Interesting…
“…there is a large body of thought that says that a story has to have more than an SF setting to be SF. In other words, if the characters and plot can be successfully transplanted to a non-SF setting, it isn’t really SF. If all you’re doing is setting a western in a post-apocalyptic setting, you’re probably better of simply writing a western.”
I strongly disagree. Setting has a huge influence on the theme of a story. The theme of the story has a huge influence on the types of symbolism and icons used throughout, all the way down to the problems the characters face.
I just don’t believe settings and themes can be written off so easily. Do you?
I also don’t think writers should be concerned with hardcore-isms such as “true vs. psuedo sci-fi.” Such trivial arguments only muddy the writer’s purpose; To write a meaningful story.
I would say go ahead and write your space western or western set in a post-apoc universe. Do whatever the hell you want. All I ask is that you make it compelling so that readers will enjoy it.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this one. Whether you’re writing a western, a piece of literary fiction, or a mystery novel, placing in an SF setting automatically frees you from a lot of constraints placed on the other genres by…well, reality.
That, in turn, gives you the opportunity to take the story in directions you wouldn’t otherwise be able to. So, yes, I think that anything in an SF setting qualifies as SF.
I also agree. Think about Ben Bova’s Mars. Technically it’s not really scifi in the same sense of the word, but it remains scifi because it hasn’t happened yet. We’ve not gone to mars–well, at least not that we know of and it would be incredibly rude of the government not to say “hey we went there”.
Plus, if that were the case, then you’d have to say the same about fantasy, but that would mean this new trend of magic realism would go right out the window right? *Shrugs*
Just a note, I linked you on my blog cause there is valuable info on here for writers.
Take care!
I agree, too. I found an interesting post from another blog about the comfort/familiarity and the possibilities that having a sci-fi/fantasy setting provides.
http://tinyurl.com/3ah2gx
The original premise for Star Trek was “‘Wagon Train’ to the stars”.
But I doubt there are too many that think Star Trek isn’t science fiction. Maybe not hard SF, but it brought a whole lot of young readers into bookstores looking for SF …
I’m facing the same sort of question with a new idea for a fantasy tale: “Why exactly is this fantasy and not just historical fiction?” The answer is the same, ultimately, as it is for SF.
Because it’s cool.
i’m sorta on the fence about this. take the movie (didn’t read the book) Children of Men. it’s a little SF at first, but then turns into a long chase scene and gun battle. the SF suspension that was built up in the first 20 minutes was almost entirely lost by the end. this also seems to be the case in many SF stories. “here’s the setting (check out the flying cars), now keep that picture in the back of your mind and let’s get into the story.” books that continue to utilize and work the SF setting throughout the entire story in a more ambitious or endeavoring way would be Altered Carbon, The Handmaid’s Tale, etc. the setting and characters interact and can not exist without the other.
on the other hand, i like flying cars.
I agree that it’s not good to use setting so superficially. Something about the setting should resonate with the themes or values expressed in the story.
Take the western set in space. The wild west was a new frontier of exploration and danger. This is why it is appropriate to transpose wild west tales into sci-fi… sci-fi involves a lot of new frontiers and exploration, so the themes are shared between the two genres and exploring one in the other isn’t any great leap.
In the example you give, there’s nothing wrong with flying cars. A writer could even work some thematic elements into that. What if flying cars represent freedom? What if they represent the freedom brought by modern technology? When we were kids we all thought there’d be flying cars when we grew up. Perhaps flying cars represent the dreams of childhood? Maybe there is a dark reality of the flying car manufacturers, or an unspoken danger or change to society as a result of the flying cars?
I think the original objection is against stories that don’t probe the depths of theme, rather than what makes real sci-fi. Transposing stories between genre works fine as long as main themes stay intact and feature some depth.