The Definition of Science Fiction
Neo Bretonnia
23-01-2008, 15:56
One of the things I find exciting about living during the period of time we do is that the fantastical and future-amazing is becomeing the here and now.
For example, if I wrote a book 50 years ago about a guy who becomes an astronaut, goes into space for a few months, then comes home to find his new perspective on life has caused him to doubt his relationship with his wife/friends/family, that would be a science fiction book.
If I wrote that same book today it would be a drama. Why? Because traveling into space for a few months is no less realistic or plausible than a sabbatical to Nepal. Exciting, yes. Unusual, yes. But less plausible? No.
And I find that marvelous.
But the question is, does that now mean that for something to truly feel like sci fi it has to involve time-travel, aliens, ESP, etc? I don't count the fantasy sub genre, because whenever you involve magic it moves out of teh realm of sci-fi into something else.
To the question is? How do we define sci-fi? Is it still sci-fi if someday it can be read as j ust an action or drama story?
To the question is? How do we define sci-fi? Is it still sci-fi if someday it can be read as j ust an action or drama story?Science fiction is (or should be) a story taking place in the future (or past, if it involves time travel) that makes a prediction about what kind of technology is available, and possibly, how it affects society (human or other).
PelecanusQuicks
23-01-2008, 16:07
Good point. Pure sci-fi as you mentioned can't involve magic and is supposed to scientifically possible is it not? So in reality wouldn't all pure sci-fi eventually move into the drama/action segment of the library?
Maybe there just needs to be a new genre altogether encompassing the evolution of those great books that have come to pass.
The Alma Mater
23-01-2008, 16:07
Science fiction is (or should be) a story taking place in the future (or past, if it involves time travel) that makes a prediction about what kind of technology is available, and possibly, how it affects society (human or other).
Query: are steampunk stories like "Wild Wild West" science fiction ? If so, your definition needs to be amended.
Peepelonia
23-01-2008, 16:09
Science Fiction = Fiction with Science in it. Yep!
Neo Bretonnia
23-01-2008, 16:10
Query: are steampunk stories like "Wild Wild West" science fiction ? If so, your definition needs to be amended.
I'd almost say Wild Wild West would belong in the Fantasy section. Strange that it's easier for me to suspend disbelief for a time machine than for a giant steam powered walking crab.
Peepelonia
23-01-2008, 16:11
I'd almost say Wild Wild West would belong in the Fantasy section. Strange that it's easier for me to suspend disbelief for a time machine than for a giant steam powered walking crab.
What about a giant steam powered time machine?
Query: are steampunk stories like "Wild Wild West" science fiction ? If so, your definition needs to be amended.Good point, but I did leave those out for a reason. That's a form of "Alternate History", which I'm not sure really belongs into the SciFi category.
Eofaerwic
23-01-2008, 16:16
Science fiction is (or should be) a story taking place in the future (or past, if it involves time travel) that makes a prediction about what kind of technology is available, and possibly, how it affects society (human or other).
Hmm... which does raise some interesting questions as to other authors. Jules Verne for example, or H.G. Wells. These authors, at them time, would be considered science fiction. Are they now drama or possibly fantasy. They're not set in the future, and often detail achievements that are now possible, yet the technologies described are entierly different.
Hmm... which does raise some interesting questions as to other authors. Jules Verne for example, or H.G. Wells. These authors, at them time, would be considered science fiction. Are they now drama or possibly fantasy. They're not set in the future, and often detail achievements that are now possible, yet the technologies described are entierly different.Not really. Writing a Vernesque story nowadays would be more akin to alternate history, while writing it back then would have been science fiction. If Wild Wild West had been written during Grant's term, and featured Loveless' mechanical spider, it would have been science fiction.
Neo Bretonnia
23-01-2008, 16:23
What about a giant steam powered time machine?
You know, I was thinking about that already, because of the latest version of the movie The Time Machine, which I woudln't hesitate to call sci-fi.
I guess it's because, at this point, we know that it's impossible to build a giant crab walker out of the technology of the 1880s. Steam doesn't produce enough power to move something like that, materials woudln't be strong enough, control systems weren't feasible, etc.
