Personal Views of Sci-Fi and Fantasy

[W'Kar]

Sci-Fi novels. We love 'em. We hate 'em. Sometimes we even sleep with them (or is that just me )

It seems to me there is a serious flaw in many Science Fiction books that always irks me. And that my lovely friends is overwhelming scientific complexity. Serious almost overwhelming scientific complexity. A Novel is defined as 'a fictitious prose narrative of considerable length and complexity, portraying characters and usually presenting a sequential organization of action and scenes.' Now that is a novel, whew... I feel winded just imaging it.

An excellent example from an author I enjoy is Orson Scott Card. The novel Ender's Game, which I do suggest for anyone to read, is an excellent example of Sci-Fi writing. It is in a fantastic setting where the very definition of sci-fi is brought to bare, which is 'a form of fiction that draws imaginatively on scientific knowledge and speculation in its plot, setting, theme, etc.'

However this is where my problem lies, and I believe a serious considerable flaw in many novels comes from. 'draws imaginatively on'. Draw means to form a basis, to pull ideas. Not to draw solely from and operate only based upon. Sci-Fi has a nasty taste in history of overwhelming readers with terms and scientific basis so complex and rigidly operated in that often it overwhelms the readers with needing to cite encyclopedia's or scientific journal's merely to understand what is occuring in the story. Ender's Game had a basis, a setting, with (IMO) well drafted forms of imaginative scientific possibilities. Speaker of the Dead and Xenocide, however, delved so deeply into various scientific terminologies and far out ideas that the author HAD to write extended nearly twenty to thirty page portions of the story merely to explain one story based concept.

In gaming we define this as 'Grinding to a Halt'. This is a common problem faced by Role-Playing games and Tactical Simulations where the environment and rulesets are so complex and cumbersome that the illusion of the story or play is destroyed for a time while the meat and bones of the game must be re-examined and digested. In novels it seems to be a common occurance among Sci-Fi novels and possibly, in my opinion, one of the absolute worst examples of entertaining prose currently in circulation on the face of this planet. It is as though they sparsed a Fiction novel with an article from 'Scientific Monthly'. Not only does it tear you from the illusion of the world you are in like a premature birth, but it may even force you to search outside of the book for the answers for what is occuring in the book. How terrible is that?

Now Fantasy. I love fantasy, even more than Sci-Fi really. Fantasy in literature is defined as 'Fiction characterized by highly fanciful or supernatural elements.' Whew, I might need to get a gatorade after that, how about you!

Well, fantasy, as it seems to be has turned a blind eye to one of the key elements of fiction. And this is 'organization of action'. Action in a fantasy novel is really more than just how the swords clang together, how the Orc's breach the hold, or even how the Wizard creates his magical force. Fantasy has to do with consistency and realism.

Of course your eyes may have bulged when I used the word Fantasy and realism in the same sentence, but allow your humble narrator to explain. Realism is not merely the laws of physics. Physics should be shelved under 'Fiction' when writing 'Fantasy'. They are mutable, transformative and moldable. But it is the reality of the story, not the setting, that I speak of. Characters in a fantasy story are hero's, just as they are in Sci-Fi. Maybe not pleasant people but they are certainly the protaganists. Fantasy has a habit of shining a flashlight on the protaganists so that you can follow they journey, their story. And one of the worst parts about that is the lack of background and setting. The world seems formed around them rather than the world forming them. There is a big world out there and though the protaganist may be one of the larger parts of it, the remainder dwarfs him. People all over the world go on every day every moment engaing in conversation. Yet Fantasy seems to have a nasty habit of centering the main protaganist so much that the world around them falls under shadow. Quite a nasty habit indeed.

