Science Fiction and Fantasy

[Virtual_Burlesque]

My POV ---

Science Fiction is fiction about anything that is or might be possible.

Fantasy is fiction about anything that is not or may not be possible.

The two are usually listed together, because it is immensely difficult to decide – day to day – into which category each of them belong.

For example:

Some people are equally as certain that extra terrestrials exist, as other people are about the existence of angels and devils.

At one time the account of a man making a lunar landing was the stuff of sheerest fantasy, then it was no more than an old newspaper headline.



Whether it is fictional speculation upon the first societies of man (Quest for Fire), what someone believes may happen after an apocalyptic war (Damnation Alley), or an interaction with deadly artifacts left by a long-dead race of beings on the far side of the universe (Forbidden Planet), there is room under one of the two labels.

Beyond space flight, extra terrestrials, and rocket ships, science fiction also postulates the consequence of new technology, social forces, and political movements, to arrive at either utopian or dystopian conclusions.

Over the years Science Fiction has championed – even popularized – such diverse causes as ecology, overpopulation, nuclear disarmament (and armament) toleration of divergent lifestyles and life forms (also xenophobia) a celebration of the scientific approach, and the concept of perpetual progress.

Many Science Fiction authors write to promote, or explain, serious concerns of the day, or of the future. Many more write Science Fiction for its entertainment value. Often Fantasy writers have humane concerns camouflaged in fantastic garb, as well. At other times, entertainment is their only intent.

SF&F embraces a far larger territory than what is usually suggested by their labels. Mainstream, as well as other categories, enrich themselves with SF&F’s successes, while enfeebling their competiton by culling formerly popular enthusiasms, and sloughing them off as Science Fiction or Fantasy.

 

[sweetnpetite]

I too am annoyed at shuffling through book racks filled with Sci-fi and fantasy, definately when people get it all disorganized and you have to shuffle through to even find the fantasy novels. But, the market isn't large enough on either by themselves, so thus they get lumped together. I generally feel like smacking a few heads together whenever someone refers to all fiction as Sci-fi.. But thats just a personal issue I'm trying to work on

I think that the market is large enough. There are enough books and enough fans. I guess we are just not in charge of the stores.

(note to self about future career goals...)

 

[sweetnpetite]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Or does a fantasy tale nessecary have to take place in a medieval enviroment? Then what the heck is Harry Potter?

No it doesn't. It doesn't even have to take place in the past. Neither does fantasy fiction.

 

[tolyk]

I think that the market is large enough. There are enough books and enough fans. I guess we are just not in charge of the stores.

(note to self about future career goals...)

That was all my recantation of what a Market guide book stated. We are not mainstream. Oh, and consequently, if you look at my Profile, it states how I plan to start a bookstore..

 

[sweetnpetite]

That was all my recantation of what a Market guide book stated. We are not mainstream. Oh, and consequently, if you look at my Profile, it states how I plan to start a bookstore..

So do we get to have a Fantasy section?

And is this bookstore going to be in Ontario then? I'm in Michigan. How bout here?

 

[Weird Harold]

I don't think I like the definitions that always seem to be given for 'Fantasy' I think that there is an awful lot of Fantasy literature that doenst' fit into this whole 'no basis in reality' write off that mostly comes from science fiction fans. And I don't think most Fantasy fans would define it that way. Nor do I think we should look to fans of a *different* genre to define ours.
...
Huffily offended fantasyfan,

Sweet.

As somone who is both a SF and Fantasy fan (With a distinct preference for fantasy based on the proportions in my collection), I'm huffily offended at your huffy offense.

The problem with separating the two genres is that they're often hard to distinguish.

Take Robert Jordan's Wheel Of Time series -- it's marketed as Fantasy, but it's internal characteristics make it much closer to Apocalyliptic Science Fiction. It's set in a world that is or could be either our past or future (or both, based on the cosmology of his world.)

There are lots of "Fantasy" authors who approach the genre with a "There is more to our world than science" attitude that fills our very day world with Mythical Creatures -- Mercedes Lackey's series about Elves in the road racing business is typical of the type.

Are those stories Fantasy or Science Fiction? In one way, they fit the "One Big Lie" rule becaus they make a single assumption -- Mythical creatures aren't really Mythical, they've just gone into hiding -- but in another way, they're pur fantasy because they involve magic and mythical creatures that aren't real.

Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series is marked by the publisher and shelved as Romance, but it is a "TimeTravel" series which is one of the staple plot devices of Science Fiction, but then again, the time travel takes place because of "Magic" so it's obviously a fantasy series, and yet again, most of the action takes place in a well researched historical time frame, so it just as obviously Historical Fiction (which is normally shelved as simply "Literature.")

