Science fiction vs. fantasy

[African_Love]

If you like speculative fiction, which do you prefer and why?

In 'practice', I prefer science fiction (I've read more science fiction and swords/dragons/wizards etc. do not interest me). In theory, however, I prefer the idea of fantasy over the idea of science fiction. Fantasy is the oldest genre of story telling. I think that to read about or create a world where logically implausible things occur requires (even) more imagination than to read about or create a world where everything is explainable. The whole point of story telling is to experience what we aren't directly experiencing, I'm more interested in experiencing (through imagination) what I never will directly than about something I may very well experience in future.



Also, a lot of science fiction stories involve things that are logically or practically implausible, the fact that they're explainable in the story doesn't change that. Why offer a pseudo-scientific explanation for backwards time travel or shapeshifting aliens if these things are so obviously not realistic? If I ever start writing again, I think all of my stories will be fantasy but not based on medieval European culture, contemporary and African mythology based stories. I think you can do more with fantasy than you can with science fiction but it seems like most fantasy novels have the same common themes. I do like vampires, zombies, werewolves, though.



"If you want your children to be intelligent, read them fairy tales. If you want them to be more intelligent, read them more fairy tales"-Albert Einstein.

[Paulclem]

I like both genres, but I tend to read more Sci Fi. I hae been more disappointed by fantasy, which is sometimes a bit formulaic. A curent exception is RR Martin with his Game of Thrones series.

Also Sci Fi offers broader opportunities for new ideas - Neal Asher and Iain M Banks are my current favourites for a bit of escapism.

I was also surprised by China Mieville's Perdido St Station, which is a sprawling dystopian novel choc full of ideas.

As for your wish to write some African based Sci Fi - there is Dune, which draws heavily from Norh African culture embodied in the Fremen. Also a superb series, and so much richer than the bit of Asimov I've read.

[Aragorn Elessar]

As much as I like science fiction, I usually prefer fantasy, more specifically high fantasy. It's probably due to the fact that I started out with fantasy greats like Tolkien's books, and I got into science fiction later, starting with H.G. Wells. But it really depends on the book; science fiction can often be better. Usually, though, I would enjoy a read regarding dragons, wizards, elves, warfare, and such. It's just a matter of what sparks your personal interest, I suppose.

[Dark Muse]

I enjoy Dystopian literature which often tends to be of a Science-Fiction nature, but I generally do not really read a whole lot of Sci-Fi

Overall I prefer Fantasy for various reasons, for one thing because I myself am not a rational personal I am far more of a mystic, so I am much more impressed with swords, dragons, magic, than I am with lazar guns and practicality.

Also while Fantasy takes place in an alternative world most of it does generally draw from old, past civilizations, and I have a greater interest in the past than I do in the present or in the future. So I like that atmosphere of fantasy books more so than that atmosphere of Science Fiction works.

And because of my interest and love of myth, I enjoy the way many fantasy novels draw from various different mythologies.

[PeterL]

So a science fiction novel that featured elves and such would be popular?

[JBI]

In theory, fantasy, in practice, sci fi.

The reason is that sci-fi writers on the whole tend to have a lot more quality writers than fantasy, as fantasy is a bastard-child genre (literally).

However, the limitations of sci-fi are similar to fantasy; fantasy has more potential I think, and can remove some of the more boring aspects of sci-fi, but as of now, there aren't too many great writers of it.

Then again, in 50 years, will probably be the reverse, and this is just English we are talking about.

[Mr.lucifer]

In theory, fantasy, in practice, sci fi.

The reason is that sci-fi writers on the whole tend to have a lot more quality writers than fantasy, as fantasy is a bastard-child genre (literally).

However, the limitations of sci-fi are similar to fantasy; fantasy has more potential I think, and can remove some of the more boring aspects of sci-fi, but as of now, there aren't too many great writers of it.

Then again, in 50 years, will probably be the reverse, and this is just English we are talking about.

Who would you say are some really good sci-fi and fantasy writers?

[Niamh]

And because of my interest and love of myth, I enjoy the way many fantasy novels draw from various different mythologies.

This is the same reason i enjoy Fantasy more. I've had a love for myths and legends since i was a child, and its never gone away. The Bitterbynde Saga is an amazing example of fantasy drawing on mythologies and is by far the best fantasy i've ever read.

[JBI]

Who would you say are some really good sci-fi and fantasy writers?


good fantasy:

Gene Wolfe
Le Guin
Kay

Good Sci Fi

Clarke
Wolfe
Le Guin
Dick
Atwood
and many others; just check the sci-fi lists that drkshadow gave you earlier, as he is far more knowledgeable in the genre than I am.

