Science Fiction and Fantasy

[alyxen]

I recently realized that almost anywhere there are collections of books or stories, they will tend to have science fiction and fantasy as one section. I can see some general basic similarities between the two genres, but they are still different enough that they could easily get their own sections.

How would you define science fiction and fantasy, and what are your thoughts on why they tend to be lumped together?

 

[pop_54]

I recently realized that almost anywhere there are collections of books or stories, they will tend to have science fiction and fantasy as one section. I can see some general basic similarities between the two genres, but they are still different enough that they could easily get their own sections.

How would you define science fiction and fantasy, and what are your thoughts on why they tend to be lumped together?

Science fiction has no basis in reality, ergo, it is pure fantasy... Something that has never been, and possibly never will be, dreamed up in someones head.

 

[yui]

I recently realized that almost anywhere there are collections of books or stories, they will tend to have science fiction and fantasy as one section. I can see some general basic similarities between the two genres, but they are still different enough that they could easily get their own sections.

How would you define science fiction and fantasy, and what are your thoughts on why they tend to be lumped together?

Hi alyxen and Pop,

IMHO, Science Fiction is largely the technical side of the non-existent. Space, the future, advanced technology, aliens, other planets, etc… Though in good sci-fi I do think there is a basis in reality - in the science. Movie examples would be stuff like "Star Wars" or "Pitch Black"; those are Sci-fi to me.

Fantasy for me is magic, elves, dragons, knights, gods, demons, other supernatural elements, parallel universes and the like. Like the Hamilton's Anita Blake Series, "Wheel of Time" series or "Lord of the Rings".

I do think the genres can overlap with quite spectacular results, and, for me, they are not mutually exclusive styles. However, mentally I do lump certain books/movies into sci-fi and certain books/movies firmly into fantasy.

I think they are lumped together as a whole because they are not generally huge collections on their own; or, because people who do not read them to do not distinguish between the two genres.

Luck to you,

Yui ^_^

 

[sweetnpetite]

Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Science fiction has no basis in reality, ergo, it is pure fantasy... Something that has never been, and possibly never will be, dreamed up in someones head.

Sorry Pop, that's not even close to true.

A lot of science fiction from the past has come true. Real science fiction is based on good science. Otherwise is just futeristic fantasy.

It bugs me too that they are always lumped in together. ON the other hand, you are more likely to hear of science fiction on it's own that fantasy. maybe it has something to do w/ the nature of the word 'fantasy'

When I mention fantasy without saying 'science fiction and fantasy' or 'fantasy and sci-fi' people tend to think I either mean anything thats made up (ie, all fiction) or sexual fantasy. The fantasy genre needs a *new* lable! (I"d say, speculative fiction, but that also encompases sci-fi. Maybe speculative fantasy?)

They do at times overlap, and there are many people who are just to lazy to diferentiate, but I agree that Fantasy deserves it's own category!

Should we start an online petition?

 

[sweetnpetite]

Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

I think they are lumped together as a whole because they are not generally huge collections on their own; or, because people who do not read them to do not distinguish between the two genres.

Luck to you,

Yui ^_^

Yeah, and I was going to say- it's usually the smallest section of the store or librairy!!!! no fair! no fair!

 

[gauchecritic]

Hard sci-fi has a possible science base, fantasy doesn't.

Good sci-fi is about the human condition with maybe some hard science basis for background. Fantasy is more like space opera.

The reason they are lumped together is the same reason that sex and violence are lumped together. An audience pigeon hole.

People who like sci-fi are weirdos so they must like fantasy as well.

People who like sex (other than marital) are the same as people who like violence.

The people who think these thoughts are the same people that think transvestites are all gay and that those who lead a gay lifestyle are inherently paedeophile.

Gauche

 

[Guest]

Gauche, I wish you would write a dictionary. (You just cracked me up, but taught me something.)

Perdita

 

[CrazyyAngel]

Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Movie examples would be stuff like "Star Wars" or "Pitch Black"; those are Sci-fi to me.

Star Wars is more Science Fantasy. Its just a basic Fantasy plot (well, one of the most basic plots ever) set in a future reality. Like Gauche said, somethings in Sci-Fi have a real scientific basic. Almost none of Star Wars has any scientific truth.

Better examples are "Minority Report", "Blade Runner" and "I, Robot" as they are trying to evolve todays world accordingly.

But maybe thats just me ...