On the other hand, we can't conclusively say that it's impossible to build a time machine that runs on steam power, because we haven't yet established whether time travel is possible at all and if it were, how would we do it?
So I suppose someday, should time travel be invented, it may be possible to look at a movie like The Time Machine and reclassify it as either drama or fantasy.
You know, I was thinking about that already, because of the latest version of the movie The Time Machine, which I woudln't hesitate to call sci-fi.I'd call that SciFi, simply because its a film adaptation of a science fiction story from a time long past.
Eofaerwic
23-01-2008, 16:28
Not really. Writing a Vernesque story nowadays would be more akin to alternate history, while writing it back then would have been science fiction. If Wild Wild West had been written during Grant's term, and featured Loveless' mechanical spider, it would have been science fiction.
For aspects yes. But I would still classify, say, War of the Worlds as science-fiction despite being actually set in the past. It still very much deals with science-fiction concepts and ideals. Similarly, 2001: A Space Odessey is still science-fiction, despite technically, now, being set in the past.
I suppose I have issue with the 'set in the future' criteria as there are too many blurred lines
For aspects yes. But I would still classify, say, War of the Worlds as science-fiction despite being actually set in the past. It still very much deals with science-fiction concepts and ideals. Similarly, 2001: A Space Odessey is still science-fiction, despite technically, now, being set in the past.
I suppose I have issue with the 'set in the future' criteria as there are too many blurred linesYou misunderstood me. War of the Worlds is set in the future, much like 2001: A Space Odyssey. That it is now our past is largely irrelevent, since it was depicting the future when it was written. "The Future" in this case is relevant to the author at the time of writing, not the audience at the time of reading or viewing.
Neo Bretonnia
23-01-2008, 16:35
For aspects yes. But I would still classify, say, War of the Worlds as science-fiction despite being actually set in the past. It still very much deals with science-fiction concepts and ideals. Similarly, 2001: A Space Odessey is still science-fiction, despite technically, now, being set in the past.
I suppose I have issue with the 'set in the future' criteria as there are too many blurred lines
Maybe that's part of the definition... Those are things that we can't conclusively discount as possible. I'd say a spider walking thingy was simply impossible for the technology of the late 1800s, but was a ship like Discovery possible in 2001? I'd say so, given the technology we had then.
War of the Worlds is trickier because to keep it as sci-fi we can't discount the possibility of Martians. If we do, I'd say the original story then becomes fantasy while the most recent version is still sci-fi (Because it doesn't specify Mars as the origin)
UNIverseVERSE
23-01-2008, 17:26
Ah, but if you insist on the future, how do you account for books such as The Difference Engine, which is set in the past, just one in which scientific discovery proceeded differently (pardon the pun).
I would define SF as being stories about beings in a world predicated on a scientific difference, be that new scientific discoveries or a change in the way things occurred (say, the information age arriving 100 years early). However, the important part is the societies and interactions of the characters from that, not really the science itself (generally).
Neo Bretonnia
23-01-2008, 17:55
After reading the posts in the thread so far, I propose the following defintion:
Science Fiction is fictional stories based upon factors, technologies or theories that have not yet happened or been proven, but cannot be conclusively proven false.
as opposed to
Fantasy is fictional stories based upon factors, technologies or theories that may or may not be possible in reality.
Risottia
23-01-2008, 18:22
Science fiction is (or should be) a story taking place in the future (or past, if it involves time travel) that makes a prediction about what kind of technology is available, and possibly, how it affects society (human or other).
QFT, old chap, QFT.
That's why Star Wars is space opera, not science fiction, while Dune is (at least partly) sci-fi.
Risottia
23-01-2008, 18:26
Ah, but if you insist on the future, how do you account for books such as The Difference Engine, which is set in the past, just one in which scientific discovery proceeded differently (pardon the pun).
No, this is uchrony (unsure about the english spelling of it): from the greek ουχρωνία, ouchronìa modeled after ουτοπία, outopìa. Utopy is about "a non-existant place" (example, Erehwon), while uchrony is about "a non-existant time".
Xiscapia
23-01-2008, 18:34
One of the things I find exciting about living during the period of time we do is that the fantastical and future-amazing is becomeing the here and now.