The famous dirty word uttered in the sailor bars and mosh pits of literature is 'Deus Ex Machina' (partly the personal inspiration behind my own Deus). This is defined as 'An unexpected, artificial, or improbable character, device, or event introduced suddenly in a work of fiction or drama to resolve a situation or untangle a plot.' DEM are nefarious because they pull you from the world just as I described before. You are introduced to an element that nothing has pointed to before and have it shoved in your face to make up for either an authors mistake, or merely poor storytelling in and of itself. It is literally a well packaged mistake made whole by an outside element. I have been guilty of using these before, as have every author on this site and in the world at large. Plot devices that are used to provide an easy solution to complex problems by acting as a fantasical or scientific god, solving plot issues as easily as flipping a switch. A horrible form of storytelling which I sacrifice goats for daily that the god of literature may forgive me of my transgressions.

Fantasy has the nasty habit of using magic and divine power for this very purpose! I agree, fantasy is about magics or supernatural means, but there needs to be a set guideline for the readers or the fantasy seems unnatural rather than supernatural. Like a plastic world made of stickers and happy jelly beans. Science Fiction uses far stretched otherworldly beings or alien devices, or 'Recently discovered Technologies' for this. It sickens me and should leave a bad taste in any readers mouth.

Well, my rant is over. Tell me, what are you opinions my lovely audience?

[Aranor]

I agree with you all the way. Having to put a book down to figure out what is happening and then try and get back into the book again usually leaves me picking the book up again some time later. Might I suggest Robert Jordan's "The Wheel of Time" series. Twelve books..... Kind of like "Lord of the Rings" only....more. He constantly moves you about the world throughout each book until a huge climax at the end. The jumping around leaves you wanting more of that chapter but the next is usually just as good as the last. He even has a book in which the main character is barely mentioned.

[W'Kar]

Robert Jordan had an excellent series and should be considered one of the best fantasy authors in the past few decades. An excellent source of character narration, plot, and setting.

My only complaints with his writing was that his plots were SO interwoven with SO many characters that it actually took 12 books to write out what could probably have been done in 8 and left the reader far more satisfied and less jaded from reading such a mass of material.

And don't a single one of you suggest Harry Potter. I'll smite the wrath of Webster, god of words, upon your heathen heads!

[Spartan Warlord]

Me myself being a great lover of fantasy i would highly suggest Darren Shan... The Demonata Series consiting of 6 books so far...1/Lord Loss...2/Demon Theif...3/Slawter...4/Bec...5/Blood Beast...6/Demon Apocolypse

The're some of the best books ever!!...if your into demons and such but its definately worth a read...its quiet gorey and the detail of the demons leaves a picture perfect image in your mind

[W'Kar]

Haven't tried that author yet, but I will read the first of the series. Usually if that doesn't grasp my interest the rest never will.

Currently I am reading 'The Electric Church', by Jeff Somers. Want to read a bit check out

http://www.the-electric-church.com

Not bad so far. I'm about 1/4 of the way through it. That much of it is worth reading anyway.

[largo]

Personally two of my favorite authors are Chris Bunch(It's such a shame he died in 2005), and while technically it's horror it's stepped very much in sci-fi is Brain Lumley he writes the Necroscope series.It's very very good, I've read all like 15 of them.

[omegaling]

I am a huge connoisseur of the fantasy genre, not only as a reader, but also as a writer. My favorite author is Mercedes Lackey (if not be default since she her books is what started my obsession), but I feel I've read a fair amount of authors and variations to the genre, proving that every fantasy novel isn't Lord of the Rings, which sadly cannot seem to hold my interest. It reads too much like a history book, and I'm a very character-driven reader, as well as a seeker of worlds that don't all take place in Middle Earth.

C.S. Friedman, who wrote the Coldfire Trilogy, is one of the few authors I've found who dapples with a rare genre known as science-fantasy. While the world of the Coldfire Trilogy has undeniable fantasy tones, it is a world inhabited by people who have traveled from earth to the furthest reaches of our galaxy. While there are no mentions of advance technology or aliens in the story, the characters have not forgotten their centuries-old heritage.

Another interesting trilogy is the Second Sons trilogy by Jennifer Fallon. This is, so far, the *only* fantasy trilogy that's completely rooted in politics, not sword and sorcerey. Not only that, but it's extremely well written, and full of story twists.

