Random thoughts

[DragonOfTheAerie]

Many years ago, I was into Space Stories very much.

I had this huge epic story in my mind, which was all about a mighty and ultra-powerful civilization that had spread their fleet of warships and stellar bases to nothing less than thirty seven different galaxies. They had nearly a million ships, and their weaponry and military prowess were so great that very few opponents could stand in their way.

In general, their science (or at least, what I imagined to be science back then) had granted them godlike powers and their weapons were so dreadful that anything from the Star Wars universe would be a joke in comparison.

I was like: Wow, this is so great! Wonderful! This is going to be the greatest Science Fiction ever!

Well, guess what? Imaginary physics do not count as Science Fiction. I could imagine and define in great detail all of those science-flavored concepts and warships and powers and weapons, and still they were never Sci Fi. That story and everything in it were always Fantasy, or what now I like to call Science Fantasy.

I think that we need to place a clearer barrier between Fantasy and Science Fiction.

To me there is no such thing as soft science fiction. The so-called Soft Sci Fi is nothing but science-flavored Fantasy, all dressed up with starships and other similar things. Authentic Science Fiction is a very, very different creature... and it attracts me very much, but I doubt that I would ever be able to produce a good Sci Fi story.

Anyway, I do not want to start yet another argument about this stuff like it has happened in this site before. I know you will disagree with me, no worries. I just wanted to post these thoughts here.

And yeah, I like Science Fantasy very much =)

Very few people, if any, write sci-fi that is completely authentic to real science. I mean, you have to extrapolate and exaggerate and handwave at least a little on almost everything in sci-fi, just by the definition of sci-fi. It's speculative. The technology within it often does not exist yet, and often we don't know how to create it, so we must make stuff up.

 

[Russ]

While there are flavours of sci fi, I do think there is a hard boundary between what should be called science fiction and what should be called fantasy.

Real science fiction is based on science or extrapolation of science. Hard sci fi does more of the math and tells the reader about it.

I would call Star Wars Space Opera, not real sci fi.

I have a good friend who both writes Sci Fi for a living and is considered a scholar in the field and he argues that sci fi has more in common with mystery than fantasy despite where they end up in the book store.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

My username has something like eighteen letters in it, if I counted at all correctly.

Also, I wrote 20+ pages of my newest story in only three days! How did that happen?! I haven't written so much in so short a time since last summer.

 

[Sheilawisz]

Yeah, sorry everyone for my rant.

What happens is that I almost cringe every time that I read (or hear!) somebody saying that Fantasy and Science Fiction are like two variants of the same thing, or two sides of the same spectrum. To me they are as different as water and sulfuric acid, and I wish that they would always be recognized and regarded that way.

I think that both genres would benefit a lot from having a different place, both at the shelves of every bookstore and in the minds and hearts of people. Science Fiction in particular has suffered because many people assume that any book, series or movie with starships is automatically Sci Fi, when in fact true Sci Fi is much deeper than just a space setting and (in its own way) a very beautiful genre.

My theory is that we get thrown into the same shelves together because Fantasy and Science Fiction have something important in common: We are the weird ones in the world of literary genres, and since both of us are weird then the easiest way to market and categorize us is to try and fuse us together.

I'll continue to propose the new term of Science Fantasy for stories with imaginary science, I think it's great and works just fine.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

My fantasy story takes place on a planet, involves some outer space stuff, reincarnation, and a near cosmic cataclysm [among many, many other things].

 

[La Volpe]

Yeah, sorry everyone for my rant.

What happens is that I almost cringe every time that I read (or hear!) somebody saying that Fantasy and Science Fiction are like two variants of the same thing, or two sides of the same spectrum. To me they are as different as water and sulfuric acid, and I wish that they would always be recognized and regarded that way.

I think that both genres would benefit a lot from having a different place, both at the shelves of every bookstore and in the minds and hearts of people. Science Fiction in particular has suffered because many people assume that any book, series or movie with starships is automatically Sci Fi, when in fact true Sci Fi is much deeper than just a space setting and (in its own way) a very beautiful genre.