For example, if I wrote a book 50 years ago about a guy who becomes an astronaut, goes into space for a few months, then comes home to find his new perspective on life has caused him to doubt his relationship with his wife/friends/family, that would be a science fiction book.
If I wrote that same book today it would be a drama. Why? Because traveling into space for a few months is no less realistic or plausible than a sabbatical to Nepal. Exciting, yes. Unusual, yes. But less plausible? No.
And I find that marvelous.
But the question is, does that now mean that for something to truly feel like sci fi it has to involve time-travel, aliens, ESP, etc? I don't count the fantasy sub genre, because whenever you involve magic it moves out of teh realm of sci-fi into something else.
To the question is? How do we define sci-fi? Is it still sci-fi if someday it can be read as j ust an action or drama story?
I apologize if this has already been said, but Orson Scott Card, on of the greatest Science Fiction writers to have ever lived in my opinion, defines Science Fiction as "Could happen but dosen't.", or "making the improbable possible." Alternativly, Fantasy is defined as "Couldn't happen at all", and "making the impossible possible."
The Alma Mater
23-01-2008, 18:37
The real dividing line between sci-fi and fantasy is whether the impossible is achieved via science/technology (science fiction), or magic (fantasy).
What would that make Dune and Star Wars ?
I would consider sci-fi/fantasy to be a single genre, where things that are not normally possible play a major role. Some books or films contain advanced technology as a plot device, such as the hologram in Oceans' Twelve, but that doesn't make Oceans' Twelve sci-fi. The real dividing line between sci-fi and fantasy is whether the impossible is achieved via science/technology (science fiction), or magic (fantasy). Aliens, incidentally, are considered "science".
A third sub-genre, historical fantasy, which uses historic events and/or a lower technology setting. Most of this is alternate history, but it includes cases where elements of another sub-genre are introduced. Take the 1632 series by Eric Flint, where a West Virginia mining town is dropped into the middle of the Thirty Years' War. Or The Paladin (can't remember the author's name), set in a fictional realm based on China, where everybody knows that demons and dragons exist, but we never actually see any. Steampunk is also historical fantasy.
Sci-fi need not be set in the future. Independence Day, for instance, is set in the present, but is clearly sci-fi.
Here's a rule of thumb I have recently developed. There's a publishing company, Baen Books. If a given story sounds like Baen would publish it, it's probably sci-fi/fantasy.
Aegis Firestorm
23-01-2008, 18:44
I've always considered that Science Fiction had to have science an irremovable part of the story. If the story could be done without the science, then it isn't SF.
I consider a lot of things not SF.
St Edmund
23-01-2008, 18:44
Or The Paladin (can't remember the author's name), set in a fictional realm based on China, where everybody knows that demons and dragons exist, but we never actually see any.
It's by C.J. Cherryh...
What would that make Dune and Star Wars ?
The interesting thing about Dune is that much of it is actually less advanced than modern society; the Ixians and Tleilaxu are the exceptions rather than the rule when it comes to technical development in the Dune universe. The rest of the galaxy is in many ways hardly more advanced than a medieval, feudal economy despite the presence of some extraordinary devices.
It's science fiction, but without the technology (and for many people in-universe, without the science).
Fishutopia
24-01-2008, 04:37
I've always considered that Science Fiction had to have science an irremovable part of the story. If the story could be done without the science, then it isn't SF.
I consider a lot of things not SF.
You beat me to this point.
IN regards to an earlier post, I'll give a quote "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
Katganistan
24-01-2008, 05:06
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=definition+of+genre%3A+science+fiction&btnG=Google+Search
There are many different definition, depending upon whom you are asking.
Neo Bretonnia
24-01-2008, 05:17
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=definition+of+genre%3A+science+fiction&btnG=Google+Search
There are many different definition, depending upon whom you are asking.
Any fool can Google it. I want to see what people on here think ;)
Jovian Empire
24-01-2008, 05:20
To me, if it has technology well beyond what we currently have, it's at least partly SF. It might also have elements of fantasy mixed in (I put Star Wars in that category), but it's still SF.