Other than steam punk, I don't recall seeing anything I would define as sci fi occurring in the past, in which all players have less technology than we readers do, and certainly no sci fi taking place in entirely pre-technological settings. Sci fi for me is the future we probably won't have, while fantasy is the past we never had. I find the Harry Potter series to be jarring when it includes bits of the present, like automobiles.
Harry Turtledove and his alternate histories are hard to peg, though. Are they sci fi or fantasy? Guns of the South and the World at War series I'd say are sci fi, since at least some of the parties involved have technology beyond our present day abilities, but his other alternative histories take place completely in the past.
Science fiction and/or/versus Fantasy
They are...alternate histories.narya wrote:Harry Turtledove and his alternate histories are hard to peg, though. Are they sci fi or fantasy?
(Though I once read an alternate history book in which Joan of Arc's angel visions were real that became very fantasy.)
I wanna love somebody but I don't know how
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists
I wanna throw my body in the river and drown
-The Decemberists
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
narya, interesting post. A lot of people agree with you.
There has been non-steampunk SF set in, say, the far past of Earth. But it involves either time travel or aliens as a rule, if not both.
Alternate history is a special case. I would argue that it fits my own definition of SF, since it's a "what if" based in the physically possible (though maybe not historically so). "What if the Allies lost World War II?" is the "twist" for at least a couple of books, and that certainly could have happened. Kim Stanley Robinson's The Years of Rice and Salt describes world history after the 14th-century Black Death killed, not "just" a third of the population of Europe, but 99%. I'd argue that it's science fiction, because the "what if" is based in the possible. The level of technology doesn't matter to that definition.
There has been non-steampunk SF set in, say, the far past of Earth. But it involves either time travel or aliens as a rule, if not both.
Alternate history is a special case. I would argue that it fits my own definition of SF, since it's a "what if" based in the physically possible (though maybe not historically so). "What if the Allies lost World War II?" is the "twist" for at least a couple of books, and that certainly could have happened. Kim Stanley Robinson's The Years of Rice and Salt describes world history after the 14th-century Black Death killed, not "just" a third of the population of Europe, but 99%. I'd argue that it's science fiction, because the "what if" is based in the possible. The level of technology doesn't matter to that definition.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
That's interesting, narya. What about urban fantasy, then. Let's avoid the vampires, but what about Night Watch for instance (Lukyanenko, not Pratchett)? It is comparable to Potter-verse in that magical forces light and dark exist and struggle in the real world, unbeknown to regular folks, but unlike HP the protagonist is the denizen of the magical world, not an innocent child plunged into it. It is, unquestionably, fantasy, but there is nothing medieval about it.narya wrote:I find the Harry Potter series to be jarring when it includes bits of the present, like automobiles.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
They are stomach turning.narya wrote:Harry Turtledove and his alternate histories are hard to peg, though. Are they sci fi or fantasy?
I refuse to read any more of his stuff. 
A lot of old favorite science fiction stories are now too dated for me to enjoy re-reading. Starship Troopers by Heinlein is one such. Thirty five years ago it was pretty cool. Nowadays, current technology has almost passed up most of the things he describes.
I recently read something that has that same feel to it, but with super cool technology, called "Old Man's War" by John Scalzi. The science part was inventive enough to make me smile for that aspect alone several times in the book.
Science fiction should have a "gee whiz" factor to it for the innovativeness of the technology involved-- and the more likely it is to be able to be real, the better.
Scalzi's book hit that in spades, even if character development was sketchy. 
I have to say, Prim, that I haven't read your second or third books yet, because your character development in the first was too good. I empathized too much with the characters for the trials they went through. I'm kind of scared to read the sequels to Hidden Worlds, for fear of more trauma.
In short, I prefer cardboard cutout characters so I don't get too sympathetic to their troubles. Your little people are too real, and it hurts too much to read about their pains.-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
Well . . . I guess I can't honestly say I'm sorry that's the case, except that of course I wish it hadn't caused you distress, Maria.