And the basic reason for putting Sci-Fi and Fantasy together is the one Gauche already stated ... normally both are only liked by Nerds, Weirdos and stuff ... although I think Fantasy is more popular than Sci-Fi.

CA

 

[Remec]

I recently realized that almost anywhere there are collections of books or stories, they will tend to have science fiction and fantasy as one section. I can see some general basic similarities between the two genres, but they are still different enough that they could easily get their own sections.

How would you define science fiction and fantasy, and what are your thoughts on why they tend to be lumped together?

Personally, I think there's no real reason to seperate books by genre. I can understand the purpose, somewhat, from a marketing and store arrangement point of view, but feel that it really isn't that difficult to simply line your shelves by author like a library would. (Granted, most libraries still maintain seperate categories, but let's not go there.<g>)

Now...as to the question at hand...

I define the two as stories wherein the details of plot, character, and language are enbedded in a distinctly nonreal environment. When said environment is designed to work with the technology and physics of the real world...even a hypothetical or potential one...than it's science fiction. But when it's based in a world that could not really exist, then it's fantasy.

But it's a fine line sometimes, both in literature and movies. An example..

Bladerunner...as a movie moreso, but in its original novella also...is a film noir tale of intrigue, crime, and the pursuit of wrongdoers. The replicants and other artificial lifeforms, as well as the bleak world they inhabit, are extrapolations of current scientific and climatic trends.

It is always thought of and grouped as a science fiction work, which I'd not deny, but it could also fall into other areas fairly easily.

I'd be happier if there was just a fiction and nonfiction section. The nonfiction could be broken up by topics, and the fiction perhaps broken by literary form...novel, short story, screenplay, stageplay.

 

[Just-Legal]

Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Yeah, and I was going to say- it's usually the smallest section of the store or librairy!!!! no fair! no fair!

sweetnpetite, a girl after my own heart...

(side note: Fantasy fans - I highly reccomend Robin Hobb's "Farseer Trilogy"; Assassin's Apprentice, Royal Assassin and Assassin's Quest)

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Science fiction and fantasy both get their narrative thrust by putting people in imaginary realities and seeing how they adapt under those circumstances. That makes them different from "literary" fiction, in which the narrative is propelled by issues of character manifesting itself in more credible situations.

Before someone jumps on me by listing such-and-such sci fi or fantasy a book that is character-driven (1984 comes to mind, which uses an imagined future to make statements about the contemporary human condition), I would point out that this is a very general definition and of course has exceptions. Even so, I think the distinction holds pretty well.

---dr.M.

 

[rgraham666]

Generally I would say SF is extrapolated from today's world and using today's science and speculation about science to use as a background in which the story happens.

Fantasy would exist in a place separate from our space-time line. Or would use magic and or mythical/magical creatures.

Good examples of SF would be Bladerunner and Rollerball in the movies; 1984, Neuromancer, Little Fuzzy in literature; Babylon 5 (Yay!) and Dr. Who on TV.

Star Wars is a fantasy. So is Lord of the Rings.

And there are lots of iffy things as well.

The only hard and fast rule is that there are no hard and fast rules.

 

[gauchecritic]

The only hard and fast rule is that there are no hard and fast rules.

Sounds like Fight Club.

Or maybe the University of Wallamaroo.

Rule 1. Nooooo puftas

Gauche

 

[Weird Harold]

I don't remember the quote exactly, but John Campbell -- the legendary editor of several Gloden Age science-fiction pulp magzines had a very specific defintion of the diference between Science Fiction and Fantasy.

In Essence, a story is Science Fiction if the author assumes one (or more related) technological advance and extrapolates the effect of that advance on society and his characters.

A story is Fantasy if there are two or more unrelated technological extrapolations or if there is no basis or explanation for the differences from the real world.

I think most science fiction fans use a looser definition of "Science Fiction is based on extrapolations of current technolgical trends and Fantasy makes little or no effort to relate the "science" to the real world."

 

[R. Richard]

Good SciFi is based upon the 'one big lie' situation. The author is allowed 'one big lie.' The big lie may be a future setting or as yet undeveloped technology. However, once the lie has been used as a basis for a SciFi story, the rest of the story needs to be logically consistent.

If an author postualtes an alternate world where fire has neer been discovered, that is OK. However, metal weapons cannot exist in such a world, as there is no fire to smelt said weapons. Many poor SciFi stories suffer because of logical inconsistencies.

