Quote:
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.
Quote:
|
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.
Quote:
|
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