Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-4041-

Prejudice against speculative fiction

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-29 14:25

do you think that there is prejudice against fantasy and science fiction? (Fantasy, Science fiction etc')
If so, why? Is it justified?

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-29 17:52

Sure, that shit's for nerds. Give me a good old Amish romance novel any day.

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-29 18:49

>>2
lol

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-30 3:03

>>2
A more serious post?

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-30 4:05

Yes, but I think there's resistance to anything new.  As science supersedes religion, science fiction will take it's rightful place alongside all of the great genres.  Now fantasy?  Science Fiction is defined, more or less, as fiction that explores the impact of science on societies.  What's special about fantasy?  I'll admit I'm not generally a fan.  Except for the setting, it seems no different from any other sort of fiction, and the differences in setting are sociologically irrelevant.  I see it all as the fan fiction of myth and fable, and derivative of Tolkien.

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-30 5:47

>>1
Because more often than not these books are really fucking bad. Not because of what they are about, but how awfully written they are and how horribly bland their characters are.

They appeal to children with underdeveloped tastes because they are captivatingly fantastic (in their eyes). If those books were free from fantastic imagery (often delivered really badly, too), nobody would've even published them.

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-30 6:39

>>6
and how horribly bland their characters are.
How can you speak so badly of the genre that brought us Ponter Boddit, Lenie Clarke (mermaid of the apocalypse), Bren Cameron, and Apollo Papadopulos?

>>4
Oh, fine. I think this genre is considered by many to just be “weird stuff”. Like it or not, but most people aren't looking  to learn a whole new world every time they crack open a book from a series they haven't read before. Maybe you get excited when you read something that makes absolutely no sense (when you're sure it will become clear in the future/with more thought), but I think the average person is just irritated. Consider how often this happens to you (in a good book), then consider how often it's going to happen to a person who isn't familiar with genre conventions. It would be like mixing up Gravity's Rainbow, A Clockwork Orange, and a few electronic circuit schematics, then asking a person to figure it out as they went along. By its very nature, it's limited to people who like to work their brains.

Name: Anonymous 2009-06-30 7:16

>>7
Consider how often this happens to you (in a good book), then consider how often it's going to happen to a person who isn't familiar with genre conventions.
Oh, and consider that good books are generally more bewildering, so you've got people either being underwhelmed by the nerd equivalent of a romance novel (e.g. Nor Crystal Tears), or you're just losing them with dead women transforming into schools of fish or something.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 15:13

>>5
As science supersedes religion, science fiction will take it's rightful place alongside all of the great genres.
You are a very stupid person.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 15:21

there are like three or four science fiction authors and about as many fantasy authors that are legitimately good

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 17:02

>>10
I know nothing about science fiction.
Fixed that for you.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 17:12

>>7
Ponter Boddit, Lenie Clarke (mermaid of the apocalypse), Bren Cameron, and Apollo Papadopulos
Who?.. I bet if I read prose involving them I'll find them horrible. I bet you're one of the people who like really bad shit simply because it's pretty obscure. But probably they are fucking awesome, who knows? Chances are slim, but they might exist. So, what are these characters from and is it, in your opinion, worth reading?

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 17:24

>>11
well let's see, there's H. G. Wells, Aldous Huxley, Ursula K. Le Guin, Stanislaw Lem.. am I missing anyone important?? George Orwell and Kurt Vonnegut don't really count, anyone else is probably worth ignoring/only appeals to boring nerds.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 17:47

Yes there is. Rightfully so, too. There's a lot of sci-fi/fantasy out there that's absolute shit, and it deserves to be scalded like harlequin romances. But on the other hand there's stuff like "Fahrenheit 451" which gets stuck in science fiction when it's good enough to be considered literature, alongside "1984." Even Ray Bradbury's non science-fiction stuff like "Dandelion Wine" get crammed in science fiction.

Seriously though, the day I find Harry Potter and Terry Pratchett and shit like that in literature isles of bookstores is the day I start pulling my hair out.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 17:48

>>13
The works of Jules Verne, Frank Herbert, Philip K. Dick, and Arthur C. Clarke are widely recognized, have had a huge impact on society, and have been made into dozens of films. I could go on, but I want to give a special shout out, out there, to Mr. Gene Rodenberry!

