SF/Fantasy Poll

[slayda]

I started reading SF many years ago when they lumped Fantasy & Horror into the SF group. I never really liked Horror nor most fantasy even though sometimes it is difficult to tell the difference between the three. The reason I started with SF was, in college on a very tight budget, my entire entertainment came from borrowing my brothers books. He read either SF or "Hornblower" & I just couldn't get into the Hornblower series.

Some time later when thinking of my favorite authors (Heinlein, L'Amour and Jean Auel) I realized that I like well-told stories about people. Each of these authors fit that category.

In the old days, before Star Wars and Star Trek, it was easier to find a good SF book since SF writers (writing to a smaller set of readers) had to be good just to survive as a writer. This made it much easier to walk into a book store and quickly find a few good books to buy.

Today the Internet and ebooks makes that criteria somewhat obsolete.

[=X=]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

I think because they are all story where things happen that don't happen in our current world. In fantasy it is due to magic and in SF it is due to advanced technology. Of course, Star Wars is both SF and Fantasy.... They have tech and the force.

BOb

Never thought of it that way. I've always felt SF always took place in the future but thinking more about it a good amount of SF does take place in different worlds.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

"Loosely tie"?

Let's see: Discworld is a flat disk, supported on the back of giant elephants, who are standing on the shell of great A'Tuan, a giant turtle swimming through the see of space. It has magic, wizards, barbarians, various non-human inhabitants like the Nac Mac Feegle...

If Discworld isn't straight up fantasy, I'd have a hard time saying what is.
______
Dennis

It reads like science fiction or humour. People that prefer science fiction tends to like Pratchett. It is definitely not straight fantasy.

Also the distinctions you described are used. But other distinctions are also used. i thing the Fantasy Encyclopedia for example use something else.

There is also a rather strong argument that science fiction and fantasy have different "feel" and you read them differently and for different purposes.

[=X=]

Well this thread has been an eye opener for me. I didn't realize the vast majority read both genre. There also seems to be some good choice of SF out there I'll have to give them a try sometime.

=X=

[tompe]

Originally Posted by =X=

Well this thread has been an eye opener for me. I didn't realize the vast majority read both genre. There also seems to be some good choice of SF out there I'll have to give them a try sometime.

=X=

I read both but I prefer science fiction so in my SF/Fantasy reading 80-90% is science fiction.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by tompe

It reads like science fiction or humour. People that prefer science fiction tends to like Pratchett. It is definitely not straight fantasy.

I don't think anything Terry has written in many years can be called "straight".

Yes, it's humorous, but fantasy has it's share of humor. The late L. Sprague de Camp once did a contribution for a collection on writing about how to write humorous fantasy. Unfortunately, it missed the mark, because you can describe the technical aspects of writing, but it's much harder to describe how to be funny.

Also the distinctions you described are used. But other distinctions are also used. i thing the Fantasy Encyclopedia for example use something else.

Sure. I wasn't trying to define either SF or fantasy. I was describing edge cases that fell into the gray area between the two categories, as examples of why you probably couldn't draw a sharp dividing line.

There is also a rather strong argument that science fiction and fantasy have different "feel" and you read them differently and for different purposes.

Agreed, though we can discuss what the feel might be, and the purposes for which they are read.

I saw interesting discussion elsewhere some time back, trying to define the difference between SF, and "techno-thillers" like the stuff done by Tom Clancy or Dale Brown. Beyond "they scratch different itches", I don't recall firm conclusions being drawn.

Pretend you get a book that could be either SF or fantasy, because there is no distinctive cover art or category listed, no revealing blurbs, and the author is not someone you are familiar with. You must make up your mind when you read it which it is. What characteristics do you use to assign it to a category? What makes it SF or fantasy? I think you'll get as many answers to that question as there are readers.
______
Dennis

[Falbe Publishing]

I voted both. In my teens, I leaned more heavily toward science fiction although I always included fantasy. Now I read more fantasy. I guess as my adulthood advanced I needed more entertainment apart from this world. Lately I've been craving some sci fi reading. Maybe this is because there isn't any cool sci fi on TV right now, like when Lexx, Farscape, and Voyager were still airing. I was getting my fix there. Essentially I'll always adore both genres because I live in this world and rarely need it reinforced to me through fiction books, except once in while when the books are good like "The Grapes of Wrath."

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by mazzeltjes

I love dedicated SF fans
You ask for a comment
and you end up with a lecture

That wasn't a lecture, it was an essay.

If it had been a lecture, there would have been a quiz at the end of the period, and a paper to hand in the following day.
______
Dennis

[Donnageddon]

I said "SF" for the poll, with very few exceptions I do not read fantasy. But SF has it's subdivisions as well, and I reside in the "hard SF" district.

But I do love another genre nearly as much: Mystery (which of course has its many subdivisions; Police Procedural, Pulp Detective; parlor mystery, etc.)

