Whither science fiction ?

[carpetmojo]

Yes, Ardeegee, and very glad of them I was - I didn't put it there by mistake.

And have you really never delved in a skip/dumpster,Diap ? Just now and then is definitely worth it, you never know what you'll find - I speak from personal experience in the field of art and antiques !

For me, Steve has it about right - incidentally, Steve, I wasn't using "whither" in any sense of falling off the vine - a lot of the "old school" remains top job, but a very large amount requires a few malts to tackle

[ I can't be too antedeluvian, I'm onto Gibson and Stephenson ]

Many thanks again to those who gave advice - Forums like Mobile , and, yes, some others I've gone to in the past for DIY and computer first aid, have to some extent, taken the place of that friendly old librarian who helped me in my callow youth.............

[DiapDealer]

But not all: I still remember the first time I read Lem's Solaris, and how it rocked me.

Lem holds up remarkably well. I did a reread of His Master's Voice not long ago and was just as wowed the second time around.

My avatar was drawn by Lem, btw.

[mldavis2]

There are some excellent posts here. As a new multiple-genre reader (retired from a working life of reading tech literature and journals), I'm diving into a bit of everything including sci-fi and fantasy (just completed David Eddings The Baleriad). What I'm finding within virtually all genres is that there are few truly new ideas. So I'm leery of trying to objectively evaluate a book for others because I don't possess the literary background to know if the author is truly, originally creative or simply borrowing from something (s)he read elsewhere and used as a springboard. How many really great stories are modifications of basic themes of Shakespeare, Dostoevsky, Tolkien, etc.?

If you read philosophy, you soon realize that there are rarely any truly new ideas. Most of what we think are revelations turn out to be the fodder of far greater minds of yesteryear. So my benchmarks change a bit from seeking an original framework, to simply enjoying a good wordsmith and a good storyteller. @StevenLyleJordan's post was spot-on in pointing out that old classics must be read in the chronological era in which they were created in addition to the chronological era which the author has imagined. If we can do that for any genre, but especially for sci-fi/fantasy, it goes a long way towards being able to enjoy the book/series.

[carpetmojo]

Hi midavis2, I think your premise of few truly great ideas is correct - but it was also correct for Shakespeare, for example. who quite unashamedly picked and borrowed from ancient tales & myths. (Tolkien is a bit stand alone, with the world he created over many years using his scholarly background, I suppose}, but the ideas of quests, revenge, betrayal,defeat of evil, a sort of messiah ..... all obviously basic myth and legend standbys.
As it was for those the Bard nicked his ideas from.

It's all in the telling, when it comes down to it, isn't it.
One Shakespeare's King Lear is another playwright's dreadful load of old
cobblers !
And there's always the old "there's only one basic joke.." theory.

So your 'go for the story quality of story/teller' is all we have left, in a way.

My philosophy student son first became interested upon finding out it involved discussing a lot of the " great ideas" put in many different ways, which then required, for the ideal answer, a novel question in reply, about the question being asked of him originally...........
No, I didn't quite get it either, but it seems to be serving him in good stead

[RexGalore]

I wanted to make a contribution to this thread since I love Sci-fi (especially hard Sci-fi). But after reading through the thread I realize that most of what I wanted to say was already said by ATDrake. So karma to him for not only recommending a few of my favorite authors but also opening up with referencing Sturgeon's law!

[rkomar]

Steve Lyle Jordan and DiapDealer bring up Lem as an author who stands the test of time. I wholeheartedly agree with them, and I think it's interesting to bring Lem up in this thread as he quit the field because he was disillusioned with the lack of progress in space travel since its early days. The 50's and 60's were times of great anticipation, when the imagination could go wild in predicting what might come. Unfortunately, space travel has since proven very risky, time consuming, unpleasant, and not economically friendly, and so has languished since the Moon landings. Perhaps our hunger for space-based SciFi has been dulled because of this, too. Maybe we'll only see a resurgence in the old exploration/colonization-heavy stories when/if technology improves and we start having something to look forward to again. Until then, we may have to keep going back to books written during that time of early wonder if we want to experience that mood.

[dworth]

There's still plenty of space opera being produced. I don't know whether I get a skewed perspective sitting in these islands, but most of the written stuff appears to be British, whilst the majority of the television output is American. The tone has changed I think. In most works that you come across now, the 'high frontier' period of exploration, rapid colonisation and expansion has already taken place and the stories generally revolve around the consequences, the power blocs that have developed or something horrible and unexpected that appears out of the darkness and knocks everything over like a house of cards.

For the written word I'd recommend Iain M. Banks, Dan Simmons, Alastair Reynolds, Steven Baxter, Peter F Hamilton and the Warhammer 40,000 universe or, ahem, my good self. For TV you could do a lot worse than the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica or Babylon 5

[WillAdams]

Poul Anderson attempts a scientific rationalization in his _A Midsummer Tempest_, and _Three Hearts and Three Lions_ I believe. I really enjoyed his _The Broken Sword_ as well as _The Merman's Children_ (though I misliked the sex in the latter).

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by dworth

I don't know whether I get a skewed perspective sitting in these islands, but most of the written stuff appears to be British, whilst the majority of the television output is American.

Well... Canadian, anyway...

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

Well... Canadian, anyway...

We have the sets, might as well use them.

[rkomar]

Originally Posted by dworth

There's still plenty of space opera being produced. I don't know whether I get a skewed perspective sitting in these islands, but most of the written stuff appears to be British, whilst the majority of the television output is American. The tone has changed I think. In most works that you come across now, the 'high frontier' period of exploration, rapid colonisation and expansion has already taken place and the stories generally revolve around the consequences, the power blocs that have developed or something horrible and unexpected that appears out of the darkness and knocks everything over like a house of cards.

But that is the stuff that is least speculative; power politics is new for most, but never really changes over time. It doesn't really matter whether it takes place around Rigel IV or Iraq or the spice routes to India, as far as the stories go. So, the books may take place in the future, but I wouldn't call them science fiction, per se, but rather adventure tales of businessmen and power brokers applying current methodologies to new markets. Since that is where most of the action is these days on Earth, it's not surprising that popular fiction tracks that field rather than the sickly one of space science and exploration.

[dworth]

Ah, I suppose that raises the question: is it really science fiction if the story doesn't centre on the science itself, but merely tells a story set within a society with more advanced technology? Is Star Wars sci-fi, for example, or it is just a sword and sorcery fantasy story that happens to be set in space?

[carpetmojo]

Hoo woo !!!

Pigeons and cats come to mind..............................

[DiapDealer]

Is Star Wars sci-fi, for example, or it is just a sword and sorcery fantasy story that happens to be set in space?

I thought it had been determined long ago that Star Wars was Fantasy.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by dworth

Ah, I suppose that raises the question: is it really science fiction if the story doesn't centre on the science itself, but merely tells a story set within a society with more advanced technology? Is Star Wars sci-fi, for example, or it is just a sword and sorcery fantasy story that happens to be set in space?

If so, a lot of SF centered around human issues and psychological speculation (Solaris immediately comes to mind) would no longer be SF.

Of course, this is a part of the larger discussion of storytelling genres, and of stories' occasional ability to transcend multiple genres and therefore render said genres ineffective. If we get into that discussion, we may find that there is no SF, that it's all just storytelling, and this entire thread is moot.