Thread: Is SF dying?
View Single Post
Old 01-30-2015, 11:26 AM   #47
Rizla
Member Retired
Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Rizla ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 3,183
Karma: 11721895
Join Date: Nov 2010
Device: Nook STR (rooted) & Sony T2
Quote:
Originally Posted by BearMountainBooks View Post
That's not my whole definition, but I don't find anything particularly scientific in her books--not saying that is bad, it's just not very science fiction to me. One of my books is somewhat futuristic with lots of gadgets that either exist or probably will someday, but I don't market it as science fiction. Maybe I should, but I don't really think it fits that genre. And again, I'm not poking at your definition. I think it's fine to have various definitions of it.
Science-fiction need not be "scientific." Yes, there are those who insist that science-fiction must depict future science, etc, and ideally contain rockets, too. That's hard science-fiction, and IMO an obviously over-narrow definition of the genre.

But yeah, it's whatever we want to define it as. And definitions should never get in the way of good books, or (hopefully) selling them.
Rizla is offline   Reply With Quote