All Fantasy fans should also like Sci-FI

[Stevenator]

People have told me that Fantasy is awesome, and in the same sentence, that Sci-Fi stinks. I cannot come to comprehend the blatant separation of these two genres because they are mirror images of each other. Both can be fictitious narratives solely aimed at inspiring intrigue and adventure or simply modems for spreading some deeper theme or meaning.

 

The big difference that Sci-Fi emphasizes is the creation of a rational framework for anything it describes. Unlike Fantasy (where things can be described away as “magicâ€), this form of literature is focused on the “how†and “why†of an occurrence, on the process and means by which something exists. Sci-Fi attempts to examine the wider picture. For example in a Fantasy book, the reasoning behind the reality of Aliens could be that an evil Sorcerer created them to be his minions. In a Sci-Fi book, there would be a questioning of how Aliens could have been developed and an exploration of the effects of their existence on how humans view themselves and the universe.

 

Sci-Fi doesn’t have to involve the Pop Culture icons (space vessels, laser guns, kooky vampires ect) commonly identified with the genre, either. In fact, nowhere is that mentioned as a requirement.

 

Take Alfred Bester’s The Demolished Man, a genuine masterwork of Sci-Fi. The whole novel is centered around telepathy (not a very scientific topic), but the method with which Bester handles the subject determines its categorization. The author makes this one change to humanity and then extrapolates coherently the repercussions of this change on the development of civilization. It is a triumph of sociological speculation.

 

One advantage of Sci-Fi over Fantasy is that it is preparing us for the next step in human evolution. Not only can we explore and study the impact of future technologies, but we can consider the dangers of their hasty adoption into society.

 

So that is why I think Sci-Fi is deserved of all Fantasy-lovers’ attention.

[Gondring]

I am both really. I am able to get more into fantasy than Sci-Fi, cause its more fun, not as much reason.

Now *Takes cover in a nuclear bomb shelterr* Im a bigger Star Wars Fan than anythign else. *Locks and barricades door to shelter* But that had a little of fantasy as well. The whole mystical Force, and the Jedi Knights. But its easily classified as Sci-Fi because of everything else. *Eats freeze dried food in the shelter as the bombs begin to arrive*

[Stevenator]

w000t!

 

there's a name for that - Science Fantasy

[Werthead]

Well, both are increasingly unified under the banner 'speculative fiction', which I think is the best way of approaching them. As genres I find them generally inseperable, and increasingly linked to one another (the SF background to Bakker's fantasy series, for example).

 

George RR Martin once said that if you have a single story based on character and a plot, then you can swap the scenery around as much as you want. Set it in a graveyard and make the bad guys vampires, and it's horror. Set it on a space station and make the bad guys telepathic aliens, and it's SF. Set it in a castle and make the bad guys orcs, and it's fantasy. Doesn't work for every story, naturally, but authors like Simmons (The Canterbury Tales in space) and Bakker (the Crusades with magic) show that this approach can be taken with ease.

[Kivam]

science fiction can be as "magical" (i.e. unexplained and unexamined) as bad fantasy - space operas where the technological advances are just taken for granted and the plot is all about people blasting away at each other. And fantasy can be as explained as - well - RJ, with complex systems and rules governing the magic and driving the plot and ideas

[SinisterDeath]

Wot is classified as Science Fiction Fantasy.

[Stevenator]

Wot is classified as Science Fiction Fantasy

 

 

How so? Why so?

By whom?

 

its undeniably high fantasy

[SinisterDeath]

The Age of Legends, a highly advanced Utopian Society, that uses their Magic as a source for there High Tech Science Fiction machines.

Like I said, its classified as both. And I wouldn't quite call WoT High Fantasy, its a little bit less then it, because its not just putting down carpet excuses saying 'oh, that was magic' and enough said. It also helps that RJ himself was a military physicist, and he knows his stuff about science, and there is plenty of 'science' in the books. Just not as high tech as it would be, as in the AoL... In fact.. I believe the books could go in as a 'post apocoliptic world where Magic was used in combination with Science, that led to disaester.

[goldeneys]

I really like Fantasy, but I also like Sci-Fi.

 

hmmmm thats really interesting Sinister, never thought of it that way.

[Guest Majsju]

I'm almost more into sci-fi than fantasy. At least the kind of sci-fi that has a strong base in actual science, Arthur C Clarke and Peter Nilsson being two favourites there.

 

But at the same time I can understand those who loves fantasy but sneers at sci-fi. Fantasy allows for a great deal of escapism, you're drawn into a magical world. While sci-fi, at least good sci-fi creates an image of a very possible future for us.

[SinisterDeath]

What about Frank Herberts Dune? Propbably one of the greastest Science Fiction Novels of all time! And yet, they have very unscientific things in it, that are often attributed to fantasy novels.

[Guest Majsju]

I'm not sure if Dune should really be considered pure sci-fi. Just like Asimov's Foundation novels.

 

Though, if WOT can be classified as Sci-Fi Fantasy, perhaps Dune and Foundation should be considered F :D antasy Sci-Fi

[SinisterDeath]

Well, the orginal Dune was SciFi, no doubt. As the series went on, and got more indepth, it had much more un-scifi, fantasy in it.

[Kadere]

I think it all depends on the book or the series. I love plunty of Science-fiction, and I love most Fantasy novels. Of course there are some series I like more then others, and other's I just plain hate.

