Out of this world

Amazing Stories June 1947 (public domain)
Future transport as envisaged in Amazing Stories June 1947 (public domain)

Another week, another update to the creative writing classes I attend where we look at literary genres: this last week we looked at Science Fiction. And already we’re in difficulty. Is it ‘science fiction’ (where the emphasis appears to be on science), ‘sci-fi’ (which already looks rather passé as an abbreviation, and is often used in a derogatory sense), ‘SF’ (which seems to be the preferred acronym), ‘speculative fiction’ (which is less constrictive, encompassing elements which may otherwise be counted as fantasy) or ‘SFF’ (=SF+fantasy, an acronym which seems to have had its day)? I’m going to use SF, but you can read it how you like.

Let’s start with what it’s not, as popularly perceived. It’s often regarded as the antithesis of fantasy, perhaps differentiated in a table somewhat like this one:

Science fiction Fantasy
Describing the possible Describing the impossible
Non-religious Myth
Social commentary Fairytale

 

But anybody with half a brain (even one in a bell jar) can see flaws with these assumptions. So-called ‘soft SF’ often, despite using pseudoscientific language, sometimes describes what is never possible (such as Ursula Le Guin’s ansible supposedly allowing instantaneous communication across the universe). Some fiction in this genre can be very religious in its broadest sense, asking big questions about Primal Causes or critiquing current orthodoxies (as I think Frank Herbert’s Dune novels try to do). And some writing — I’m thinking now of Robert Silverberg’s Majipoor series — cheerfully mixes up ‘possible’ aspects of SF (a large planet colonised by humans in the distant future) with magic, the classic ‘impossible’ attribute of classic fantasy. A plague on both these houses: I’m rooting for creative fiction that doesn’t necessarily travel down well-worn paths.

With such a large and disparate genre we can’t do much than quickly romp through the history of SF, from antecedents like Plato’s Critias (which introduced Atlantis), through classic 19th- and early 20th-century fiction (Frankenstein, Jekyll & Hyde, Jules Verne, H G Wells, Edgar Rice Burroughs) to the innovative magazine Amazing Stories (which began publishing in 1926). So-called ‘hard SF’ dealt with exciting scientific and technological possibilities only (Poul Anderson’s Tau Zero for example), but there were visions of a dystopian future such as Nineteen Eighty-Four which only incidentally used possible technologies.

The forties and fifties are regarded as the Golden Age of SF, but the genre has fragmented massively since then, with sub-genres such as cyberpunk, steampunk (Philip Reeves’ Mortal Engines), alternate history (Philip K Dick’s The Man in the High Castle), alternate universes (Dick’s Ubik perhaps) and comic SF (Douglas Adams’ The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy being perhaps the epitome of this type).

Scratching the surface then, and indubitably simplistic, but enough to show that SF is not just about BEMs (bug-eyed monsters) or just for enthusiastic Whovians and Trekkies. After all, if it has attracted highly regarded writers like Doris Lessing, Margaret Attwood, David Mitchell and Salman Rushdie it shouldn’t deserve the disdain that literary snobs used to heap on it. (And may still do for all I know.)

Advertisements

21 thoughts on “Out of this world

  1. Well said! I think here you have clarified once for all why SF is the preferred way of calling it, even though many talk now of speculative fiction, which is anyway something broader. A question: which one of cyberpunk authors have you discussed in class ( apart from Gibson?)

    1. Thanks for confirming my understanding of SF, Stephen — I have to say the tutor only used the term sci-fi, never SF, leading me to suspect she wasn’t an aficionado of this genre. Cyberpunk? This was only mentioned in passing in class, and I myself haven’t knowingly read any, let alone Gibson. What would you recommend for a first foray?

      1. I think you’re right about your tutor not liking SF a lot…! Re: cyberpunk, I would certainly start with Neuromancer, by Gibson, the first of its kind. For something recent, try Altered Carbon, by Richard Morgan. I have written a short description of both on my blog (under Fiction-SF snippets) if you want a quick summary.

        1. Thanks very much, Stephen, Neuromancer seems to be the often-cited template, so I’ve no excuse now not to try it; I’ll certainly check your snippets for this and Morgan’s novel.

  2. What always amazes me is how the snobbism about SF goes both ways. It happened with Ishiguro’s Never Let me go – how dare he write SF (He’s doing it again with his latest of course – how dare he write Fantasy (having read it, it’s only fantasy in passing though)). So it’s not just literary types being snobbish about what they perceive as ‘genre’ fiction. Although I don’t have time to read much SF these days, I still love it and all its off-shoots, and hope that the term ‘speculative fiction’ can help bridge the gap a little?

    I would recommend you start any exploration of cyberpunk with Gibson’s Neuromancer — he is the Daddy of the sub-genre after all.

    1. Thinking that a writer ought to stick to ‘their’ one genre is like assuming that a person has to always wear the suit, casual wear or uniform in which they first appeared in public — ridiculous really. I wonder if this attitude is more prevalent in the UK where there seems to be a prejudice against diversifying, a sort of jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none prejudice. Though I suspect this is starting to change.

