Breaking down the sci-fi genre

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by elcreative

And also had his name removed from the credits when they ignored his criticisms...

He took their money, though.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

He took their money, though.

Yep.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

He took their money, though.

And why not... he'd done work on it, used his time and effort so why shouldn't he be paid for it??? Not his fault that the film people then threw every cliche they think of into the thing...

[QuantumIguana]

Originally Posted by elcreative

And why not... he'd done work on it, used his time and effort so why shouldn't he be paid for it??? Not his fault that the film people then threw every cliche they think of into the thing...

If it is so comdemnable, when he shouldn't have taken the job.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by elcreative

And why not... he'd done work on it, used his time and effort so why shouldn't he be paid for it??? Not his fault that the film people then threw every cliche they think of into the thing...

He delivered a product, he got paid, and he knew beforehand that television shows rewrite material. Bottom line, he has nothing to complain about.

So enough about that mood vampire, already.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

He delivered a product, he got paid, and he knew beforehand that television shows rewrite material. Bottom line, he has nothing to complain about.

So enough about that mood vampire, already.

Actually the few times I've met and spent time with Harlan, I found him to be a nice guy to talk and drink with... strong opinions and views but otherwise fine... personally I'll take my own viewpoint over the general attacks, anytime... and the changes, which led to his withdrawing his name, were against the agreements and discussions which led to the original work...

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Yes, I think this is mostly right.

I think this is almost completely wrong. The most common technology used in SF, I think, is FTL travel. Not only does FTL travel not exist, based on everything we know about physics, it *can't* exist. If it existed, pretty much all of our physics would be broken. It would be like biology if evolution didn't exist. FTL travel is the intelligent design of science fiction.

Ummm... actually, we don't know that FTL cannot exist. In fact a number of scientists have found loopholes in Relativity that would allow FTL travel. In particular, wormholes, Alcubierre warps and Krasnikov tubes all are consistent with Relativity. They all have problems (possibly, even most likely, unsolvable problems), and they could simply be an artifact of the mathematics that has no real world counter part.

That being said, from a Science Fiction perspective, these loop holes can be used to achieve FTL without actually violating any physical law as we now know it. Granted many sci-fi writers, especially ones who don't write hard sci-fi (though even some that do), just use a hand wavy solution and rightly proceed with the assumption that the reader won't care, but some take their time to get it reasonably right. Robert Forward wrote a Hard Science Fiction story about FTL travel and its implications called Timemaster.

However, it doesn't matter for science fiction because science fiction is not really about the real science. All science fiction has to do is posit the impossible technology and then realistically treat it as if it existed and had been created through the scientific method. But the real purpose of the technology is just to further the story - if the story is about the interaction with humans and aliens, for example, the FTL drive just isn't important to the story. In the same way that the fact that Yoknapatawpha County doesn't really exist doesn't matter for Faulkner's work.

I think it depends on the Science Fiction. Sure stuff written by a lot of SF writers is just made up, but some Science Fiction is really about real science; essentially thought experiments given a story form by their author.

Of course, once we've posited the "technology," we do need to treat it realistically, so the FTL drive will probably need fuel of some sort, and will work in a certain way, and may need maintenance, and may break down...and we want all of these to be internally consistent and superficially plausible (given the impossibility, of course). But the genre is science *fiction,*, not science. And the science has usually been as fictional as anything else. And that's okay.

Again, depends on the author. In Hard SF, part of the game is trying to find mistakes in the author's story.

He may have been an optimist.

Star Wars is science fiction. It requires too much special pleading to argue otherwise. You can't just wave away the aliens, spaceships, technology, etc. It's as least as "sciency" as, say, "The Demolished Man."

I suppose I might call it "science fiction lite," though.

Actually, I would say The Demolished Man is considerably more scientific. Yes, it posits the existence of Telepaths which is at best on the very edge of things that could be considered scientific. But what it does from there is that it rigorously examines the implications of a world with Telepaths, particularly with respect to how it might change law enforcement (and how society might try to protect personal privacy in such a world). Star Wars is an adventure story with mystical and semi-scientific elements grafted on to it. If we consider both stories to be SF, they are definitely in very different sub-genres.

--
Bill

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by elcreative

Actually the few times I've met and spent time with Harlan, I found him to be a nice guy to talk and drink with...

A shame he doesn't come across that way whenever he's in front of a camera, which is the only way I've ever seen him, and probably ever will...

But anyway. We were talking about breaking down the genre, and I'd rather not go on and on about a professional curmudgeon.

