Silly Science in Science Fiction

[j. d. worthington]

Yes... and it's a pertinent point. D. C. Fontana said something of the same sort in a symposium of writers of sf/f for tv and film, and was seconded by others such as Matheson, Ellison, Moore, etc. It's "what if" and then look at how that alteration affects people. This is why something like Earth Abides, which has little to do with science as such, is science fiction. Flowers for Algernon (short story or novel): the same. And so on. Which is why even terribly outdated scientific speculation usually doesn't really matter -- it isn't about the science, it's about how changes in worldview brought about by science affects people -- usually entire societies, but sometimes individual people. For all the gadgetry, sf is, at base, a very humanist branch of literature.

[HardScienceFan]

Originally Posted by j. d. worthington

For all the gadgetry, sf is, at base, a very humanist branch of literature.

NAIL ON THE HEAD,JD.
Now this is one of the major prejudices people harboured against SF since its inception as a genre,they presuppose it is about gadgetry,alien invasions, because,let's face it:if U look at movie posters and book covers,who WOULDN'T?.Pick up any story by Simak,Sturgeon,Dick,Heinlein and you'll
find that the science is peripheral,and is meant to be so.I find it very gratifying,by the way,to notice that not all discussion on the board is
frivolous,"head in the clouds"-style.

[mosaix]

Originally Posted by HardScienceFan

NAIL ON THE HEAD,JD.
Now this is one of the major prejudices people harboured against SF since its inception as a genre,they presuppose it is about gadgetry,alien invasions,

Slightly off topic here HSF but this is because, by its very nature, the background to any SF story is 'alien' and this all has to be put in context before the story proper can be told. Many authors can't do this 'info dump' well and so most readers don't get past it. It's a great shame. When I try to persuade some friends of mine to read SF I see their eyes just glaze over. I think I'll try Flowers For Algernon on one or two without mentioning SF and then see their response later!

[HardScienceFan]

First of all,to all those people who think science/scientific literature is boring:
yes and no.Switch your computer off,please.It is here through the combined efforts of devoted scientists,not scientist who thought :'well I can't be bothered, this is so BORING!'
SF is about the thrill of discovery,exploration,invention*,human endeavour in general,and intellectual curiosity.If a little "silly"science is used by the author,that is fine by me.I know enough of science to know when the author is playing tricks with his/her science. Since when is an SF novel accompanied by the following claim: I hereby swear that every scientific claim in this novel is well researched,every scientific fact is extrapolated from known data,and I'll pay a goodly sum to anyone who feels slightly bothered by my making up several minor details up from scratch,please specify bank account number?
Illogic bothers me more.
It is nigh impossible to create a (from scratch)a world with a believable climatology,geology,ecology,ethnology and history.Not a book would be written if the author was really trying to get every scientific detail right.

[HardScienceFan]

Originally Posted by Dave

Biology is particularly badly served.

Plus geology,climatology,ecology,linguistics,and a host of other things,but hey,I know U're right.