One of the best SciFi stories of all time is 'The Man Who Counts,' by Poul Anderson.

Fantasy stories, as has been previously pointed out are mostly elves and wizards. However, there are fantasy stories that overlap SciFi.

 

[alyxen]

Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

I do think the genres can overlap with quite spectacular results, and, for me, they are not mutually exclusive styles. However, mentally I do lump certain books/movies into sci-fi and certain books/movies firmly into fantasy.

Yui ^_^

A good, imho, example of said mixing would be Pierce Anthony's Blue Adept series (Split Infinity , Blue Adept , Juxtaposition ).

Personally, I prefer fantasy, but that could well be due to the fact I have not been turned on to a sci-fi writer I really like yet.

This question just came up as I was thinking of an english class in high school where we tried to define science fiction. We were not as successful as this thread has been though.

I have always thought it unfair that fantasy never got it's own section. It's just as good a genre as any other dammit!


hmmm. I wonder if Dubya considers Apollo 13 a sci-fi movie.

 

[tolyk]

Well, to be able to examine the difference within the categories, one must look at all the sub categories as well. How they have grown, and mutated over the years since their 'creation'.

Fantasy has such subcategories as High Fantasy, Dark Fantasy, Epic Fantasy, many more I can't remember.. but it also now contains one called Cyber-freak or something.. Which is not sci-fi, but is a fantasy novel that does make use of technology. Instead of a wizard, you have an engineer, creating "magic" with his skill. A good example of this is 'The Darksword Trilogy' by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman, it starts out as an epic fantasy story, but the forbidden 'magic' is technology. Later on they are attacked by a technologically advanced people, but the book only contains HUMANS... Fantasy does NOT need Elves, or any mythical creatures to be fantasy. Doesn't even need Magic. These are just what people have come to expect, and is the general category (Epic Fantasy most times)

Science Fiction has a number of subcategories as well, but I have never really been a sci-fi fan, and cannot recall them at this point in time. The book that I have where they are all listed is currently lent out to someone (and I think they moved away with it *growl*).. But if you want examples of the two differences, check out Isaac's magazine.. (can't remember how to spell his last name even... Asnimov?).. you will find all types of different sci-fi in there, and some fantasy. What the book I mentioned said is that sci-fi is a much broader field than fantasy, and that fantasy is a more specific category of fiction. You don't just make a fantasy by throwing in elves.. Hell, I've read some great fantasy stories based in our current time, and on our world even. (Terry Brooks' 'Running with the Devil' comes to mind)

I too am annoyed at shuffling through book racks filled with Sci-fi and fantasy, definately when people get it all disorganized and you have to shuffle through to even find the fantasy novels. But, the market isn't large enough on either by themselves, so thus they get lumped together. I generally feel like smacking a few heads together whenever someone refers to all fiction as Sci-fi.. But thats just a personal issue I'm trying to work on

 

[Liar]

Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Star Wars is more Science Fantasy. Its just a basic Fantasy plot (well, one of the most basic plots ever) set in a future reality.

Actually, "A Long Time Ago In A Galaxy Far Far Away". Really, Star Wars is pure fairy tale fantasy. The only difference is that the setting is outer space.

Or does a fantasy tale nessecary have to take place in a medieval enviroment? Then what the heck is Harry Potter?

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Sci-fi... fantasy...

...geek-stuff.

I think that's the idea, generally. Looking at the arrangment of all my favorite book stores, I notice that Science fiction, Fantasy, roles-playing games, and such stuff are all in the general vicinity of each other. At least, I think that's about right. I don't really care for it, haven't checked.

Geek-stuff.

I think that's probably as good a reason as many.

 

[tolyk]

Sci-fi... fantasy...

...geek-stuff.

I think that's the idea, generally. Looking at the arrangment of all my favorite book stores, I notice that Science fiction, Fantasy, roles-playing games, and such stuff are all in the general vicinity of each other. At least, I think that's about right. I don't really care for it, haven't checked.

Geek-stuff.

I think that's probably as good a reason as many.

See, it is all labeled as 'geek-stuff' but then when a movie like Lord of the Rings comes out, it makes a killing. Suddenly the books are reprinted with new covers, and everyone is buying them.. it made a ton of money in the theatre.. But no, those kind of books are only for geeks (Until the movie comes out and they loved it)

 

[sweetnpetite]

Re: Re: Re: Science Fiction and Fantasy

Star Wars is more Science Fantasy. Its just a basic Fantasy plot (well, one of the most basic plots ever) set in a future reality. Like Gauche said, somethings in Sci-Fi have a real scientific basic. Almost none of Star Wars has any scientific truth.