[kennyc]

All fiction is 'made up.' It all must be internally consistent. For something to be Science Fiction (instead of Fantasy) only requires a reasonable explanation of the real-world basis for the science in a manner that the reader can accept. Fantasy does not require the explanation so much but still has to be consistent and the reader must buy in with a willing disbelief and acceptance of trust in the author. There is much overlap and a full spectrum of stories from one to the other as well as into mainstream, horror, etc. etc. etc.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

Actually, I would say The Demolished Man is considerably more scientific. Yes, it posits the existence of Telepaths which is at best on the very edge of things that could be considered scientific. But what it does from there is that it rigorously examines the implications of a world with Telepaths, particularly with respect to how it might change law enforcement (and how society might try to protect personal privacy in such a world).Bill

Key word: rigorously.

Good SF needs discipline in following through on the implications of the core assumptions.
Bester's DEMOLISHED MAN is an excellent example. I favor THE STARS MY DESTINATION even more, although for the same reasons. Once Bester postulated a native human talent for teleportation he was unrelenting in following through on the implications for society when everybody--good or evil, smart or stupid, rich or poor--could teleport enormous distances, even past locked doors or sealed walls. And he identified both problems and solutions. Not easy to do. One reason while really good SF is relatively rare.

Bad SF is all over and one of the most common causes of it is not following through on an established premise--either through oversight or because it conflicted with a pre-planned plot element. That's when you get handwaving or gobbledygook. (It's hard to do good Science Fiction if you do bad *science*, Mr Lucas. )

Another good example of followthrough is Bujold. She really nailed it with the replicators in her Vorkosigan stories and her recent focus on Cryogenics in CRYOBURN looks to be just the beginning of her analysis of the impact of life extension technologies. I'm really looking forward to seeing where she takes it.

[Torwan]

Originally Posted by bill_mchale

Ummm... actually, we don't know that FTL cannot exist. In fact a number of scientists have found loopholes in Relativity that would allow FTL travel. In particular, wormholes, Alcubierre warps and Krasnikov tubes all are consistent with Relativity. They all have problems (possibly, even most likely, unsolvable problems), and they could simply be an artifact of the mathematics that has no real world counter part.

That being said, from a Science Fiction perspective, these loop holes can be used to achieve FTL without actually violating any physical law as we now know it. Granted many sci-fi writers, especially ones who don't write hard sci-fi (though even some that do), just use a hand wavy solution and rightly proceed with the assumption that the reader won't care, but some take their time to get it reasonably right. Robert Forward wrote a Hard Science Fiction story about FTL travel and its implications called Timemaster.
Bill

It is also possible that our understanding of Physics and how the universe works is so incomplete, that we are missing huge chunks of what there is to know.
I mean, people in the 19th century didn't know anything about Fission or Fusion and still their steam engines worked fine. So what if we know a lot about rockets, gravity and electronics, but are missing "hyperdrive physics" or "wormhole physics"? Not knowing that doesn't necessarily affect the stuff that we are constructing on our current basis of knowledge.

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by Torwan

It is also possible that our understanding of Physics and how the universe works is so incomplete, that we are missing huge chunks of what there is to know.
I mean, people in the 19th century didn't know anything about Fission or Fusion and still their steam engines worked fine. So what if we know a lot about rockets, gravity and electronics, but are missing "hyperdrive physics" or "wormhole physics"? Not knowing that doesn't necessarily affect the stuff that we are constructing on our current basis of knowledge.

Yes our understanding of Physics is incomplete, but I think if we are shooting for Hard Science Fiction, we need to stick with stuff that can be at least justified by the physics as we have them now.

Now when we get to other sorts of sci-fi, like space opera, then the rule of cool can be applied.

--
Bill

[QuantumIguana]

Science fiction doesn't require an explanation of the technology. How much of the technology in your house do you REALLY understand? Most of us just use it. What is really needed to know about a spaceship's engines is that they make a ship go fast. If it enhances the story to explain how they work, then by all means explain.

[DrNefario]

SF doesn't really need an explanation, no, but it usually operates under the assumption that there is an explanation. That's kind of what differentiates it from other varieties of the fantastic, and why Star Wars is a problematic case.

[bill_mchale]

Originally Posted by QuantumIguana

Science fiction doesn't require an explanation of the technology. How much of the technology in your house do you REALLY understand? Most of us just use it. What is really needed to know about a spaceship's engines is that they make a ship go fast. If it enhances the story to explain how they work, then by all means explain.

--
Your absolutely right, not every bit of technology in a SF story needs to be explained. And if the story is trying for space opera or some softer form of science fiction, I am not even sure it has to be plausible (But it does need to be seen as based on scientific principles, not mystical ones).
--
If the novel is trying to be hard sci-fi, then the author at least should do the homework to understand the science around the central elements as much as is possible. Take Ringworld as an example; it is clearly Hard Sci-fi, but it requires lots of technologies that we don't even have a clue how they might exist (beginning with a material strong enough to hold the Ringworld together. Niven calculated all the properties it would need... he just can't tell you how to make it .

--
Bill