If you ever get the urge to try another, I'd suggest the third. The characters' trials in that one are born from their adventures rather than from anything emotional.
If you ever get the urge to try another, I'd suggest the third. The characters' trials in that one are born from their adventures rather than from anything emotional.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Harry Potter was born in 1980. It'd be weird if the world didn't have automobiles....
And since I was, too, I can't say I've been reading sci-fi for 40 years
. I've read a decent sampling of it, though: Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Dune, Orson Scott Card, Star Trek novels . I've not read Vernor Vinge, though my friend keeps recommending him to me. I still say that aliens get free reign with mental abilities. What is more rare is blatantly psychic humans. A good part of sci fi is the encounter with the unknown, the strange alien otherness that defies expectations. Not that Solaris counts as modern sci fi, but that is a strong component. Sure, you aren't allowed to conjure a spirit, but if you can keep a head alive after the person dies and have him speak from beyond the grave that way as Card does in Wyrms...well, you can get away with these things. There needs to be a strongly material explanation available, but the events that occur can look remarkably like they are supernatural. Wyrms is a cross between sci-fi and fantasy, though - the mystery is biological, and the action occurs on an alien planet colonized by humans...but the names are all allegorical and it's about prophecies and princesses. So, what do you do with that?
Charles de Lint is good with urban fantasy. Most of his stories are set in modern day, in which 'normal' people stumble into a side of the world that involves all sorts of fantastical creatures and events. And sex scenes. Usually in Canada. Svaha was an exception, in that the urban world that story was set in was unrecognizable, and thus even if nationalities were retained it was still futuristic in ways.
Guy Gavriel Kay's 'Light of the Setting Sun' can be read as historical fiction or fantasy. His characters are Welsh and English and Viking, but he doesn't use those names and the fairies are also real enough.
The boundaries of genres can be fuzzy, because people don't generally let the rules of what you're supposed to write about fuel the story. Science fiction is imaginative and speculative and largely made up. If you want to say that it is limited by what can be, you find that people define possibilities in different ways. After all, while we'd all admit that Tolkien's dwarves are not real, it would be hard to argue that they cannot be. Dwarfism is real enough - we just mean that there is no diminuitive race of miners in reality. But...
Both sci fi and fantasy get at the fabric of the world and questions of what it means to be human and live with one another in society. By creating exotic backdrops, we see the every day more clearly. A family that lives here where I do, amongst the familiar? Well, yes, that's easier to relate to. But a family in space will make us see the family, because all the clutter around them is not so familiar any more.
Both sci fi and fantasy can include an element of social criticism or preachiness or cautionary tale. Sometimes that is as simple as the issue of class in Harry Potter, where magical heritage is seen through the lens of pedigree more than ability, and non-humans do not count as citizens, or Gandalf's comment that could be construed to refer to the death penalty. Or it could be as elaborate as an entire dystopia such as Huxley's or Wall-E.
Other genres do this, too, in different ways. Allegory doesn't just crop up amidst the fantastic. Sci-fi need not be possible, or even plausible. But it does have a different set of expectations attached to it. Mechanisms tend to be explored, not taken for granted.
I know you know more about writing sci-fi (and the expectations that go with it) than I do, Prim. I'm just observing from my point of view as a reader. I see the technical side of sci-fi as one part of it, yes, but the structuring of societies as an equally as important component. The what-ifs aren't usually only directed towards technology.
As for alchemy. I'm hardly condemning the alchemists as hopeless magicians. We wouldn't have had the chemists if we didn't have the alchemists, because the experimentation of the alchemists led to the experimentation of the chemists. Both were motivated by a desire to understand and manipulate a vast and confusing world. The esoteric side dropped out, and chemistry has a different face now. But its roots are there, and it would be silly to deny history.
