Fantasy or science fiction?

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by issybird

First of all, “instant classic” is an oxymoron, a nonsense term. Classic implies, strongly, tested by time. Instant classic is just blurb hyperbole.

Our disagreements are immaterial. No one or even two people determine classic status. It’s the consensus. I do suspect that my judgments are more in line with the accepted assessment than yours. “Instant classic.” :shudder:

I find myself agreeing with issybird. Instant classic is nothing but an advertising term. To me, classic when applied to a book implied that it has been judged over a long period of time to be an outstanding book.

The last book I read that had instant classic in the description put me more in mind of one critic's comment about a book called To You I Tell It: “It is not a book to be lightly thrown aside. It should be thrown with great force…”

[nana77]

There is a Wiki too that explains the concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classic_book

[Sonnenfee]

It seems I belong to a minority regarding the result till now
I prefer fantasy, sci-fi isn’t my world by books, same for movies.

In fantasy books, the world described is more mysterious, fantastical and mysterious and I can completely immerse myself in them while reading. Sci-fi books are too abstract and too far removed from reality for me.

There are exceptions, though; Marc Elsberg's Blackout is one of them and personally I found this sci-fi book, if considered to sci-fi genre, really really good.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

First of all, “instant classic” is an oxymoron, a nonsense term. Classic implies, strongly, tested by time. Instant classic is just blurb hyperbole; bring a more critical attitude toward those who are trying to sell you something. I’ll grant you modern classic, but that serves to differentiate between books 50 to 100 years old, say, and those older than that.

Our disagreements are immaterial. No one or even two people determine classic status. It’s the consensus. I do suspect that my judgments are more in line with the accepted assessment than yours. “Instant classic.” :shudder:

Instant classic is used mostly for reviews.

[John F]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You don't need something to be old to be a classic. The term modern classic comes to hand. There is also the term instant classic. The passage of time does not need to happen to make something a classic.

And since we probably disagree, how would you handle this when we'd have book classified as classic that we'd both disagree on?

Right up there with unputdownable?

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by issybird

First of all, “instant classic” is an oxymoron, a nonsense term. Classic implies, strongly, tested by time. Instant classic is just blurb hyperbole; bring a more critical attitude toward those who are trying to sell you something. I’ll grant you modern classic, but that serves to differentiate between books 50 to 100 years old, say, and those older than that.

Our disagreements are immaterial. No one or even two people determine classic status. It’s the consensus. I do suspect that my judgments are more in line with the accepted assessment than yours. “Instant classic.” :shudder:

Yes to all that.

I added bold to the important bit.

Not just books, but cars (though classic can simply mean not old enough to be vintage but admired).

"Instant classic" is terrible phrase when really what they mean is "fashionable or popular right now". Could be reviled in five years time... Or less.
"Fifty Shades of Grey"?

[Dopedangel]

I personally don't think there is a real line between Fantasy and Sci-Fi. After all, the tech, aliens, different worlds, and universes in Sci-Fi are as fantastical as magic and dragons.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Quoth

Yes to all that.

I added bold to the important bit.

Not just books, but cars (though classic can simply mean not old enough to be vintage but admired).

"Instant classic" is terrible phrase when really what they mean is "fashionable or popular right now". Could be reviled in five years time... Or less.
"Fifty Shades of Grey"?

I do think that some of what is called classic may not actually be classic. They may be classic to some, but not others. So to be truly classic, I would think most would have to agree.

For example, War of the Worlds. I don't think anyone would say that it's not science fiction.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

For example, War of the Worlds. I don't think anyone would say that it's not science fiction.

Vintage Science Fiction.

Meanwhile on Mars, the natives hope the reports of an invasion from the third rock will come to nothing. So far the little robots have been amusing.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I do think that some of what is called classic may not actually be classic. They may be classic to some, but not others. So to be truly classic, I would think most would have to agree.

As Issybird said, classic is not the synonym of "I like it". There are plenty of classics I hated, for example, but they're still classics by general consensus. And there are hundreds and hundreds of books I love that will never be considered classics.

[Quoth]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

As Issybird said, classic is not the synonym of "I like it". There are plenty of classics I hated, for example, but they're still classics by general consensus. And there are hundreds and hundreds of books I love that will never be considered classics.

Absolutely.

[JSWolf]

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is considered a classic.

[haertig]

What I like is Adventure. When other genres cross over into Adventure, then I like those other Genres in the combination. Action often times crosses over. Same for Thriller. Same for Science Fiction. Fantasy does sometimes.

I like the Fantasy that entails adventure, but not so much when it adds other weird stuff. Like say the main characters find themselves in a tense situation with attackers closing in. You can't see any way for them to get out of that situation. But then, one of the characters starts singing, which causes far away trees to uproot themselves and swim across the ocean to the relevant location, which disturbs the flesh eating birds nesting in their branches, who then fly over and save the heroes by eating the attackers. Say what? Didn't see that one coming. That kind of Fantasy is not to my liking.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by haertig

I like the Fantasy that entails adventure, but not so much when it adds other weird stuff. Like say the main characters find themselves in a tense situation with attackers closing in. You can't see any way for them to get out of that situation. But then, one of the characters starts singing, which causes far away trees to uproot themselves and swim across the ocean to the relevant location, which disturbs the flesh eating birds nesting in their branches, who then fly over and save the heroes by eating the attackers. Say what? Didn't see that one coming. That kind of Fantasy is not to my liking.

Is this from a book or you invented it yourself? If the latter, you might consider writing a fantasy novel!

[haertig]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Is this from a book or you invented it yourself? If the latter, you might consider writing a fantasy novel!

It's a mis-mash of events taken from several different books and put together into the kind of nonsense that tends to appear in some Fantasy books I've read. Although this exact pieced together scenario has not been published yet (to the best of my knowledge, but who knows?) You kind of roll your eyes at some of the plot scenarios in these novels. It's not just Fantasy that does this. I remember an Action book where someone drives a jet ski up the ramp of a large boat and flies through the air to grab their prize (what that prize was, I can't bother to remember). The prize might have been shooting down an airplane, now that I'm thinking about it. All genres are capable of coming up with some whack-a-doodle bizarre scenarios. Fantasy just seems to have more of "the author must have been high on something" scenarios committed to paper.