Whither SF?

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Just another 4 years until they're in the public domain in Canada; 24 for the UK and Australia, and they should be rolling into the US PD in 2046.

(Just ignore the bitter mumblings from the corner here.)

There's cute little short story in the current free SF&F magazine thing that Kindle owners can get, about a 250 year old man plotting to kill his 500 year old father to get control of his copyrights.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Consider this:
"Military hero is discharged so he can go undercover infiltrating a vast criminal conspiracy involving piracy, slavery, and drug trafficking. In his quest to reach the highest levels of the conspiracy he finds himself fully participating in all the vices of his 'comrades' and slowly sinking in the same sinkhole of adiction and iniquity. Will he find the inner strength to complete his mission or be derailed by temptation?"

That marketing could fit a drama, a thriller, or a police procedural, no?

Perfectly "honest" description of the narrative, too. Definitely "not inaccurate".
But I suspect not everybody buying into that blurb would be pleased if inside they found E.E. Smith's GRAY LENSMAN.

(shrug)
SF has its native audience who will seek it, buy it, and appreciate it for what it is. They don't need to be tricked or even "eased" into reading it.

Police procedural? Maybe not. But at any rate, I'd call that a drama or adventure set in the future (or in space), ergo, space adventure/drama or future adventure/drama.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ApK

There's cute little short story in the current free SF&F magazine thing that Kindle owners can get, about a 250 year old man plotting to kill his 500 year old father to get control of his copyrights.

That's almost enough to get me to subscribe. I did subscribe to the print version of F&SF for many years ... maybe time again...

[charlesatan]

Originally Posted by kennyc

That's almost enough to get me to subscribe. I did subscribe to the print version of F&SF for many years ... maybe time again...

It's available electronically now, so why not? (unless expense is the hindrance)

[BeccaPrice]

There's another interesting blog post, by Sharon Miller (half of the team writing the Liaden sf books) that briefly addresses the language used in SF, mostly in light of one of their books, but she raises an interesting point:

http://sharonleewriter.com/2012/05/y...unny-part-one/

You of course know that writers use. . .techniques. . .in order to signal readers, gently letting them know what sort of experience they should expect. A prominent technique is the use of genre-appropriate language — High Fantasy reads differently than Hard SF, which reads differently than Urban Fantasy, all of which reads differently than Mystery.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by BeccaPrice

There's another interesting blog post, by Sharon Miller (half of the team writing the Liaden sf books) that briefly addresses the language used in SF, mostly in light of one of their books, but she raises an interesting point:

http://sharonleewriter.com/2012/05/y...unny-part-one/

Very good find. Thanks!
Highlights some of the unappreciated skills and disciplines that set the various genres apart and why trying to sneak SF as something else risks alienating the readers. "Bad grammar" indeed.

I'll have to move the Liaden series up in my TBR queue.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by charlesatan

It's available electronically now, so why not? (unless expense is the hindrance)

Yes, both expense and the content. I kinda fell off when KKR left and GVG took over editing.

[hidari]

Nothing wrong with YA or any other Fun read...but for me if I don't want to think much I prefer to watch a Movie like Godzilla or Dances with Smurfs (Avatar)...

Litfic has always been a minority genre... but for me more interesting when I want a challenge... Then again occasional light sci-fi, mysteries, and what not are good to read...


which led to this link on why so many people are reading YA these days rather than litfic.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...804387216.html

I'd love to read any comments people here would have.

Me, other than select authors, I've pretty much stopped reading most SFF because it's all so grim. And it seems like there are two kinds of mysteries these days: cute cozies that relate to cats, bookstores, and/or cooking, or antiheroes and grimness.[/QUOTE]

[ebusinesstutor]

I'm not convinced that most science fiction has gotten grim. But then, I prefer science fiction that is overall positive in nature even when there is conflict or issues to overcome.

I love Lois McMaster Bujold's science fiction Vorkosigan series. Space opera with some space military, wonderful sense of humour and a light touch of romance. All superbly crafted.

As well, Elizabeth Moon's Vatta and Seranno/Suiza series. Once again, strong military, good humour and light romance. And her Speed of Dark book was brilliant and I also enjoyed Remnant Population for a great elderly character. (also an excellent elderly character in Vatta series)

And Kristine Katherine Rusch's Retrieval Artist series. Great clash of human/alien cultures, strong characters.

While there is drama and some dark elements in parts of these, especially the Retrieval Artist series, these are overall about star spanning societies and are quite positive.

I find dreary, post apocalyptic stories somewhat boring. Stories that try to wring every last bit of anguish out of a character and try to be too dark seem to suffer in their story telling to me.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by ebusinesstutor

I'm not convinced that most science fiction has gotten grim. But then, I prefer science fiction that is overall positive in nature even when there is conflict or issues to overcome.

I love Lois McMaster Bujold's science fiction Vorkosigan series. Space opera with some space military, wonderful sense of humour and a light touch of romance. All superbly crafted.