I have read Robert Jordan (may he rest in peace), but I stopped reading the Wheel of Time Saga around book seven or eight. While I admire him for creating such a world, it simply became too complex with too many characters and side story lines. I simply lost interest.

While the second and third books became slightly odd and a little overbearing, The Golden Compass by Phillip Pullman was sheer genius. It is another example of science-fantasy IMO, but it also had incredible atmosphere, and not many books take place in distant northern regions. It was refreshing.

I know this will make people cringe, but man up and bear it. I *have* read Harry Potter, I *did* enjoy it, and I *do* commend Mrs. Rowling for not only creating the world she did, but also inspiring the newer, computer-and-TV driven generations to read again.

Some may argue that David Eddings follows more of the LotR trilogy than most of the other books I have listed, his writing style - especially for The Elenium - was simply astounding. His characterization in that story was fantastic as well; still some of the best I have read to date.

I have collected a sizable library of fantasy books, although due to time constraints, have not been able to read as much as I would like. Right now I am working on the Obsidean trilogy by Mercedes Lackey (which is also very good thus far), but some of the other books I hope to read in the future are: Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke, The Liveship Trilogy by Robin Hobb, The Faery Wars Chronicals by Herbie Brennen, Thief's Gamble by Juliet McKenna, Kushiel's Dart by Jacqueline Carry, The Looking Glass Wars by Frank Beddor... The list goes on and on.

Now, on *being* a fantasy author, particularly a science-fantasy author... I'm not sure how many others here enjoy writing fantasy, or science-fiction, or a hybrid of the two, but perhaps some feel the same I do.

I am by no means ashamed of what I do and what I write. I feel it defines who I am. I mean, I have the phrase "Once Upon a Time" tattooed on my back, for pete's sake. But I feel as though there's such a misconception about the whole fantasy genre that I almost dislike telling people what I right about, simply for the look that I get more often than not. I think a lot of non-fantasy enthusiasts simply think that people who write fantasy live in a world inhabited by elves and faeries and dwarves and that we're completely disconnected from reality. I speak from personal experiance that this is not true - I feel as though I have a perfect grip of reality - but the stereotype that goes along with it is tiresome. My art history teacher even poked fun at me after a round of the standard beginning-of-semeter "This is who I am, this is what I do". She wasn't being purposly malicious or trying to humiliate me, but I still felt as though something I take very seriously was being degrated.

Perhaps I'm just over analyzing, but it is simply my personal view and opinion.

[largo]

I am a huge connoisseur of the fantasy genre, not only as a reader, but also as a writer. My favorite author is Mercedes Lackey (if not be default since she her books is what started my obsession), but I feel I've read a fair amount of authors and variations to the genre, proving that every fantasy novel isn't Lord of the Rings, which sadly cannot seem to hold my interest. It reads too much like a history book, and I'm a very character-driven reader, as well as a seeker of worlds that don't all take place in Middle Earth.

C.S. Friedman, who wrote the Coldfire Trilogy, is one of the few authors I've found who dapples with a rare genre known as science-fantasy. While the world of the Coldfire Trilogy has undeniable fantasy tones, it is a world inhabited by people who have traveled from earth to the furthest reaches of our galaxy. While there are no mentions of advance technology or aliens in the story, the characters have not forgotten their centuries-old heritage.

Another interesting trilogy is the Second Sons trilogy by Jennifer Fallon. This is, so far, the *only* fantasy trilogy that's completely rooted in politics, not sword and sorcerey. Not only that, but it's extremely well written, and full of story twists.

I have read Robert Jordan (may he rest in peace), but I stopped reading the Wheel of Time Saga around book seven or eight. While I admire him for creating such a world, it simply became too complex with too many characters and side story lines. I simply lost interest.