I think the two genres are usually shelved together, not because they're so hard to tell apart, but because they are in fact, "Geek Fiction" and most of the people who read them read both genres with only a slight preference for one over the other. There really are very few hardcore SF and hardcore Fantasy fans who totally disdain the other genre -- many who disdain certain sub-genres or particular authors, but very few who will throw down a good book in disgust because it actually explains how magic is really lost technology.

Arthur C Clarkes' maxim, "any technology, sufficiently advanced, is indistinguishable from Magic," is at the root of why SF&F are shelved together. It's just too difficult to separate them completely to make it worth the effort.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

I don't know if anyone cares, but I'm a little drunk tonite (college town, I'm that kind of guy) and I want to make it clear that I wasn't dissing Sci-Fi or Fantasy.

Personally, I'd like to appreciate them better. I have a position on the matter that is "If they've been /that/ popular for /that/ long, there's something good there", I'm just saying it appears to the public that its all geek stuff.

(mucho drunk)

(...I still type like a badass)

(I can't believe I'm typing this prior to a bar hookup)

(ok... I'm going now...)

(Lisa is still a turn on)

(ha)

 

[sweetnpetite]

I think the two genres are usually shelved together, not because they're so hard to tell apart, but because they are in fact, "Geek Fiction" and most of the people who read them read both genres with only a slight preference for one over the other. There really are very few hardcore SF and hardcore Fantasy fans who totally disdain the other genre -- many who disdain certain sub-genres or particular authors, but very few who will throw down a good book in disgust because it actually explains how magic is really lost technology.

Isn't reading geeky to begin with?

that's what I was always tought. (by virtue of being a reader when reading wasn't cool) is it 'cool' now as long as you don't read speculative? hmm. didn't know that

I far, far far prefer fantasy. It's my favorite kind of book while science fiction is one of my least favorite, with few acceptions. I wold never actually distain any entire genre, I love books in general far to much for that.

I started to read the Pern books, but they were to sci-fi for my taste. Does that qualify as throwing down a good book in disgust?

IF sci-fi fantasy are geekier than regular book geeks does that put us/them at the TOP of the geek food chain or the BOTTOM?

 

[Huckleman2000]

Interesting thread!

First, I think we can all agree that Virtual_Burlesque's AV is a fantasy. But apart from that...

I've always thought the distinction of the Fantasy/Sci-Fi genre was grounded in the use of future technology (Sci-Fi) or magic (Fantasy) as an integral plot device, apart from setting. To use the previous example, 1984 is certainly character-driven, but the use of invasive technology to coerce society is essential to the story.

Maybe "integral plot device" isn't the right term - Dr. M said much this same idea above when he said that the narrative thrust came from placing characters in otherworldly situations.

The rationale for placing Fantasy and Sci-Fi together, therefore, lies in Asimov's assertion that magic and technology are indistinguishable at some level.

I also agree with Dr. M re: Space Opera, but I would still place Star Wars, Flash Gordon, etc. in the Sci-Fi category based on the definition I've stated above. Likewise, The Magnificent Seven would be a Horse Opera, and therefore a Western. As The Seven Samurai, the same story is Historical Fiction (maybe?), since Feudal Japan isn't the setting for enough stories in the U.S. to merit its own genre.

 

[sweetnpetite]

YOu sir, are drunk.

And I am a geek

But tomorrow you shall be sober.

And I shall still be a geek.

I don't know if anyone cares, but I'm a little drunk tonite (college town, I'm that kind of guy) and I want to make it clear that I wasn't dissing Sci-Fi or Fantasy.

Personally, I'd like to appreciate them better. I have a position on the matter that is "If they've been /that/ popular for /that/ long, there's something good there", I'm just saying it appears to the public that its all geek stuff.

(mucho drunk)

(...I still type like a badass)

(I can't believe I'm typing this prior to a bar hookup)

(ok... I'm going now...)

(Lisa is still a turn on)

(ha)

 

[tolyk]

So do we get to have a Fantasy section?

And is this bookstore going to be in Ontario then? I'm in Michigan. How bout here?

When I franchise, I'll make sure to open one in your neck of the woods. Until then, it will indeed be exclusive to the small town I live in, within Ontario.

 

[Weird Harold]

started to read the Pern books, but they were to sci-fi for my taste. Does that qualify as throwing down a good book in disgust?

With the exception of the very first, the Pern series has never been even close to Fantasy, but since it is one of my favorite series, I'd have to say you are missing a "good read" by passing on most of the series. (there are a few less-than-great volumes in th series, but that's kind of expected in a series that spans nearly forty years of the author's life.)