As well, Elizabeth Moon's Vatta and Seranno/Suiza series. Once again, strong military, good humour and light romance. And her Speed of Dark book was brilliant and I also enjoyed Remnant Population for a great elderly character. (also an excellent elderly character in Vatta series)

And Kristine Katherine Rusch's Retrieval Artist series. Great clash of human/alien cultures, strong characters.

While there is drama and some dark elements in parts of these, especially the Retrieval Artist series, these are overall about star spanning societies and are quite positive.

I find dreary, post apocalyptic stories somewhat boring. Stories that try to wring every last bit of anguish out of a character and try to be too dark seem to suffer in their story telling to me.

Agreed. There's a whole range of stuff out there, and that's part of the issue, more "stuff" is being published and it makes it harder to find what you like sometimes.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by hidari

Nothing wrong with YA or any other Fun read...but for me if I don't want to think much I prefer to watch a Movie like Godzilla or Dances with Smurfs (Avatar)...

Litfic has always been a minority genre... but for me more interesting when I want a challenge... Then again occasional light sci-fi, mysteries, and what not are good to read...


which led to this link on why so many people are reading YA these days rather than litfic.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...804387216.html

I'd love to read any comments people here would have.

Me, other than select authors, I've pretty much stopped reading most SFF because it's all so grim. And it seems like there are two kinds of mysteries these days: cute cozies that relate to cats, bookstores, and/or cooking, or antiheroes and grimness.

Don't want to go too far off-base, but I particularly dislike books that are (apparently) intentionally "hard" -- I put Neil Stephenson's books (other than some of his first) into this category. As well as many that were mentioned in the article like Thomas Pynchon but the article then goes on to say we may be seeing a revival of "readable" novels. I certainly hope so. And not there are not any coming out...E.L. Doctorow, John Irving...

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Agreed. There's a whole range of stuff out there, and that's part of the issue, more "stuff" is being published and it makes it harder to find what you like sometimes.

Which brings up back to the point that the field is nice and healthy.
Of course, the issue cuts both ways; if it is harder for readers to ferret out specific SF variants it is also harder for specific stories and writers to find their natural audience.

But that is a generic *ebook* problem, not SF-specific.
The whole economy of plenty issue, already discussed around here.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

The article suggests, as others have in this thread, that genres are hybridizing. And it doesn't surprise me a bit that readers are seeking "less hard" stories to read; life is hard enough for many, I suppose.

It does suggest that what we think of as SF may be in store for a sea-change, away from neuron-snapping quantum physics exposition and toward simply accepting and using the tech at hand. One of the more popular SF TV series, Galactica, would be a perfect example of this: How much did the show get into the mechanics of the robots, or the theory behind their jump drives? They didn't; they just accepted 'em, used 'em, and told us a great dramatic story of exodus, prejudice, war and love. And the show was a runaway hit.

(I'd like to use examples from my own books here, but the mods would just yank the post. Suffice to say, I've tried to swing in the lighter direction in favor of story myself, though not to the extent that other authors have managed. But I think it's a valid direction.)

[ApK]

Originally Posted by Steven Lyle Jordan

One of the more popular SF TV series, Galactica, would be a perfect example of this: How much did the show get into the mechanics of the robots, or the theory behind their jump drives? They didn't; they just accepted 'em, used 'em, and told us a great dramatic story of exodus, prejudice, war and love. And the show was a runaway hit.

Funny you should mention the new Battlestar Galactica as an example.
BG is about as hard sci-fi as it gets in my book. "Hard sci-fi" doesn't equate to "bogged down in technical minutia," nor does it need to be purely extrapolative, based only on real-world physics.

The new BG was great, with some of the best writing in television, but, except for the decided effort to push it toward recognizable military fiction with the use of bullet-firing weapons, mid-twentieth-century-like naval gear, BG DID get a lot of it story and drama from hard sci-fi details:
The idea of humanity originating on another planet, the Frankenstein notion of our technology causing our doom, the nature of artificial intelligence, and the difference between 'human' and 'human-like manufactured beings', the space assaults on space-based techno-centers.
Heck, they even made an effective dramatic moments out of "jumping way past the red-line."

ApK

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by ApK

Funny you should mention the new Battlestar Galactica as an example.
BG is about as hard sci-fi as it gets in my book. "Hard sci-fi" doesn't equate to "bogged down in technical minutia," nor does it need to be purely extrapolative, based only on real-world physics.

Correct.
"Hard" SF doesn't require David Weber-style data dumps.
(Which isn't to say some of us don't enjoy them.)

It does require at least a nod to the physics of the real world. Even if it is just to drop in "inertial compensators" or to hint at actual orbital mechanics. Or to have techies actually talk like techies.

Babylon 5 was a show that at least tried to show what might be possible in actual space combat with decoupled manuevers, in-place attitude changes, etc. Unlike other shows and movies that simply took WWi and WWII combat and put it against a "space-like" environment.

SF has rules but they're flexible rules; it's not hard to at least pay them lip service. But it helps if you respect them.