The dark age of sci-fi

[michiel]

I've been feeling this for quite some time, and since I saw a thread that seemed complementary to my feelings, it seemed natural to debate it here.

I -- somehow -- get the feeling science fiction has gotten into a slum.

Science Fiction tv-shows are being cancelled left and right (or subtly turned into soap operas).

At my local bookstore, science-fiction is being filed under fantasy. Perhaps 7% of their sff stock is genuine sci-fi, and most of it is of extremely poor quality.

What bothers me is that science fiction stories tend to be more... compressed than fantasy stories. Telling a single story in, say, 5 volumes is a feat very few sci-fi writers can carry off. (And most of them that do, do so badly). For fantasy writers, 5 volumes is small beer.

Of course, long-winded stories spread over several volumes are more profitable than a pocket of collected short stories, never mind their respective quality.

So, will sf be driven from the bookshelves by sci-fi?

 

[Kamakhya]

I -- somehow -- get the feeling science fiction has gotten into a slum.

When I get PMS or when I see that the fantasy board has 35,000+ posts, I feel this way!

I am a die-hard sf fan. I like some fantasy, too, but my true calling is in this weird unknown genre called science fiction.

I'm not so sure sf is in a slump, because I have seen some amazing new authors out there (as well as some old timers who keep plugging away), but right now, the money is the endless jordon, eddings, gmmr, etc. spewings. (No offence to fantasy readers, I have read none of these authors.) Quite frankly, I think all genres have been hurt by this demand for sequals. A trilogy is good, but, beyond that, it becomes schlock 90% of the time. Yet, publishers believe that if 3 books make money, imagine what 10 books would make!

I am saddened by the lack of popular interest is sf. Fantasy is also cool, but there is a place for realistic speculation on the future of people.

Kamakhya

 

[Aik Haw]

SF is not dying.

SF is evolving, SF has grown, SF has changed, appealing no longer to the general population but to people with strong science training. This may be seen as a downward spiral, but can also been seen as an entire genre specialising.

Peter F. Hamilton, Alistair Reynold etc.. have produced science fiction deemed as ground breaking in the recent years, and in fact have changed the way we view the future, away from what older writers have shown.

 

[michiel]

That's more or less the same thing that happened to classical music.

First it lost it's economic appeal.

Then it lost it's mass audience appeal.

Then it got in a downward spiral.

Of course, the genre has some very dedicated followers.

But how much new classical music has been written in the last 20 years?

Exactly.

 

[alan empty]

Hi Michiel. I hope you're wrong. These things fluctuate - who knows whether the popularity of SF will soar again in the future? SF on TV has had a pretty good run for the past 15 years but nothing lasts forever.

But is you're talking about books - I don't know about sales-wise (there may be a decrease) but in terms of quality I certainly don't see any Dark Age. Writers that Aik mentioned - Hamilton, Reynolds - plus others such as Neal Asher, Ken McLeod and Richard Morgan. More established writers are still with us, such as Gibson, Sterling, Banks & Stephenson. Or Ursula Le Guin. Or Joe Haldeman. Or Gene Wolfe.

I think you're wrong when you say SF writers can't write multi-volume epics - Hamilton has. Donaldson has. Mostly I think they don't want to. I think SF writers and Fantasy writers are mostly very different in their aspirations. SF is more about ideas - that's why it's got such a history of short stories. A good idea doesn't need a 6 volume epic. Fantasy's...different.

Besides, I really don't need an SF version of Robert Jordan. I'd cry - there's only so much dragging out of the same storyline that I can cope with.

Also, unlike Fantasy, the wealth of good SF from the past 50 years or so is enormous. Fantasy doesn't have such a rich past. Nor such a diverse present.

Don't worry about it. You'll never run out of good quality SF to read. I only wish there was as much good Fantasy stuff out there for me to read.

All the bookstores I go to have more SF than Fantasy. Maybe you just need to find yourself a new store?

 

[fortytwo]

Originally posted by Kamakhya


When I get PMS or when I see that the fantasy board has 35,000+ posts, I feel this way!

.....
Kamakhya

What you must remember Kamakhya, it's not the number of posts that count, it's the quality of them.


