Ahira's Hangar

I think the difference between fantasy and science fiction is how the strange things are explained. Science fiction is something that could happen somewhere, in the future or on an another planet (but not on present-day Earth, that's mainstream, and historical Earth is the real of the historical novel), and fantasy is something that breaks the natural laws so badly it can't happen in this universe. A story can be science fiction without obeying real-world science exactly, if the author didn't intend there to be any disrepancies or presents the infringing bits as later development of science that correct erraneous modern beliefs.

Some examples:

Science fiction
Faster than light trave is possible because Einstein was wrong
Aliens of a particular planet look like unicorns
Hitler won WWII by developing nukes

Fantasy
Faster than light travel is possible when a god helps
There just are unicorns, and they are magical too
Hitler kept vampires in his employ <i></i>

Ok, another thought for folks to ponder on the general topic. Cheryl Morgan in her E-zine Emerald City www.emcit.com has put forth the following proposal, there is lots of stuff out in the literary marketplace that is really fantasy masquerading as science fiction. To explain further, she says that what many authors put in their books as aliens are really elves, or at least how Tolkien redefined Elf, with just a name change. These elf/aliens are longer lived than humans, smarter (and perhaps wiser) than humans, more beautiful and have fairer features than humans, stronger than humans and possess 'magical' powers (maybe explained through ESP or some parascience). All features of elves as described by Tolkien (I make the Tolkien distinction because prior to Tolkien elf had had many negative indentifications and were more like goblins). These points were made by Ms. Morgan when she was reviewing a book written by Julie Czerneda. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i></i>

A short comment continuing our discussion. Earlier today I read a quote by Kathryn Cramer regarding science fiction. Ms Cramer is, AFAIK, married to David Hartwell, an editor of several anthologies and a few they've edited together. Ms. Cramer says: Quote:SF allows us to understand and experience our past, present and future in terms of an imagined future

More comments. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i></i>

I dunno, I always flinch a bit when "the future" is included in a definition of SF. I've read many representative works set in present day physics labs. Sometimes they're even about scientists in the past. ******************

To seek the sacred river Alph, to walk the caves of ice ...<i></i>

I am going to write a couple of messages to this thread, please everyone feel free to coment on these or anything before.

AlphSeeker wrote before me Quote:I always flinch a bit when "the future" is included in a definition of SF....many representative works set in present day physics labs...even about scientists in the past. Well I think Kathryn Cramer's quote covers those two contingencies.

taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i></i>

Does anyone here think there could be a difference in preference for science fiction or fantasy, based on if one is a man or a woman? And do our tastes change with time, and anyone know why they might have changed? (of course tastes change with time, that's almost a rhetorical question, but the interest lies a little deeper)

I know the first part of that question is probably a little "HOT" and could ruffle some feathers, but I think we might consider the question a little rationally and with some analysis.

For myself when I was much younger, grade schoool, high school and some college years.(speaking about 25+ yrs ago). I was a real scifi reading junkie. Bradbury, Asimov, Heinlein and some AC Clarke, read them all and at the time I even had some disregard for fantasy. Tried The Hobbit, and could only make about 3/5s through before I gave up, and then turned away from fantasy; although, I did like Andre Norton (but I did not know she was women for the longest time and maybe I did not know she was a fantasy writer, either) for a long time. (FWIW, Hobbit probably not best first choice). Also, went through a phase of adventure reading, Hornblower series, Three Musketeers, Man in the Iron Mask. Now my tastes and predilictions definitely turn heavily towards fantasy. And I really can not say why, but give me stories with magic, dragons and demons and I am happy. Hence my present reading of the LoTR trilogy. However, my friend in California, to whom I postulated this question to (regarding my changed taste), formulated the following reason of some plausibility. I worked for many years, 20+, for a scientific company, a speciality chemical company, and her reasoning was I got my fill of science through my work, and for off work time I needed something else. And since she and I used to work for this same company, she knew this part of my history. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i>Edited by: taraswizard at: 2/17/04 8:47 pm
</i>

"Well I think Kathryn Cramer's quote covers those two contingencies."

I guess I don't see how. She says "in terms of an imagined futrue". Maybe we're parsing the sentence differently. I understood her to means this:

"SF allows us to understand and experience our (past, present and future), in terms of an imagined future."

