV series, adapted from eponymous novel||1977||style="color:#8B0000;" | 90–227||1750–1882||
 |-
-| ''{{w|Star Wars#Original trilogy|Star Wars}}'' (IV – VI)||original film trilogy ||1977*|| style="color:#8B0000;" data-sort-value="1,000,000,000" | 1 billion || data-sort-value="-1,000,000,000"|"A long time ago"|| It's not clear why Randall has chosen 1 billion years here. Wookieepedia puts the age of the ''Star Wars'' galaxy at [http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/13,000,000,000_BBY ~13 billion years], and our Universe is only 13.8 billion years old, and the oldest known galaxy took 380 million years to form... So it would seem ''Star Wars'' should be no farther than 400 million years in the past, give or take.
+| ''{{w|Star Wars#Original trilogy|Star Wars}}'' (IV – VI)||original film trilogy ||1977*|| style="color:#8B0000;" data-sort-value="1,000,000,000" | 1 billion || data-sort-value="-1,000,000,000"|"A long time ago"|| It's not clear why Randall has chosen 1 billion years here. Wookieepedia puts the age of the ''Star Wars'' galaxy at [https://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/13,000,000,000_BBY ~13 billion years], and our Universe is only 13.8 billion years old, and the oldest known galaxy took 380 million years to form... So it would seem ''Star Wars'' should be no farther than 400 million years in the past, give or take.
 |-
 | ''{{w|Grease (film)|Grease}}''||film by Randall Kleiser||1978||style="color:#FF0000;" | 20||1958||