42

 

[Chlestron]

There is a surprising amount of Sci-Fi hidden in the Fantasy section at the bookstore. Basically, a lot of people can't tell the difference and realistically, the lines are blurring. Unless a title SCREAMS sci-fi at the person, it is automatically assumed that it is fantasy.

Example: Neuromancer - haven't read, but rated as one of the best novels around but the title looks a LOT like Necromancer (which SCREAMS fantasy) and so this is probably found in the fantasy section.

Example: Battletech - haven't really gotten into this universe, but the title just SCREAMS sci-fi and lo-and-behold, Battletech books are in the Sci-fi section.

 

[Ouroboros]

Seems to me that SF has in the past enjoyed a 'Golden age' when god-like figures such as Isaac Asimov, Blish, Bester, Heinlein and others walked among us mere mortals.

I think that in many ways SF today remains more progressive than the fantasy genre, there seems to be less of a trend for sticking to formulas.

In my opinion, the best SF work of the past few years has been the Night's Dawn trilogy by Peter F. Hamilton, and the various Culture novels by Iain M. Banks. David Zindell also impressed me with Neverness.

Actually, I am a lot more enthsiastic about the state of the SF genre than that of the fantasy genre, and I have always regarded myself more as a fantasy buff. Hmm....

 

[Robert]

I am a hard core sci-fi fan. And I am disapointed in the growing dominance of fantasy. Yes, I love fantasy, especially all the left field stuff coming out like Sara Douglass etc, but my heart will always be forever Sci-Fi.

Though to tell you the truth, since I have just discovered some of the greats of Sci-Fi for the very first time (ala Le Guin), it might be a while before I lift my head up long enough to look around.

 

[Aik Haw]

Actually, come to think of it a few new titans of sci-fi is emerging among the Oriental market, that is if you can read either Mandarin or Korean.

Wong Lung Gan ( most certainly not his real name but a pen name. No parents will ever name their child by such a name ) is the author of a complete pentalogy set in the 26th century AD, or his 412th year since the foundation of the Technocratic Dynasty. A very interesting read, though would be deemed racist by the West. It is not a space opera ( even though people have long colonised space ).

 

[Clarkesworld]

I don't think that science fiction has entered a dark age. There are a lot of good young writers out there filling in the gaps where the big names once were. I'm seeing a good batch of British authors lately. The real problem is a shortage of publishers willing to take a chance on new talent.

I run an online bookstore that only sells science fiction, fantasy, and horror. The genres are splitting, crossing over, and harder to pin down than ever. I will note that fantasy books tend to have the largest show in our used book sales. I'm far from tossing in the towel. I think the genre still has a lot to offer.

 

[Kamakhya]

42 reminded me:

What you must remember Kamakhya, it's not the number of posts that count, it's the quality of them.

Gosh, you are so right 42. Thank you for reminding me! I have had some really brilliant and insightful discussions here (and another e-list I am on) about sf. There are some truly brilliant folk attracted to the genre. I do read most of the fantasy forum and I have to admit that it is not all brilliance.

Aik Haw said:

Actually, come to think of it a few new titans of sci-fi is emerging among the Oriental market, that is if you can read either Mandarin or Korean.

Dang, I don't think these are likely to be translated and from what I have heard, Mandarin and Korean are extremely difficult to learn. Languages are not my strong suit!

Wong Lung Gan ( most certainly not his real name but a pen name. No parents will ever name their child by such a name ) is the author of a complete pentalogy set in the 26th century AD, or his 412th year since the foundation of the Technocratic Dynasty. A very interesting read, though would be deemed racist by the West. It is not a space opera ( even though people have long colonised space ).

I, for one, would really like to hear more about these books. It is highly unlikely we will see them in English and I know, I will not be learning Cantonese soon (though I wish I could). Why is the name not likely? Why would they seem racist to Westerners? What do they portray or fortell? Does the race of the author alter their vision of the future and if so, why?

I would love to hear and learn more about the Eastern viewpoint of the world through SF!

By the way, I started a similar thread last year and should still be in the archives. I don't know how to point to a past thread, but I'm sure one of our fearless moderators could dig up my thread concerning the decline of SF, or you could just check through past threads.