      Thanks for the recommendation, Annabel. This is certainly the Gibson title I keep coming across in discussions!

  3. As a self confessed book snob, I admit, I love the genre, it done well. Many writers of SciFi are very articulate and entertaining. Arthur C Clark wrote some mind bending short stories. Many Scifi writers ask their readers to question social norms and to look closely at the human condition.
    I have to admit, I tried Neuromancer twice. I could not get into it. My hat is off to Annabel for enjoying it. I love Steampunk, but will leave Cyberpunk on the shelf.

    1. I’m not an SF fanatic but I do like to read the occasional novel in the various sub-genres, Sari, whether hard or soft, comic or speculative. I will give Neuromancer a go sometime, but perhaps not just yet — just too much to catch up on at the moment.

  4. Ursula LeGuin has long pondered the SF/Fantasy divide. See a recent discussion with her about this at http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6253/the-art-of-fiction-no-221-ursula-k-le-guin
    Also, check out notes on a discussion between her and Margaret Atwood at http://io9.com/5650396/margaret-atwood-and-ursula-k-le-guin-debate-science-fiction-vs-realism
    I love LeGuin’s point that “all writing is by definition ‘literary’, except that some is better than others.”
    Someday I may write something comparing the ideas in LeGuin’s Intro to Left Hand of Darkness (find it here: http://theliterarylink.com/leguinintro.html) to those in Tolkien’s On Fairy Stories (find it here: http://brainstorm-services.com/wcu-2004/fairystories-tolkien.pdf), to end with a statement stolen from Peter Schickele (originally in reference to music): If it sounds good it IS good.

    1. Thanks for these links, Lizzie; I occasionally visit Le Guin’s own site where she posts regular updates and links, but these look extra special, especially the discussion between her and Atwood. Look forward to your comparison post!

  5. elmediat

    When I first started teaching, the English 2A ( Grade 10 academic stream) course was centred on Science Fiction and English 4A ( Grade 12 academic stream). At this particular secondary school the English Department used thematic structuring for grade and levels.

    One problem I found was there was a great deal of misunderstanding of Fantasy Literature & Speculative Fiction because most people define/describe it in terms of popular culture, specifically movies & television. BTW I put Atwood in that Category. A huge part of her disagreement with LeGuin and why Atwood does not refer to work as science fiction is because she sees it in the narrow terms that many of my grade 10 students did.

    I did a lengthy rant/explanation about this problem on Dark Pines Photo.

    https://darkpinesphoto.wordpress.com/fantasy-literature-science-fiction/

    To give the bare bones – Speculative Fiction is a form of Fantasy Literature.

    Fantasy Literature – A Definition: Narratives( stories) whose settings, characters, events, and plots depend in some way on a reality that is radically different from the “real world” of the audience/reader. The rules of this reality depend on magic, mysticism, the supernatural, supra-natural (divine or semi-divine), dreams & psychological states, or speculation (metaphysical or scientific).

    Speculative Fiction – A Definition: A form of Fantasy Literature whose reality is based on speculations upon scientific facts and hypotheses. These can be broken into three sub-categories based on the sciences – Hard Sciences, Soft/Social Sciences and Metaphysical-Theoretical Sciences.

    This answers the attitude that produces these statements:

    It is not real so it can not be real/meaningful/true.

    Science Fiction is about spaceships, robots, outer-space & monsters.

    1. Thanks for the link, Joseph, a very helpful analysis, even though I might query particulars (eg your distinction between fairie- and fairy-tales).

      It strikes me from what you say, there and in summary here, that there are many narratives that can and do overlap subgenres, making hard and fast definitions applicable only some of the time;innovative writers will always be challenging boundaries. As far as publishers are concerned it’s all about the labelling, it seems to me.

      On a subjective level there are only two categories: good or meh, with a lot clustering on the boundary. A fairer categorisation would be those that work on their own terms and those that don’t, though I don’t expect that’s going to be adopted any time soon.

      Ultimately, though, it’s true to say that all narrative (including non-fiction) is fantasy, being a product of the creative imagination. But that’s no help at all if we’re looking for specific stories that tick our personal criteria for narratives!

      1. elmediat

        Yes, I actually enjoy the overlapping/cross genre stories and the breaking down of genre walls. As a teacher, I had to make sure I had terms/labels to make it easier to describe and navigate the literary waters with students who did not have a wide experience & often had a stereotypes as definitions for what certain types of stories were like in content & structure.

        The faerie/fairy terms was a means to get around expectations of children’s bedtime stories ( also getting past Disney was a challenge ).

        All the definitions and categories are just a means of talking about art , should not be a seen as hard & fast rules.
        So one day we might see a banjo-opera about Gothic cowboy detective on Mars. 😀

        Some recent gender-benders from Tor. 🙂

        http://www.tor.com/2017/05/04/new-releases-genre-benders-may-2017/

Do leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s