Talk:Gateway (novel)

Comment about sentence in the article

(spoiler warning)

He decides to sacrifice himself and closes the hatch.

From my reading of the novel, my first impression was that the guy tried to escape before the others did, thus stranding them and having the subsequent 'survivor guilt'. I haven't read the other sequels yet, but maybe that sentence should be changed to a mere statement of the facts (he closed the hatch, he aimed to push some sort of release control, the others yelled to him not to do it (not to do what?)), to accept wider interpretations. :-) He certainly didn't seem the sacrificing kind up to that point. Cheers Raystorm 00:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

They were moving all the excess equipment into that ship and everybody else was in the other one. He tried frantically to get out, then realized there wasn't time. As for motivation, he loved Klara. Clarityfiend 00:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know they were trying to move out the excess equipment and he found himself on the wrong place when they ran out of time. I finished the novel yesterday. :-) I'm just saying it looked more like self-preservation when he closed the hatch than something more noble as self-sacrifice. As for Klara, he loved her yes, but he also beat and hurt her. I guess it's a matter of interpretation. Raystorm 10:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Locking yourself into the ship that isn't supposed to make is a strange kind of self preservation, isn't it? --86.154.209.253 (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Pohl deliberately leaves this ambiguous. When the AI asks Robin whether he intended to desert the others he shouts "Yes. No. I don't know." It has been established before this (when he beat Klara and when he damaged the Heechee ship) that Robin has difficulty controlling his emotions in a crisis. The implication is that he wanted to sacrifice himself, but his unconscious mind performed the actions necessary to get away. CharlesTheBold 21:50, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Gateway(1stEd).jpg

Image:Gateway(1stEd).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Warning about the ending

I have added a warning that the plot section reveals the ending of the book. I have read some of the discussions regarding "spoiler warnings" and after reading some of the arguments from both sides I feel that in this instance the warning is justified. The twist at the end is an important factor for the enjoyment of the book and people who come to the Wikipedia page to have a look at the plot do not necessarily expect that the ending will be revealed to them. Spiros Bousbouras (talk) 03:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I agree with you, but they've posted Wikipedia:Spoiler, so I've felt it necessary to revert. :-( - Denimadept (talk) 04:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

geteway getaway just practicing on puns? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4DD7:F05:0:25AE:52D7:4DFC:AFCA (talk) 22:24, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Independence

I would find it very helpful to provide some information on whether or not you need to read the whole series to enjoy this book or whether "Gateway" can stand on its own. Normen Behr (talk) 15:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

It's the first book in the series. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:16, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

This is an awesome book on it's own. It is the original of the concept, and all else beyond it are sequels (as far as I know). --Neptunerover (talk) 09:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Or does this book have a cliff-hanger at the end? One of them in the series did, if I remember right, but I can't remember now. --Neptunerover (talk) 02:23, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

No cliffhanger. I don't think this novel was constructed as the first in a series; that came later after it was so successful. - Denimadept (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion the book stands alone and the sequels are nowhere near as good -- I'd advise to read Gateway and not bother with the others. James Fryer (talk) 12:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

a better direction?

I really don't like the plot-report style of this article. I think we should be able to let people know what the story is about without extensively detailing the plot and storyline. Then people can have the fun of discovering all those details on their own. It often is tempting to spoil something, but I think it's really better not to.

So what are the main topics here?

• Humanity suddenly discovers something incredible that has been right under our nose all along.
• A whole new frontier opens up distributed equally with dangers and rewards previously undreamed of, or at least of a nature that mankind has never before had to face.
• etc.

I have not worked on this article at all, and so I'm not going to go in and start changing things around. I know there's got to be people who loved the book as much as I did who want to make this article show people that if they miss reading this book, they're really missing out. --Neptunerover (talk) 09:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Keep in mind WP:SPOILER. I don't agree with it, but that's just me. - Denimadept (talk) 13:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure the spoilers here are serving that great of an encyclopedic purpose in the first place, so if they were replaced with something better, I don't know how terrible that would be thought of as. I already read the book, so I don't want to read this article. It was better for me learning all that stuff first hand. I don't think the present article mentions the concept of the half-way point, which was a very intriguing (and frightening) aspect of the story. But who can say what will or won't spoil some part of a story for a reader? Maybe my suggestions aren't the best. They are just suggestions though, and since it's one of my favorite books, I'm probably biased. --Neptunerover (talk) 16:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, show us what you have in mind. You can always revert it. Or put it here, or in your sandbox and point people there to review it. - Denimadept (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Having just taken a fresh look at the text, I see what you mean. I'll take a whack at revising it. - Denimadept (talk) 21:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

There's a revision for you. Feel free to rip it apart. :-D - Denimadept (talk) 22:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey yeah, all is good! I believe in no such thing as a bad idea (since badness is just a judgment made from a relative perspective that can never be all encompassing). --Neptunerover (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking of there being an introductory section that summarizes the book as far as it's major themes, along with detailing the style it is written in, which is one of the great aspects of the book. (and that's already there in the last paragraph: "The novel is divided between chapters of dialogue between Bob and Sigfrid and chapters covering the main action. Also embedded are various mission reports (usually with fatalities), technical bulletins, and other documents Broadhead might have read.")
..various mission reports (usually with fatalities).. : I love it! --Neptunerover (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Kirkus Reviews

Evidently the novel was covered by Kirkus Reviews in 1977. The review seems to be in the online archive but inaccessible by some mistake in assignment of eddresses. Search Kirkus Reviews: 'gateway' returns at least four hits for the simple title Gateway (as well as The Gateway, Gateway to Freedom, and so on). But the review of Sharon Shinn's Gateway is served for both of these two URL, which I have copy-pasted from the search report.

• https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/frederik-pohl-5/gateway-2/
• https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/sharon-shinn/gateway-2/

(I tried '1', '4', and '5' as the final numeral because other eddresses --which incorporate names of other writers-- include "gateway-" without any numeral and with '2' or '3'.)

The search report does include for Pohl's Gateway the lead sentence: "Lately Pohl has been gearing his future worlds and technologies less to fate-of-civilization extrapolation than to the imaginative shaping of inner events."

--P64 (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Heechee may be the Navajo Haashchʼéé

The Heechee appear to resemble the Haashchʼéé in the Navajo creation story, Diné Bahaneʼ. These gods or deities include Haashchʼéé Oołtʼohí, deity of the hunt; Haashchʼééłtiʼí, the Talking God, god of the dawn and the east; and Hashchʼéoghan, the House-God, god of evening and the west. As the Heechee and the Haashchʼéé are both supposed to be races of a long past era, there certainly seems to be a connection. Just sayin'.

And there really should be a page for the entire Gateway series. Right now the only list appears on the Heechee page, and they are two distinct concepts, a race and a series of books. A year or two ago I tried to create a page for it but it was deleted. Would someone who can start a page without it getting taken down please do so, and I would be happy to provide additional information for the page.

Mseanbrown (talk) 19:03, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

As long as your information comes with citations, feel free to add it. - Denimadept (talk) 21:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)