Kamakhya

 

[Hobbit]

By the way, I started a similar thread last year and should still be in the archives.

This'll be the one then, Kamakhya.

Is Sf on the decline?

Best

Hobbit

 

[lemming]

Speculative science-based fiction goes on, the name changes

Science fiction will never die for the same reason nobody will ever write the last love story. The concepts driving the genre are a) dreaming about the future and b) worrying about the future, especially about what we might do to ourselves and the future if we ever manage to do such-and-such, and those concepts will never die.

Does the face of speculative fiction change? Yes. On some thread a while ago I remember posting how nobody ever writes books based SOLELY on the idea of people developing better robots anymore, and yet the robot idea hasn't gone away; it's simply been accepted and incorporated into a variety of works. Other trademark features of SF may be going the same way; that doesn't spell the end of science fiction, not even if nobody ever writes anything about a spaceship again. People are still speculating. What's happening is that people are focusing their speculation on areas of science possibly less near and dear to us, and rather often that speculation is getting shelved in areas of the bookstore we don't usually go to. For example, most of Robin Cook's stuff is actually science fiction, with the speculated scientific advances being made in the area of medicine. Other medicine-based SF that's gotten rather more acclaim would include Nancy Kress's excellent Beggars in Spain (what would happen if some people didn't have to sleep?) and Elizabeth Moon's even more excellent The Speed of Dark (what would happen if autism could be treated far more effectively in the future?). Eco-disaster novels can be viewed similarly. And features of classic SF are being incorporated into far more crossover and cross-genre books than ever before... the fable-like Girl in Landscape by Jonathan Lethem relies on the idea of humankind colonizing other planets, even though that's not really the point of the book; many of Ursula K. Le Guin's fables are set against SF backdrops; and books like China Mieville's The Scar and Perdido Street Station contain so many SF elements that only the coexistence of fantastic elements seem to keep them out of the genre proper.

To sum up and shut up, GENRES CHANGE. What is science fiction, anyway? I say it's speculative work in which depends on some advance of science or human knowledge for its backdrop or plot, but is somewhat based on our current knowledge of the universe. Also, the universe should be understandable and controllable through science (not magic, which would make it fantasy; and it can't be uncontrollable or malevolent without edging toward horror). Within those bounds there's lots of room for lots of new SF focusing on every field of science that people get fired up about. It may not be about space travel and it may not be labeled science fiction, but it will be out there. The hard part for us, the readers, may be to find and acknowledge it.

 

[Duraccione]

Re: Speculative science-based fiction goes on, the name changes

Originally posted by lemming
To sum up and shut up, GENRES CHANGE.

This is the reason imho - or one of the reasons - why today science fiction, fantasy and horror are mostly united on the shelves and dealt as a single genre: today it is often difficult to separate one genre from the others, since many works have elements of each genre in them.
"Contamination", I think they call it, and sharpening of readers' taste: we want continuously something new.

 

[Aik Haw]

lemming hit the nail right on the head, science fiction changes, and that is one beautiful thing about science fiction. Where all the other genres remains static, science fiction advances, marches forward with new discoveries in science and technology.

Robots for example are no longer the main feature of scifi as has been stated by lemming, it is subsidiary, taken for granted. Why? Because we already have the technology. Space travel between the Moon and Earth is no longer main features? Why? Because 5 nations on Earth if they so choose to can start sending fleets of spaceship between Moon and Earth on a daily basis today. Cryogenesis no longer makes up the stories for the same reason, we use it daily in medicine in some parts of the world.

What is the main focus of science fiction nowadays? Things that to Arthur C. Clarke and Asimov would be almost impossible to write. Nanotechnology, Inversion G-M, biowares, cellular structure printing ( yes we can do that now!! Only problem is whether commercially it will become viable ), precise weaponaries etc..

And soon, these things will fade into old science fiction and new things will take over. Scifi as a genre grows, evolves, mutates. Other genres remain where they are.