Here is an additional question for our newly minted Moderator, Dennis.

Where does "Alternative History" fall in? I have always associated it with SF, but I don't know why.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Donnageddon

I said "SF" for the poll, with very few exceptions I do not read fantasy. But SF has it's subdivisions as well, and I reside in the "hard SF" district.

If I had to pick only one of the many variants called SF, I might pick "hard" SF, too. Fortunately, I don't have to.

But I do love another genre nearly as much: Mystery (which of course has its many subdivisions; Police Procedural, Pulp Detective; parlor mystery, etc.)

It certainly does, and count me as another mystery fan. I tend toward offbeat police procedurals, like the "Tromp Kramer and Mickey Zondi" stories, set in South Affrica and featuring an Afrikaner police Lieutenant and his Bantu Sergeant partner, or William Marshall's "Yellowthread St" books, featuring Detective Chief Inspector Harry Pfieffer and his crew at the Hong Bay Police Precinct in Hong Kong.

Here is an additional question for our newly minted Moderator, Dennis.

Where does "Alternative History" fall in? I have always associated it with SF, but I don't know why.

It's a good question, and Alternate History may just establish itself as a separate genre. The roots are in SF, starting with the question "What would have happened if X historical event had turned out differently?"

But unless you consider that very question to define it as SF, you can make a case that the resulting work may not be. Randall Garrett's "Lord Darcy" stories mentioned earlier are alternate history, set in a world where Richard the Lionhearted settled down to become a good king after being wounded in one Crusade, instead of going off on another when he recovered. But the world that resulted was fantasy, not SF, by the usual definitions.

And there have been mainstream works that are alternate history, like Robert Harris's _Fatherland_, a detective story set in a world in which the Axis won WWII. It's a contemporary mystery set in the present day, with one critical difference. Does that difference make it SF? I think not, but it depends upon how you define SF.
______
Dennis

[Elsi]

I chose "both", though I own many more SF books than fantasy. I have tended to avoid fantasy until recently. That means I have a large body of work to read just to catch up with the folks who've been reading it all along! And it's fun.

Thanks for recommending the Silence Leigh series. They don't appear to be available in electronic format so maybe I'll crawl the second-hand PB markets.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Elsi

I chose "both", though I own many more SF books than fantasy. I have tended to avoid fantasy until recently. That means I have a large body of work to read just to catch up with the folks who've been reading it all along! And it's fun.

I got interested in fantasy many years ago, after an English teacher gave me PB copies of LoTR. (I think the motivation was "If you're going to read other books in the class room than the ones assigned, they might as well be good ones!". _The Fellowship of the Ring_ was slow going at first, and I had to push myself through the first hundred pages, but after that it kicked in, and I blitzed through the trilogy in a weekend. It gave me a taste for it, and curious about what else existed. The Ballantine Adult Fantasy series introduced me to E.R. Eddison, William Morris, Lord Dunsany and other, and off I went.

Tolkien inspired a number of clones, which I avoided, but other authors did good work not cast in that mold.

Thanks for recommending the Silence Leigh series. They don't appear to be available in electronic format so maybe I'll crawl the second-hand PB markets.

My copy is an SF Book Club hardcover anthology edition. You might also look for Suzette Haden Elgin's "Ozark Fantasy" series. The series is set on a colony planet settled by folks from the Ozarks, who have developed magic alongside of technology. The protagonist is Responsible of Brightwater, a young woman who happens to be the most powerful magician on the planet, in a society not quite up to accepting that for various reasons. The books include _The Wind's Twelve Quarters_, _The Grand Jubilee_, and _And Then There'll Be Fireworks_.

Good stuff.
______
Dennis

[Donnageddon]

My copy is an SF Book Club hardcover anthology edition

I am stubborn in that I am still an SF Book Club member, even though I (for various reasons) do not want dead tree hardback, or paperback books.

I still enjoy the monthly mails that let me know what is new, and the reviews and commentary.

I have said this before, but I wish SFBC would find a way to adopt an ebook alternative. They have a captive audience to hopefully sway publishers for a "bulk" sale.

I hope they (and other book clubs) will use this formula to get into the ebook world. It might help getting older neglected works into the mix.

[Donnageddon]

addendum: I have many anthologies and classic SF hardbacks from SFBC that I would love to have transformed into ebooks. And SFBC would be just the outlet for that opportunity.

I do not like having them kept in storage.

[babyd]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

"Loosely tie"?

Let's see: Discworld is a flat disk, supported on the back of giant elephants, who are standing on the shell of great A'Tuan, a giant turtle swimming through the see of space. It has magic, wizards, barbarians, various non-human inhabitants like the Nac Mac Feegle...

If Discworld isn't straight up fantasy, I'd have a hard time saying what is.
______
Dennis

I completely agree, but I have come across many who call it humour or even fiction.........I guess they don't wish to be tarred with the fantasy fan brush, but me, I love it LOL