Isn't reading geeky to begin with?

that's what I was always tought. (by virtue of being a reader when reading wasn't cool) is it 'cool' now as long as you don't read speculative? hmm. didn't know that

If my granddaughters are any indication, reading is now cool -- or at least not despised as it was when I was tagged a "bookworm" and regularly beaten on the playground.

By "Geek Fiction" I don't mean the genres are geeky or that rading is geeky, but a large percentage of fans of SF&F are geeks and nerds -- i.e. very bright people who seek escape from reality in well written fictional worlds.

That doesn't describe ALL SF&F fans by any means; just a significant percentage of them. (It does decribe me, though.)

 

[CrazyyAngel]

There are lots of "Fantasy" authors who approach the genre with a "There is more to our world than science" attitude that fills our very day world with Mythical Creatures -- Mercedes Lackey's series about Elves in the road racing business is typical of the type.

Have you a book title for that Elven Road Racers? Amazon lists 114 results under Mercedes Lackey and so far I havent found it ...

EDIT: Never mind, found it ...

CA

 

[Weird Harold]

Have you a book title for that Elven Road Racers? ...

EDIT: Never mind, found it ...

CA

Did you find the sequels as well? I belive there are about sven books in that series -- some co-authored by Margaret Ball, IIRC.

 

[gauchecritic]

Well you can count me in as a hard core sci-fi fan who disdains fantasy. If the cover has the guy holding his girl in one arm and a broad sword in the other I won't even read the blurb.

I love Anne McCaffrey's 'Ship' series but I won't touch her 'Dragon' series.

And I've been know to throw books across the room when they turn into fantasy while I was expecting sci-fi.

Having said that, as everyone knows I adore Discworld, which is probably fantasy (The most shop-lifted series in the history of bookshops apparently)

On the subject of the subject of genres as definition, someone mentioned The Seven Samurai (historical) remade as The Magnificent Seven (western) there is a film that was a remake in space opera which starred Johnboy from the Waltons.

And I think someone mentioned 'Forbidden Planet' which was a remake of Shakespear. (The Tempest)

For Alyxen, who asked about Dubya, I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that in a public speech he labelled the characters of the film Apollo 13: "celluloid heroes".

Gauche

 

[Marsipanne]

In 'The Rivian Codex' intro by David Eddings, he wrote--

Epic fantasy can be set in this world. You don't have to create a new universe just to write one. My original 'doodle', however, put us off-world immediately. It's probably that 'off-world' business in Tolkien that causes us to be lumped together with science fiction, and we have no business on the same rack with SF. SF writers are technology freaks who blithely ignore that footnote in Einstein's theory of relativity which clearly states that when an object approaches the speed of light, its mass becomes infinite. (So much for warp-drive.) If old Buck Rogers hits the gas-pedal a little too hard, he'll suddenly become the universe. Fantasists are magic and shining armor freaks who posit equally absurd notions with incantations, 'the Will and the Word', or other mumbo-jumbo. They want to build a better screwdriver, and we want to come up with a better incantation. They want to go into the future, and we want to go into the past. We write better stories than they do, though. They get all bogged down in telling you how the watch works; we just tell you what time it is and go on with the story. SF and fantasy shouldn't even speak to each other, but try explaining that to a book-store manager. Try explaining it to a publisher. Forget it.


Personally, I think that sci-fi and fantasy obviously have a few similarities--in that they're unrealistic. I like sci-fi, but I get bored when authors start droning on about some particular scientific thing too much. I've read some Anne McCaffrey--namely the first Pern book (which I enjoyed, but I didn't know which one to read next so I gave up) and the Crystal Singer series, which I liked very much. I'm a big fantasy reader, but I still don't like most fantasy novels. However, it's still the genre that I enjoy the most by far.

Just thought of something. I know that Anne Rice typically is rated as a horror author, but in my opinion, her Vampire Chronicles aren't horrifying at all and in fact resemble fantasy much more.

 

[Sabledrake]

Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Yeah, and I was going to say- it's usually the smallest section of the store or librairy!!!! no fair! no fair!

Well, actually, that'd be the horror section ...

Sabledrake

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Interesting thread!
First, I think we can all agree that Virtual_Burlesque's AV is a fantasy....

It is?

The rationale for placing Fantasy and Sci-Fi together, therefore, lies in Asimov's assertion that magic and technology are indistinguishable at some level.

Not Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke!

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Clarke's Third Law.

I also agree with Dr. M re: Space Opera, but I would still place Star Wars, Flash Gordon, etc. in the Sci-Fi category based on the definition I've stated ...

Space Opera is determined by the quality of its plot.

The archetypal Space Opera would be Buck Jones, who when trying to catch a gang of asteroid rustlers, jumped into his trusty spaceship and headed them off at the Horsehead Nebula.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

.... If the cover has the guy holding his girl in one arm and a broad sword in the other I won't even read the blurb.

