Ray Bradbury Forums
The Martian Chronicles

This topic can be found at:
https://raybradburyboard.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3791083901/m/8291074372

11 February 2004, 02:49 PM
Nabisco
The Martian Chronicles
Simple question, I am currently reading The Martian Chronicles and recently came across your sight. The except you have for this book reads:
Chapter one reads January 2030 -

can I ask why?

The book I have reads January 1999, followed by Yilla, February 1999 - again you have 2030

Thanks.
11 February 2004, 06:11 PM
dandelion
Different editions. I believe the changes were made late '80s-early '90s. Maybe someone has the date.
11 February 2004, 08:51 PM
Nard Kordell
oooo... I hate to say this... It also has to do with... 'marketing'
11 February 2004, 10:45 PM
Mr. Dark
They were just trying to keep the dates relevant to current readers. I don't see it as evil, but my own preference is that you don't upgrade the masterpieces. Could you see the Mona Lisa in a halter top and low slung jeans? I don't think so!
12 February 2004, 06:20 AM
pterran
Mr. Dark,

RE: Mona Lisa in halter top and low slung jeans.

Yes, but it'd be kinda nice, wouldn't it?

Pete
12 February 2004, 07:19 AM
lmskipper
And of course Mona would need to be chatting on a cell phone!
12 February 2004, 10:09 AM
Nabisco
Thank you all.
Excellent response Mr. Dark.

The last copyright I find for the book is 1977.
My thought is it didn't need to be edited for current readers - since I am one. Knowing that today is 2004 and these ideas and dreams, though most importantly impressions & interpretations of Earthmen were originally presented in 1946 is astonishing. I can't wait to move on to Fahrenheit 451, which I have been told is another excellent, must read.
12 February 2004, 05:28 PM
From Greentown Illinois
Don't you mean Centigrade 232.78?
Also check out George Orwell's classic novel, 2015.


Andy
12 February 2004, 06:48 PM
Mr. Dark
Yea, it just doesn't feel right, does it?
26 February 2004, 04:45 PM
Spender
I don't think that The Martian Chronicles should have been updated in terms of years. The way it originally began, in 1999, is good enough. I just wished NASA had launched a manned expedition that year.
26 February 2004, 05:10 PM
dandelion
1999 was a nice symbolic choice. Turn of a century, dawn of a new age type thing.
27 February 2004, 04:18 PM
groon
My copy of MC is from 1980 and it still has the old dates, starting with 1999. I wans't even aware of the date changes 'till I read it elsewhere on this site.

Personally, I thinhk the old dates are more fun. Besides, I think everyone gets the idea that the book was written 40, 50 years ago, and we all know it's fiction. It's not like we're going to put the book down when we realize that 1999 is past. In fact, for me, it helps me feel like the events are really happening in my lifetime! Like right now, it corresponds to "2004, 2005...the Naming of Names." Pretty relevant, actually, to the current Mars exploration. That story comes to mind every time I see the news about Mars. What will we name the cities on Mars? What are the old names? And I didn't even realize until I picked the book up to check the dates that this story is supposed to be happening right now! I still like the idea someone had about naming the first town on Mars after Ray. Who can argue that!?