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 18:30

>>15
cool, other good science fiction authors : JK Rowling

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 18:38

>>14
ray bradbury is OK

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 19:42

>>15
Roddenberry.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 19:45

>>12
Ponter Boddit is from Robert J. Sawyer's Neanderthal Parallax trilogy. He's kind of a big deal, and you should be familiar with it. I read the first one or two, and they were pretty good. Not a bad character at all.

Lenie Clarke is from Peter Watts's Rifters trilogy. Slightly obscure. Shit rocked so hard.

Bren Cameron is from C.J. Cherryh's ever-growing Foriegner series. I don't think I need to say any more.

Apollo Papadopulos is from Paul Melko's Singularity's Ring. He's a fairly new author, but definitely someone to watch.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 19:47

>>13
am I missing anyone important
...yes.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 19:50

>>20
No, actually, I'm not, or at least not anyone that can really be called a science fiction author.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 19:52

Nobody's even mentioned Asimov. I'm not a big fan, but his influence on technological society is undeniable.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 20:28

>>21
Low-grade trolling. You're missing basically everyone.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 20:53

>>23
Yeah, everyone who doesn't matter in the world of actual literature. You're deluding yourself if you think I'm trolling. Science fiction is crap, man.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 21:25

I'm actually writing a paper on it now!

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-01 21:53

>>24
You're deluding yourself. It's not possible to be smart and dislike science fiction. Therefore you are wrong.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 4:16

>>22
He was also a very bad writer.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 4:42

>>27
Just like every other science fiction author except four or so.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 13:12

The Sci-fi genre has some great writers, Philip K. Dick, Theodore Sturgeon, Roger Zelazny, Frederik Pohl, J.G. Ballard, Brian W. Aldiss, Larry Niven, Poul Anderson, Stanislev Lem, Poul Anderson, William Gibson... I could go on. Some of these authors have written some of the most thought provoking fiction ever put to paper. I don't think there is prejudice against Sci-Fi, although those awful book covers do not help, whereas I do think Fantasy has enourmous prejudice against it. While not a big fan (most of it seems like D&D shite for kids, which is a prejudiced opinion in itself) I have read a couple of good Fantasy novels and I quite enjoyed some of David Gemmel's Drenai books. And in some defence of Fantasy, Tolkien was not the be all and end all of Fantasy, The Lord Dunsany and E.R. Eddison were writing Tolkien style Fantasy long before he was, and much better I might add.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 13:13

Ha, I wrote Anderson twice, sorry...

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 14:05

>>29
I don't think Dunsany was Tolkien-style.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 15:56

>>1

Maybe, but it's inconsequential; like prejudice against particular genres of music. Only the people who read enough to bother forming an opinion are the ones who make these distinctions. The diversity of genres are tantamount to the fact that everybody likes their own flavor of ice cream.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 16:39

>>29
The only thing Dunsany had in common with Tolkien is the overall escapist thing. Otherwise they were as different as could be. And as a prosaic DUnsany was even worse than Tolkien.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 21:15

>>1
The ignorant see only the cover, while the wise actually read the book. People deride it because they only see a fantasy, while most enjoy it, as the fantasy is only a backdrop.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-02 22:10

>>29
yeah man, a good 80% of that science fiction list of yours isn't all that interesting, sorry to say.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 5:14

>>35
Like you'd know “interesting” if it bit you on the nose then exhibited a startling new scientific ability.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 5:57

>>34
You're very wrong. It's actually the opposite: people enjoy it for the fantasy, while those who are used to seeing beyond the cover actaully witness horrendous storytelling.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-03 21:15

i wonder if i'll get trolled if i bring up the fact that i really enjoy Heinlein.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-04 0:12

>>38
Of course you will, 'cause all of the naysayers are trolls.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-11 5:06

I don't think it's science fiction that gets looked down on so much as it's 'genre-fiction' that gets looked down. Anything that happens to involve romance, sci-fi, fantasy, etc. is assumed to be 'not serious literature'.

Name: Anonymous 2009-07-11 6:08

>>40
Which is totally justified. On the other hand, there are exceptions; and "serious fiction" is more often than not just as shitty as any poorly written as any SPAEC FUTUR MARS COLONY BIG BREAST BLONDE AND ALIENS novel.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List