While the second and third books became slightly odd and a little overbearing, The Golden Compass by Phillip Pullman was sheer genius. It is another example of science-fantasy IMO, but it also had incredible atmosphere, and not many books take place in distant northern regions. It was refreshing.

I know this will make people cringe, but man up and bear it. I *have* read Harry Potter, I *did* enjoy it, and I *do* commend Mrs. Rowling for not only creating the world she did, but also inspiring the newer, computer-and-TV driven generations to read again.

Some may argue that David Eddings follows more of the LotR trilogy than most of the other books I have listed, his writing style - especially for The Elenium - was simply astounding. His characterization in that story was fantastic as well; still some of the best I have read to date.

I have collected a sizable library of fantasy books, although due to time constraints, have not been able to read as much as I would like. Right now I am working on the Obsidean trilogy by Mercedes Lackey (which is also very good thus far), but some of the other books I hope to read in the future are: Johnathan Strange and Mr. Norrell by Susanna Clarke, The Liveship Trilogy by Robin Hobb, The Faery Wars Chronicals by Herbie Brennen, Thief's Gamble by Juliet McKenna, Kushiel's Dart by Jacqueline Carry, The Looking Glass Wars by Frank Beddor... The list goes on and on.

Now, on *being* a fantasy author, particularly a science-fantasy author... I'm not sure how many others here enjoy writing fantasy, or science-fiction, or a hybrid of the two, but perhaps some feel the same I do.

I am by no means ashamed of what I do and what I write. I feel it defines who I am. I mean, I have the phrase "Once Upon a Time" tattooed on my back, for pete's sake. But I feel as though there's such a misconception about the whole fantasy genre that I almost dislike telling people what I right about, simply for the look that I get more often than not. I think a lot of non-fantasy enthusiasts simply think that people who write fantasy live in a world inhabited by elves and faeries and dwarves and that we're completely disconnected from reality. I speak from personal experiance that this is not true - I feel as though I have a perfect grip of reality - but the stereotype that goes along with it is tiresome. My art history teacher even poked fun at me after a round of the standard beginning-of-semeter "This is who I am, this is what I do". She wasn't being purposly malicious or trying to humiliate me, but I still felt as though something I take very seriously was being degrated.

Perhaps I'm just over analyzing, but it is simply my personal view and opinion.

Isn't that the point of this discussion is in essence to over analyze are opinions on the sci-fi genre.

[W'Kar]

Omega, I also enjoy C.S Friedman, though I have not perused the prodigious prose of Mercedes Lackey. I'll take your suggestion in account next I scan the fantasy aisle at my local book seller. Any particular you suggest.

I do also shun at the stereotype of the 'Fantasy Geek'. Though personally I do live in a world of dwarves and elves. Mostly gnomes, I have some in my lawn. But I agree, though I don't believe that it should bother anyone more than a wink. Fantasy films have grossed MAJOR profits! Spiderman, LOTR, Harry Potter. It's obvious more than just your pimple faced teen is interested in fantastical stories, else no money.

Though Omega I was refering mostly to the storytelling quality of fantasy and science fiction literature. J.K Rowling's work, though influential, is really so because of it's marketability, at least to me. Her setting is extremely beautiful, though not unique, and carries greatly into the imagination especially for children. However I feel that Harry as a protaganist is amongst the lowest quality I have ever seen. He is a 'Deus Ex Machina' almost and of himself. He violates the said laws of magic of his community with no real ramifications, and regularly tromps wizards of far greater power and experience out of mere boyish luck. He is excellent for a child audience but beyond that and how he is treated by J.K Rowling as a protaganist, is woefully weak. My previous argument on one of my major pet peeves of fantasy does not apply to Harry Potter, he is quite a character within the world. However the status quo of that world is beaten back and altered to allow Harry to pretty much do as he pleases. This act breaks the realism of the story so harshly that I'm surprised more readers don't have to take oxycontin just to dull the pain in their skulls.

And yeah, please, overanazlyze to your heart's content. Personal opinions are just as important as facts. WE ARE NOT MACHINES!