[Angel of Death]

I prefer Sci - Fi on screen to fantasy, ie tv, movies. And prefer fanasy books. I think fantasy works better in book format beacuse more information can be given. Wheras Sci-Fi is more visual stuff, like the new planets - hard to get across well in text.

[Covenant]

The difference between sci-fi and fantasy

 

Sci-fi spends 13 pages explaining the how the watch works

 

Fantasy tells you what time it is and moves on.

[schneb]

The difference between sci-fi and fantasy

 

Sci-fi spends 13 pages explaining the how the watch works

 

Fantasy tells you what time it is and moves on.

 

Have you read WoT?

 

 

But Seriously, I'm with Angel of Death. I prefer to read Fantasy and watch Sci-Fi on the screen. My reasoning is this. For the fantasy stuff, I can imagine the scenes better than any film budget would allow. Sci-Fi is more gadget based, and those are fairly easy/cheap to make as props.

[Stevenator]

they are different ways of storytelling. Whereas science fiction is the discussion of large thems of culture, history, society, and any number of large ideas that encompass the world of social causes, fantasy primarily discusses the inward journey of an individual and the insecurities and vices that can inhabit the soul. I've seen this written and heard it spoken too many times to not believe it. Both are legitimate speculative fiction, but they are different in the elements of the world they want to discuss. A person can say they enjoy one over the other but enjoy cannot be misconstrued as "better form of literature."

 

Most people think the distinction between the two deals with space or swords, aliens or elves. It isn't that simple, nor would that be correct. Personally, to label WoT Sci-Fi Fantasy is diseving becuase even though there was a Utopia way back in its history, its purpose is not to address the overreaching themes and effects of that Utopia but rather it just acts as a plot device for further fantasy.

 

Dune is considered Sci-Fi and falls into the sub-genre of Space Opera--more conserned with adventure and narritive drive over realism or the exploration of issues. Storylines are willing to go beyond the realms of scientific plausibility to create spectaular effects.

 

Vance, Wolfe, and Harrison are true cross-pollinations of the genres.

[Werthead]

Wot is classified as Science Fiction Fantasy

 

 

How so? Why so?

By whom?

 

its undeniably high fantasy

 

Definitely. Just because WoT has a spurious quasi-SF rationale for its science (the telekinetic manipulation of subatomic particles to create the One Power effects seen in the books, via a missing genetic link that 97% of the human race does not possess) doesn't make it SF in any way, shape or form. The True Source and indeed the Wheel of Time itself all defy science as we understand it, most notably Jordan's assertion that the Wheel only exists as long as humans do, so that in the WoT universe neither the Big Bang (no humans alive at the time) nor the Cold Deah of the universe (all humans dead by this time) take place.

 

The Encyclopedia of Fantasy, by Clute, Grant, Langford and Nicholls, very definitely categorises WoT as High or Epic Fantasy.

 

At the same time, there are fantasy undertones to Dune (the ability to access the memories of previous incarnations or ancestors; Paul and later Leto II's abilities) it is primarily a work of SF.

[Mardragon]

Like other posters here, I tend to prefer sci-fi on screen and fantasy to read, mainly because I don't think fantasy turns out that well on screen. 'The Lord of the Rings' would be an exception- I thought the films were a great interpretation of the story and looked great. I think modern digital-effects deffinitely help in this.

 

A lot of the sci-fi books I've read haven't been that good, at least in terms of style. The stories were often ok, but the writing... meeehh. That being said, I think there are probably some good ones out there. I did prefer the Dune books to the film and mini-series (although I haven't seen the Children Of Dune yet).

 

As for AoL having sci-fi elements, it's true that it doesn't have any basis in 'real world' science. However, a lot of sci-fi doesn't either.

 

Look at the way science fiction gets around the light-speed barier for example. Some simply don't bother with the science. Some just assume Einstein was wrong and it is possible to break the light barrier. (Real world scientific experiments using atomic clocks to measure time-dilation at least suggests he was right, but who knows for sure?) Others invent another dimension (such as hyperspace) which is either conveniently smaller than normal space (but contiguous with it) or where the laws concerning light speed just don't apply. Others utilise warp-drive, wormholes, stargates, blackholes, fold-space technology etc etc...

 

The point is, all these ideas are unproven, (although some are based on valid theories), some even are even highly unlikely. They make certain assumptions (or is it presumptions?) to move the story along- just as fantasy does. It could be argued that if science is a measure of how the world works then as 'The One Power' and 'The Source' is an integral part of the world of the tWoT books, then that is the science of that world.

 

I agree it's more fantasy than science though, but there is a bit of both. This brings to mind a converstation I read in another such hybrid series "The Dark Tower cycle" (Wolves of the Calla) where one character asks another if everyone in his world (our world... sort of) likes their stories to be categorised into specific tastes. The answer he gets is essentially yes. He replies "Does no one eat stew?"

[SinisterDeath]

Well, one guy proved "I'll use that loosely" with a very long formula how you can fold space to make it smaller and travel in it, to other places in half the time..

The problem with warp technology isn't the warping.. Its the energy involved to actually reach it... And making sure you in the process don't die.

[Guest pheobe sedai]

what is the big deal? everyone knows that most fantasy or sci-fi books have blurred edges between the two catagories.either way the said authors have put out some d*** good books and why should we worry about whether or not they fall into one specific catagory or not they are still exelent books!