Revolution of the Science Fiction Authors 292
An anonymous reader writes "85 science fiction authors including Iain M Banks, Larry Niven, Stephen Hunt, Greg Bear and Michael Moorcock have written an open letter of protest to the BBC complaining of disrespect towards the genre, when, during an entire day of coverage of fiction by the BBC, not a single SF, fantasy or horror book was looked at. Here's the original article that sparked the open letter, along with updates. The British prime minister, David Cameron, when asked to comment, said that he doesn't have a favorite genre, so I guess he's not taking Greg Bear books to bed either!"
As Newt says ... (Score:5, Interesting)
... "It won't make any difference." The literary establishment has not only decided that anything but "serious," contemporary*, mainstream fiction isn't Literature, and any protest from authors in other** genres will not only not change their minds, but will in fact solidify their position. They'll see it as further proof of the inherent immaturity of those who write (and, by extension, those who read) "genre fiction," and be further reassured in their smugness.
* Exceptions may be made for historical fiction, as long as the history in question is within the last century or so.
** Literary fiction is a genre of its own, with rules far more rigid than those of SF and fantasy and at least as rigid as those of horror, romance and Westerns, but you'll never get them to admit it.
Not surprising (Score:2, Interesting)
Sign of the times. Sci-fi is the genre of the innovater and thinker. The current world order does not encourage either.
Asimov is rolling over in his grave.
I'm moderately surprised that Reynolds, Stephenson, Varley, and Vinge are missing from the list.
Re:To mainstream lit, sci fi is like comic books (Score:5, Interesting)
No. To what's currently mainstream, SciFi is, like a large majority of good literature, too long, too complicated, and boring.
What is "mainstream" (as in, what I see on display in book stores) are "Become an Einstein in one week while losing 50 pounds and making tons of money", some cooking, and books about orgasms.
You mad? (Score:5, Interesting)
Am I really? How exactly was I condescending to mainstream literature? I did say that people who were into "literature" as opposed to "reading books" tend to be elitist snobs, but that isn't slandering mainstream literature, or even the realm of literary criticism. I was merely pointing out that, if you characterize yourself as enjoying "literature" as opposed to "reading" you may be an elitist snob. Just say it to yourself: "I like reading books." Now say "I enjoy literature." Which sounded snobbier to you?
Psychological projection is the habit of ascribing to others those parts of your own personality that you refuse to accept. I accept that I am opinionated and critical. Therefore, projection is hardly the correct term, Mr. Hanky. Now, are you mad because you characterize yourself as enjoying literature, or is it something more personal?
Re:TV Doesn't Grok Sci-Fi (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course I remember going into a video store and asked them where Apollo 13 was. I wanted to cry when they told me it was in sci-fi! I had to ask why but all I got was because it was about space! Ever get the feeling that a large percentage of the population really doesn't understand? Of course I also had a discussion very artsy friend of mine about Apollo 13 and how I really thought it should have gotten best picture over Braveheart. She actually told me that Braveheart was a better movie because you knew how Apollo 13 ended before you saw the movie. I had to say "You didn't know the english won?"
Good freaking heavens.
Re:To mainstream lit, sci fi is like comic books (Score:5, Interesting)
This month they are doing "Tom Sawyer". This is not what would be called an easy read for a teen ager or even many adults. My son is doing it, but with great effort. The other parents are just renting the movies or cartoons. Then patting themselves on the back for exposing their kids to great "liturature". It is sad.
Realism time. (Score:2, Interesting)
Firstly, sci-fi is a niche genre. Those of us that love it and study it and understand that it's mostly a way of doing the fun, speculative side of Real Science know exactly what I'm talking about. I'm betting at least half of them are already formulating an angry response to my use of "sci-fi", arguing that it should be "SF". My point being that "we" can't even agree on what "our" genre is. So it's not a genre, it's a mindset, and we can't agree.
Secondly, it's really difficult for somebody without a basic grounding of scientific method and the history of science to properly get a grasp on what sci-fi (or whatever) is actually trying to do. Their closest reference point is literature, because SF (or whatever) is often done in book form. Scify (or whatever) doesn't do traditional literature well, in fact it often ignores the standard, conventional techniques of plot and character development because scific (or whatever) is so fundamentally grounded in explaining wild and extravagant ideas via a story. In that respect it is poor literature by any standard.
So science fiction and literature are simply two different things that happen to share a medium. The literature types don't get scifi, and the speculative fiction folk usually don't get literature. No biggy. Let just keep doing what we all do and not try to stop the other. One day somebody will do both in spectacular fashion (I'm looking at you Stephenson) and we'll all get over it and wonder what the fuss was all about.
The old school authors would actually be ... (Score:4, Interesting)
FWIW, the "literary snobs" might recognize Verne, Wells, etc. Perhaps the "literary snobs" of the next century will recognize Asimov, etc.