|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
I had an interesting piece of feedback on Cat's Paw. Scott VanKirk commented that it's Sci Fi. Now, in my opinion, that's the case, but...
Many readers, when they hear descriptors like 'Demon', 'Were', and 'Undead', think Urban Fantasy or Paranormal. While I'm writing Sci Fi, I suspect many readers will be reading Fantasy.
So my question to you guys - where is the line? I know there is wiggle room, but at what point do you say 'no, this is by no means Fantasy' or 'nuh uh, this isn't Sci Fi'?
|
|
Joined: 6/8/2012
Posts: 3
|
I'm on both sides of that line myself fairly often. The way I think of it is that if the technology in my book is regarded as "magical" by the characters, and not explained in scientific terms then it's still fantasy.
Likewise if the Demon or Undead aspects of a book were scientifically based and explained (genetic mutation, virus,...) then it could still be SF.
I don't worry too much about genre. I worry about story.
|
|
|
|
Magic has been defined as "A product without a process." So to me, when known and hypothetical natural law is ignored it's fantasy.
But even there the lines are blurred. In Wizards I explored the idea of magic sold over the counter as a commodity (wear an amulet of health, for example, and you heal from nearly anything), and the effect of that on society. If magic is treated like technology is it science fiction or fantasy?
Personally, I dunno. And since the bookstores shelve the two together, who cares?
|
|
Joined: 8/21/2011
Posts: 394
|
Interesting question. My own work has features of both fantasy and sci fi. The people of one world believe in magic, spells, wizards, etc.; but all of that is explained through science by people not from that particular world.
When you think about it, wouldn't the science and technology we take advantage of today be considered "magic" by people living 500, 1000, 2000 or more years ago?
I'm with Jay on this one - don't really know where that line is. But, I suspect, if there is a line, it's quite crooked and blurred in places.
|
|
Joined: 8/13/2011
Posts: 272
|
Personally, for me, I've never really seen much of a difference between Sci-Fi and Fantasy. They're both settings for stories that can't happen in the real world and separating them really feels like it's a little bit unnesscary.
Still, thinking about it, I'd have to say that the difference in my head is one of problem solving. In science fiction, solving a physical problem involves finding a loophole, while in fantasy, it involves overriding the problem. Take for example someone trying to get to another world. In science fiction, the FTL system will involve some trickery to get around the speed of light. However, in fantasy, it will involve summoning the spirit of space/time or something similar. Sci-Fi is all about using what you have to solve the unsolveable, while fantasy is all about finding a way to surmount the insurmountable
|
|
|
|
Science fiction occurs within a universe explainable by science while fantasy fiction is unbound by reality.
|
|
Joined: 2/27/2011
Posts: 353
|
When I worked at Del Rey Books once upon a time, one of the SF/F editors told me that they made the decision about whether a book is science fiction as opposed to fantasy in this way: if you remove the scientific elements from the story, is there still a plot? If so, then it is probably fantasy.
However, space opera is largely devoid of any real science, but is usually considered science fiction.
Robert - To answer your specific question about using vampires, weres, etc in novels...usually an editor or agent will consider any book with these elements to be fantasy, unless a scientific explanation for the creature's existence is very clearly explained within the plot. Thus THE PASSAGE by Justin Cronin, ostensibly about zombie-vampires, is considered SF, because the creatures came into existence via the use of an experimental drug.
Does that help?
Cheers!
Colleen
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
Thanks, everyone!
Colleen's answer regarding publishers and marketing is really what I was asking (even if I didn't realize that). When it comes to writing, I write what I write, then try and fit it somewhere, rather than writing to fit a particular genre.
The one I'm having a problem with at present, Cat's Paw, would probably wind up being shelved with Fantasy. The Shifters, the Magi, the Vampires, the Demons, they've each got a rational sci-fi explanation, but it/s not on the page as such. I've got an idea I'm going to do a series, and each successive book will have more of the backstory, but I've also tried to avoid excessive exposition, so...
|
|
|
|
Woot:
"...if you remove the scientific elements from the story, is there still a plot? If so, then it is probably fantasy."
Great rule of thumb! Thanks for the insight, Colleen.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
@GD Whoa. I'd focused on some of the other stuff Colleen mentioned, and sort of overlooked that line. THAT puts Cat's Paw firmly back in Sci Fi territory again.
So many decisions. So little time.
Heckwithit. I'ma go write some more. This time pure Sci Fi. Young Adult Space Opera, to be precise.
|
|
Joined: 3/13/2011
Posts: 412
|
Labels... ugh. But yeah, Colleen hit exactly what I wanted to say, better than I could have said it.
|
|
|
|