| Re: Future fiction
Realist novels depict things "as they are", rather than romanticised or in a fantastic mode. And while sf novels usually don't feature contemporary settings, what is presented is done as "realistically" as possible. It's this insistence on plausibility within the confines chosen by the author (laws of physics, biology, etc.) that separates sf from fantasy.
At least that's what I think. :-)
(The origins of the genre tend to confirm it. The fantastic has been around since Sumerian times, but Gernsback stressed the scientific credibility of the fiction he published when he founded Amazing Stories.)
As for Julie's posts, I must have misinterpreted them. Unfortunately, I saw them first as "science fiction sucks as predictive literature" (it isn't meant to be predictive), and then as "science fiction written by a mainstream writer but it's not science fiction oh no it isn't I would n't dare sully myself with that". Two old, old arguments, guaranteed to get most sf fans frothing at the mouth :-) |