Obviously, the use of the scientific method is what 'corrected' for some of the mistaken magical notions that pervaded the early sciences. But it is difficult to apply empiricism when you're still in the speculative, hypothetical stage. Science fiction is fiction, a what-if. It needs some facts to stand on, but where you go with them isn't science...yet. That is why I'm trying to point out that if you're going to make up the rules...it's not that different. In reality.
In tone, sure. In purpose, in how the author addresses these questions, in what the point of the story is...it's easy to distinguish sci fi from fantasy. But at the base of it all, they are cousins.
I read a story set in the early 1900's, in which technology is appropriate to 1930's or earlier - cars, phones, rifles, hospital equipment, etc. Except they have the ability to tie artificial limbs to your nervous system, so highly advanced prosthetics. And, rather than normal science, they have alchemy, so while you study the natural world, you end up with a personal contribution to actually make a reaction occur. But the esoteric side of alchemy is in place, and zombies were recently introduced, so I'd say it's fantasy (and not particularly steam punk).
And since I was, too, I can't say I've been reading sci-fi for 40 years
. I've read a decent sampling of it, though: Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Dune, Orson Scott Card, Star Trek novels . I've not read Vernor Vinge, though my friend keeps recommending him to me. I still say that aliens get free reign with mental abilities. What is more rare is blatantly psychic humans. A good part of sci fi is the encounter with the unknown, the strange alien otherness that defies expectations. Not that Solaris counts as modern sci fi, but that is a strong component. Sure, you aren't allowed to conjure a spirit, but if you can keep a head alive after the person dies and have him speak from beyond the grave that way as Card does in Wyrms...well, you can get away with these things. There needs to be a strongly material explanation available, but the events that occur can look remarkably like they are supernatural. Wyrms is a cross between sci-fi and fantasy, though - the mystery is biological, and the action occurs on an alien planet colonized by humans...but the names are all allegorical and it's about prophecies and princesses. So, what do you do with that?Charles de Lint is good with urban fantasy. Most of his stories are set in modern day, in which 'normal' people stumble into a side of the world that involves all sorts of fantastical creatures and events. And sex scenes. Usually in Canada
. Svaha was an exception, in that the urban world that story was set in was unrecognizable, and thus even if nationalities were retained it was still futuristic in ways. Guy Gavriel Kay's 'Light of the Setting Sun' can be read as historical fiction or fantasy. His characters are Welsh and English and Viking, but he doesn't use those names and the fairies are also real enough.
The boundaries of genres can be fuzzy, because people don't generally let the rules of what you're supposed to write about fuel the story. Science fiction is imaginative and speculative and largely made up. If you want to say that it is limited by what can be, you find that people define possibilities in different ways. After all, while we'd all admit that Tolkien's dwarves are not real, it would be hard to argue that they cannot be. Dwarfism is real enough - we just mean that there is no diminuitive race of miners in reality. But...
Both sci fi and fantasy get at the fabric of the world and questions of what it means to be human and live with one another in society. By creating exotic backdrops, we see the every day more clearly. A family that lives here where I do, amongst the familiar? Well, yes, that's easier to relate to. But a family in space will make us see the family, because all the clutter around them is not so familiar any more.
Both sci fi and fantasy can include an element of social criticism or preachiness or cautionary tale. Sometimes that is as simple as the issue of class in Harry Potter, where magical heritage is seen through the lens of pedigree more than ability, and non-humans do not count as citizens, or Gandalf's comment that could be construed to refer to the death penalty. Or it could be as elaborate as an entire dystopia such as Huxley's or Wall-E.
Other genres do this, too, in different ways. Allegory doesn't just crop up amidst the fantastic. Sci-fi need not be possible, or even plausible. But it does have a different set of expectations attached to it. Mechanisms tend to be explored, not taken for granted.
I know you know more about writing sci-fi (and the expectations that go with it) than I do, Prim. I'm just observing from my point of view as a reader. I see the technical side of sci-fi as one part of it, yes, but the structuring of societies as an equally as important component. The what-ifs aren't usually only directed towards technology.