[JCamilo]

I would just say Sci-fic is just fantasy where the discuss changed to scientific realism. Other than that they are pretty much similar and even with the label of popular or not high literature, which is obviously a failure of perspective.

[African_Love]

I would just say Sci-fic is just fantasy where the discuss changed to scientific realism. Other than that they are pretty much similar and even with the label of popular or not high literature, which is obviously a failure of perspective.


Good point.



fantasy is a bastard-child genre (literally).

How so? I'd be willing to bet that fantasy is the oldest genre of storytelling

[JCamilo]

What JBI most likely means is the modern concept of fantasy, which is somehow true, from the momment Brothers Grimm used folk-lore tales to educate children and urban literature deemed as higher form of literature the realism of novels and romance,as mature literature. Mythical themes is somehow not fantasy, which is obvoiusly silly...

[JBI]

What JBI most likely means is the modern concept of fantasy, which is somehow true, from the momment Brothers Grimm used folk-lore tales to educate children and urban literature deemed as higher form of literature the realism of novels and romance,as mature literature. Mythical themes is somehow not fantasy, which is obvoiusly silly...

Depends too - the most popular genre fiction in China seems to be Wuxia, or Chivalry novels which in themselves are half fantasy, and go back 1000s of years. One of the four classic novels itself is pretty much all fantasy (Monkey King's and all), and there are fantastical elements in all 4 of the Classic novels, and a sense of Buddhist realism in the Fifth of the 4 classic novels, which other than that is perhaps the first work of Realist Fiction in the world.

Spirits and superstitions dominate much of other fiction as well; Genji is clouded in it, as are numerous other works in the Japanese Canon. Korean work early on featured many shamanism elements, and from what I know of Indian literature, there is a strong tradition there as well.

That is to not include other things. For instance 志怪 or Strange Recountings are a significant genre of Chinese fiction in itself, culminating in the masterpiece Tales From a Make-Do Studio, which is similar to the Brother's Grimm in many ways.

Satire too uses fantastical elements - Swift in Gulliver's travels, and Li Ruzhen in Flowers in the Mirror (which is very similar to Gulliver's Travels in its first half, though is a very nutty novel elsewhere).


I think the problem is just that in the 19th century, somehow the genres separated - realism became the norm, and fantasy disappeared. In the 20th century, the works began to consider themselves "fantasy" as a movement, the same way Romance Novels call themselves Romances despite Romance being written in the West for about 1000 years, and pointing back to older, classical traditions.

My recommendations and understanding then, were based on the genre identity, not on classical works of any sort - As such, Sci-Fi is often different, as it is often more obviously political, and often used as a vehicle for politics, in the case of Doris Lessing, Orwell, Huxley, or Atwood. That being said, the line is rather vague - generally anything with space or technology we take to be sci fi, with the genre of political revisioning of the world thrown in, and anything built around the impossible being possible, or the unreal becoming real we take as fantasy, that is, in the sense of it as a genre, not as an attribute, despite it being an attribute to a great number of non genre texts.

[JCamilo]

well, I do not think those genres (horror, sci-fic, policial, infantil) are anything but forms to organize shelves. Classical works that predate those definition can not be really limited by it (well oedipus king is a detective story, hamlet a horror story, in 1001 nights we have it all, etc. Most of sci-fic seems to have origem on philosophical parables and some are very similar to sufi parables. They also seems to be more suited to prose...
Genres like Satire, comedy, tragedy are different, well deffined, so they can be applied...

[Night_Lamp]

I think JBI makes a good point by having Le Guin on both lists. I love her work and can't decide which she fits on both- I vote for both!

I'm not really a sci/fi student; although I took a 'speculative fiction' course last year, but I have really begun to love Gibson's works.

[OrphanPip]

I think JBI makes a good point by having Le Guin on both lists. I love her work and can't decide which she fits on both- I vote for both!

I'm not really a sci/fi student; although I took a 'speculative fiction' course last year, but I have really begun to love Gibson's works.

Well the Earthsea series is clearly fantasy, while The Left Hand of Darkness and The Dispossed are clearly sci-fi.

Although, one of her recent collections of short stories from a couple years back, Changing Planes, combined elements of both genres. The book was essentially a group of short stories about inter-dimensional tourism.

