Thread: SciFi history?
View Single Post
Old 07-14-2010, 04:32 AM   #30
mike_bike_kite
Digitally confused
mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.mike_bike_kite ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
mike_bike_kite's Avatar
 
Posts: 500
Karma: 1500000
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London, UK
Device: KPW, K2i, Nexus 7 32gb, Kobo Mini
I think folks should call the genre whatever they feel comfortable with. I've been reading SF for decades and didn't realise there was a difference between SF, SciFi, Sci-Fi, and science fiction until now - so I now stand educated but my rebellious streak will mean I'll continue to mingle the terms.

Where does all this terminology put something like Battlestar Galactica (TV series)? It uses space jumps that aren't based on any known physics but all the the other hardware looks very achievable and then they often go all retro and have stuff like coiled wires on the telephones - I presume this would fall into the soft/hard/retro/opera SF category. I guess it's difficult enough categorising the present without trying to do the same for all possible futures.
mike_bike_kite is offline   Reply With Quote