Then you miss a lot: H. Beam Piper, Arthur H. Landis, and Donald Barr, they act a an anodyne to Hal Clement and Larry Niven.

And I've been know to throw books across the room ....

OOH!!! The POOR thing! Was it hurt?

...there is a film that was a remake in space opera which starred Johnboy from the Waltons.

Battle Beyond the Stars (1980) with Richard Thomas.

And I think someone mentioned 'Forbidden Planet' which was a remake of Shakespear. (The Tempest)

Except for the work of George Pal and Ray Harryhausen, the only 1950's Sci-Fi film that didn’t incorporate paper mache costumes or blow-ups of cockroaches.

http://sfstation.members.easyspace.com/fbcol3.jpg

 

[Guest]

Gauche, I know zip about this thread's subject, but I've been known to throw books at people (well, male people).

Perdita

 

[yui]

Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Star Wars is more Science Fantasy. Its just a basic Fantasy plot (well, one of the most basic plots ever) set in a future reality. Like Gauche said, somethings in Sci-Fi have a real scientific basic. Almost none of Star Wars has any scientific truth.

CA

Hi CA,

I am in no way trying to attack what you have said, because I think we rather agree. However, forgive me for being this lame, but Star Wars wasn't set in a future reality, it was set "long ago, in a galaxy far away...”

And I am absolutely certain that single statement will consign me to Geekdom forever…

As for the "scientific truth" of Star Wars, if you have more than a passing interest in physics, then I am sure you are aware that NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics Program is currently exploring how to propel spacecraft without rocket propellant (and whether vacuum energy or negative energy or some such thing can be put to use for this purpose). They are also trying to discover whether quantum physics can get you from point A to point B without having to travel in between. Jump to lightspeed, anyone?

Also, there is the Podkletnov Effect, a phenomenon which some believe demonstrates that objects can be shielded from gravity (i.e. the hovering landspeeders in "Star Wars").

And, the lightsaber effect, theoretically, could be duplicated by containing a superhot plasma within a magnetic field in the form of a figure-8. In order to duplicate the lightsaber, the figure-8 would have to be so tall and narrow that it appeared to be a straight blade. In truth, this would simply represent an exaggerated variation of the “stellarator” concept for a nuclear fusion containment device.

The problem with all of these theories is, as always, the HUGE amounts of energy that would be required to produce results.

The geek in the third row,

Yui ^_^

Edited to add sources: Jeanne Cavelos (astronomer and author) and Marc Millis (NASA)

 

[yui]

Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Yeah, and I was going to say- it's usually the smallest section of the store or librairy!!!! no fair! no fair!

Absolutely unfair! Shall we stage a revolt?

How about a Read-In?

 

[alyxen]

This has been some great discussion on this topic!! Thanks all!!!

One of the general things that has been talked about a bit is that the definition of science fiction is constantly changing.

Now, let me throw a new question out to you.....


Let's say someone wrote a book 300 years ago about underwater vessels (submarines). At the time that would have been considered science fiction.

The question is this: Would it still be considered science fiction today, or would it now be relegated to just fiction?

 

[gauchecritic]

Let's say someone wrote a book 300 years ago about underwater vessels (submarines). At the time that would have been considered science fiction.

The question is this: Would it still be considered science fiction today, or would it now be relegated to just fiction?

It would still be science fiction because of when it was written and the fact that it was speculative.

Arthur C Clarkes short story (I forget which one) wherein he 'invented' the geostationary sattelite is still science fiction because the story was about the effects of his invention on the people of that time.

Lots of what-if sci-fi are simply devices with which to set a background for a story, not necessarily fantastic but everyday devices (I can't recall anyone using lasers in 50's sci-fi to read dvds)

I do recall a story (maybe Heinlein) wherein the owner of the moon, in order to protect his investment bought a metre(?) wide strip of land encircling the earth so that his rights as landowner gave him rights from the earth upwards to any reachable point.

This has always been possible, in the same way as the geosynchronous orbit of a telecoms sattelite, the stories merely mention their effects on the characters.

Gauche

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Now, let me throw a new question out to you.....


Let's say someone wrote a book 300 years ago about underwater vessels (submarines). At the time that would have been considered science fiction.

The question is this: Would it still be considered science fiction today, or would it now be relegated to just fiction?

Jules Verne is generally considered to be a science fiction author, even though time has passed him by.

There's even a word for the way the past looked at the future. It's called "retrofuturism", as with the steam-powered spider in the movie "Wild, Wild West" or those glowing 1940's pictures of the "World of 2000" where we're all flying around in our atomic-powered helicopters.

---dr.M.