The barriers between sci-fi and fantasy are blurred frequently by a number of authors. Tad Williams Otherland series, about a group of people stuck in a computer simulation, involved fantasy settings within what is ostensibly a basic sci-fi story. Another example is the subgenre of steam-punk, like Mieville's Perdito Street Station. Gene Wolfe's New Sun novels seem to me to evolve from fantasy to sci-fi by the end of the series.

[Drkshadow03]

Well the Earthsea series is clearly fantasy, while The Left Hand of Darkness and The Dispossed are clearly sci-fi.

Although, one of her recent collections of short stories from a couple years back, Changing Planes, combined elements of both genres. The book was essentially a group of short stories about inter-dimensional tourism.

The barriers between sci-fi and fantasy are blurred frequently by a number of authors. Tad Williams Otherland series, about a group of people stuck in a computer simulation, involved fantasy settings within what is ostensibly a basic sci-fi story. Another example is the subgenre of steam-punk, like Mieville's Perdito Street Station. Gene Wolfe's New Sun novels seem to me to evolve from fantasy to sci-fi by the end of the series.

I think people are under-appreciating the uniqueness of Mieville's creation. Mieville is combining a lot of speculative fiction genres in his book. The work is essentially a second-world fantasy set in a Victorian steampunk style world rather than a medieval one.

[OrphanPip]

I think people are under-appreciating the uniqueness of Mieville's creation. Mieville is combining a lot of speculative fiction genres in his book. The work is essentially a second-world fantasy set in a Victorian steampunk style world rather than a medieval one.

Not just that, but The Scar is also a pirate/seafaring adventure story, and Iron Council incorporates a lot from westerns. I think Mieville is doomed to the same fate as Gene Wolfe, he'll do well at awards, but he'll never sell well.

[Paulclem]

JBIs point about the political nature of Sci Fi is a strong point. Well's The Time Machine is definately based upon social conditioning, as the workers, who were at that time working on the London Underground - transform into the Morlocks over the millennia.

Clearly there is a lot of pulpy Space opera, but what message does a book like Dune have within it where the Fremen are clearly modelled upon Middle Eastern people in extremis, and they go on to pursue their religion for their prophet -Paul Atreides - across the Galaxy in a space Jihad?

Kurt Vonneut's pacifism is evident in Slaughterhouse 5, and the repercussions of the possibility of Robot sentience have been explored in Asimov.

I think one of the appealing features of Sci Fi is the extrapolation of ideas it takes - beginning with Wells and Verne - (where Well's idea of the social repercussions of workers working long hours underground never came to pass, and the themes had to be changed for the two films). The best makes fascinating speculative fiction, and a new way to look at human problems.

[Aragorn Elessar]

good fantasy:

Gene Wolfe
Le Guin
Kay

Good Sci Fi

Clarke
Wolfe
Le Guin
Dick
Atwood
and many others; just check the sci-fi lists that drkshadow gave you earlier, as he is far more knowledgeable in the genre than I am.

I see no Tolkien or H.G. Wells in there. 0_o

[Atari]

I see no Tolkien or H.G. Wells in there. 0_o

Let's be honest, Tolkien was not a great writer. Why he is considered one of the great writers still baffles me. I suspect most lovers of Tolkien discovered him at an impressionable age and didn't have the experience to see past his mediocrity and thus now hold him to some inflated sense of greatness belying his true ability as a writer. But maybe it's just me who doesn't see the wonder of long, dry passages on nature and cribbed mythology. Maybe I just don't "get it" but I trust that he won't be remembered must past a few generations, while the Greeks and Romans will still be read and known for centuries.

H.G. Wells may be interesting for his time, but he has not aged well. I think that's pretty obvious.

[ClaesGefvenberg]

Basically I prefer SciFi to fantasy, but the fact is that the border between the two is very fuzzy to say the least.

/Claes

[Drkshadow03]

Let's be honest, Tolkien was not a great writer. Why he is considered one of the great writers still baffles me. I suspect most lovers of Tolkien discovered him at an impressionable age and didn't have the experience to see past his mediocrity and thus now hold him to some inflated sense of greatness belying his true ability as a writer. But maybe it's just me who doesn't see the wonder of long, dry passages on nature and cribbed mythology. Maybe I just don't "get it" but I trust that he won't be remembered must past a few generations, while the Greeks and Romans will still be read and known for centuries.

H.G. Wells may be interesting for his time, but he has not aged well. I think that's pretty obvious.

I think H.G. Wells was extremely talented writer on a prose level. The War of the Worlds and The Time Machine are still classics. In what way hasn't he aged well? The War of the Worlds is still surprising fresh even after all this time.

