|
An interesting point was made earlier but I phrase it a little differently. SF is more tolerant of weak characters than most fiction. Yet the best SF equals the best "other" literature for me. This might be a tradition in SF (love my Ben Bova) but there is an equal pile of infantile drivel coming from the fantasy genre. You might say the same exists in mainstream fiction but I don't notice it as much.
Jack McDevitt and John Ringo are good modern examples because they are both guilty pleasures of mine. The plots engage me enough to (usually) forgive their weak characters. The novels are enjoyable enough to read but they do not create the symphony's in my head that, say, Gene Wolfe or Robert Anton Wilson do for me.
SF is more tolerant, to me, because a brilliant plot can contain enough interest to overshadow the characters themselves. Geopolitical fiction can work the same way for me. Tom Clancy, for example, engages me while I realize most of his characters are not fully fleshed and motivated with real complexity.
|