My theory is that we get thrown into the same shelves together because Fantasy and Science Fiction have something important in common: We are the weird ones in the world of literary genres, and since both of us are weird then the easiest way to market and categorize us is to try and fuse us together.

I'll continue to propose the new term of Science Fantasy for stories with imaginary science, I think it's great and works just fine.

I think the whole fantasy and science fiction being on the same spectrum comes from Clarke's third law:
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Which, if you consider it, is actually quite believable. You mentioned in your first post that "Imaginary physics do not count as Science Fiction." But two thousand years ago, electricity would have seemed like imaginary physics. But it's still science (even though it would have seemed like magic way back when).

So, my take on this: I don't think Fantasy and Science Fiction are on the same spectrum. (One could argue that Magic and Science are on the same spectrum, but that's a different discussion.) But they do share some similarities. And in my view, they both have a soft and a hard version. I.e. soft sci-fi and hard sci-fi, and soft fantasy and hard fantasy. And the soft/hard distinctions in both are fairly similar. The harder the fiction, the more in explained with rules (and in sci-fi's case, math).

And finally, I think fantasy and sci-fi are generally shelved together (whether in libraries or minds) because many people who like one like the other (in my experience, at least).

 

[Sheilawisz]

Hello La Volpe.

To start with, I want to say that I love foxes! I have always thought that foxes are cool in their own way, like they are small but still powerful and very smart members of the Canidae family. One of my ideas was about people that could turn into giant foxes, instead of giant wolves... Who knows, maybe I'll do a story like that, someday.

Well, sorry but that saying Any sufficiently advanced is another thing that I encounter often in sites like Mythic Scribes and it annoys me too, a lot. I know what it means, and it can be true (depending on what Magic is like and how it is defined in one Fantasy world or another) but it makes no sense according to my worlds.

Some time ago in this site, a random person showed up saying that eventually all forms of Magic in Fantasy stories would lose all appeal and wonder because technology keeps advancing. I participated in that thread a lot, and it's really not necessary to post that kind of stuff here all over again.

In my worlds, Technology is like a Chess player that follows all the rules and is never allowed to break them, while Magic is a Cheater that moves all pieces like Queens and then stomps on board and pieces alike and will always win the game.

Anyway, that is not what I meant with my description of why Fantasy and Sci Fi are different.

Sure, any imaginary Science Fantasy concept could become a reality someday in the future. It is a possibility that something like my Violet Energy will be discovered, or the Midichlorians, but in that case we could say that any kind of wacky and fantastical science would be a legitimate Sci Fi simply because there is some slight chance that it could be real in the future.

Then, any imaginary science that we come up with would be Sci Fi.

The beauty of Sci Fi is that it's about Science as we know it today, and what could happen with it in the future according to real and serious possibilities. My point is that if we start talking about the kind of concepts that come from free and wild artistic license, then we are working with Fantasy and not Sci Fi.

I love both concepts, both the seriousness and possibility of Sci Fi and the wild fantasies of Fantasy. It's just that I would love to see them regarded as two very different things, like Comedy and Horror.

Yeah, many people that like Fantasy also happen to like Science Fiction and that is part of why we are in the same shelves. I think that it's all about marketing.

 

[Thomas Laszlo]

Yeah, sorry everyone for my rant.

What happens is that I almost cringe every time that I read (or hear!) somebody saying that Fantasy and Science Fiction are like two variants of the same thing, or two sides of the same spectrum. To me they are as different as water and sulfuric acid, and I wish that they would always be recognized and regarded that way.

I think that both genres would benefit a lot from having a different place, both at the shelves of every bookstore and in the minds and hearts of people. Science Fiction in particular has suffered because many people assume that any book, series or movie with starships is automatically Sci Fi, when in fact true Sci Fi is much deeper than just a space setting and (in its own way) a very beautiful genre.

My theory is that we get thrown into the same shelves together because Fantasy and Science Fiction have something important in common: We are the weird ones in the world of literary genres, and since both of us are weird then the easiest way to market and categorize us is to try and fuse us together.

I'll continue to propose the new term of Science Fantasy for stories with imaginary science, I think it's great and works just fine.

