NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/fan/pern/2668

Text File | 1993-01-26 | 5.9 KB | 120 lines

Newsgroups: alt.fan.pern
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!linac!uchinews!quads!bdh4
From: [e-mail] (bryan david hardin)
Subject: Re: SF or Fantasy?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (News System)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: University of Chicago
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:12:42 GMT
Lines: 107

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris Croughton) writes:
>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>
>>"Offended" ?!?!?  I have read sci-fi all of my life, and have never been
>>offended by the usage of the word sci-fi.  Who cares ? SF, sci-fi, its
>>all the same.  As far as Hollywood productions go, they are certainly
>>on the same level of writing/action/scientific accuracy as the majority
>>of SF/sci-fi out there.  Take this to mean that most Hollywood stuff is
>>good or that most sci-fi is written at a fifth grade reading level with
>>the scientific accuracy of the late news, however you wish.  I think
>>it is a bit much to get "offended" and warn someone they are in dire
>>peril of inviting flames because they use the term sci-fi.
>
>*You* aren't offended, *I* am not offended, but what was stated was that
>*some* people *are* offended by the term.  I have personally been flamed
>by one of them (incorrectly - I was quoting another message that used te
>term), so the warning (as a warning of possibilities, not a flame in
>itself) was, I think, correct.
>
>Incidentally, I generally use the term SF to mean the whole field
>('Speculative Fiction', which includes fantasy).
>
>As far as Pern goes, I would say that it's not fantasy in the general
>sense, as that virtually always has aspects of 'supernatural' and/or is
>set in a conciously medieval-style world.  Neither are they very much
>Science Fiction, as the science is, at best, dubious, and in the main
>part of most of the stories is absent totally.
>
>What the books *are*, almost totally, are romances, using elements of
>fantasy and science fiction.  The same goes for Anne's other books, with
>greater or lesser amounts of science.  IMO there's nothing wrong with
>that...
>
>***********************************************************************
>*  [e-mail]      *                                     *
>*  [e-mail]  *  FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life)  *
>*  [e-mail]   *                                     *
>***********************************************************************

From uchinews!linac!uwm.edu!wupost!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!pipex!demon!keris.demon.co.uk!chris Mon Jan 25 12:55:03 CST 1993
Article: 2544 of alt.fan.pern
Newsgroups: alt.fan.pern
From: [e-mail] (Chris Croughton)
Path: uchinews!linac!uwm.edu!wupost!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!uunet!pipex!demon!keris.demon.co.uk!chris
Subject: Re: SF or Fantasy?
Distribution: world
References: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Keristor Systems
X-Mailer: Simple NEWS 1.90 (ka9q DIS 1.19)
Lines: 37
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 20:06:20 +0000
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

>>"Offended" ?!?!?  I have read sci-fi all of my life, and have never been
>>offended by the usage of the word sci-fi.  Who cares ? SF, sci-fi, its
>>all the same.  As far as Hollywood productions go, they are certainly
>>on the same level of writing/action/scientific accuracy as the majority
>>of SF/sci-fi out there.  Take this to mean that most Hollywood stuff is
>>good or that most sci-fi is written at a fifth grade reading level with
>>the scientific accuracy of the late news, however you wish.  I think
>>it is a bit much to get "offended" and warn someone they are in dire
>>peril of inviting flames because they use the term sci-fi.

>*You* aren't offended, *I* am not offended, but what was stated was that
>*some* people *are* offended by the term.  I have personally been flamed
>by one of them (incorrectly - I was quoting another message that used te
>term), so the warning (as a warning of possibilities, not a flame in
>itself) was, I think, correct.

>Incidentally, I generally use the term SF to mean the whole field
>('Speculative Fiction', which includes fantasy).

Actually, I think Speculative Fiction is even a weirder term than
SF or sci-fi.  After all isn't the definition of fiction the fact that
it is made up, i.e., Speculative ? :)

>As far as Pern goes, I would say that it's not fantasy in the general
>sense, as that virtually always has aspects of 'supernatural' and/or is
>set in a conciously medieval-style world.  Neither are they very much
>Science Fiction, as the science is, at best, dubious, and in the main
>part of most of the stories is absent totally.

In some ways the atmosphere is Medieval with Lords and the like,
guilds and low technology.

>What the books *are*, almost totally, are romances, using elements of
>fantasy and science fiction.  The same goes for Anne's other books, with
>greater or lesser amounts of science.  IMO there's nothing wrong with
>that...

I totally agree.  If they fall into any genre 'well', it is that they
are romances.  In a lot of ways in current fiction, these three of become
a continuum.  Fantasy books will make references to parallel worlds that
are High-tech, and many 'space operas' are just romances in space.

>***********************************************************************
>*  [e-mail]      *                                     *
>*  [e-mail]  *  FIAWOL (Filking Is A Way Of Life)  *
>*  [e-mail]   *                                     *
>***********************************************************************

-David Hardin
-University of Chicago
-Committee on Neurobiology