Better examples are "Minority Report", "Blade Runner" and "I, Robot" as they are trying to evolve todays world accordingly.

But maybe thats just me ...

And the basic reason for putting Sci-Fi and Fantasy together is the one Gauche already stated ... normally both are only liked by Nerds, Weirdos and stuff ... although I think Fantasy is more popular than Sci-Fi.

CA

I agree that Star Wars is more or less Science Fantasy. However, I think it appeals more to a scifi audience. (JMO)

Also, it isn't set in the future. "A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away." People always seem to forget that, lol.

I like fantasy better, but I think Science Fiction is more popular. You don't see a Fantasy Channel on cable (and don't say the Spice Channel, lol- you know what I mean). People take Science Fiction much more seriously (or at least certain people do) and many fans consider it an insult to call it 'sci-fi'.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Science fiction and fantasy both get their narrative thrust by putting people in imaginary realities and seeing how they adapt under those circumstances. That makes them different from "literary" fiction, in which the narrative is propelled by issues of character manifesting itself in more credible situations.

Before someone jumps on me by listing such-and-such sci fi or fantasy a book that is character-driven (1984 comes to mind, which uses an imagined future to make statements about the contemporary human condition), I would point out that this is a very general definition and of course has exceptions. Even so, I think the distinction holds pretty well.

---dr.M.

Actually, that is a good point.

Science Fiction and Fantasy (together) are removed from the rest of what constitutes fiction, even other genres such as Westerns, Romance, Historical, ect.

Real World Fiction vs. Other World Fiction.

However, I still think that they are seperate categories and would like to see them being made more distinct. There is cross over in everything. There are Western/Romance, Young Adult/Supernatural Romance, Time Travel Romance, Romantic Adventure, ect, ect. They get both lables and put in the category where more readers who would like that sort of thing would look.

They could each have their own section with a spot in the middle for hybrids. (LIke the Pern novels) Then we can all start on the end we like the best, and work our way accross

 

[dr_mabeuse]

"Star Wars" is an example of what's known as "Space Opera", and it really doesn't matter whether it's set in another galaxy or another time or another dimension, all space opera is basically the same: it's a swash-buckler with space ships and ray guns (lasers, nowadays). There's no real difference between the plot of Star Wars and a pirate movie or a knights-in-shining-armor epic. They all involve the same stock characters in the same situations. Just the settings are different.

This is my main beef with fantasy. Most fantasy stories are adventure stories, and adventure stories have limited possibilities.

---dr.M.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Good SciFi is based upon the 'one big lie' situation. The author is allowed 'one big lie.' The big lie may be a future setting or as yet undeveloped technology. However, once the lie has been used as a basis for a SciFi story, the rest of the story needs to be logically consistent.

If an author postualtes an alternate world where fire has neer been discovered, that is OK. However, metal weapons cannot exist in such a world, as there is no fire to smelt said weapons. Many poor SciFi stories suffer because of logical inconsistencies.

One of the best SciFi stories of all time is 'The Man Who Counts,' by Poul Anderson.

Fantasy stories, as has been previously pointed out are mostly elves and wizards. However, there are fantasy stories that overlap SciFi.

I don't think I like the definitions that always seem to be given for 'Fantasy' I think that there is an awful lot of Fantasy literature that doenst' fit into this whole 'no basis in reality' write off that mostly comes from science fiction fans. And I don't think most Fantasy fans would define it that way. Nor do I think we should look to fans of a *different* genre to define ours.

And there is an awful *lot* of fantasy that is *not* even close to being 'all elves and wizards' A good example off the top of my head would be "Mists of Avalon" although, I suppose there are wizards and fairies in that story it isn't as fru-fru as that sounds like it would entail, and they are *not* the focus.

Huffily offended fantasyfan,

Sweet.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Sci-fi... fantasy...

...geek-stuff.

I think that's the idea, generally. Looking at the arrangment of all my favorite book stores, I notice that Science fiction, Fantasy, roles-playing games, and such stuff are all in the general vicinity of each other. At least, I think that's about right. I don't really care for it, haven't checked.

Geek-stuff.

I think that's probably as good a reason as many.

Yeah, and you know what they say about Geeks-



We all look alike.




.