Well, honestly I think we were all talking about the spectrum in a sense referring to the fact that science fiction and fantasy are technically sparked by the same urge for the unknown in our brains. Subconsciously, we don't care if we need special gloves, or if hereditarily we have the ability to become a bender (Avatar the Last Air Bender) we just love that we can move matter without a shovel and breaking our backs for hours!

In the sense your talking about, I did say early on that there are many differences that shouldn't be discounted. Science Fiction, Science Fantasy, Space Opera (although Star Wars books are technically science fantasy I'm guessing?), And Fantasy, are all flavors of the Human inability to truly explain the unknown abilities of our perception of the Tolkien esque worlds, and the worlds of Star Wars or Star Trek and the like. (Sorry, not much of a science fiction nerd yet. Most of the hard science fiction don't appeal to me.) so in a sense, were all right; There are plenty of differences that are noted, and yes they could benefit from another shelf. BUT from the origin point, they started the same, and then accumulated new styles and have now developed into what we know as mainstream science fiction and fantasy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

Hello La Volpe.

To start with, I want to say that I love foxes! I have always thought that foxes are cool in their own way, like they are small but still powerful and very smart members of the Canidae family. One of my ideas was about people that could turn into giant foxes, instead of giant wolves... Who knows, maybe I'll do a story like that, someday.

Well, sorry but that saying Any sufficiently advanced is another thing that I encounter often in sites like Mythic Scribes and it annoys me too, a lot. I know what it means, and it can be true (depending on what Magic is like and how it is defined in one Fantasy world or another) but it makes no sense according to my worlds.

Some time ago in this site, a random person showed up saying that eventually all forms of Magic in Fantasy stories would lose all appeal and wonder because technology keeps advancing. I participated in that thread a lot, and it's really not necessary to post that kind of stuff here all over again.

In my worlds, Technology is like a Chess player that follows all the rules and is never allowed to break them, while Magic is a Cheater that moves all pieces like Queens and then stomps on board and pieces alike and will always win the game.

Anyway, that is not what I meant with my description of why Fantasy and Sci Fi are different.

Sure, any imaginary Science Fantasy concept could become a reality someday in the future. It is a possibility that something like my Violet Energy will be discovered, or the Midichlorians, but in that case we could say that any kind of wacky and fantastical science would be a legitimate Sci Fi simply because there is some slight chance that it could be real in the future.

Then, any imaginary science that we come up with would be Sci Fi.

The beauty of Sci Fi is that it's about Science as we know it today, and what could happen with it in the future according to real and serious possibilities. My point is that if we start talking about the kind of concepts that come from free and wild artistic license, then we are working with Fantasy and not Sci Fi.

I love both concepts, both the seriousness and possibility of Sci Fi and the wild fantasies of Fantasy. It's just that I would love to see them regarded as two very different things, like Comedy and Horror.

Yeah, many people that like Fantasy also happen to like Science Fiction and that is part of why we are in the same shelves. I think that it's all about marketing.

Do people generally write Sci Fi that is based only on well established scientific facts and possibilities? Your definition seems to exclude a lot of things like time travel, interstellar travel, etc etc...

 

[Russ]

Do people generally write Sci Fi that is based only on well established scientific facts and possibilities? Your definition seems to exclude a lot of things like time travel, interstellar travel, etc etc...

I think your definition of science fiction is too limiting by using "well established scientific facts" (if there is such a thing).

Science fiction extrapolates from what we know to be possible via science to things that are not inherently impossible based on our current knowledge of science.

For instance a few years ago there was (and may still be) a debate in the scientific community about the missing matter in the universe between the MACHOs and WIMPs. Now at the time we did not have a definitive answer as to which was correct. And thus one could safely write sci fi by talking about the extrapolation of either of those theories.

Fantasy involves elements that are inherently unscientific (although as humans we have a desire to systematize things).

The context changes things as well. Middle Earth is clearly fantasy, while Pern, despite having dragons, is science fiction.

There has been plenty of ink spilt over just how one can achieve interstellar travel or if time travel is really impossible. In both cases I suggest that both types of travel remain possible within our current understanding of science.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

I think your definition of science fiction is too limiting by using "well established scientific facts" (if there is such a thing).

Science fiction extrapolates from what we know to be possible via science to things that are not inherently impossible based on our current knowledge of science.

