Science Fiction, Not Science Class
I love science fiction, except when I hate it. Maybe part of the reason is that the definition can be so broad that it includes everything speculative under the sun, even the kitchen sink. Especially when the kitchen sink is a symbiotic life form, or a mind-controlled robot, or maybe a hologram.
Science fiction (SF) might be about space travel, aliens and distant planets, or it might not. It might involve lots of technical language and fancy gear, or it might not. It might be choked with exposition trying to convince the reader that a made-up technology is viable.
But the way I write it, it isn’t.
I think the tendency of some authors to get carried away with explaining their technology is a big turnoff to readers who aren’t predisposed to SF in general from watching Star Trek as a kid, or playing with Planet of the Apes action figures. I’ve noticed that TV shows handle the SF element a lot more elegantly than many books. Instead of spending pages and pages belaboring physics and inventions and telling the entire darn history of the storyverse, they’ll just flash to a newspaper with the headline “Superheroes Exist!”, give us a montage of a few characters flying and knocking down walls, and trust that if the we hasn’t yet switched to something else in our Netflix queue, we are willing to suspend disbelief.
One of my favorite SF series is Beggars in Spain by Nancy Kress, which deals with the genetic engineering of fetuses. When parents begin selecting children who don’t need sleep, all sorts of personal and societal ramifications spiral out from that technology. Do I remember anything about the genetics? No. I remember the way the sleepless characters were ostracized and feared. I remember the way the science affected the characters, not the science itself.
My Mnevermind Trilogy is about a technology that allows people to have a recreational memory implanted, just as easily as they’d go get a tattoo or a tooth whitening. It sounds techy. But it’s not presented in pages and pages of technical explanation. It’s accessible. I just show people using it…kind of like the TV shows that show superpowers exist with shots of people causing tornadoes or playing catch with minivans.
So if you already enjoy my urban fantasy stories—which means you like speculative elements and you’re willing to suspend disbelief—I bet you’ll dig Mnevermind too. It’s not a bunch of dry tech. It’s a tender story about a guy, his dad, his failing family business, and his awkward love interest. But don’t just take my word for it. Read a sample chapter at JCP Books and see for yourself!
MNEVERMIND TRILOGY
1 - Persistence of Memory
2 - Forget Me Not
3 - Life is Awesome
newest »
Zoe ~ Is incognito wrote: "I don't mind when SF has lots of technical explanations, but it has to make sense."I think I'm reacting to a SF story where the author spent easily 3000 explaining why a guy could stop time, doing it as a conversation between two guys who both knew physics but explained it in detail to one another anyway.
For me, explaining anything at all in fiction is a delicate thing that can so easily be done totally wrong. There were huge chunks of the DaVinci Code that I thought were mind-numbingly expository, but other folks enjoyed.
For myself, the science of SF books really is dependent upon the type of story being told.When reading space opera, I expect the science in the story be something that is explainable and accessible by everyone who's reading/watching the story (e.g. Star Trek/Star Wars) without too much explanation. I'm looking for the action and adventure here, not a two page discussion of how a particular technology works.
When reading military SF I expect it to be more tech heavy but still realistic (though I'm willing to accept warp/FTL drives - without explanation*). A little more exposition on how a laser works in space would be good, and sometimes interesting. I've learned more science reading SF books than I ever did in school.
If it's about how the characters in the story deal with a new technology and how it changes their lives, then the technology is just background, a springboard from which a story can grow. I want the story to stay focused on the characters.
======
*There's an author who likes to give detailed explanations about his fictional ships, weight ratios, speeds ... For an action based story, this really drags the story down.
Lori S. wrote: "If it's about how the characters in the story deal with a new technology and how it changes their lives ... I want the story to stay focused on the characters."This is a good way of articulation what I generally look for and what I aim to achieve, because the characters are the part that sticks with me.
Wise considerations, as usual from you.I could write an ''Ode to JPC'' to praise how you handle world building and everything else in your books ;-). But I'm not a poet: suffice to say, I consider you one of the best authors around.
Antonella wrote: "Wise considerations, as usual from you.I could write an ''Ode to JPC'' to praise how you handle world building and everything else in your books ;-)."
Thank you, Antonella! *hugs*
If the story deals with some crazy non existent technology the author either better know a heck of a lot about the science they're trying to explain, or find a way to explain it without using technical jargon.
I like how you handled it in Mnevermind. It's very believable.