Despite what my last two posts might imply, I don't want to use this entire Blog simply for discussing my Aspergers. Today I'm going to write about some stuff I've been thinking about, especially in the past year, and anyone with additional thoughts or disagreements, by all means, join in!
I'm a HUGE fan of science fiction and fantasy. Most of the stories I write, or try to write, end up being one or the other, if not both. I actually have some level of trouble coming out with "normal" stories. If no one becomes a superhero, fights aliens, or has anything abnormal happen to them, then I don't write it.
What I wanted to bring up though, is my personal thoughts on science fiction vs fantasy. I think that a lot of literature, even literature that isn't nessisarily SF or fantasy, contains elements of them. Fantasy as a literary element is defined by Perrine's Literature as something that "trancends the bounds of known reality" (Page 283). Fantasy literature, then, is a story that relies on something that we know is impossible, forcing us into a suspension of disbelief.
Science Fiction is somewhat different. Though it may, and usually does, rely on an element of fantasy, it focuses less on the element of impossability, and more on how this small effect might affect the theme, or raise questions about it. A great example of this is Frankenstein, by Mary Shelly. It only uses a small level of impossible events -- that science can create a living being from dead matter, but spends most of the plot exploring the ethical and philosphical questions that would come from creating something like that. SF then, is concerned with the "what if" questions. Taking some possibility or impossibiliy, and showing what might happen because of it.
More on the SF, I think that there are two types of Sci Fi and Fantasy. I think that classic, more literary SF is designed with a message. It forces the reader to analyse the question of "what if." Shelly, Wells, and Hawthorne would write thier SF and fantasy to spread thier beliefs, and the reader leaves the story with fresh thoughts on the topic.
Most modern SciFi and fantasy, such as Star Trek, Stargate, Harry Potter, and so on, however, are more entertainment-based. The author is showcasing thier own ability to imagine the answers to the questions. The reader or viewer does not leave with thier mind provoked, but inspired. The beauty isn't in what you think or learn, but in what you see and feel.
Does anyone agree or disagree with my opinions on this? Does anyone have anything to add? I would love to hear from readers about what they think of this.
Your Brother in Christ,
-Caleb
That's a really good way of putting it, Caleb. However, I would suggest the division lies in that fantasy could never come to pass on our world, but science fiction tells things that are the tiniest bit possible. Science fiction (with the exception of maybe Star Wars) shows what could happen to our world; fantasy deals with other places or realities. This isn't hard and fast, but it's usually my guideline.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think modern things like Star Trek and Harry Potter aren't devoid of meaning either. Maybe the new Star Trek movie, but the old shows dealt with religion, morality, and life (if more casually than literature). Good reading or watching almost always has a deeper point.