Not this:

"SF allows us to understand and experience our past, present and (future, in terms of an imagined future)."

But really, the point is somewhat academic since I mischaracterized the quote as a "definition" to begin with. It's really just a general comment about SF (which mostly is set in the future), and one I agree with. ******************

To seek the sacred river Alph, to walk the caves of ice ...<i>Edited by: AlphSeeker  at: 2/18/04 7:35 am
</i>

That last part would certainly make sense to me, Taras. I also read to escape, not to be reminded of my job. So both science fiction and fantasy work for me...as do some destective novels, historical novels, history books, etc. -- but not medical thrillers, as I've worked in hospitals for all of the years of my adult life.
In fact, the only germ/sickness/death story I can rememebr ever enjoying was King's The Stand...which was more of a fantasy than a medical thing...I just can't get into books like Chrichton's Coma and others like it, I end up shaking my head at the depictions of hospitals and medical personnel...
I still stand by my answer that there are too many books that straddle the line...perhaps, as someone suggested, calling it all speculative fiction might be the answer...
As to the gender thing, I have often noticed that I am the only woman in the SF&F section of the bookstore, though there are plenty of other women here at the Hangar, such as MsMary and Foam...I always see plenty of guys in that part of the bookstore, though. It would be interesting to see some stats on the buying habits per gender, and see a breakdown on such areas as "high fantasy", horror, and "hard" science fiction. I wonder if anyone else sees this in their bookstore, or it is a phenomenon of this particular geographic area for some odd reason? ******************************************************

Our lives are the songs that sing the universe into existence.~David Zindell
<i></i>

Short reply to Duchess, well I agree if one was to collect retail statistics on the topic of preference, it would be interesting. I grew up in an era, and was introduced to SF during a time when if girl admitted any interest in such a thing, it would be like admitting you kissed your brother or something. (IOW, to put in kinda juvenile terms, SF was a BOY thing, cause, this was the attitude of my younger years, girls would be to sensible to be interested in all such nonsense). Of course nowadays things are different. I see lots of women at Cons. Of course TV shows like Xena and Buffy (and IMO Babylon 5 and Star Trek; TNG were part of the trend) have got many younger women interested in SF and F. And now there are many Women SF and F authoresses, some recent writers and some been writing for 30 yrs or more. (name dropping time, Patricia McKillip, Misty Lackey, Tanya Huff, UKL, Storm Constatine, Pamela Sargent, Kathryn Sullivan, and I could go on)

edited to add on 2/25/2004. Women authors. JK Rowling.

More to follow. This reply turned out to be not so short. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i>Edited by: taraswizard at: 2/25/04 1:17 pm
</i>

Based on my last two posts to this thread this is the logical next step.

Almost, hate to say this and ask the following, but here goes anyway. Is there any difference between women writers and men writers of SF and F? First a little historical background, initially Science Fiction writing was to appeal to the 12 to 20 year old market of United States young men. And to drag up a famous quote regarding women writers by Robert Silveberg in 1974 or 1975: 'James Tiptree Jr. is obviously a man since a women could not write science fiction this well' Of course, James Tiptree was not a man, but the pseudonym for Alice Sheldon.

Andre Norton, when we she started writing in the early 30s (I think) chose the gender ambigous Andre as her writing pseudonym because at the time she did not think as a woman writing in this genre she would be taken seriously.

Mike Resnick has recently been involved with an anthology Women writing science fiction as men.

Comments, please. I need to know this is not to far out for everyone. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i>Edited by: taraswizard at: 2/27/04 3:08 pm
</i>

My contrarian nature can barely resist asking this question. Is Kurt Vonnegut an SF writer? Yes, he uses elements that are SFnal, aliens and alien planets, strange science, time travel, etc. But is it any different than the Magical Realism writers who use fantasy elements but are not writing fantasy novels. As an example, considering Bernard Malamud's book The Natural is that a fantasy story? Or Virgnia Woolf's Orlando?

And I am sure that Vonnegut has inspired many writers who are currently SF writers.

Comments, I am sure there will be some. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i>Edited by: taraswizard at: 3/25/04 9:57 pm
</i>