[Mugwump]

From the start I must admit that I’m not the most gushing fan of Space Opera. Page upon page of disorientating, badly written space battles bore the bones out of me. That said, I grudgingly admit that, through the efforts of a handful of authors, the genre has “grown up” during the last 20 years. Peter F. Hamilton’s complex and fascinating “Bitek” concept; Iain M. Banks’s enigmatic yet deliciously mischievous “Culture” and Alastair Reynolds’s seductively enjoyable Gothic renaissance have, IMO, propelled the genre light-years beyond the pickle it not-so-long-ago occupied.

But no matter how much Space Opera endeavors to evolve, can it ever escape the trap set for it by the ilk of Star Wars or, God forbid, Battlestar Galatica? Will Space Opera always be regarded as the “trash” of SF?

[Rocket Sheep]

Actually Star Wars had a lot going for it and it was way ahead of its time. It also spawned a lot of new technology that wasn't around until George Lucas needed to use it to create the first movie and wonderful companies like Pixar have risen from the ashes of companies created to make Star Wars. Star Wars was the first real hit movie and affected every action adventure movie that followed.

The dialogue was terribly cliched but I think it was a great idea to use familiar plotting devices, fresh new actors, and to concentrate on worldbuilding and high action. If you look at each of the creatures and the world's they inhabit they are terribly logical, the Ewoks suit Endor, the Jawa suit Tatooine, the Gungans suit Naboo. If you look closely there's a lot of good stuff like that in Star Wars.

And dare I say the same goes for Star Trek? Do you remember how the bridge of the Enterprise used to spin? It doesn't now sadly but scientifically that is a way to create on board gravity, making wandering around the ship as if you were on a plane possible... unlike most sf movies. Also the tachyon drive was cutting edge science. Okay so the dialogue again was awfully cliched but how much mileage have we got out of "beam me up Scotty" or "ye cannae change the laws of physics" or "Clingons on the starboard bow"?

I think there's room for more space opera, especially if it is serious like the Alastair Reynolds, Greg Bear type.

[Leiali]

I prefer Space Opera to Hard Sci Fi sometimes and I think there is always room for galactic issues with character driven plots, as the complexities of humanity (and other races I'm sure) has a wealth of possibilities. I also think that an original writer could easily overcome the stigma you speak of. Though I have to say I love star trek and am gutted I am missing Battlestar Galactica (it is raved about by my friends) and I don't have a problem with trash either. But the Ian M Banks and my personal favourite - Louis Mc Master Bujolds of this world I am sure will keep Space Opera relatively respectable.

There will always be mileage out of Star Trek. If you love it you love it for ever.

[Archren]

My personal feeling is that Charlie Stross' "Singularity Sky" proves that Space Opera can be updated & respectable in this day & age. Amazing book!

[Rob B]

I kind of see Space Opera as the "kissing cousin" of Epic Fantasy. Both flavors of SpecFic can feature stories on a grand scale, conflicts between differing races, cultures from far distances.

For example, Hamilton's Fallen Dragon had the epic feel to it, the story within a story (prophetic, even) that Epic Fantasy has, a talisman-ic object.

[Monty Mike]

I totally agree with Fitz :D

[Leiali]

So do I! It makes sense thinking of it like that. It is plot and character driven, whilst some sci fi is all about the sci and not the fi.