For instance a few years ago there was (and may still be) a debate in the scientific community about the missing matter in the universe between the MACHOs and WIMPs. Now at the time we did not have a definitive answer as to which was correct. And thus one could safely write sci fi by talking about the extrapolation of either of those theories.

Fantasy involves elements that are inherently unscientific (although as humans we have a desire to systematize things).

The context changes things as well. Middle Earth is clearly fantasy, while Pern, despite having dragons, is science fiction.

There has been plenty of ink spilt over just how one can achieve interstellar travel or if time travel is really impossible. In both cases I suggest that both types of travel remain possible within our current understanding of science.

That's why the dividing line is so fuzzy. How far can you extrapolate? How much extrapolation is too much?

 

[Russ]

That's why the dividing line is so fuzzy. How far can you extrapolate? How much extrapolation is too much?

Strange. I don't find the dividing line fuzzy at all. As long as the extrapolation is rational and supportable you can extrapolate as much as you like, inwardly or outwardly.

 

[Thomas Laszlo]

Strange. I don't find the dividing line fuzzy at all. As long as the extrapolation is rational and supportable you can extrapolate as much as you like, inwardly or outwardly.

But, what if you think about it like this, the extrapolation may be so small, that it isn't explained and therefore looks like magic and maybe the reader finds it looks more like a fantasy novel?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Russ]

But, what if you think about it like this, the extrapolation may be so small, that it isn't explained and therefore looks like magic and maybe the reader finds it looks more like a fantasy novel?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think what you mean is "small" extrapolation, I think you mean large or long extrapolation or even extreme extrapolation.

While it may seem a challenge in the abstract, practically speaking I cannot recall reading a book that I had a problem with classifying it as sci fi or not, at the time it was published.

 

[AnonymousNobody]

If they buy it, read it and like it, I don't care if they call it salami.

 

[Sheilawisz]

The debate between what makes Fantasy and Science Fiction different to each other has been explored in various ways, and in the end we always come to the conclusion that these literary genres are very similar in some things and very different in others. I celebrate both, and I hope that the world will always love and celebrate them as well.

Some time ago, I read what somebody famous said about it. I do not recall exactly who it was or what were the exact words, but it was something like this: Science Fiction is about things that could happen for real, but maybe we would not want them to happen, while Fantasy is about things that cannot happen but we would like them to be real.

I think that's a good definition, even though the matter can be much deeper than just that.

These days, I have been thinking a lot about all of this because my next story Freya 7 could be a Science Fiction work. At least, that's what I am going to try even though it could turn out to be a Fantasy story after all... It's a story that I look forward to, because it has loads of potential and it's going to be something new for me.

My other idea for a Science Fiction story Seven Heaven is one that I like very much, but I am afraid that my scientific knowledge does not reach far enough to complete a work in that scale.

 

[Ireth]

Some time ago, I read what somebody famous said about it. I do not recall exactly who it was or what were the exact words, but it was something like this: Science Fiction is about things that could happen for real, but maybe we would not want them to happen, while Fantasy is about things that cannot happen but we would like them to be real.

Clearly that person doesn't read dystopian fantasy. XD I don't know if anyone would actually want to live in a world like Panem or wherever the Maze Runner takes place. Or, heck, anyplace grimdark like Westeros.

 

[DragonOfTheAerie]

Clearly that person doesn't read dystopian fantasy. XD I don't know if anyone would actually want to live in a world like Panem or wherever the Maze Runner takes place. Or, heck, anyplace grimdark like Westeros.

Several of my books are dystopian fantasy, or else the fantastical stuff just really sucks. So...yeah. I don't think I would want to live in any of my worlds above this one.

 

[Russ]

Clearly that person doesn't read dystopian fantasy. XD I don't know if anyone would actually want to live in a world like Panem or wherever the Maze Runner takes place. Or, heck, anyplace grimdark like Westeros.

Arthur C Clarke, many years ago. I don't think he read much fantasy at all. Nor do I think he meant it to be a definitive academic definition.

 

[TheCrystallineEntity]

I don't like dystopian/cautionary stories. Too many of them come true. I'll stick to fantasy, thank you.