 

[Aik Haw]

Kamakhya:-
No one writes in Cantonese. All the Chinese languages are bound by a single, standard written system even though you can sound them differently. The Core Vocal Language or Standard language of the Chinese though is Common/Mandarin. There is only one written system though.

For example, this word - ( stretch the line a little longer ) means One in all Chinese languages, though how you read it differ. In Common/Mandarin, it is read as yi, though in Fukien you read it as yik, or yie in Cantonese, or yip in Hakka, or sek in Shanxi or gou in I don't know what.

Back to the story, Lung Gan writes about an Earth broken up into five major Empires. Technocratic Dynasty rules over the entire South East Asia, Australia, the Orient, India, Pakistan and Iran, and Eastern Russia till the Arctic Ocean. The Holy Conquest rules over the Islamic world west from modern day Iraq. The Aryan Star rules over everywhere West from the ruins of Moscow to Greenland, everywhere East from Moscow belongs to Technocratic Dynasty. The Cross rules over the entire North and South America, while the Axle rules over Antarctica.

His world is very complex. Following the Sino-Indian war in the 22nd century what was than the Chinese Nation extinguished the Indians completely, but alas, something strange happened to all the Chinese, pulling the Chinese race down a different evolutionary line from other humans. After massive GE etc.. on the part of the old government, some kind of balanced genome appeared, ensuring the entire nation don't go into extinction but alas, the Chinese were no longer humans ( the story later explained why the Chinese were affected, resurrecting tales of dragons being the founding race for the Chinese while other humans were pure, indigenous primates. Oh by the way, dragons here are not the mythical beast but rather some advanced alien species doing some kind of experiments on the primates).

The story is about how the other 4 nations reacted when the dragons, long quiscent in Earth's magma core awakened, and how the dragons and the Technocratics fought with each other over supremacy of NeoChina while at the same time fending off attacks from the other 4 nations. Than, we have new threats from the Tuatha Du Danaan coming from the Aryan Star who admitted that the Aryans were not fully humans either but experimented. Then we have the Dragons finally pouncing on the Tuatha Du Danaan who their species thought they brought to extinction but never realised that a small pocket survived on Earth.

Very complex storyline, full of nanotechs, biotech, space time dilation on Earth, dimensional sliding etc.. The main characters were Technocratics though later jumped up the third jump of their evolution and their descendants became Transcedants.

 

[Hobbit]

Wow....

Lemming....... brilliant response. Summed up the point of Sf & Spec Fic nicely. Though I like the Golden Age stuff every now and then, it is definitely different today....what we should expect.

It is also true that Sf has become 'mainstream' - what is often amusing and saddening is the way authors/film directors go out of their way to make sure that people think it is not science fiction... *sigh*

Aik - I meant to say earlier that, like Kamakhya, I wanted to know more about these books. Fascinating. Once again the globalisation of this Forum puts me in awe.

Hobbit

 

[Aik Haw]

Hobbit:-
I disagree ALL of SF have become mainstream. Some traditional aspects of SF have become mainstream. For example, nowadays any movies on new virus strain, some degree of space travel etc.. are considered mainstream. That is because these ideas have been explored for so long and are manifesting into reality that they have become mainstream.

However, newer frontiers of SF like wormhole travel etc.. are still not mainstream, or AI for that matter.

 

[Hobbit]

Yes, that was a bit of a generalisation, wasn't it?

OK - let me rephrase - much of SF has become part of popular culture and life style. perhaps I shouldn't have used the word mainstream....it has connotations!

I did say in one of the earlier threads here that I had read a comment that I thought struck a nerve in that science had become 'too small to be interesting....' genetics and microsurgery are fantastic achievements, but don't have that 'sense of wonder' that for example a flight to Mars would have.


Aik, I can see what you're saying (it's what I was trying to say!)but I think your examples might be a little off...I think wormhole travel is seen if not understood (by me also!) by those who watch Star Trek or Babylon 5 (and there's a lot of them out there who watch Star Trek!) and many of those distance themselves from SF.

AI also - though most see it as 'robots' rather than AI (Spielberg's movie, for example!)

Now quantum physics....... you might catch me out there....

People have got used to miraculous achievements - they want more dramatic gestures perhaps?

Hobbit