As for alchemy. I'm hardly condemning the alchemists as hopeless magicians. We wouldn't have had the chemists if we didn't have the alchemists, because the experimentation of the alchemists led to the experimentation of the chemists. Both were motivated by a desire to understand and manipulate a vast and confusing world. The esoteric side dropped out, and chemistry has a different face now. But its roots are there, and it would be silly to deny history.
Obviously, the use of the scientific method is what 'corrected' for some of the mistaken magical notions that pervaded the early sciences. But it is difficult to apply empiricism when you're still in the speculative, hypothetical stage. Science fiction is fiction, a what-if. It needs some facts to stand on, but where you go with them isn't science...yet. That is why I'm trying to point out that if you're going to make up the rules...it's not that different. In reality.
In tone, sure. In purpose, in how the author addresses these questions, in what the point of the story is...it's easy to distinguish sci fi from fantasy. But at the base of it all, they are cousins.
I read a story set in the early 1900's, in which technology is appropriate to 1930's or earlier - cars, phones, rifles, hospital equipment, etc. Except they have the ability to tie artificial limbs to your nervous system, so highly advanced prosthetics. And, rather than normal science, they have alchemy, so while you study the natural world, you end up with a personal contribution to actually make a reaction occur. But the esoteric side of alchemy is in place, and zombies were recently introduced, so I'd say it's fantasy (and not particularly steam punk).
-
Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46098
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
Hey folks! I'm thinking that this thread really is more about the different genres in general rather than about the specific work in the respective genres that our respective fiction writers have done, are doing, or will do. As such, I think it probably belongs in the Library of Rivendell forum rather than here in the Red Book forum. That way the interesting observations being made would be readable by the public. However, we wanted to give a heads up before doing so, so that people can edit any posts that they think should not be publicly readable (I can't think of any that I have seen that that would the case about, but I certainly haven't memorized the thread, and anyway, it really isn't my call. If anybody has any objections to moving the thread, please contact me privately so that we discuss. We're going to wait 24 hours before moving it.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
V, I was the one who asked for the thread to be in Red Book, so I guess I ought to pipe up. I had hoped to get some insight into a project of mine. The thread took an entirely different direction, so provided there's no personal writing here (I don't recall any, but I may have missed it) I think a move would be a good idea, and I'll start a different thread if it comes to that.
If there was anything that depressed him more than his own cynicism, it was that quite often it still wasn't as cynical as real life.
Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
Terry Pratchett, Guards! Guards!
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
I hope you will, Frelga.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
-
Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46098
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
Frelga, I hope you will, too. And if you review this thread and feel that some or all of it really shouldn't be moved, don't hesitate to speak up further.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Nah, it's not horror. I don't like that genre at all, but when I have come across it, I've certainly recognized it for how creeped out I got . The story I was referring to earlier is Fullmetal Alchemist. It has a dark side to it, but it's not a horror story. More a typical stop-the-bad-guys-from-annihilating-the-world story, with a very strong dose of redemptive suffering thrown in. The zombies were an attempt to create artificial humans gone awry, but they are a minor side story.
Realism is difficult to define. Stories with perfectly mundane settings/characters/plots can be unrealistic in that they seriously strain credulity. But all of these genres of writing are intentionally unrealistic in different ways. They have things happen that we all know don't really happen.
Setting the story in space doesn't make it sci fi, of course. The anime of The Count of Monte Cristo literally does that - the carnival scene in Venice takes place on the moon, and all the talk of ships refers to spaceships. The plot of the story, focusing on revenge, betrayal, and Parisian aristocracy is largely unchanged, however. It has some sci-fi-ish trappings, but they are barely discernable - the only notable one is a battle in space. The characters don't even use high tech communication like cell phones, and certainly no one bothers discussing technology at all. There is also a fantasy/horror element introduced, in that the Count seems to have some inhuman tendencies along with his vast wealth, suggesting that however he escaped the Chateau d'If involved a deal with the devil.