[JBI]

I think H.G. Wells was extremely talented writer on a prose level. The War of the Worlds and The Time Machine are still classics. In what way hasn't he aged well? The War of the Worlds is still surprising fresh even after all this time.

My list was done in 20 seconds, and they already are nitpicking.

[Paulclem]

I think H.G. Wells was extremely talented writer on a prose level. The War of the Worlds and The Time Machine are still classics. In what way hasn't he aged well? The War of the Worlds is still surprising fresh even after all this time.

I think Wells is a good writer, but cetainly The Time Machine's premise and context is non-sensical. you can see that in the revisions of the premises - nuclear war and an environmental disaster - in the two films.

I think his characterisation in the Island of Dr Moreau is very good though.

[JCamilo]

I could see arguments towards Verne not aging well, since many of his stories are based on technological inovations and their impacts, but Wells texts are not like that, the scietific theme is just a pretext to deal with more philosophical themes and are just details. Some of his short stories are still fine examples of good work. But lets blame JBI mini-canon for the old age of Wells.

[Mr.lucifer]

I can think if writer don't age well, they're not worth remembering.

[DonovanTalbot]

I could see arguments towards Verne not aging well, since many of his stories are based on technological inovations and their impacts, but Wells texts are not like that, the scietific theme is just a pretext to deal with more philosophical themes and are just details. Some of his short stories are still fine examples of good work. But lets blame JBI mini-canon for the old age of Wells.

20,000 Leagues Under The Sea is an awesome story but I don't like Verne, every page is either a scientific lecture or a flora and fauna travelogue. He bores me.

[Mr.lucifer]

In melville's moby dick, I heard a great deal of the book was dedicated to describing seafaring. longest chapter in the book is like an excerpt from a book about whale biology from what I heard.

[JCamilo]

Yes, but Melville didnt age well... he even died...

[Paulclem]

I can think if writer don't age well, they're not worth remembering.

It depends what you want from a writer. The social and historical context is often interesting, as is the narrative method and the phrasing of their era. I don't particularly like Austin, but some of the appeal must be the combination of polite social idiom, with the story, irony and humour of manners.

[Bastable]

In theory, fantasy, in practice, sci fi.

The reason is that sci-fi writers on the whole tend to have a lot more quality writers than fantasy, as fantasy is a bastard-child genre (literally).

However, the limitations of sci-fi are similar to fantasy; fantasy has more potential I think, and can remove some of the more boring aspects of sci-fi, but as of now, there aren't too many great writers of it.

Then again, in 50 years, will probably be the reverse, and this is just English we are talking about.

How so?

[Ruminate]

Bastable - I would think one of the most tedious aspects of sci-fi is the requirement to explain. I have a tough time getting through Niven's books because while there is a plot, it feels secondary to the thought exercise he has created for himself. It's a interesting thought exercise to be sure, but I feel like the folks living in his novels there are more to demonstrate the peculiarities of his universe than to undergo any real growth or change. If I have the choice between reading about Draco's Tavern or Callahan's Place, I'll take Callahan every time because the characters are the story and the sci-fi is just the setting.

Paulclem - I was debating between Iain Banks and Gene Wolfe (both new to me) the other day. Ended up with Wolfe, but I think I will have to return for Banks! Which book do you recommend I start with?

[Heteronym]

For me fantasy is a big blanket genre that covers some other genres, like horror, fairy-tale, fable and science fiction. I've read The Lord of the Rings, but I've never been much into high fantasy. I prefer writers who mix the fantastic with the everyday, who place the action in contemporary urban settings, like Arthur Machen and Jorge Luis Borges. I love a good fantasy story that's full of mystery and strangeness, and can't be rationally explained, like The Picture of Dorian Gray, The Third Policeman or The Master and Margarita.

[Paulclem]

Bastable - I would think one of the most tedious aspects of sci-fi is the requirement to explain. I have a tough time getting through Niven's books because while there is a plot, it feels secondary to the thought exercise he has created for himself. It's a interesting thought exercise to be sure, but I feel like the folks living in his novels there are more to demonstrate the peculiarities of his universe than to undergo any real growth or change. If I have the choice between reading about Draco's Tavern or Callahan's Place, I'll take Callahan every time because the characters are the story and the sci-fi is just the setting.

Paulclem - I was debating between Iain Banks and Gene Wolfe (both new to me) the other day. Ended up with Wolfe, but I think I will have to return for Banks! Which book do you recommend I start with?

Sorry, I missed your question.

Hmm tough one. I liked The player of Games, The Algebraist and Excession.