I think there is such a thing as casual sci fi - an author can explore a sci-fi idea on the side of a story about something else. The work might not be considered 'serious' sci fi on that account, but it does blur the edge. As a for instance - an arms race can involve the invention of new and unusual military technology (invented by the author, I mean), but not every slightly futuristic story with an arms race is 'really' sci fi at the end of the day.
. The story I was referring to earlier is Fullmetal Alchemist. It has a dark side to it, but it's not a horror story. More a typical stop-the-bad-guys-from-annihilating-the-world story, with a very strong dose of redemptive suffering thrown in. The zombies were an attempt to create artificial humans gone awry, but they are a minor side story. Realism is difficult to define. Stories with perfectly mundane settings/characters/plots can be unrealistic in that they seriously strain credulity. But all of these genres of writing are intentionally unrealistic in different ways. They have things happen that we all know don't really happen.
Setting the story in space doesn't make it sci fi, of course. The anime of The Count of Monte Cristo literally does that - the carnival scene in Venice takes place on the moon, and all the talk of ships refers to spaceships. The plot of the story, focusing on revenge, betrayal, and Parisian aristocracy is largely unchanged, however. It has some sci-fi-ish trappings, but they are barely discernable - the only notable one is a battle in space. The characters don't even use high tech communication like cell phones, and certainly no one bothers discussing technology at all. There is also a fantasy/horror element introduced, in that the Count seems to have some inhuman tendencies along with his vast wealth, suggesting that however he escaped the Chateau d'If involved a deal with the devil.
I think there is such a thing as casual sci fi - an author can explore a sci-fi idea on the side of a story about something else. The work might not be considered 'serious' sci fi on that account, but it does blur the edge. As a for instance - an arms race can involve the invention of new and unusual military technology (invented by the author, I mean), but not every slightly futuristic story with an arms race is 'really' sci fi at the end of the day.
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
A surprising number of best-sellers qualify as that kind of SF. They use SFnal elements to spice the plot or create something that will be new to the reader, but they seem to be careful to go no farther than that.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
-
axordil
- Pleasantly Twisted
- Posts: 8999
- Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 7:35 pm
- Location: Black Creek Bottoms
- Contact:
Mith--
Credulity is a function of authorial skill, not genre.
What you call casual scifi often seems to take the form of your example: it's (fill in blank with well known story) in Space! Star Wars is really that (It's The Hidden Fortress/The Searchers in Space!) and Star Trek started that way (It's Wagon Train in Space!). Not that there's anything wrong with that.
But it doesn't allow for the sort of exploration of social themes in that SF can do so well, unless the original story (now set...in Space!) did to begin with.
Credulity is a function of authorial skill, not genre.
What you call casual scifi often seems to take the form of your example: it's (fill in blank with well known story) in Space! Star Wars is really that (It's The Hidden Fortress/The Searchers in Space!) and Star Trek started that way (It's Wagon Train in Space!). Not that there's anything wrong with that.
But it doesn't allow for the sort of exploration of social themes in that SF can do so well, unless the original story (now set...in Space!) did to begin with.
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
One of the many purist definitions of SF is that if you can tell the same story with no SF trappings, it isn't SF. There has to be a science fictional element without which there would be no story (not just setting or props: "they're all in space" or "they have lightsabers").
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
-
Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
Spice = oil?
I don't know. I don't think you could tell substantially the same story set in modern Saudi Arabia. Herbert invents a lot of future history and culture that are vital to the plot, and the spice is actually more necessary to his world than oil is to us.
And then there are the sandworms—a detail of setting that turns out to be not just kewl but essential to the story.
I don't know. I don't think you could tell substantially the same story set in modern Saudi Arabia.
Herbert invents a lot of future history and culture that are vital to the plot, and the spice is actually more necessary to his world than oil is to us.And then there are the sandworms—a detail of setting that turns out to be not just kewl but essential to the story.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King